# # # #
Current clinical efforts at restorative medicine for neurodegeneration are still largely focused on stem cell and neurotrophic factor-based methods. Novel techniques are being preclinically proposed however, and some of them employ some radically different approaches.
An international group of researchers have recently published a report describing a means of repairing the damaged central nervous system that involves ‘gluing’ neurons together via an artificial protein.
They called this new method CPTX.
In today’s post, we will explore what this artificial protein does, what was reported in the new study, and consider how this could potentially be used for Parkinson’s.
# # # #
Earlier in the year I wrote a post called the 2020 wish list, where I discussed some hopes for Parkinson’s research this year. Despite everything that 2020 (annus horribilis) has thrown at us, there have been significant developments regarding Parkinson’s research and some of those wishes.
One of those hopes was the announcement of new and innovative methods for restorative techniques for Parkinson’s. At present, all of the restorative approaches in clinical trial for Parkinson’s are focused on stem cell transplantation (Click here to read a recent SoPD post describing an example of this), and it would be good to broaden the range of approaches being tested.
As a result of this particular wish, a theme here on the SoPD this year has been to write posts highlighting new restorative research as it has been published (Click here, here and here to read some examples).
In today’s post, we are going to continue that theme with an extremely radical bit of research that utterly boggled my mind.
Me after reading this report. Source: 1zoom
Be warned, this is very futuristic, blue sky, “way out there on the horizon”-kind of stuff.
But when I read this report in August, I was left stunned… and rather excited by the potential possibilities.
Sounds interesting, what was the research report about?
Continue reading “CPTX: Gluing the brain back together”
Given that the condition is defined by the loss of specific types of neurons in the brain, any future therapy for Parkinson’s should include some form of restorative treatment. Much of the current clinical research exploring restoration in Parkinson’s is focused on cell transplantation – replacing the cells that have been lost in the brain.
But the adult brain is very different to the developing brain. While youngsters have lots of nurturing and supportive protein floating around – encouraging plasticity and survival – once we reach adulthood, our brains appear to be full of inhibitory molecules that reduce rejuvenation in the case of injury.
What if we could re-introduce some of those supportive factors and remove the inhibitory proteins? Could this help with restorative therapies for Parkinson’s?
In today’s post, we will look at new research exploring how we may be able to reduce some of those inhibitory factors and provide a more supportive environment for restorative therapy in Parkinson’s.
As we regularly state here on the SoPD, any ‘curative therapy’ for Parkinson’s is going to require three core components:
- A disease halting mechanism
- A neuroprotective agent
- Some form of restorative therapy
Now, the bad news is (as far as I am aware) there is no single treatment currently available (or being tested) that can do all three of these things. By this I mean that there is no disease halting mechanism therapy that can also replace lost brain cells. Nor is there a restorative therapy that stop the progression of the condition.
That statement can obviously be read as bad news, but it shouldn’t.
Let me explain:
A curative therapy for Parkinson’s is going to need to be personalised to each individual, with varying levels of each of the three component listed above. It will be a multi-modal approach designed for each individual’s needs.
Making things personal. Source: Flickr
By this I mean, there is a great deal of heterogeneity (or variability) between individuals with regards to their symptoms and the amount of time that they have had the condition. Some folks are more tremor dominant, while others do not experience tremor at all. Likewise, some individuals have only just been diagnosed, while others have lived with the condition for many years.
The treatment needs of each individual will be different, and thus what we will require is different amounts of the disease halting mechanism component, the neuroprotection component, and the restorative therapy components for each affected person.
In today’s post we are going to explore some alternative approaches being tested for restorative therapy.
What do you mean ‘alternative’?
Continue reading “A case for chondroitinase?”