Timothy Ray Brown: The First Person To Be Cured of HIV/AIDS

[Miss Philicia]

try reading the links and the thread next time, meech

[mecch]

Gee Miss Snark, I did.

Was just noting it was in the news, and since 2008. And the public doesnt think its "the" cure - rather good news and adds hope for a cure. 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7726118.stm
http://news.doctissimo.fr/sida-vih-indetectable-apres-une-greffe-de-moelle-osseuse_article4509.html

and so on and so on.

I understand the difference between "maybe cure" in 2008 and "cure" in 2010 but in a bigger sense its still the same story today - no everyday cure, which is what was understood in 2008, anyway.

I like the Huff post piece with advice to journalists.

[Inchlingblue]

I understand the difference between "maybe cure" in 2008 and "cure" in 2010 but in a bigger sense its still the same story today - no everyday cure, which is what was understood in 2008, anyway.

He has been closely monitored for almost 3 years at this point (maybe longer?) and even his own doctors were loathe to declare that he had in fact been cured, in case the virus came roaring back.

What prompted this latest news is that his doctors have at this point officially declared him, for all intents and purposed, cured. It begins to close the chapter on the debate as to whether or not he was cured.

It also adds more fuel to the possibility that this approach, albeit modified via gene therapy, may actually provide a cure for others.

[Jeffreyj]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/14/hiv-cure-berlin-patient_n_796521.html?ref=fb&src=sp#sb=830614,b=facebook

Could this be the begining of the end?

[metekrop]

Does it mean that should we all undergo to stem cell transplant in order to get cured of our friend HIV? 

[Realist]

Does it mean that should we all undergo to stem cell transplant in order to get cured of our friend HIV? 

No.

It represents a functional cure, but the variables are huge and it isn't a blanket approach.

1. You'd have survive the chemo which would wipe out what little immune system we have already.
2. There wouldn't be enough donors with the right mutation to treat everyone.
3. You'd need to be able to afford it (if you aren't in a country with a social health care system).
4. The stem cell transplant dealt with the CCR5 co-receptors but not the CXCR4 receptors - it remains to be seen whether they may become targetted by any latent virus in this patient.

Its great news but its a hard, hard journey. All has not been rosy in the garden for this patient - he has neurological problems, coordination problems and needs speech therapy. It also took more than one transplant attempt to get him where he is today.

Lets hope the researchers build on this experience and can generate a modified genetic solution which is easier to implement.

As the OP says - it gives hope.

[Hellraiser]

Actually I'm assuming he still reliably tests positive, so he would be allowed to post in the forums even though he is no longer infected.  In that way he is still HIV+.

[mecch]

Assuming a cure eventually, and assuming a continuing need for this forum, I'm sure nobody would prevent previously HIV+ people from joining or staying. 

[Inchlingblue]

Actually I'm assuming he still reliably tests positive, so he would be allowed to post in the forums even though he is no longer infected.  In that way he is still HIV+.

A previous update on him said they were finding fewer and fewer HIV antibodies so it was expected there would come a point in time that he would actually test negative. That probably hasn't yet happened but it's what they expect based on the declining numbers of antobodies.

[Inchlingblue]

The article linked below is an excellent, very clearly-written explanation of what precisely happened with Timothy Ray Brown and his treatment that resulted for him in an HIV cure.

LINK:

http://www.webmd.com/hiv-aids/news/20101215/hiv-aids-cure-faq

[leatherman]

http://www.webmd.com/hiv-aids/news/20101215/hiv-aids-cure-faq

"Few people with HIV would want to go through the grueling and life-threatening cancer treatment that was part of this cure. And so far, the cure has not been duplicated in other HIV-positive leukemia patients who underwent similar treatment."

is there any more information somewhere on how many other "HIV-positive leukemia patients who underwent similar treatment" and were not cured?

[Inchlingblue]

"Few people with HIV would want to go through the grueling and life-threatening cancer treatment that was part of this cure. And so far, the cure has not been duplicated in other HIV-positive leukemia patients who underwent similar treatment."

is there any more information somewhere on how many other "HIV-positive leukemia patients who underwent similar treatment" and were not cured?

I could be wrong but I don't think it's a question of others not being cured but rather that the "experiment" has not been exactly duplicated because so far for others with HIV and leukemia it has not been possible to find a donor match who also had the delta-32 mutation.

It's not that easy to find, most donor registries don't contain that information so people have to be screened, which is expensive and time consuming. As mentioned above, for Ray it took 61 donor screenings before they found one that was a match and also had the delta-32 mutation.

The article is vague when they say the others underwent "similar" treatment.  There have been bone marrow transplants on those with HIV in the past that did not involve a donor with the delta-32 mutation.

It does say this, though:

A patient with leukemia can't wait very long for treatment, and it's not easy to find a matched donor who carries the double mutation.

"The Germans have tried and we have tried in the U.S., but we have not found another situation where we had an AIDS patient who could go forward for the transplant," Zaia says.

[leatherman]

ah! and that's why I was wondering. It phrases it in one place that "the cure was not duplicated in patients who underwent similar treatment" which to me sounds as they tried this/similar treatment in other patients who were not cured - meaning they still had HIV or they might have died during treatment. Yet later it says that they "have not found another situation with a patient that could have the transplant" which sounds as if they haven't actually done this/similar treatment at all.

obviously those statements/situations are very different. Viewing it one way, this patient is the one and only that has tried this procedure and he was cured. Batting 1000. However in the other view, they've done this procedure on 5 patients and he is the only one to survive or be cured. Batting 200. Very different results indeed.

and then as you pointed out there is the vagueness of "similar treatment" which doesn't mean the "same treatment".

thanks