The investigators found that a factor called Axin2 is essential for normal repair of nerves stripped of myelin. This is the process called remyelination.
A small molecule XAV939, which stabilises levels of Axin2, accelerates remyelination.
These findings indicate that Axin2 is an essential regulator of remyelination and that it might serve as a pharmacological target for drug development for MS’ers.
“Another promising target for the Pharma industry to develop drugs to promote remyelination and recovery in MS’ers. The NMSS Promise 2010 delivers another target! Are you happy?”
[Epub ahead of print] Fancy et al. Axin2 as regulatory and therapeutic target in newborn brain injury and remyelination. Nat Neurosci. 2011 Jun 26. doi: 10.1038/nn.2855.
“Well done Steve and colleagues.”
CoI: Nil
Further reading: myelin
"Another promising target for the Pharma industry to develop drugs to promote remyelination and recovery in MS'ers. The NMSS Promise 2010 delivers another target! Are you happy?"I'm guessing if you did a poll there would be a resounding "NO". The press coverage said that any treatment would be 10-15 years away (assuming it does work).We can't be happy given what this disease does to you (see you posts on Twitter about the recent clinics you have held). Happiness goes with health and this disease robs you of health. We are in a period where there is much promise, but nothing to take home from Boots i.e. a drug which stops progression / treatment to promote repair. On the positive side, I think we'll see some positive news about the Phase III Alemtuzumab trial in third quarter 2011 and some positive (but not great) news at the end of the year from the CUPID trial. So this time next year there may be some more treatments available, so happiness among MS patients will be slightly higher. Any other treatments likely to become available in the next year?
Anonymous said: "treatment would be 10-15 years away (assuming it does work)" – it seems incredible that it is beyond the wit of man (or woman) to work out a way of speeding things up. I'm sure everything possible is being done, but is it possible that thinking 'outside the box' could speed things up?Do you collaborate with the myelin repair work going on in California? From what I understand, their raison d'etre is to find some treatments in the shortest time frame possible.And yes, it is great news that a potential target has been identified 🙂
Re "15 years". It is interesting to note that you all find 15 years a problem. Almost all the current MS drugs have had a 15 years or longer clinical development time. Alemtuzumab (aka Campath-1h) will have taken longer than 20 years to get to market. I know this is depressing for those of you with progressive MS and ticking clock; the duration is mainly driven by regulatory issues (safety issues) and the time it takes to do MS trials (EDSS is not a very good outcome measure).
Re "It is interesting to note that you all find 15 years a problem. Almost all the current MS drugs have had a 15 years or longer clinical development time."That is why Britain needs to legalise assisted dying. It's quicker and a more realistic option for progressive MS sufferers.
"Re "15 years". It is interesting to note that you all find 15 years a problem."I think this illustrates the key difference between individuals with MS and those without MS (even those who encounter patients with MS as part of their job).Imagine you were on fire and I said that the water might be coming out of the hose in 15 minutes – if you were on fire, very second is critical.15 year is way too long. And we mustn't forget that MS research has been we resourced since the mid 1950s. You only have to look at the number of MS research articles produced each year ('000s), or the number of MS researchers who turn up at ACTRIMS, ECRIMS…..After 50 years of MS research we still don't know the cause, can't stop progression, can't repair damage. I imagine their are neuros who've been in the business for 40 years and not one of their MS patients has ever got better.If MS research were a business, the administrators would have been called in decades ago.Patients and neuros will have different metric for measuring progress / success. For a patient it might be stopping progression, reversing deficits, going from wheelchair to cane, living to the average lifespan etc etc. I don't think that in 2011 these expectations are unreasonable.Great strides have been made in cancer, Aids etc, but for MS this is not the case. While as a patient I don't doubt the commitment and the complexity of the disease, my interest is in my well-being / health. 15 years is a problem. Why? Becuase technology has improved beyond imagination over the last 15 years – internet allows exchange of ideas / papers across the globe in seconds, computer power allows us to analyse the genome in vastly reuced times etc etc. MRIs are hugely better than 15 years ago. So it's not unreasonable to expect that the pace of MS research should also be increasing. The 15 years rule needs to be challenged. There must be ways to streamline the process by usign modelling, computer power, different models. I can't do this – I'm just a patient.
Sad. 40 years with MS. I treated with a prominent neurologist in the mid- 1970's. When I switched to a local neuro, my father was upset that I would leav A "world renowned" doctor. I was 25. I said what difference is it if he's world renowned or a local when the disease has no cause, cure, or treatment?On the upside I asked for Ampyra 2 years ago which has improved much of my function even though walking is over for me.What I find frustrating as someone with secondary progressive, the medical world seems to have given up on me. I am the one who has to research and ask for treatment.Lhalvor
Dear Anon 2:43I disagree with you we have not given up. I suggest you listen to the video given by Prof G on MS life 2012 The link is on the blog