PLXTO

Canadian-made HIV vaccine approved for human testing

fatck

Member
Apr 20, 2010
359
7
18
CTVNews.ca Staff
Date: Tuesday Dec. 20, 2011 1:19 PM ET
Many have tried and failed to create a vaccine that could prevent infection with HIV. Now, Canadian researchers say they're working on one that takes a different approach.

Researchers from the University of Western Ontario in London, Ont. say they have developed an HIV vaccine that uses the whole HIV virus, unlike other attempts that have used just certain genes or proteins from the virus.

The virus has been genetically engineered to be "non-pathogenic," meaning it can't actually cause HIV in recipients. The idea is the vaccine would prime the body's T-cells to destroy any cells that might become infected with HIV.

So far, the vaccine has been shown to stimulate a strong immune response in preliminary toxicology tests in lab animals, the university reports. But it will be several years before researchers know whether it's effective in humans.

The team announced Tuesday they have just received approval from regulators with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to begin testing the experimental vaccine on humans. The Phase I clinical trial will begin in January using 40 volunteers who already have HIV. That phase will test the safety of the vaccine.

If all goes well, the next phases of study would test whether the vaccine is actually effective.

Phase II would measure immune responses to the vaccine in people who are HIV negative. Phase III would test the effectiveness of the vaccine in a larger group of about 6,000 volunteers who are at risk of becoming infected. Half would be given the vaccine and half given a placebo. Participants would then be tracked for three years to see how many in each group become infected.

The vaccine, dubbed SAV001, was developed by Dr. Chil-Yong Kang and his team over the last 10 years, and is the only HIV vaccine currently under development in Canada.

The vaccine was developed with support from Sumagen Canada, a biotech company established in 2008 specifically to support clinical development of Kang's vaccine. Sumagen Canada is a subsidiary of Sumagen Co. Ltd., a Korean-based pharmaceutical venture company.

A number of pharmaceutical companies and academic researchers around the world have tried to develop a vaccine against HIV, but all have ended in failure.

One large study in Thailand showed an experimental vaccine offered some protection against infection, but only in about a third of recipients. Researchers continue to work on that vaccine to improve it.

Earlier this year, researchers halted a study that was testing a daily HIV prevention pill called Truvada in thousands of African women, after partial results showed the pill was ineffective.

The World Health Organization estimates that 34 million people are living with HIV around the world, and that 2.7 million people are newly infected every year.
 

wigglee

Well-known member
Oct 13, 2010
10,068
1,914
113
I wish they would have spent the money developing an HIV vaccine on
one for Alzheimer's disease instead. That will be devastating as the population gets older.

We already know how to prevent getting HIV.

yea.....don't get raped
 

shack

Nitpicker Extraordinaire
Oct 2, 2001
49,805
9,189
113
Toronto
I wish they would have spent the money developing an HIV vaccine on
one for Alzheimer's disease instead. That will be devastating as the population gets older.
So you're saying Alzheimer's has a microbial cause?
 

shakenbake

Senior Turgid Member
Nov 13, 2003
7,824
1,939
113
Durham Region, Den of Iniquity
www.vafanculo.it
Still might be 10 yrs away, but humble UWO developed it when all the brain power in the states couldn't. Last time London, ON developed something like this it was Dr. Banting who changed the world.

Canadians rock.
The idea may have come from UWO. However, it was U of T where the idea became reality.

http://news.utoronto.ca/celebrating-90-years-insulin

However, we have to acknowledge UWO's part in the discovery, too. They had and still have one of the best, if not the best, medical faculties in Canada.
 

night ride

Active member
Jul 23, 2009
3,448
5
38
I wish they would have spent the money developing an HIV vaccine on
one for Alzheimer's disease instead.
If the PR machine isn't behind an illness (i.e. celebs) it remains underfunded no matter how worthwhile. I can't remember ever having someone collect for alzheimers. Some causes are expert at this such as breast cancer research.
 

night ride

Active member
Jul 23, 2009
3,448
5
38
No disrespect to any cause but some are just better at getting money than others. Alzheimer sufferering is largely locked away out of sight and this would impact their funding.
 

fuji

Banned
Jan 31, 2005
80,011
7
0
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
is.gd
I read somewhere that the level of funding that a type of cancer receives is inversely proportional to its lethality. For the cancers where there are effective treatments and good survival odds, generally things that can be easily detected and effectively treated, there are a lot of survivors, and the survivors turn into advocates who succeed in raising funds for the disease. The more lethal cancers have no survivors, and therefore, fewer people earnestly engaged in fundraising.

By that sort of analysis it makes sense that HIV gets a lot of funding. It is a chronic disease, and the survivors are largely able to engage in political activities and fundraising activities, so naturally they do.

Survivors of Alzheimer's are unlikely to be successful in their fundraising activities, and things like pancreatic cancer get little funding because there are no survivors.
 

shack

Nitpicker Extraordinaire
Oct 2, 2001
49,805
9,189
113
Toronto
The more lethal cancers have no survivors, and therefore, fewer people earnestly engaged in fundraising.
Maybe you're correct to a point, but I think the flaw in your logic is that survivors are the prime movers when it comes to fundraising. I'm of the opinion that friends and family members of non-survivors would be very, very motivated by their loss, as well as seeing the slow painful demise from the disease, to be spurred on to try to find a cure so others could be spared the same fate.

For sure survivors contribute, but to make them such a huge factor may be overstating their contribution to the fundraising efforts. Tough to prove either way, IMO.
 

larry

Active member
Oct 19, 2002
2,070
4
38
whatever the reason, the gay lobby is strong. it's funny when the study itself will use people at high risk of infection. who do you think that will be? and why is the risk high? how would you reduce that risk? by spending 10s of millions of dollars or just asking them to wear protection? i hope it's not public money.
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts