122

Chinese scientists develop cure for diabetes, insulin patient becomes medicine-free in just 3 months (m.economictimes.com)

submitted 5 months ago by naturalgasbad@lemmy.ca to c/world@lemmy.world

22 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 22 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] Soulfulginger@lemmy.world 80 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I literally worked in a research lab working on islet cell therapies for diabetes in the US. This has actually been done many times before with cells from cadavers. It has been successful, although most the of the time the person reverts back after a few years

The issues we were trying to solve in the lab were

Finding a good place to transplant where the cells will last: Implanting in the hepatic region (liver), which is the most common place to implant, is toxic to the cells over time hence only lasting 3-5 years. The cells need a really good blood supply and the volume you're transplanting can't be easily transplanted in the pancreas or kidney capsules (where many successful studies were performed in mice and rats)
Being able to consistently make a high volume of stem cells that are fully grown into insulin producing cells: Cadaver cells usually require 3-5 donors for 1 person and require the receiver to be on lifelong immunosuppresors due to the immune response. Depending on the kind of stem cells, the patient may still even need immunosuppresors due to the cell type you're converting from

All this the say - the article says nothing about where the cells where transplanted, where they came from, or whether the person has Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes. Although it is still a feat, it is likely not the first time it has been done, and we're still a long ways off from a cure

[-] HubertManne@kbin.social 13 points 5 months ago

"The new therapy involves programming the patient's peripheral blood mononuclear cells, transforming them into "seed cells" to recreate pancreatic islet tissue in an artificial environment."

I don't see anything for the other two questions though but being patient derived would seem to fix your number 2.

[-] Soulfulginger@lemmy.world 9 points 5 months ago

Unfortunately, that doesn't necessarily negate the requirement for immunosuppresors or some other kind of immuno protection. If it is Type 1 diabetes, the person originally became diabetic because the immune system saw certain markers on the beta cells (insulin producing cells) as a threat. So, if you recreate the beta cells, there is still a possibility that it will happen again. You are fighting your own immune system. Someone in our lab was studying encapsulation of cells to create a protective barrier around them for this very issue

If the person was Type 2, this might be less of a risk since type 2 can also be due to high insulin resistivity. There are a lot of other factors involved, though, it's not straightforward

[-] fiat_lux@kbin.social 6 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

1 patient, T2 since mid-30s and now 59, had kidney transplant 2017 after end-stage diabetic nephropathy and fucked glucose control since 2019. The successful cells were endoderm stem cells from him cultivated by mice they injected with his PBMCs that they then made diabetic. So not from cadavers (except mouse cadaver i guess), which is the actual new part here. Intrahepatic implant, and cells from unrelated donor failed that were embedded at the same time. His personalised mouse-donor cells worked well enough to take him off insulin 3 months later.

Wu, J., Li, T., Guo, M. et al. Treating a type 2 diabetic patient with impaired pancreatic islet function by personalized endoderm stem cell-derived islet tissue. Cell Discov 10, 45 (2024).

It's good news, but you're entirely correct that the article missed the point entirely. Thanks for the crash course in islet cell therapy!

[-] HubertManne@kbin.social 1 points 5 months ago

Yeah they don't say the type but based just on what we are discussing I would be a bet its type 2.

[-] Zehzin@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

would seem to fix your number 2.

Hehehehehe

[-] yokonzo@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

Interesting. So if you chose the hard route (implant in the pancreas through invasive surgery) would that effectively cure you? I'm betting many people would be willing to take the risks

[-] Soulfulginger@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

The pancreas is not really stable enough to be implanted in at all. Other organs you're imagining like liver, stomach, heart, etc. have a solid lining that can be cut open and stitched back together. The pancreas is more like a cluster of loose cells with veins throughout and held together by a very thin, tissue paper lining. If you try to open it and insert cells, you're not going to be able to put it back together.

That's why cells are usually put in the liver, which has a large vein going directly to the pancreas. Close proximity and high blood supply. Implanting in the pancreas will likely never be an option unless you can drastically reduce the volume of cells.

Our lab was working on implanting the stem cells on a porous scaffold in the fat pad of the stomach as an alternative

[-] phdepressed@sh.itjust.works 4 points 5 months ago

Short answer is no, not long-term.

[-] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 63 points 5 months ago

Interesting, but that headline is misleading.

A single patient was weaned off blood sugar medication over a year and hasn't redeveloped diabetes in almost three years.

There's obviously a lot more research into the cell therapy process and many more patients are going to have to undergo this therapy in controlled conditions before we can call it a new cure.

Right now, this is an interesting medical anomaly that occurred over more than a year of treatment in which someone's pancreatic process was restored in correlation with a new cell therapy.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 13 points 5 months ago

Interesting, but that headline is misleading.

As is standard for science stories, especially medical stories, in the media.

This is how big of a problem it is: https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2019/6/15/18679138/nutrition-health-science-mice-news

[+] naturalgasbad@lemmy.ca -6 points 5 months ago

First human trial for a treatment strategy passed (notably, we know that placebo treatments for diabetes fail). This more than passes the bar to justify further large-scale human trials and, clinically, is a very strong indicator of success.

What, is it not a cure until it's available to the public?

[-] MontyGommo@lemmy.one 20 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I mean, the guy is correct… there are plenty of cases where someone has recovered from something that doesn’t have widespread impact.

That doesn’t make this any less, but a good dose of scepticism is pretty healthy when it comes to broad statements like ‘cures diabetes’

Edit: too many versions of ‘healthy’ haha

[-] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 17 points 5 months ago

It justifies, in fact begs for human trials, but a single unregulated data point from a single moment is hardly a cure.

It becomes a cure after the treatment is isolated from mitigating factors and acutely applied to the same disorder in many patients in controlled conditions with peer-reviewed and independently confirmed repeatable results over time.

[-] ReallyActuallyFrankenstein@lemmynsfw.com 8 points 5 months ago

Well, the phrase is, "the plural of anecdote is not statistic." In this case, we only have a single case, so it doesn't even escape "anecdote." I think at that point, there isn't yet a scientific basis to call it a "cure."

[-] Rayspekt@lemmy.world 41 points 5 months ago

Insulin-selling companies are sending out hitmen this very second.

[-] DestroyMegacorps@lemmy.ml 9 points 5 months ago

The scientist who discovered the cure just recently died of a severe fever

[-] OneWomanCreamTeam@sh.itjust.works 11 points 5 months ago

The pain was so unbearable he shot himself in the back of the head three times.

[-] Zorsith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 5 months ago

And jumped out a top floor window, what a pity

[-] critical@reddthat.com 3 points 5 months ago

His research associates also died of grief.

[-] Libertus@lemmy.world 19 points 5 months ago

Until there is proof or external verification of the results, it's just another case of Chinese propaganda.

this post was submitted on 29 May 2024

122 points (86.7% liked)

World News

39019 readers

2241 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world

Recommendations

How to spot Misinformation and Propaganda

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

quinten@lemmy.world

NewsAutoMod@lemmy.world

jordanlund@lemmy.world

Tenthrow@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

lemmyAtom@lemmy.world

FlyingSquid@lemmy.world