The innovation that gets an Alzheimer’s drug through the blood-brain barrier

This article first appeared in The Checkup, MIT Technology Review’s weekly biotech newsletter. To receive it in your inbox every Thursday, and read articles like this first, sign up here.

Therapies to treat brain diseases share a common problem: they struggle to reach their target. The blood vessels that permeate the brain have a special lining so tightly packed with cells that only very tiny molecules can pass through. This blood-brain barrier “acts as a seal,” protecting the brain from toxins or other harmful substances, says Anne Eichmann, a molecular biologist at Yale. But it also keeps most medicines out. Researchers have been working on methods to sneak drugs past the blood-brain barrier for decades. And their hard work is finally beginning to pay off.

Last week, researchers at the West Virginia University Rockefeller Neuroscience Institute reported that by using focused ultrasound to open the blood-brain barrier, they

improved delivery of a new Alzheimer’s treatment and sped up clearance of the sticky plaques that are thought to contribute to some of the cognitive and memory problems in people with Alzheimer’s by 32%.

For this issue of The Checkup, we’ll explore some of the ways scientists are trying to disrupt the blood-brain barrier.

A patient surrounded by a medical team lays on the bed of an MRI machine with their head in a special focused ultrasound helmet
An Alzheimer’s patient undergoes focused ultrasound treatment
with the WVU RNI team.
WVU ROCKEFELLER NEUROSCIENCE INSTITUTE

In the West Virginia study, three people with mild Alzheimer’s received monthly doses of aducanumab, a lab-made antibody that is delivered via IV. This drug, first approved in 2021,  helps clear away beta-amyloid, a protein fragment that clumps up in the brains of people with Alzheimer’s disease. (The drug’s approval was controversial, and it’s still not clear whether it actually slows progression of the disease.)  After the infusion, the researchers treated specific regions of the patients’ brains with focused ultrasound, but just on one side. That allowed them to use the other half of the brain as a control. PET scans revealed a greater reduction in amyloid plaques in the ultrasound-treated regions than in those same regions on the untreated side of the brain, suggesting that more of the antibody was getting into the brain on the treated side.

Aducanumab does clear plaques without ultrasound, but it takes a long time, perhaps in part because the antibody has trouble entering the brain. “Instead of using the therapy intravenously for 18 to 24 months to see the plaque reduction, we want to see if we can achieve that reduction in a few months,” says Ali Rezai, a neurosurgeon at West Virginia University Rockefeller Neuroscience Institute and an author of the new study. Cutting the amount of time needed to clear these plaques might help slow the memory loss and cognitive problems that define the disease.

The device used to target and deliver the ultrasound waves, developed by a company called Insightec, consists of an MRI machine and a helmet studded with ultrasound transducers. It’s FDA approved, but for an entirely different purpose: to help stop tremors in people with Parkinson’s by creating lesions in the brain. To open the blood-brain barrier, “we inject individuals intravenously with microbubbles,” Rezai says. These tiny gas bubbles, commonly used as a contrast agent, travel through the bloodstream. Using the MRI, the researchers can aim the ultrasound waves at very specific parts of the brain “with millimeter precision,” Rezai says. When the waves hit the microbubbles, the bubbles begin to expand and contract, physically pushing apart the tightly packed cells that line the brain’s capillaries. “This temporary opening can last up to 48 hours, which means that during those 48 hours, you can have increased penetration into the brain of therapeutics,” he says.

Focused ultrasound has been explored as a method for opening the blood-brain barrier for years. (We wrote about this technology way back in 2006.) But this is the first time it has been combined with an Alzheimer’s therapy and tested in humans.

The proof-of-concept study was too small to look at efficacy, but Rezai and his team are planning to continue their work. The next step is to repeat the study in five people with one of the newer anti-amyloid antibodies, lecanemab. Not only does that drug clear plaque, but one study showed that it slowed disease progression by about 30% after 18 months of treatment in patients with early Alzheimer’s symptoms. That’s a modest amount, but a major success in a field that has struggled with repeated failures. 

Eichmann, who is also working on disrupting the blood-brain barrier, says the new results using focused ultrasound are exciting. But she wonders about long-term effects of the technique. “I guess it remains to be seen whether over time, upon repeated use, this would be damaging to the blood-brain barrier,” she says.

Other strategies for opening the blood-brain barrier look promising too. Rather than mechanically pushing the barrier apart, Roche, a pharmaceutical company, has developed a technology called “Brainshuttle” that ferries drugs across it by binding to receptors on the cells that line the vessel walls.

The company has linked Brainshuttle to its own anti-amyloid antibody, gantenerumab, and is testing it in 44 people with Alzheimer’s. At a conference in October, researchers presented initial results. The highest dose completely wiped out plaque in three of four participants. The biotech company Denali Therapeutics is working on a similar strategy to tackle Parkinson’s and other neurodegenerative diseases..   

Eichmann is working on a different strategy. Her team is testing an antibody that binds to a receptor that is important for maintaining the integrity of the blood-brain barrier. By blocking that receptor, they can temporarily loosen the junctions between cells, at least in lab mice.

Other groups are targeting different receptors, exploring various viral vectors, or developing nanoparticles that can slip into the brain. 

All these strategies will have different advantages and drawbacks, and it isn’t yet clear which will be safest and most effective. But Eichmann thinks some strategy is likely to be approved in the coming years: “We are indeed getting close.”

Techniques to open the blood-brain barrier could be useful in a whole host of diseases—Alzheimer’s, but also Parkinson’s disease, ALS, and brain tumors. “This really opens up a whole array of potential opportunities,” Rezai says. “It’s an exciting time.”

Read more from MIT Technology Review’s archive

Until recently, drug development in Alzheimer’s had been a dismal pursuit, marked by repeated failures. In 2017, Emily Mullin looked at how failures of some of the anti-amyloid drugs had researchers questioning whether amyloid is really the problem in Alzheimer’s. 

In 2016, Ryan Cross covered one of the first efforts to use ultrasound to open the blood-brain barrier in humans, a trial to deliver chemotherapy to patients with recurrent brain tumors. That same year, Antonio Regalado reported some of the first exciting results of the Alzheimer’s drug aducanumab. 

From around the web

Bayer’s non-hormonal drug to treat hot flashes reduced their frequency and intensity and improved sleep and quality of life. These results, coupled with other recent advances in treatment for symptoms of menopause, are a sign that these long-neglected issues have become big business. (Stat)

Covid is surging. Wastewater data is the best way we have to measure the virus’s ebb and flow, but it’s far from perfect. (NYT)

Last week the FDA approved Florida’s request to import drugs from Canada to cut costs. The pharmaceutical industry is not thrilled. (Reuters) Neither is Canada. (Ars Technica

These AI-powered apps can hear the cause of a cough

This article first appeared in The Checkup, MIT Technology Review’s weekly biotech newsletter. To receive it in your inbox every Thursday, and read articles like this first, sign up here.

This week I came across a paper that uses AI in a way that I hadn’t heard of before. Researchers developed a smartphone app that can distinguish tuberculosis from other diseases by the sound of the patient’s cough.

The method isn’t foolproof. The app failed to detect TB in about 30% of people who actually had the disease. But it’s simpler and vastly cheaper than collecting phlegm to look for the bacterium that causes the disease, the gold-standard method for diagnosing TB. So it could prove especially useful in low-income countries as a screening tool, helping to catch cases and interrupting transmission.

In the new study, a team of researchers from the US and Kenya trained and tested their smartphone-based diagnostic tool on recordings of coughs collected in a Kenyan health-care center—about 33,000 spontaneous coughs and 1,200 forced coughs from 149 people with TB and 46 people with other respiratory conditions. The app’s performance wasn’t good enough to replace traditional diagnostics. But it could be used as an additional screening tool. The sooner people with active cases of TB are identified and receive treatment, the less likely they will be to spread the disease. 

This new paper is one of dozens that have come out in recent years that aim to use coughs and other body sounds as “acoustic biomarkers”—sounds that indicate changes in health.  The concept has been around for at least three decades, but in the past five years, the field has exploded. What changed, says Yael Bensoussan, a laryngologist at the University of South Florida, is the growing use of AI: “With artificial intelligence, you can analyze a larger quantity of data faster.”

Covid also helped drive interest in cough analysis. The pandemic gave rise to 30 or 40 startups focusing on the acoustics of cough, Bensoussan says. AudibleHealthAI launched in 2020 and began working on a mobile app designed to diagnose covid. The software, called AudibleHealth DX, is currently being reviewed by the FDA. And now the company is now branching out to influenza and TB.

The Australian company ResApp Health has been working on acoustic diagnosis of respiratory diseases since 2014, well before the pandemic. But when covid emerged, the company pivoted and developed an audio-based covid-19 screening test. In 2022, the company announced that the tool correctly identified 92% of positive covid cases just from the sound of a patient’s cough.  Soon after, Pfizer paid $179 million to acquire ResApp.

Bensoussan is skeptical that these kinds of apps will become reliable diagnostics. But she says apps that detect coughs—any coughs—could prove to be  valuable health tools even if they can’t pinpoint the cause. Coughs are especially easy for smartphones to capture. “It’s a sea change to have a common device, the smartphone, which everyone has sitting by their bedside or in their pocket to help observe your coughs,” Jamie Rogers, product manager at Google Health, told Time magazine. Google’s newest Pixel phones have cough and snore detection available.

Bensoussan also thinks cough-tracking apps could be game-changers for clinical trials where coughs are one of the things researchers are trying to measure. “It’s really hard to track cough,” she says. Researchers often rely on patients’ recall of their coughing. But an app would be far more accurate. “It’s really easy to capture the frequency of cough from a tech perspective,” she says. 

And it’s not just coughs that can reveal clues about our health status. Bensoussan is leading a $14 million project funded by the NIH to develop a massive database of voice, cough, and respiratory sounds to aid in the development of tools to diagnose cancers, respiratory illnesses, neurological and mood disorders, speech disorders, and more. The database captures a wide variety of sounds—coughing, reading sentences or vowel sounds, inhaling, exhaling, and more. 

“One of the big limitations is that a lot of these studies have private data sets that are secret,” Bensoussan says. That makes it difficult to validate the research. The database that she and her colleagues are developing will be publicly available. She expects the first data release to happen before June.

As more data becomes available, expect to see even more apps that can help alert us to health problems on the basis of cough or speech patterns. It’s too soon to say whether those apps will make a significant difference in diagnosis or screening,  but we’ll keep an ear out for any new developments.  

Read more from MIT Technology Review’s archive

Vocal cues could provide a way to diagnose PTSD, traumatic brain injuries, mood disorders, and even heart disease, Emily Mullin wrote in this story from 2017. 

AI tools might perform well  in the lab but falter in the chaos of the real world. Will Douglas Heaven unpacked what happened when Google Health implemented a tool in Thailand to screen people for an eye condition linked to diabetes. 

In a previous issue of The Checkup, Jessica Hamelzou outlined why we shouldn’t let AI make all our health-care decisions: “Doctors may be inclined to trust AI at the expense of a patient’s own lived experiences, as well as their own clinical judgment.” 

From around the web

Safe bathrooms equipped with motion sensors have eliminated overdose deaths at a Boston clinic that serves unhoused individuals in the city’s infamous “methadone mile”—further proof that supervised consumption sites would save lives. (STAT)

Now that we’ve got new blockbuster weight-loss drugs, some companies are looking to develop longer-lasting treatments and preventatives. But some say an obesity-free future won’t come from pharma. “We are not going to be able to treat our way out of this problem, or medicalize our way out of this problem,” says William Dietz, director of the Global Center for Prevention and Wellness at George Washington University. “What we need to do is to come to terms with the kind of environmental forces which are driving obesity, and generate the political will necessary to address those factors.” (STAT

Advances in neuroscience have sparked worries that brain-computer interfaces might someday read people’s minds or hamper free will. Now “neurorights” advocates are racing against the clock to push for laws that would protect against the misuse and abuse of neurotechnology. (Undark)

Gene editing had a banner year in 2023

This article first appeared in The Checkup, MIT Technology Review’s weekly biotech newsletter. To receive it in your inbox every Thursday, and read articles like this first, sign up here.

Welcome back to The Checkup. This will be our last issue of 2023, so this week I’ve been reflecting on our biotechnology coverage over the past year. As I scrolled through our archives, I was struck by the vast number of stories we wrote about gene editing.

It really shouldn’t have come as a surprise. Perhaps no technology has more power to transform medicine, and its vast potential is just beginning to be realized. Gene editing can be used to delete, insert, or alter portions of our genetic code. We’ve been able to modify DNA for years, but newer technologies like CRISPR mean that we can do it faster, more accurately, and more efficiently than ever before. In 2023, we saw the first approval of a CRISPR-based gene-editing therapy. And many more are to come. So let’s take a look at the developments that made news this year. What is the promise of gene editing, and what are the current pitfalls?

Lucky breaks and next steps 

Casgevy, the first CRISPR therapy, has already been approved in the UK and US to treat sickle-cell disease. And it’s now on the cusp of approval in the European Union. Sickle-cell disease is caused by a mutation in the hemoglobin gene that leads to a characteristic crescent moon shape of the red blood cells. The treatment doesn’t address the underlying cause of the disease; instead, it disables another gene, one that hampers production of a type of hemoglobin that people normally produce only in the womb and as babies. With that gene out of commission, production of this second type of hemoglobin resumes. The therapy works because cells with fetal hemoglobin won’t form sickles. You can read more about the fascinating backstory on the development of Casgevy in this story by my colleague Antonio Regalado. 

Why go at it in this roundabout way? Current versions of CRISPR work best as a pair of scissors, creating snips that disable genes. That limits its usefulness. New versions of CRISPR will allow researchers to alter the genetic code or even insert new genes, which will make it possible to address a wide variety of genetic diseases.

Verve Therapeutics, for example, is testing an approach called base editing. Jessica Hamzelou covered this technique in depth in this story in January: “There are four DNA bases: A, T, C, and G. Instead of cutting the DNA, CRISPR 2.0 machinery can convert one base letter into another. Base editing can swap a C for a T, or an A for a G.” According to Kiran Musunuru, cofounder and senior scientific advisor at Verve, “It’s no longer acting like scissors, but more like a pencil and eraser.”

Verve’s therapy, now being tested in a small clinical trial, swaps out a single base in a gene for a protein called PCSK9, which is linked to high cholesterol. (The therapy was one of MIT Technology Review’s 10 Breakthrough Technologies 2023.) That change disables the gene, which means that the body makes less PCSK9 and cholesterol levels fall. In November the company announced interim results: a single injection of the therapy reduced LDL levels in the blood by up to 55% in 10 people with a genetic condition that causes high cholesterol.

CRISPR 3.0, which allows scientists to replace bits of DNA or insert new chunks of genetic code, is still being tested in animals. One company, Prime Medicine, plans to seek FDA approval to launch a human trial of a treatment for chronic granulomatous disease, a genetic immune disorder, in 2024 .

Pitfalls remain, at least for now. 

The only approved CRISPR therapy isn’t a simple fix. Patients have to undergo a bone-marrow transplant: after chemotherapy to destroy their faulty cells, stem cells are extracted, edited in the lab, and then reinfused. Jimi Olaghere, one of the few people to have received the therapy, wrote about how arduous this was. The cell collection process left him so weak he needed blood transfusions. And the chemo meant “dealing with nausea, weakness, hair loss, debilitating mouth sores, and the risk of exacerbating the underlying condition.” All told, he spent 17 weeks in the hospital.

Given the complexity of the treatment, you won’t be surprised to learn that it’s expensive—it costs an estimated $2.2 million. That price tag means it’s out of reach for many, especially people in low-income countries.

Vertex is already exploring strategies to make sickle-cell therapies more accessible and affordable. Antonio spoke to the company’s head of research, David Altshuler, about some of the strategies earlier this month.  One of the more promising approaches might not involve gene editing at all.

“One question I get a lot is: How are we going to get to the rest of the world?” Altshuler said. “And I think the answer is not by trying to do bone-marrow transplants in the rest of the world. It’s just too resource intensive, and the infrastructure is not there. I think the goal will be achieved sooner by finding another modality, like a pill that can be distributed much more effectively.”

Safety concerns abound. Gene editing is permanent, and one of the biggest concerns is that these therapies might miss the mark and create “off-target” effects. Regulators were so concerned about this possibility that an FDA advisory committee met in November to assess whether Vertex would need to provide additional data to prove Casgevy’s safety. (They ultimately decided the existing data was sufficient for approval.) The company plans to follow up with patients for 15 years to confirm safety.

Most experts think base editing, which doesn’t involve snipping, should be safer than the CRISPR scissors. But even there, safety has been front and center in discussions. The positive results in Verve’s trial of base editing to treat high cholesterol were partly overshadowed by the fact that two participants had heart attacks, and one of them died.

The epic patent dispute over CRISPR has long been another potential hiccup for possible therapies. But this month Antonio reported on a partial resolution. Vertex agreed to pay tens of millions of dollars to competitor Editas and the Broad Institute for the right to use Broad’s CRISPR patent, thus avoiding a potential lawsuit. “It’s not yet clear if the license agreement points to an end of the fierce patent fight between Broad and Berkeley. That has been continuing before a US patent court, with Berkeley still trying to overturn its rival’s claims,” he wrote.

Despite the pitfalls, it’s clear that gene-editing therapies, when they work, can be transformational. Olaghere detailed his experience as a trial participant.  “I started to experience things I had only dreamed of: boundless energy and the ability to recover by merely sleeping. My physical symptoms—including a yellowish tint in my eyes caused by the rapid breakdown of malfunctioning red blood cells—virtually disappeared overnight,” he wrote. “Most significantly, I gained the confidence that sickle-cell disease won’t take me away from my family, and a sense of control over my own destiny.”

Another thing

  • Hunter-gatherer societies may still retain many of the microbes that people living in industrialized societies lack. That’s why scientists are racing to catalog their microbiome. But there’s a catch, writes senior reporter Jessica Hamzelou. “We don’t know whether those in hunter-gatherer societies really do have ‘healthier’ microbiomes—and if they do, whether the benefits could be shared with others.” What’s more, members of these communities say some research is being conducted without regard for ethics or equity. “Taking advantage of an Indigenous population and using their microbes to try to reinstate health in somebody from a wealthy, industrialized nation, I think, is a problematic thing to do,” Justin Sonnenburg, a microbiome scientist at Stanford University, told her.

From around the web

  • A New York Times investigation delves into the increasingly popular practice of snipping “tongue-ties” in babies, an often unnecessary procedure being aggressively pushed by some lactation consultants and dentists. A heartbreaking must-read. (NYT)
  • Studies call into question the benefit of spinal cord stimulation for pain (Medpage
  • Researchers are testing a new non-hormonal male birth control pill in a clinical trial in the UK.. (Stat)
  • Chemotherapy drug shortages are robbing cancer patients of the therapies they desperately need and highlighting systemic problems in the generic drug market. (NYT) But there are some possible fixes. (NYT)
  • The high lead levels in some applesauce pouches, which sickened more than 100 children in the US, came from the cinnamon that was added. Regulators are still trying to work out why the cinnamon contained lead. (Washington Post)