2
$\begingroup$

Is is possible to cure AIDS patients by using white blood cells of blood cancer, by fooling HIV to attack a false target?

Is it possible to wrap HIV in a physical boundary, such that it has no interaction out side the wrapper, so the functionality of the cell will not be affected by HIV?. Since all cells in out body are replaced within three years, after 3 years, the HIV affected victim will have fresh HIV free cells.

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
4
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ So you're trying to cure pest with cholera? Leukemia also causes problems with the immune system (since mainly only one clone is maintained) so this wouldn't be a good idea. $\endgroup$
    – Chris ♦
    Commented Oct 7, 2015 at 13:34
  • $\begingroup$ why not give a try in a worst case? $\endgroup$
    – Johny Royan
    Commented Oct 7, 2015 at 13:41
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Because HIV can be controlled for quite a while with the actual medication. And who will be the person conducting these experiments? This is unethical. $\endgroup$
    – Chris ♦
    Commented Oct 7, 2015 at 13:43
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The reason AIDS develops is that your normal run of the mill immune cells are plenty potent enough to kill off all of your Helper T-Cells that are infected with HIV, so now you want to let loose killers that are not necessarily specific to cells infected with HIV that will lay waste to everything else? $\endgroup$
    – AMR
    Commented Oct 7, 2015 at 18:04

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
6
$\begingroup$

What would you choose when your treating physician gives you the option: leukemia or antiviral treatment? HIV is not lethal anymore these days, at the least life expectancy can be substantially prolonged. Admittedly, treatment is life long and not a cure, but you'll live.

Leukemia on the other hand, is life threatening and needs immediate treatment. Treatments for leukemia are primarily chemotherapy, and perhaps radiation therapy, biological therapy, targeted therapy, and stem cell transplant, all of which are by no means guaranteed to be curative.

But interestingly: a Berlin leukemia patient with HIV was actually cured after receiving chemotherapy and having received HIV-resistant stem cells to repopulate his white blood cells (Source: Medicine Net). The donor carried the relatively rare mutation called CCR5delta32. People with this mutation lack functional CCR5, the protein that HIV most often uses to enter cells.

Why is this not a standard treatment? The Berlin patient serves as a good example, because the patient suffered intestinal and neurological symptoms due to the chemotherapy. And besides being dangerous in itself, chemo is truly a grueling experience to go through. And in fact, this patient was the only instance in which this approach was followed (Source: Medicine Net).

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
8
  • $\begingroup$ Then why not try the vice versa: treating Leukemia with HIV? $\endgroup$
    – Johny Royan
    Commented Oct 7, 2015 at 13:53
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @JohnyRoyan - All cancerous cells need to be killed off. AIDs infects many, but not all. $\endgroup$
    – AliceD ♦
    Commented Oct 7, 2015 at 14:02
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @JohnyRoyan - trying new treatments needs careful risk-benefit analysis as well as ethical consideration. Given the grave dangers associated with leukemia, and minimal chance of success, both will not have a positive outcome I'm afraid. $\endgroup$
    – AliceD ♦
    Commented Oct 8, 2015 at 7:55
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ No. See this answer to 'How fast do different organs turn over cells?' and this answer to 'Why is an HIV infection considered “incurable”?'. $\endgroup$
    – jzx
    Commented Oct 22, 2015 at 6:59
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I wouldn't say it's not lethal. Just because people can survive a decade or more with treatment does not mean it will not kill them. $\endgroup$
    – forest
    Commented Mar 22, 2018 at 21:40

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .