'Virus Sponge' Could Improve Flu Treatments, Diabetes Care, Vaccine Development

University of Maryland researchers have announced a new "virus sponge" that could aid in the treatment of, among other things, avian flu. The sponge woks similar to kidney dialysis, filtering the harmful virus from the blood. "The virus sponge is based on a technology called molecular imprinting. In molecular imprinting, researchers stamp a molecule's shape into a substance (in this case, a hydrogel--a sponge-like material). When the specific molecule filters through the hydrogel, it fits in the imprint hole and is trapped."

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:

[LifesABeach]

I would think it very amusing if either anyone on the research team, or human test subjects had a first name of "Robert".

"This is the best day ever!" - Stephen Hillenberg

Eh

[ShooterNeo]

I honestly have no idea how this is even a practical technique, much less a breakthrough. Rather than this dodgy "aerogel" technique, you could use the molecules that nature has used for millenia : antibodies. All you need is an antibody against an epitope of the virus (a unique molecular pattern somewhere on it's surface), and then you bind the antibodies to a medium. Or, there's a way to generate the membrane bound antibodies present in B cells, and to adhere those to a surface. In any case, such a "filter" has existed for years, though as far as I know, this technique hasn't been used to filter the blood of a living patient.

Then again, neither have these researchers : they are just claiming it is practical.

Re:Eh

[Anarchysoft]

Rather than this dodgy "aerogel" technique, you could use the molecules that nature has used for millenia : antibodies.

But then what they patent and sell for gazillions of dollars? ;)

Re:

[iminplaya]

Really. You see this in all sorts of industries where strong patent and copyright laws exist. Let's look at desalination, for instance. I can sell a multi million dollar, patented reverse osmosis machine and the power needed to run it. Or I could show you a method collecting fresh water that falls from the sky every day, all day, with a minor effort on our part for distribution. As a government that owes much debt to the industries the placed it into power, or the industry itself, which do you think I'm goi

Re:

[iminplaya]

Heh, It's a little like the upgrade cycle that software and hardware manufacturers are constantly foisting upon their users. Neat trick. The patent expires and the medicine no longer functions :-)

Re:

[bigtrike]

Perhaps you should take your method of water collection to remote areas of the desert in a poor nation and save some lives. I don't think the manufacturers of desalination technology could possibly have paid informants watching out for someone in every remote village, so you probably won't get killed by an elite squad of assassins too quickly.

You have the power to purchase or grow your own food with reduced amounts of chemicals and fertilizers by buying organic or growing some of your own food (hopefully t

Re:

[iminplaya]

Also, I would hope that someone as concerned as you would take some steps to minimize their contribution to pollution and oil wars by using a vehicle with minimal oil usage, such as a bicycle.

Heh, I do better than that. I walk virtually everywhere I go. Carrying the bike across the highway is real pain. I actually do make an effort to live close to the source of what ever I need, including my intoxicants. I made a personal commitment never, ever to take a job that would require me to drive. And it has been

Medicine did improve human condition

[DrYak]

They actually believe that we live longer because of the medical and pharmaceutical industries. It's quite possible that just the opposite is true.

Then it's bad that you didn't get a chance to live in Middle Age or any other place/moment before modern medicine arrived. You could have gotten a so much better life expectancy of...
forty years.</sarcasm>

Modern medicine can reliably be considered as a source of better human condition, because :
- when it was introduced in the occidental world, mortality rates did fall.
- in other countries where it was introduced later, we didn't see an increase of mortality rate due to "occidental-produced superbugs" migrating, but we saw a decrease of mortality later when medicine arrived there, too. (and has caused a lot of overpopulation troubles because mortality fell faster than natality)
- mortality keeps going lower, unaffected by what is actually called a super bug. The only thing that increase is some disease that are usually age related (like cancer) that we haven't seen that much back when people died younger.

Their drugs are responsible for creating the super bugs our bodies can't eliminate naturally, thus actually creating a physical dependency on them.

You're confusing things.
"Super bugs" are problems linked not to the existence of drugs themselves, but to the abusive usage of drugs by :
- industries that pour them happily in their flock's food or in basins where they raise fishes (The hugest proportion - the increase of H5N1's resistance to anything but Tamiflu is directly linked to the tendency of Asian poultry producers to almost literary feed them on other flu anti-virals)
- doctors under pressure of patient (usually too easily afraid mothers) prescribing them for disease /that don't require them/ (the rise of antibiotics-resistant skin bacteria in developed world is such an example).
- patient not following the instructions for antibiotics correctly because they stop too early their treatment when they feel better because they are afraid of too much chemicals.

Have been the drugs used properly (prescribed by a doctor only when needed, and taken as they are supposed to be), we wouldn't have seen "super bugs".

Also, "super bugs" aren't in any way more dangerous to the general population than the corresponding "normal bugs".
They aren't "super" because they are more aggressive. They are "super" because the usual means used by modern medicine doesn't work as well as it used to be for killing them.

In other words : YOU ARE NOT in danger to being sick more easily from a "super bug".

You'll have as much risk to catch the future human-variant of the avian H5N1 flu, as any other flu (somewhere between the spanish flu and last winter's unremarkable flu depending on how much of your previous antibodies you can re-use. Although the spanish flu is very less likely because we don't have the same post-war social situation and poverty). It'll just be much more difficult to cure if we only have Tamiflu left (or worse, if Tamiflu doesn't work anymore because people have piled boxes and eaten it like candy because of the media-created mass fear).

You have as much risk to catch a disease from your Staphyloccocus Aureus (a bacteria that normally just "lives" on the skin surface of a significant part of the population and that is the most typical example of drug resisting "super bug"), whether it's MRSA (resists to most common penicillins and such), GISA/VRSA (difficult to kill with even the latest chemical inventions) or the "normal" wild type : i.e. near to none.
The "super bug" status means only that, in the very rare case when the bug provoke an infection (usually the bug is a problem in intensive care because it can "climb" along the perfusion needles from the skin surface to the blood stream), it can be a PITA because the patient defences are low because the patient is weak (in intensive care) and bec

Re:

[iminplaya]

Then it's bad that you didn't get a chance to live in Middle Age or any other place/moment before modern medicine arrived. You could have gotten a so much better life expectancy of...forty years.

If there was a decent sanitation system in place with clean drinking water, and if people would have understood the simple practice of washing their hands, had safe food, weren't breathing the poop thrown into the streets by animals and humans, weren't being assaulted every day by other people, you can bet they woul

You missed the sarcasm tag.

[DrYak]

A little clean up, and the drugs become unnecessary.

The medieval example was sarcastic.
Yes hygiene methods participate in greate part in the increaase lifespan. But modern medicine too.

Actual example can feature :
- Drop of bacterial infections since antibiotics where discovered.
- The huge increase of life expectancy of people with AIDS since anti-HIV drugs appeared (one more argument why drug patents should be limited and developping countries should be authorised to make their own cheaper generic alternati

Re:

[iminplaya]

So sorry I jumped on your case like that. You are clearly under much better conditions than the US. We have a situation where the government is completely under the control of the industry, and the public is letting it all slide because they believe whatever these snake oil salesmen(or the pharma bimbos in a lab coat) are telling them. It makes everything very frustrating since trying to reason with them is like talking to a brick wall. They are deer in the headlights. Well, thanks for staying with me on th

Re:

[TheMeuge]

Exactly.

This is not just reinventing the wheel, but also making it square.

There are real issues with the execution of this procedure, but we also have to consider the ridiculousness of the premise in the first place. For something like the avian flu, the major damage is done on epithelial surfaces, not in the bloodstream. I don't think systemic effects of the flu have anything to do with it being in the blood either.

The majority of replicating virus will be within the cells of the respiratory epithelium. "F

Re:

[verySmartApe]

The majority of replicating virus will be within the cells of the respiratory epithelium. "Filtering" the blood would do virtually nothing for the course of the disease.

The most virulent strains of influenza infect many tissues throughout the body. How do you think it spreads? Anything you can do to slow down the spread of the infection might help relieve the severity of the disease, and give the immune system an edge.

I'm not saying this technology is revolutionary, but it's interesting enough that I would give it the benefit of the doubt.

Re:

[Reziac]

In layman's terms -- in general, a virus in your blood does nothing "bad". You only get sick when it starts replicating *inside* your cells -- out of the direct reach of any blood filtering mechanism.

I thought of the emergency HIV-needle-stick treatment too, but as you say if there is an antibody available, that would probably be more of a sure thing. Still, might the filter be more generic?

What it might be useful for is something like viral cancers, resistant bacteria, etc. where your chances are best if A

Re:

[GNT]

re: parent -- What arrogance and bred from ignorance no less!

Subtractive technology of targeted molecules from the blood has been around for a couple years now. And it works.

Removal of soluble TNF receptors crushes solid cancers.

Total viral load correlates directly to severity of disease. Removal of the viral load ameliorates the disease. This was seen in the original liver dialysis experiments in hepatitis patients. It is probably true also for HIV and very likely for avain flu.

This method creats a sys

Re:

[danzman]

I'm no virologist, but could this have implications for AIDS research?

Re:

[Magada]

Removal of soluble TNF receptors crushes solid cancers.

Citations/link, please. I am directly, personally interested in this. Thanks

Re:

[bloobloo]

Why put aerogel in quote marks? It's not a made up phrase - it's a perfectly normal phase of matter. You may as well write "liquid".

In practical terms I have doubts about this technology as described. Filters normally rely on building up a cake of residue from the feed liquid that consists of particles smaller than the filter holes rather than matching exactly. This sponge would also rely on the virus entering at the right angle.

The advantage that I can see is that you could get around virus mutations by r

Production problems with antibodies

[DrYak]

All you need is an antibody against an epitope of the virus (a unique molecular pattern somewhere on it's surface), and then you bind the antibodies to a medium.

The only problem with antibodies, is that you can't make them on demand.

You can make molecule that bind DNA, for exemple, because it follows a simple A/T-C/G rule that we can easily model.

Form more complex structures where binding depends on complex 3D surface interactions, it isn't that much easy.

You can't synthesise an antibody just by looking the

Re:

[einhverfr]

Actually, I see no reason why this is the case. One could easily create designer antibodies provided that you have a 3d model of the protein receptor sites on the virus.

However, there is a big issue that you have not mentioned that others have. Antibodies are foreign proteins. Injecting foreign proteins into the blood stream is a good way to get an immune response against the antibody. This is why so many modern vaccines use antibodies to antibodies-- safer than the actual virus but causes the same immun

Not that easy

[DrYak]

Actually, I see no reason why this is the case. One could easily create designer antibodies provided that you have a 3d model of the protein receptor sites on the virus.

The reason is : computational complexity.
There are almost infinite quantity of permutations and mutations that an Lymphocyte may undergo while maturing to produce its definitive Heavy- and Light-chain parts of antibody. Predicting the shape of a given antibody gene is just as complex as predicting the structure for any other protein from it'

Re:

[eonlabs]

I'd imagine it's easier to apply and remove quantities of this stuff than it is to do the same with antibodies.

I'm more interested in whether this works similar to enzymes in that the viruses that match the shape present in the gel could potentially form in the gel. Granted, it's a many times more complex molecule, but it's an interesting thought.

Re:

[ArsenneLupin]

Rather than this dodgy "aerogel" technique, you could use the molecules that nature has used for millenia : antibodies.

But what about those viruses against which antibodies don't work, for some reason? Could this for instance be used as a cure for AIDS?

A neat idea, but...

[HaloZero]

...it's only a short-term solution. It's great if the patient is to be kept isolated, away from any other source of new infection (after the 'sponge' is removed). The sponge works to remove the active contaminant from the patient's bloodstream - it does not, however, allow the patient to build up an autoimmune response to the target contaminant. Neat idea, tho.

Re:

[verySmartApe]

it does not, however, allow the patient to build up an autoimmune response to the target contaminant.

I think it would be very unfortunate for the patient if it caused him to "build up" and autoimmune response. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoimmune [wikipedia.org]

...it's only a short-term solution.

A short term clearance of virus may be all that is needed. Virulence (ie how sick you get) is usually proportional to your viral load. Cutting the viral load may prevent sickness and give the immune system time to adapt. Given the ubiquity of dialysis machines, I'm interested if this could become a common therapy for very acute infections. Tens of thousands

It works more like a stir fry

[Timesprout]

The sponge woks similar to kidney dialysis

Surely the sponge frys the virus in a tasty mix of oil and sauces. Mind you I have never see a dialysis machine whip something up in the kitchen so I could be wrong on this.

Troll??

[untree]

Oh c'mon, I chuckled. I say mod parent funny.

Sounds exciting but...

[janek78]

It would be great if it worked, but filtering a molecule (using whatever this "imprint" is) has to be order of magnitude simpler than filter something as complex as a virus out of something as complicated as human blood. If they get it to work, it would be perfect for "filtering" any viruses out of donor blood before transfusions.

I would be very sceptical about the proposed use in diabetes.

FTA: "Applying the technology to a drug or food additive could contribute to the dietary freedom of those who suffer from type II diabetes," Kofinas said.

It's not as simple. Diabetes is not just about glucose intake, more about energy intake. So filtering out glucose is equivalent to eating "diabetic" sugar free food. Helps, but is far from a cure and in some cases actually makes the patient's sugar higher (since they tend to have higher intake of this "sugar-free" food).

It would be great to see something like this developed to a usable stage, but I see it more useful as purifying/separating technique rather than a cure. Let's wait and see where this goes. :)

And...

[billybob_jcv]

If you bind-up all the glucose, then hypoglycemia could result, causing confusion, blackouts or seizures. Managing diabetes is not just about eliminating glucose, it is about balancing many variables - glucose, insulin, exercise, stress, hormones, illness, etc, etc. If one variable goes out of balance, you can get either hyperglycemia or hypoglycemia.
     

Re:

[janek78]

You're right, but I think the article talks about binding glucose in the gut, not in blood - that should not lead to hypoglycemia in most people (provided you reduce the dose of insulin/oral antidiabetics). In people who are on diet only, there would be no risk. But I agree with you that it's certainly no silver bullet solution for diabetes.

Not just for viruses

[brianerst]

While the article focuses on the ability of these imprinted hydrogels to filter out viruses, or ingestible versions for blocking glucose in diabetics, a whole host of other uses come to mind.

For instance, why not use it to filter out cholesterol or arterial plaque? Go in to the clinic once a month and clean out the pipes. Or an ingestible version that binds with saturated or trans-fats? Granted, there's problems with having too much undigested crap (anal seepage, anyone?), but a lot of that is because current fat blockers use a shot-gun approach that knocks out good and bad fats. If you can just bind the trans or saturated fats and let the unsaturated ones in, that could be an amazing boost to the health of all Slashdotters - pepperoni pizza suddenly becomes a health food...

Re:

[Doddman]

I wonder if it could be used to prevent alzheimer's disease? After all, that is caused by a buildup of amyloid beta protein and this could theoretically be used to "sponge up" excesses of it.

Re:

[tOaOMiB]

Unfortunately amyloid beta protein builds up in cells (and extracellular matrix). The problem with the buildup is that it's insoluble. So, being insoluble, and in the brain, and not in the blood...make it a pretty poor candidate for this technology.

Curiosity question

[jd]

(Yes, even I don't know everything.)

There are a number of cancers which leave free-floating cancerous clumps of cells in the bloodstream. Patients with such cancers often get extra chemotherapy injected into the spine to stop it reaching there. A free-floating cancer clump would seem to be easier to filter with this sort of sponge than an individual virus.

Would it make more sense for these folks to use the product on a market that actually exists right now, so that they can refine and develop the idea further for viruses who have not yet evolved to be transmissible between humans and therefore whose lethal form is as yet unknowable?

(It sounds a great idea, but great ideas need to be researched thoroughly, which isn't cheap. Free-floating cancers could be a potential source of revenue between now and when it's needed for a viral epidemic.)

not practical, publish/perish

[digitalderbs]

Selectivity is most important. It's great that this gel can 'capture' virus proteins, but does it bind them more tightly than other proteins? This could be very problematic if it removes native proteins in the human serum. Many proteins look alike structurally at low resolution -- nm resolutions. If this system doesn't discriminate based on other factors like electrostatics, then this couldn't possibly be an effective filter.

The next problem is accessibility. I'm assuming that this gel only traps proteins outside of cells. I'm not a virologist (I'm structural biologist & biophysical chemist), but it seems to me that if a virus has integrated itself into your genome or populated most of your cells, you're screwed.

Practical is the point

[DerangedAlchemist]

Selectivity is most important. It's great that this gel can 'capture' virus proteins, but does it bind them more tightly than other proteins? This could be very problematic if it removes native proteins in the human serum. Many proteins look alike structurally at low resolution -- nm resolutions. If this system doesn't discriminate based on other factors like electrostatics, then this couldn't possibly be an effective filter.

There does appear to be electrostatic and shape interactions. Functional groups involved in binding do not get crosslinked, so there is both shape and some electrostatic specificity. The binding concept does seem similar to antibodies. Polymers are easy to create on the scale of pounds to tons very cheaply however. And polymers last a long time by not being biodegradable. The differences do seem to be in the level of price and practicality. They did acheive a significant level of specificity using th

Re:

[LightPhoenix7]

I agree with publish/perish. I'm immediately leary of any scientist (myself being a bioengineer) that uses a press release (from which TFA was "adapted") to announce discoveries in an attention grab, rather than going through the proper journal process. It's important, because the journal process usually involves several rounds of peer review - a press release involves a PR guy making stuff sound good.

Also, based on TFA/press release, it sounds like this is a whole lot of speculation and conjecture withou

A few critical notes

[kanweg]

Viruses live in cells. They can move from one cell to the adjacent next cell when the first infected cell lyses. Furthermore, even if a virus ends up in blood, would you catch it with a filter at a central point, or would the virus already have infected another cell by then before reaching the filter.

Blood doesn't like to be filtered. Damage to blood by hemodialysis is well known (which is why you everyone should be a donors, especially as the chance that you will actually be a donor is minuscule).

That is n

Re:

[ColdWetDog]

Yes, one has to be a bit concerned about people who think that hemodialysis is "simple". Do they expect every potential person to get an arterio-venous fistula (basically a short circuit from the arterial to venous systems that is implanted surgically for renal dialysis patients that takes several weeks to heal before use)? It's not like there are spare hemodialysis machines and teams just waiting for something to do.

TFA seemed a bit more stupid than usual - take an interesting idea and hypes it beyond

Re:

[Speedracer1870]

You have given the most practical and rational responses yet. This sponge thing may sound like a good idea in theory, but not exactly useful for the majority of applications.

Spongebob

[cybergen007]

No wonder that spongebob is never ill.

Very Unix-y

[hey]

Like procmail or grep for the body.
Just don't mess up that regular expression or you might filter out something good.

Hmm, how about an alcohol sponge?

[flyingfsck]

I think that a method to remove alcohol from the bloodstream the moment you walk out the door of the pub would be a killer app, except that then all of a sudden that gorgeous girl at your side will just become a common broad and that just might ruin the rest of the night...

Re:

[TheCarp]

oh please....

We both know the real danger is that your friends will take the pill and see that the gorgeous girl is some common broad... no... some fat chick, and they are going to make fun of you.

Or worst, that she will take the pill and change her mind, afterall, its usually the women who make the final decision on who gets laid, not the men.

Then its back to myspace trolling for 13 year olds and telling women old enough to be your mother how much you "love the experiance of an older woman who can teach me

nothing here, move along

[janneH]

Molecular imprinting has been around for at least 15 or 20 years, and I have yet to see any binding affinities (strengths) that are really useful. Sure - if you have a 0.01 molar solution of some molecule you can make an imprint that will allow you to concentrate it to 0.02 molar. But with viruses the concentrations in blood are so low that you need an extremely high affinity (not to mention decent specificity - because of all the other competing molecules in the blood). Have not read the original work,

Re:

[NouvelleChimie]

Since it's a hydrogel, why doesn't the gel suck up the water in the blood and thus dehydrate the person?

won't dehydrate

[janneH]

I don't know about this specific case, but in general a hydrogel already has water in it. So it does not remove water when exposed to blood - it exchanges liquid with it (passively by diffusion, or by flow if the liquid is force through the gel). And in this case is proposed to bind the virus when liquid containing the virus enters the gel.

Spell check is your friend...

[NeuroManson]

"The sponge woks"? Sounds like incredibly ineffective cookware.

huh

[minus_273]

I though the virus sponge already existed. We always called it Paris Hilton...

Old news

[illegalcortex]

We already have a virus sponge. It's called Windows.

future marketing

[n3tcat]

I forsee nickelodeon making bank off the Spongebob implications.

1Insert joke about Vista being a virus sponge here

[The_mad_linguist]

2)Add modding here. 3)???? 4)Karma!