Edwin Chapman and colleagues explain that toxins, or poisons, produced by Clostridium botulinum bacteria, cause of a rare but severe form of food poisoning, are the most powerful toxins known to science. Doctors can inject small doses, however, to block the release of the neurotransmitters, or chemical messengers, that transmit signals from one nerve cell to another. The toxins break down a protein in nerve cells that mediates the release of neurotransmitters, disrupting nerve signals that cause pain, muscle spasms and other symptoms in certain diseases. That protein exists not just in nerve cells, but in other cells in the human body. However, these non-nerve cells lack the receptors needed for the botulinum toxins to enter and work. Chapman's group sought to expand the potential use of the botulinum toxins by hooking it to a molecule that can attach to receptors on other cells.
Their laboratory experiments showed that these engineered botulinum toxins do work in non-nerve cells, blocking the release of a protein from immune cells linked to inflammation, which is the underlying driving force behind a range of diseases. Such botulinum toxin therapy holds potential in a range of chronic inflammatory diseases and perhaps other conditions, which could expand the role of these materials in medicine.
Recommend this story on Facebook, Twitter,
and Google +1:
Other bookmarking and sharing tools:
Story Source:
The above story is reprinted from materials provided by American Chemical Society.
Note: Materials may be edited for content and length. For further information, please contact the source cited above.
Journal Reference:
Felix L. Yeh, Yiming Zhu, William H. Tepp, Eric A. Johnson, Paul J. Bertics, Edwin R. Chapman. Retargeted Clostridial Neurotoxins as Novel Agents for Treating Chronic Diseases. Biochemistry, 2011; 50 (48): 10419 DOI: 10.1021/bi201490tNote: If no author is given, the source is cited instead.
Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of ScienceDaily or its staff.
0 comments:
Post a Comment