Copper transport drug restores memory and clears toxic Alzheimer's proteins (monash.edu)

124 points by bookofjoe 3 hours ago

quadhome 2 hours ago

Alzheimer’s is driven by the buildup of toxic proteins called amyloid-beta.

In the words of Derek Lowe:

Amyloid-directed therapies truly, truly do not appear to be the answer for Alzheimer’s treatment. When I started work in the field back in the early 1990s, I was convinced of the opposite - the evidence looked very strong that defects in amyloid processing were indeed the cause of the disease. But that was thirty-five years ago, thirty-five years in which therapy after therapy after therapy aimed at amyloid mechanisms has failed.

[…] We’re way past persistence, way past focus, way past optimism and multiple shots on goal and old-college-tries. Do something else! For God's sake, do something else.

https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/anti-amyloid-antib...

cassepipe an hour ago

This is just one person's (informed I assume) opinion tough. It does sound like common sense but alas common sense is rarely a good guide when it comes down to how the body works.

I don't have a dog in this fight and I don't remember that much but I read someone's "in defense of the amyloid hypothesis" with interest. So if you want an counterpoint, you can go read https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/in-defense-of-the-amyloid-h...

dekhn 23 minutes ago

If I had to choose between Derek Lowe (author of the anti-amyloid-research article who is also highly experienced and skilled in pharma) and Scott Alexander/David Schneider-Joseph (psychiatrist and AI engineer, respectively), all my priors suggest Lowe gives better advice.

"I am David Schneider-Joseph, an engineer formerly with SpaceX and Google, now working in AI safety. Alzheimer’s isn’t my field, but I got very interested in it, spent six months studying the literature, and came away believing the amyloid hypothesis was basically completely solid. I thought I’d share that understanding with current skeptics."

6 months of reading literature when you don't know how to read biomedical literature isn't very confidence inducing. I know this site really likes it when smart outsiders come in and disrupt the status quo, but... probably not in this case.

bigbuppo 4 minutes ago

selimthegrim 20 minutes ago

fnordpiglet an hour ago

No actually there’s a large body of quashed research over these decades that went against the prevailing hypothesis. It’s one of the key examples of how peer review fails to consider novel approaches in the face of consensus even if consensus is shown to likely be wrong. The fact the original research driving the consensus was fraudulent at worst made it that much more sad.

To be clear this isn’t about whether it’s right or wrong it’s about that science involves investigating all avenues with evidence, proof, and rigor. Group think is how we end up incorporating bias into science, which is anti scientific.

cassepipe 35 minutes ago

uxhacker 17 minutes ago

a_conservative 28 minutes ago

dbcurtis 2 hours ago

> Alzheimer’s is driven by the buildup of toxic proteins called amyloid-beta.

Isn't the current thinking that amyloid-beta buildup is a marker, not a cause? The therapy may be working here, but it isn't clear whether clearing amyloid-beta proteins is the mechanism or an outcome.

chermi an hour ago

Yes. And to anyone paying attention, this has been current since about 2010.

bluGill 2 hours ago

I care what works, not about debate. This seems to work and that trumps any debate about what the real means are.

Don't get me wrong, if you are in this area of research this debate is important. There may be other types of Alzheimer's that have a different means. This drug may actually target something else. There might be some other truth I haven't thought it - but to me as an outsider the important part is a treatment that works, not why it works.

TaupeRanger 2 hours ago

You are wrong. This paper very clearly does not show that it "works". The debate exists for a good reason - the very thing this paper claims to show is the exact thing the person you replied to was questioning. And that is a central question in all of Alzheimer's research.

There are dozens of studies that show mice improving their memory/spatial reasoning as Alzheimer's models. None of them have led to a proven improvement in longevity or quality of life for human Alzheimer's patients. Some of them slightly slow the progression, but even then you're getting into a gray area - is it really "better" to be stuck in the Alzheimer's fog for longer? Are we actually improving quality of life? It's unclear.

So no, in order for us to say that this approach "works", we would need randomized controlled clinical trials in humans showing a strict improvement in quality of life and/or longevity. This is not even close to that level of evidence.

dgoldstein0 29 minutes ago

JackFr 15 minutes ago

vlovich123 2 hours ago

I don’t think anyone is against a treatment that works, regardless of the mechanism.

The problem is that claimed success in these rat models has never transferred to humans. Either the problem is that rat Alzheimer’s is a poor model for human Alzheimer’s or the science being done is poor quality.

> Because reducing amyloid burden is clinically proven to improve functional outcomes, these preclinical results strongly support the rationale for testing this drug in early symptomatic Alzheimer’s disease

I believe this is the critical criticism of others. There’s now two camps. One side claims that the Amyloid movement is based on faulty science and outright fraud (true AFAIK) and the other side claims that there’s still evidence the amyloid hypothesis is accurate despite the flawed start to the hypothesis (possibly true). Generally I don’t trust a lot of effort being pushed behind a hypothesis that’s got such shady behavior from proponents and that rely on fast tracking drug approvals for drugs that reduce amyloids but clearly don’t benefit Alzheimer’s. Everyone gets to choose the priors they choose to evaluate the situation on.

projektfu an hour ago

aBioGuy 2 hours ago

In the title "....in the APP/PS1 Mouse Model of Alzheimer’s Disease"

Given the decades of emphasis on clearing / preventing amyloids I would be fairly jaded. If someone (biotech) wants to spend $$$ chasing this down, good on them.

But a paper curing a mouse model of a human neurological disease does not move the needle for someone with or watching someone suffer from this disease.

gwbas1c 2 hours ago

The podcast "Why Has There Been So Little Progress on Alzheimer’s Disease?" https://freakonomics.com/podcast/why-has-there-been-so-littl... discusses a lot of the academic fraud that lead to people following the Amyloid hypothesis.

The TLDR is that the researchers were publishing doctored images to support their hypothesises, which is why the Amyloid hypothesis was such a dead end.

ebolyen 41 minutes ago

I think people are reacting to the press-release more than the work.

I don't see why this is definitely doomed just because they discuss beta-amyloid plaques. Those exist and are real. They probably don't cause it any more than tombstones cause graveyards; very related, but not in the directly mechanistic way we wish.

> Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a prevalent neurodegenerative disorder characterized by the accumulation of amyloid-beta (Aβ) peptides in the brain.

This can be true and still not be the specific mechanism.

You can treat a specific waste product or you can repair the waste stream. The issue may be waste, but not a specific product, or the issue may not be the waste stream at all.

This work appears to demonstrate evidence of waste stream repair via a well-known waste-product. That doesn't mean that any specific waste product is or is not the problem or that this particular stream is definitely going to remove enough of the waste (if that was the problem).

Maybe there have been a lot of drugs which have similarly attempted waste-stream repair so there's good reason to doubt it on that alone. But I don't think that mentioning beta-amyloid plaque is enough to discard this out-of-hand.

discretion22 2 hours ago

Great news! If you are a mouse.

For humans, not yet progressed to trials though safety has been evaluated for other diseases, so possible for trials to happen quickly?

" the compound has strong potential to quickly transition into human clinics because it has already undergone safety evaluations for other diseases."

smallerize 2 hours ago

A genetically modified mouse with human amyloid-beta peptides. https://www.jax.org/strain/004462#

PrincepsZero 6 minutes ago

I mean why not allow right to try for people who are already so far gone. It can potentially help them and all of us.

onraglanroad 40 minutes ago

The Hitchhiker's Guide was right. We spend all our time inventing new cures for the mice!

functionmouse 2 hours ago

mice are having a great year

adamredwoods 2 hours ago

helterskelter 2 hours ago

Interestingly, lithium does seem to protect telomeres and in fact lengthens them, which may affect Alzheimer's.

mlmonkey 20 minutes ago

In some parts of the world, it is recommended that drinking water be stored in copper containers. I'm wondering if these communities had figured something out about the health benefits of ingesting trace amounts of copper?

djray an hour ago

This pertinent paper appeared more than a decade ago about the flaws in the amyloid plaque hypothesis: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4207354/

Many people without dementia show amyloid plaques in their brains in autopsies. It's becoming more accepted now that there are multiple interrelated causes after decades pursuing the simplistic amyloid plaque theory.

The article is bordering on irresponsible.

avgDev an hour ago

My mother has early onset alzheimer's disease. We currently know very little about the disease and the current treatment options are controversial. The efficacy of the medications removing the amyloid plaque from the brain is questionable, as people still decline.

What makes alzheimer's difficult is that it is not really a single uniform disease. There are subtypes.

Since my mother has it, I was presented with an option of a genetic test. There are several genes which increase your risk. However, if one has PSEN1 that will 100% guarantee early onset alzheimer's at some point.

I'm still on the fence if I want to know.

I really hope we get some viable treatments for this terrible disease. Early onset azlheimer's is awful. I cannot imagine having malfunctioning brain.

IAmBroom 2 hours ago

"Alzheimer’s is driven by the buildup of toxic proteins called amyloid-beta."

That's the predominant theory, but nothing affecting them has yet proven to be efficacious so far (AFAIK).

Likewise, at one time everyone "knew" aluminum was a culprit, because it showed up in autopsy analyses of affected people. However, it turned out that correlation wasn't from aluminum causing it, so avoiding aluminum didn't affect the disease.

TaupeRanger 2 hours ago

Flagged. Nonsense puff piece by the university. The headline itself is beyond terrible - this is a mouse model and would need years of further successful research to be able to say that it "restores memory" in any meaningful way, let alone in actual humans.

Selkirk an hour ago

The linked article is intentionally misleading by omission because they left out "in mice" in the university driven article and they certainly know the relevance and consequences of leaving it out.

musiciangames an hour ago

Yes, it’s really disappointing to see Monash doing that - not a mention of mouse or mice.

contingencies 33 minutes ago

AFAIK the background is the 'big 5' universities in Australia have a fat loan due which they took out 10 years ago and can't pay. Their primary income source was foreign exchange students and that demand has fallen off a cliff. So they're shedding academics and puffing like crazy right now. It seems in the near future Australian tertiary education will be highly corporatized and move to a more American model than our European-style history.

ck2 an hour ago

btw definitely related and seems significant:

they found people who use glucosamine (joint pain, knees etc)

have a 25% higher chance of Alzheimer's progression

https://thesciverse.org/scientists-found-that-a-supplement-t...

(still can't figure out if that website is "AI" but they have great articles)

plaguuuuuu an hour ago

Yep it's all AI-generated. It's annoying that they have a fake human as the author but whatever, it's the interslop.

caycep an hour ago

..in Mice