Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New antibiotic kills off persistent infections

phenomena.nationalgeographic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 86 posts

Re: New antibiotic kills off persistent infections

#11

Post by AaronFriel »

The most understated portion of the article is that there is a method discovered that can kill biofilms. The discovery of new antibiotics and delivery techniques leaves me less optimistic for long-term change in the availability of life-saving antibiotics. I suspect bacteria can, and will, evolve around almost any mitigating technique we develop.

Yet I'm optimistic, because tools that crack biofilms are a new are of development and promise hope for exploring new attacks on bacteria. Current methods of biofilm dispersal are application of strong acids and bases or an autoclave. You can't treat a hospital room with an autoclave, and comprehensive treatment of a room with very strongly ionizing agents has its own risks. There are other, experimental methods, but all are worth examining.

I hope research like this continues.

Re: New antibiotic kills off persistent infections

#13

Post by mjn »

Some background, based on quick research, not personal knowledge, so please correct if anything's wrong:

This class of antibiotics, ADEP, was discovered as a naturally produced substance isolated from the bacteria Streptomyces hawaiiensis in 1985 (Streptomyces has been a fertile source of naturally occurring antibiotics). After some promising results, there was work on synthetically synthesizing it and producing "optimized" synthetic variants. ADEP4 is one of those, and was reported in a paper published in 2005. There's a short 1-page summary of that work in Nature Reviews Drug Discovery 4: 957. See page 19 of this PDF, article "Peptide power": http://journals2005.pasteur.ac.ir/NR/4%2812%29.pdf

There's a lot of work trying to understand its mechanism, e.g. here's one open-access paper that also has some background: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2955292/

Here's the paper discussed in the linked article, unfortunately paywalled, but with an abstract available that's actually a good summary: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/natu...

Re: New antibiotic kills off persistent infections

#14

Post by atmosx »

That's very good news actually. If first stage trials are successful might be marketed sooner than expected. However, I didn't read the paper, so I can't comment on the mechanism of action which the mos interesting part of an drug. Bacteria might become resistant if this procedure becomes overused (as usual) and it would be a shame.

Re: New antibiotic kills off persistent infections

#15

Post by im3w1l »

giarc wrote: post #10
sgarlatm wrote: post #2

It's nice to know that despite all the alarmist articles about the end of antibiotics, good progress is being made. If this works, it could completely replace traditional antibiotics. In that case, I could see dozens of new drugs in this class developed by the antibiotic companies. This would be similar to the race to develop new antidepressants, HIV drugs, and erectile dysfunction drugs. Any drug you have to take ov…

This won't completely replace traditional antibiotics. As the article states this acts on Gram positive persister cells (a very specific group). The coming storm is from Gram negative bacteria such as Klebsiella, Actinetobacter and Pseudomonas. There is actually very little activity occurring in the field of antibiotic drug discovery and you identified the issue; no money in drugs that someone takes for 14 days and s…

The scary thing is what would happen if these bacteria fell into the hands of terrorist extremists. They could potentially create bio-weapons of mass destruction. Or imagine if some suicide cult decided that the time has come for the doomsday of reckoning. Al-Qaeda anthrax letters are nothing compared to this. It could also be used to threaten mutually assured destruction in asymmetric warfare. Iran could probably develop it more easily and stealthily than their (not very) secret nuke program. Developing countermeasure to this is a matter of national security. Insha'Allah people will come to their senses and please think of the children: We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children before it is too late.

-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----

.

jA0EAwMCRocgNS5lXxmuyT+0aXL2u7pKyJ0+BNTpPRy33dvnVrD4SVfqcF+oTDUx vLOi4p3oM6sJn80NnTUCGjqlpEPuekIIRXWAjOtq+P4= =+4PK

-----END PGP MESSAGE-----

Re: New antibiotic kills off persistent infections

#16

Post by javanix »

giarc wrote: post #9
spindritf wrote: post #3

> it only works the bacteria known as gram-positives, which includes problematic bugs like Staphylococcus I have had one of those for almost a decade now. > He hasn’t tested it in humans yet How long is the road ahead before it becomes available to regular patients? Should I get my hopes up?

It's going to be a long time before it is readily available for human use. Expect three, maybe four stages of clinical trials. There is also the risk that it doesn't even work in humans or has major side effects that outweigh the benefit. This is sensationalism news, or as it is most often called, news.

I would call it a sensationalist title, but the article itself is far from sensational.

I actually found the writing to be pleasantly balanced and scientifically detailed, without jumping to unreasonable conclusions.

Re: New antibiotic kills off persistent infections

#17

Post by Brakenshire »

mjn wrote: post #13

Some background, based on quick research, not personal knowledge, so please correct if anything's wrong: This class of antibiotics, ADEP, was discovered as a naturally produced substance isolated from the bacteria Streptomyces hawaiiensis in 1985 ( Streptomyces has been a fertile source of naturally occurring antibiotics). After some promising results, there was work on synthetically synthesizing it and producing "op…

> isolated from the bacteria Streptomyces hawaiiensis in 1985 ... ADEP4 is one of those, and was reported in a paper published in 2005 ... [potential trials in coming years]

Gives an idea of the sort of development timescale we're talking about. It's almost 30 years from isolation to this point. Clinical trials would take another 10-15 years. So, if all goes well, that's 40 years from the initial discovery until a doctor starts making up prescriptions.

Re: New antibiotic kills off persistent infections

#18

Post by JunkDNA »

giarc wrote: post #10
sgarlatm wrote: post #2

It's nice to know that despite all the alarmist articles about the end of antibiotics, good progress is being made. If this works, it could completely replace traditional antibiotics. In that case, I could see dozens of new drugs in this class developed by the antibiotic companies. This would be similar to the race to develop new antidepressants, HIV drugs, and erectile dysfunction drugs. Any drug you have to take ov…

This won't completely replace traditional antibiotics. As the article states this acts on Gram positive persister cells (a very specific group). The coming storm is from Gram negative bacteria such as Klebsiella, Actinetobacter and Pseudomonas. There is actually very little activity occurring in the field of antibiotic drug discovery and you identified the issue; no money in drugs that someone takes for 14 days and s…

You're right that it's about profits when pharma is involved, but you are wrong about the reason (otherwise vaccines would not exist). I can tell you from firsthand experience that the length of time someone is on a drug makes almost no difference in where research priorities are.

The primary issue with antibiotics is that since the late 1990's, if you succeed, and you develop the best antibiotic the world has ever seen, the FDA will require it to be a "drug of last resort". It will therefore sit on the shelf and be guaranteed to not be prescribed very much during the life of its patent. Once enough time goes by, and other drugs come out if (and that's a big if) it is no longer a drug of last resort, it is likely off patent and therefore can be made in generic form for pennies by generic manufacturers. Regardless of what you think about patents, these incentives are completely misaligned with companies going all-in and taking a risk on new antibiotics.

Re: New antibiotic kills off persistent infections

#20

Post by maxerickson »

JunkDNA wrote: post #18
giarc wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This won't completely replace traditional antibiotics. As the article states this acts on Gram positive persister cells (a very specific group). The coming storm is from Gram negative bacteria such as Klebsiella, Actinetobacter and Pseudomonas. There is actually very little activity occurring in the field of antibiotic drug discovery and you identified the issue; no money in drugs that someone takes for 14 days and s…

You're right that it's about profits when pharma is involved, but you are wrong about the reason (otherwise vaccines would not exist). I can tell you from firsthand experience that the length of time someone is on a drug makes almost no difference in where research priorities are. The primary issue with antibiotics is that since the late 1990's, if you succeed, and you develop the best antibiotic the world has ever s…

Do you know if NIH uses any of their funding in a DARPA like manner?
Post reply on HN