This Is MS Multiple Sclerosis Community: Knowledge & Support

I’m not sure if this is going to work, but I’ll give it a shot. I don’t know if anyone saw this, but it’s a segment that aired on the CBS Early Show today. It’s about a MS patient who underwent a stem cell transplant and seems to have had very good results. Phase I trial and all that, but still interesting…
If the link doesn’t work, just go to cbsnews.com, click on The Early Show, then on the segment about Treating MS Symptoms With Stem Cells.

www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/02/10/earl ... 9551.shtml

This is the same treatment as Revimmune except with theirs, they re-introduce stem cells where Revimmune relies on the ones already there.

They are already doing this, minus the stem cell injection, aka Revimmune at Johns Hopkins and Rush hospital.

Your body already has stem cells in your bone marrow. All the chemo does is kills the active MS cells and lets your immune system reboot without any rogue cells.

I don't really know what the difference is because the docs at JH told me it's the same thing minus the step of harvesting the cells because your body already makes stem cells in your bone marrow anyway. Why not use the ones there? One less step is one less chance for screw ups.

.

I didn't hear what chemo drug they were using, I must of missed it? The fact that they re-inject stem cells may imply they are using a chemo drug that actually does kill the bone marrow stem cells. The question then is why do your own stem cells harvested previously work any different to the ones that are there?

I also didn't hear how they put the stem cells back.

Thanks for the link Needled! Looks good, but losing my hair????

Still I'd do it for the recovery!!!!!!

Roll on roll out. I hope it's in time for us all.

J.

The hair is back, and you, are back to normal in 6 months. You will feel normal within 1 week.

Revimmune you are only sick for 4 days and it's no worse than the flu.

The reason why JH isnt using the stem cells is because no one is doing any better by having them harvested and reshot back into you than just letting the marrow do the job.

I think Tysabri works magic for some people. It has seemed to interrupt progression in me, but I've heard other people in the infusion clinic just carrying on about it and what it has given them back. As far as side effects, I trust you are talking about the PML risk because I feel no 'active' side effects from it at all. Like I said, some people seem to really take to it. The book is still out on it for me. I want something that will allow me to actually improve, and so far (just had my 4th) I haven't improved, but it has helped me stop getting worse so rapidly which was happening up to the point of my first infustion. I was skeptical about it at first as well and I probably would not have gone on it if I were say a 2 or 3 on the EDSS. Once you get up around 4 and past, you'll do lots of things you said you wouldn't do before simply on the chance that it may work.

_________________
http://myhopefuljourneyintoactualmsreco ... ogspot.com

Lower doses of chemo are offered as standard treatment for the more progressive or aggressive cases of MS, but I think it depends on your neurologist. Some are willing to use agents like methotrexate, novantrone, rituxan, etc. Others don't like using them and stick with the CRABs and then Tysabri.

The higher dose chemo treatments that re-boot the immune system, i.e. HiCy or Campath, are still considered experimental. That's why they aren't standard treatments.

That's true - in a strict sense these drugs are experimental. I think the medical community considers experimental "not FDA approved for MS." That's the approach the play-it-safe neuros take. I'm not sure about that 10 year time frame. Campath is in phase III trials right now, and I think HiCy is supposed to start soon. That would still put them at 5 years out or longer. Too long for me.