
Anti-aging stem cell treatment proves successful in early human trials - blago
https://newatlas.com/aging-frailty-stem-cell-treatment-human-trials/51867/
======
faltad
This comment on reddit (and all the subchildren) shines a different light on
that study:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/78f3wg/antiaging_s...](https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/78f3wg/antiaging_stem_cell_treatment_proves_successful/dotd0ep/)

~~~
m3nu
Let's hope he's right. Life is a cycle and without death the world will be a
very boring place.

~~~
keymone
you're welcome to die whenever you want, just don't speak for the rest of us.

~~~
timthelion
Imagine a world in which Xi, Kim Jong *, and a host of other wealthy dictators
were immortal, and the rest of us pee-ons were not. I believe that is the
future of high tech immortality.

~~~
bamboozled
I've been thinking about this lately too, it almost feels like we're here
already.

I often read stories about innocent younger people dying from something
tragic; However, why do I almost never wake up to, "<evil tyrannical dictator>
has unexpectedly and peacefully passed away in their sleep?"

Brave new world I guess?

~~~
sleepychu
Lots of innocent young people, not many dictators

~~~
0xdeadbeefbabe
The dictators started out innocent and young too.

------
orting
The phase 2 study primarily looked at safety. There was no correction for
multiple hypothesis testing on the efficacy endpoints. So it seems that the
only conclusion that is warranted is that the study shows no adverse health
effects and that "larger clinical trials are warranted to establish the
efficacy of hMSCs in this multisystem disorder." as they state in the
conclusion.

It is interesting if it works, but lets wait for the next phase before
assuming it does.

~~~
nopinsight
“In the first trial 15 frail patients received a single MSC infusion collected
from bone marrow donors aged between 20 and 45 years old. Six months later all
patients demonstrated improved fitness outcomes, tumor necrosis factor levels
and overall quality of life.

The second trial was a randomized, double blind study with placebo group.
Again no adverse affects were reported and physical improvements were noted by
the researchers as "remarkable".

"There are always caveats associated with interpreting efficacy in small
numbers of subjects, yet it is remarkable that a single treatment seems to
have generated improvement in key features of frailty that are sustained for
many months," writes David G. Le Couter and colleagues in a guest editorial in
The Journals of Gerontology praising the research.”

~~~
orting
I am not criticizing the study. I am highlighting that the conclusion that the
paper arrives at i the correct one: That it warrants large scale studies.

This work is a prime candidate for being misrepresented as showing that this
stem cell treatment is effective for age related health issues.

There are 30 participants in the phase 2 trial. There are two treatment groups
(100M and 200M) with different dose and one placebo group. Each group has 10
participants.

None of the treatment groups showed adverse effects.

There is a difference between asking "Are there any adverse effects?" and "are
there positive effects for parameter 1 to n"? If you ask the second kind of
question and do not correct for multiple hypothesis testing, you will make
many errors.

The small dose treatment group (100M) showed improvement in many parameters vs
placebo, whereas the other (200M) showed improvement in fewer parameters vs
placebo. Since no corrections where made for testing, this only tell us that
there where no statistically significant adverse effects.

As I noted initially, I think it is interesting. Once we have seen the results
of a couple of large studies, we can talk about the effects of this treatment.

~~~
nopinsight
Thank you for your reply, in particular for the specific issue with the
results. I quoted the article to show that the researchers seem to believe
that the trial results are more promising than a formal analysis would
suggest. I agree that further studies are required.

------
dandare
As others pointed out this study may not be scientifically conclusive and I am
not in a position to comment on that.

What strikes me is our lack of preparedness for advances is anti-aging
treatments that will inevitably come. Even adding as little as 20 years to the
average lifespan will have enormous (devastating?) implications for the
economy and society. Especially if the treatment will be expensive and not
available universally.

I keep hearing about the urgency to focus on research in the safety of AI, but
I have not noticed any urgency regarding the consequences of anti-aging
medicine.

~~~
hacker_9
> I have not noticed any urgency regarding the consequences of anti-aging
> medicine.

Because that medicine is usually a hoax of some sort. Saying that, people are
living longer and longer, and changes are being made to prepare for that. More
people = more houses and jobs. In the UK having a pension is mandatory now etc

~~~
away2017throw
More interested in no pensions but 3 day work weeks and 2 months vacation.

------
charlesism
I flagged this. "Successful" suggests it actually prevented aging. From the
comments here, and on Reddit, it looks like that's sensationalism.

------
alexee
If you google stem cells + <disease name> you can find <promising> research
for almost any disease, can anyone explain in simple terms, what is so magical
in stem cells therapy?

~~~
nsomaru
My layman's understanding is that stem cells have not yet 'differentiated'
into a specialised cell type which makes them useful for many different types
of treatments.

Edit: so you can use them to create "healthy" versions of whatever you need.

------
14xx3
This is going to sound slightly tin-foilish, but the question needs to be
asked:

Are there rich/powerful people who are benefiting from anti-aging technology
already? I'm thinking of Robert Mugabe (age 93) who regularly goes to East
Asia, as an example, for medical treatment, but there seem to be others.

~~~
smitherfield
Heads of state tend to have staffs watching them all day, so they don't fall
and break their hips, and drivers so they don't get into car accidents, and
they get immediately rushed to the hospital every time they have even so much
as a cold. That's why (US) ex-presidents are now routinely living into their
90's (and longer?).

------
Pica_soO
Very interesting. Kudos to the researchers, who really went for improvement in
condition- and not just reported stabilizing conditions and the placebo effect
of exercise as a false positive.

------
olegkikin
Anti-aging is, in my mind, the most important area of research. I'm shocked
billionaires are not throwing billions of dollars at it. Everything else can
literally wait.

------
Numberwang
Is there a credible source for this?

~~~
King-Aaron
Phase 1 trial article:

[https://academic.oup.com/biomedgerontology/article/72/11/150...](https://academic.oup.com/biomedgerontology/article/72/11/1505/3746183/Allogeneic-
Human-Mesenchymal-Stem-Cell-Infusions)

Phase 2 trial article:

[https://academic.oup.com/biomedgerontology/article/72/11/151...](https://academic.oup.com/biomedgerontology/article/72/11/1513/3977809/Allogeneic-
Mesenchymal-Stem-Cells-Ameliorate-Aging)

------
Tepix
The question is this: Will those bone marrow donors have adverse side effects
(faster aging)?

------
ourmandave
Oh great, if this works Crazy Head Transplant Guy is out of a job. Thanks a
lot. =(

(I _might_ have been an early investor.)

~~~
Jaruzel
Technically, it's a full body transplant, _not_ a head transplant.

~~~
al_chemist
Technically, it's an almost full body transplant (full body minus head).

------
RahulVats
Early human trials are a bit late ...I am already turning 40 soon.
Nevertheless, a great achievement

------
reasonattlm
This should probably be considered an anti-inflammatory therapy rather than an
anti-aging therapy. Inflammation is a sufficiently sizable driver of frailty
syndrome to make that beneficial, but this is not addressing root causes, just
compensating a little for one of the secondary consequences.

The scope of the possible in the near term is to find way to incrementally
improve the condition, not produce a sizable reversal, but that is an
improvement over the current situation, given that there is no effective
treatment. The closest thing to a standardized, proven, reliable class of stem
cell therapies involves the use of mesenchymal stem cells, sourced from a
patient, or from lines of cells grown and engineered for transplantation with
minimal risk. The primary outcome of mesenchymal stem cell therapies, or at
least the reliable outcome, is a reduction in the systemic, chronic
inflammation that accompanies old age. While it is entirely possible that
other mechanisms are at work, the cells typically don't last long following
transplantation, and thus it is the brief signaling changes that must produce
benefits that can last for months or longer.

Chronic inflammation is a major problem in aging. It drives progression of
most of the age-related conditions, and high levels of inflammation are
certainly considered to be a major component of frailty syndrome in the old.
In the context of a general treatment for frailty based on reductions in
inflammation, the focus is less on the acceleration of specific age-related
conditions over time, however, and more on the immediate consequences of
constant high levels of inflammation for cell biochemistry, pain, cognitive
function, joint function, regeneration, and tissue maintenance. Many aspects
of age-related dysfunction are to some degree being actively maintained in
their current impacted state by the presence of inflammation - take away that
inflammation, and the problems subside a little, back to the lower level of
harm and loss expected due to accumulated cell and tissue damage.

In recent years, it has become clear that chronic inflammation, as opposed to
the normal short-term inflammation resulting from injury or infection,
disrupts the finely tuned dance carried out between tissue and immune system
needed for regeneration. This is an emerging theme in the investigation of how
senescent cells cause aging, for example, as these unwanted cells are potent
sources of inflammatory signaling. So if we see unreliable or marginal
benefits from stem cell therapies that look like enhanced regeneration, it
might well be that this is at root a short-term reduction in the age-related
disruption of tissue maintenance - perhaps enough to allow a little
reconstruction to take place in some patients. This is speculation, of course,
and the cellular biochemistry is challenging to investigate; we should
probably expect a first generation of moderately reliable therapies in advance
of complete understanding of their mechanisms. Here is another point to
consider on this topic: if the inflammation model of benefits is correct, then
clearance of senescent cells should be at least as good a treatment for
frailty as mesenchymal stem cell transplant, and probably better and more
lasting.

------
germainemalcolm
Can anyone think of an endogenous way us to do this?

------
perseusprime11
Honestly when it comes to longevity and anti-aging, look to CRISPR not to
these treatments.

------
mcv
Let's start harvesting bone marrow from young people to help old rich people.
It has no downsides, I hear.

~~~
away2017throw
Silicon Valley already has blood boys.

~~~
dingo_bat
The show or the city?

------
SubiculumCode
I want anti-aging, but I believe that our modern society will most likely
self-destruct in fire and death sometime in the next 100 years the most likely
outcome, which would limit the usefulness of such treatments.

~~~
cee_el1234
Sure yes, scores of people are going to die of much sadder causes - natural
and manmade disasters, epidemics, crime

But a decent number will surive and since they'll have the arduous task of
rebuilding civilization (in a much more thoughtful way this time) - such
treatments would prove all the more useful

