::
Few years ago, I hospital in Noida, UP, India had a press release about a "new procedure" that rejuvenated a diseased heart. The approach was based on use of "gene therapy" and employed delivering a gene to the heart so that new blood vessels could "sprout out" in place of the diseased ones that were blocked. This was kind of a medical first in India.
Few years ago, I hospital in Noida, UP, India had a press release about a "new procedure" that rejuvenated a diseased heart. The approach was based on use of "gene therapy" and employed delivering a gene to the heart so that new blood vessels could "sprout out" in place of the diseased ones that were blocked. This was kind of a medical first in India.
An alternative to this procedure would be a coronary angioplasty surgery, whereby a graft would be inserted to resume blood circulation to a diseased heart.
Soon again the hospital was in lime light again albeit for wrong reasons this time. The procedure was not pretested either on animals or in a pilot study. I am sure research groups across the world would have been working on the same line, but did not pursue it so speedily as did this group.
As a result of gene therapy primarily targeted on heart, there was sprouting of blood vessels in the retina of these patients, a process know as "neovascularization" to medical retina experts and ophthalmologists. Clinically it was like eliciting a diabetic retinopathy in those without diabetes!
Such a scenario could have been averted if the desire to be among the pioneers could be curbed.
What is a patient supposed to do if the research itself has proprietary or academic interests?
I seek views of readers and hope to answer through a subsequent post.
Manish
::
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment