Subscribe now

Letter: Accidental underdose?

Published 19 April 2006

From Alex Corbishley

Andy Coghlan suggested that a possible explanation for the tragic ill effects of TGN1412 might have been an accidental “overdose” (25 March, p 10). Has anyone considered the possibility that the investigators may have inadvertently “underdosed” the volunteers?

It was hoped that TGN1412 would work by binding to the CD28 receptor of regulatory T-cells and activating them to dampen down the immune response. But if it has a stronger affinity for the CD28 receptor of “conventional” T-cells than for that of regulatory T-cells, a low dose may be enough to stimulate the former but not to stimulate the protective regulatory T-cells, resulting in the disastrous effects seen. I note that the investigators administered just 0.2 per cent of the dose considered safe in animal experiments.

The same effect could appear if there were a subtle difference between the messenger systems that convey the message from the CD28 receptor into the regulatory and “conventional” T-cells.

Cambridge, UK

Issue no. 2548 published 22 April 2006

Sign up to our weekly newsletter

Receive a weekly dose of discovery in your inbox. We'll also keep you up to date with New Scientist events and special offers.

Sign up
Piano Exit Overlay Banner Mobile Piano Exit Overlay Banner Desktop