The Marshall Protocol Study Site Home

Search
   
Members

Calendar

Help

Home
Search by username
   Not logged in - Login | Register 


25-D does not activate the Human VDR
 Moderated by: Prof Trevor Marshall Page:    1  2  Next Page Last Page  
 

New Topic

Reply

Print
AuthorPost
Prof Trevor Marshall
Foundation Staff


Joined: Fri Jul 9th, 2004
Location: Thousand Oaks, California USA
Posts: 15090
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat Dec 26th, 2009 01:37

Quote

Reply
A new paper has just been published, which shows that only in the hands of master craftsmen are in-vitro and in-silico tools capable of delivering sensible results. Oh - unbiased master craftsmen, that is...

Here is the Pubmed abstract, loudly proclaiming that 25-D is a VDR agonist:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19944755

However, if you spend the money necessary to buy the full-text, a totally different picture emerges.

Take a look at Figure 1(c) below:



To make things simpler, and to make sure that we are posting this image in copyright 'fair-dealing' I have only included the graphic for 1(c).

Once you figure out how to read the figure :) you can see the primary flaw in their argument - 25-D only started to induce significant transcription when it is at concentrations around 250nmol/L, or 100ng/ml. Which levels are of course toxic in-vivo.

Adams reported bone resorption occurring at 150nmol/L to 230 nmol/L
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9245225

Now there are a number of other defects in this study which tend to distract from the essential value of what this group did - they confirmed that at physiological concentrations, 25-D is not a VDR agonist.

Which is a nice Christmas present indeed :)

..Trevor..
ps: 'Gold Stars' will be awarded to members who pick up the other defects in this study, especially to those who find ones I haven't noticed myself :)
 
 

Prof Trevor Marshall
Foundation Staff


Joined: Fri Jul 9th, 2004
Location: Thousand Oaks, California USA
Posts: 15090
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat Dec 26th, 2009 02:07

Quote

Reply
I wasn't suggesting everybody go out and buy a copy :) PM and email those who have one to share their copy...
 

Rico
Support Team
 

Joined: Tue May 30th, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 1021
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat Dec 26th, 2009 04:26

Quote

Reply
They're using samples from mice, not humans.



____________________
No diagnosis/some symptoms (more than I knew); wife with Sarc on MP; Olm 40mg q4-6h | 25D=22 (May 2014) | 25D=27 (Nov 2014)
Bane
Research Team


Joined: Sat Jan 26th, 2008
Location: Norway
Posts: 969
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat Dec 26th, 2009 09:43

Quote

Reply
The focus is on 1 gene (Cyp24a1) of the 900+ the vdr may transcribe? From a point of logic wouldn't the body try and transform this high lvl of 25D (100ng/ml) into 24R, 25(OH)2D3 so it could be cleared from the body? That's if the vdr works, or is even present under the stress of pathogens. They are testing their hypothesis on vdr's thats working. Lookin at the figure they jump from 50nM with no effect, to 250nm(100ng/ml) with transcription effect, what if 25D starts producing Cyp24a1 allready at 100nM (40ng/ml), right where immunosuppression is in effect? So the Cyp24a1 production of a WORKIN vdr might be a defence mechanism from this toxic lvl? I see no AMP's, Cathelicidin or TLR2 produced??:)  

Russ
member
 

Joined: Fri Mar 24th, 2006
Location: Hartford, Connecticut USA
Posts: 812
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat Dec 26th, 2009 10:09

Quote

Reply
I thought that agonism vs. antagonism was dependent on the structure of the molecule and how it fits into the binding pocket of the receptor.  I wouldn't have thought that something could be antagonistic at low concentrations and agonistic at high concentrations.  But from reading this thread it sounds like Vitamin D is an antagonist at normal physiological concentrations but turns into an agonist at super high concentrations (above the level of toxicity).  Am I missing something?



____________________
*** I recently moved to Connecticut so if anyone knows of MP docs in this state or nearby, please send me a PM. ***
Prof Trevor Marshall
Foundation Staff


Joined: Fri Jul 9th, 2004
Location: Thousand Oaks, California USA
Posts: 15090
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat Dec 26th, 2009 12:10

Quote

Reply
Russ, Bane and Rico you are right on the money. These authors show no production of CYP24 in a VDR null mouse, and then state this proves VDR transcribes CYP24. But no, that only proves VDR is one of the factors, not that it is the only one. Let me be clear, CYP24 is the enzyme I would probably check for, as it was found by Wang et al to be the most highly up=regulated. But I know that one gene is not enough - even measuring cathelicidin may not substitute for the Beta-defensins, TLR2, etc. A simplistic model of how the body works is the enemy of goood science...

At the recent Nuclear Receptors conference it was stated that whole-genome luciferase scans were showing that VDR transcribes several hundred without a ligand at all, and several thousand when liganded.The Foundation is in discussion to test Olmesartan with this assay, and we have ordered some pure olmesartan (not medoxomil) from China so we can get this data - how many thousands of genes are involved? :)

The fundamental advantage of in-silico molecular emulation is that it models the forces between atoms, and determines shape and affinity based on that. Why a self-respecting scientist would be thinking in terms of "pocket volume" and "filling the pocket" rather than the forces exerted by one molecule on another, is beyond my comprehension. And a sad statement on the quality of in-silico research. No wonder people say it isn't a reliable technology - it seems that the competence of the researcher is important. Sigh. Take a look at:

http://autoimmunityresearch.org/flash/Olmesartan_VDRh_VDRm.html

http://autoimmunityresearch.org/flash/VDR_activation.html

The second video was made when I finally realized exactly how the VDR activates when using a DRIP205 coactivator - something which apparently nobody else has figured out yet :X Precision is the keyword.. and lots of computing power...

Finally, there is no attempt to quantify, or take into account, all the other effects that 1,25-D and 25_d have on other receptors, raging from Rhodopsin in the eye (which was a doddle to figure out after thinking about 'floaters' for a while...) to GPCRs and the other nuclear receptors.

And then there is the mistake confusing the mouse VDR with the human VDR. Several papers have exposed that mistake in the past...

I could go on and on - maybe after breakfast...

 
ps:why did they discount the concentrations of 1,25-D in the skin at 800pmol as not being important. Haven't they ever looked at the decades of range covered by an S-shaped displacement curve?
 

Russ
member
 

Joined: Fri Mar 24th, 2006
Location: Hartford, Connecticut USA
Posts: 812
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat Dec 26th, 2009 12:24

Quote

Reply
So the correct data, from your work, shows that 25D is a VDR antagonist regardless of concentration?

What's the difference between pure olmesartan and olmesartan medoxomil?

Thanks.



____________________
*** I recently moved to Connecticut so if anyone knows of MP docs in this state or nearby, please send me a PM. ***
Bane
Research Team


Joined: Sat Jan 26th, 2008
Location: Norway
Posts: 969
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat Dec 26th, 2009 12:56

Quote

Reply
Russ wrote: So the correct data, from your work, shows that 25D is a VDR antagonist regardless of concentration?

What's the difference between pure olmesartan and olmesartan medoxomil?

Thanks.


i don't think it's that black and white, they experimented with cell line and mice. High concentrations of 25D will leak/find it's way into the cell, high 1.25 will leak out from tissues thats inflamed/infected. Once inside the cell 25D will occupy the LBP, and according to this study they say 25D will transcribe 1 gene, while 1.25D is said to transcribe over 900, even olmesartan probably can't compete with that;)

Olmesartan medoxomil is the prodrug form

Prof Trevor Marshall
Foundation Staff


Joined: Fri Jul 9th, 2004
Location: Thousand Oaks, California USA
Posts: 15090
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat Dec 26th, 2009 13:09

Quote

Reply
Olmesartan medoxomil is a prodrug, converted to the biologically-active olmesartan by esters in the blood and GI tissue.

The primary difference seems to be that olmesartan medoxomil, the pharmaceutical marketed by Sankyo, is a pharmaceutical marketed by Sankyo. The medoxomil moeity does extend the 'hypotensive efficacy' to 24 hours between dosing, something probably not too important to MP members :) :)
 

Prof Trevor Marshall
Foundation Staff


Joined: Fri Jul 9th, 2004
Location: Thousand Oaks, California USA
Posts: 15090
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat Dec 26th, 2009 13:32

Quote

Reply
Bioactive Olmesartan (white powder) is CAS: 144689-24-7
http://www.chemblink.com/products/144689-24-7.htm
(8 suppliers listed)

Olmesartan medoxomil (white powder) is CAS:144689-63-4
http://www.chemblink.com/products/144689-63-4.htm
(wow - 35 suppliers..)


Olmesartan with an extra CH2 group and unknown equivalence is CAS: 144689-78-1
http://www.chemblink.com/products/144689-78-1.htm

Trityl Olmesartan, which is 'easily' converted to very pure Olmesartan medoxomil is CAS: 144690-92-6
http://www.chemblink.com/products/144690-92-6.htm
(patent explaining how to convert is at http://tinyurl.com/ybdddpu )
 

Last edited on Sat Dec 26th, 2009 13:36 by Prof Trevor Marshall

inge
Health Professional


Joined: Sun Sep 24th, 2006
Location: Oslo, Norway
Posts: 246
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat Dec 26th, 2009 23:21

Quote

Reply
Trevor,

Do you plan to comment on the flaws of the article in the journal where it is published? If not I might do it.



____________________
CFS/ME, stopped olmesartan March 2014, feeling quite well, but not 100 %
Marysue
Foundation Staff


Joined: Sun Oct 11th, 2009
Location: Gainesville, Florida USA
Posts: 755
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Wed Dec 30th, 2009 21:30

Quote

Reply
What are "whole-genome luciferase scans" and who is using them in the research world--and for what purposes?
Anything with the term "whole-genome" in it sounds pretty interesting and useful. ;)

Marysue

Last edited on Wed Dec 30th, 2009 21:32 by Marysue



____________________
MP Apr09 (no breaks)| CFS/FM,infert/endometriosis, Autism Spec | hypotension, cardiac IP, chronic muscle/joint pain, severe light sensitivity, sensory/auditory processing | last 25D=12.5 Sep'11
Prof Trevor Marshall
Foundation Staff


Joined: Fri Jul 9th, 2004
Location: Thousand Oaks, California USA
Posts: 15090
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat Jan 2nd, 2010 15:41

Quote

Reply
Inge,
Sorry, I missed your answer while I was in China.
Paul has written to the editor asking if he might like a comment. There doesn't seem to be a way of dealing with a detailed critique at the publication, so a short letter from a physician (you) might be rather helpful, regardless of whether we eventually put a larger document together :)
 

sdcreacy
member
 

Joined: Sun Dec 6th, 2009
Location: Memphis, Tennessee USA
Posts: 8
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue Jan 5th, 2010 19:12

Quote

Reply
A methodological problem with Figure 1(C):

They use MCF-7 cells, a Her2(-) human breast cancer cell line that is nothing close to normal. This cell line, like all long term cell cultures-particularily cancer cell lines- have massively rearranged genomes and mutated gene expessions. MCF-7 could hardly be considered a normal human system. A massive overdose of a seco-steroid would have unknown cross-pathway effects. While not perfect, a low-passage primary human cell line would have been preferable in this experiment.

Figures A and B refer to mouse CYP24a1 and VDR, so- as we know- do not precisely represent human biochemistry.

sdcreacy
member
 

Joined: Sun Dec 6th, 2009
Location: Memphis, Tennessee USA
Posts: 8
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue Jan 5th, 2010 19:23

Quote

Reply
Quick question regarding Olmesartan: are there any references I could read that establish Olmesartan as a VDR agonist biochemically (in-vitro or in cells)? The 2006 paper calls it an antagonist, so I am confused.

jcwat101
health professional


Joined: Mon Jul 19th, 2004
Location: Pasadena, USA
Posts: 2044
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue Jan 5th, 2010 19:45

Quote

Reply
We don't have in vitro data as of yet.

That article is superceded by the work Trevor presented here:

Karolinska Institut “Days of Molecular Medicine-Inflammation in Chronic Disease” Conference in Stockholm, Sweden, May 24-27, 2006.

Dr. Marshall's presentation VDR Nuclear Receptor Competence is the Key to Recovery from Chronic Inflammatory and Autoimmune Disease explains how Benicar activates the innate immune system.

Available at:
http://www.marshallprotocol.com/forum39/5940.html
http://www.marshallprotocol.com/forum39/6362.html

A copy of the handout is available from URL http://autoimmunityresearch.org/karolinska-handout.pdf

Of course we do have our clinical, in vivo data, supporting this role for Olmesartan.  The indirect evidence is discussed some here  http://autoimmunityresearch.org/preprints/WaterhouseAnnals2009Preprint.pdf

and in the other papers and presentations at http://mpkb.org

Joyce Waterhouse



____________________
20 yrs with CFS/FM/Lyme/IBS, food sensitivities; 1,25D/25D 8/04:64/11 http://SynergyHN.wordpress.com
Frans
Member*


Joined: Sun Feb 20th, 2005
Location: Near Rotterdam, Netherlands
Posts: 1034
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Wed Mar 3rd, 2010 07:51

Quote

Reply
Trevor,

I just ran into this paper: PMID 20193763

It is a study way over my head, but the following stands out:

The expressed enzyme (Frans: mouse CYP27B1) has low activity at higher concentrations of 25-hydroxyvitamin D in membranes, revealing that substrate inhibition may contribute to the regulation of the activity of this enzyme

Best, Frans



____________________
Burn-out/nervous breakdown Jan01 125D 48 25D8.48 Ph1Nov06 ModPh2Jan07 Ph2Apr08 Cipramil Seroquel NoIRs lite exp r/t work cover up 25D3.9(Oct07)
Prof Trevor Marshall
Foundation Staff


Joined: Fri Jul 9th, 2004
Location: Thousand Oaks, California USA
Posts: 15090
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Wed Mar 3rd, 2010 10:55

Quote

Reply
Frans,
If you look at Figure 1 in my Bioessay you will see the specific contributions to this enzyme.

http://TrevorMarshall.com/BioEssays-Feb08-Marshall-Preprint.pdf
 

Frans
Member*


Joined: Sun Feb 20th, 2005
Location: Near Rotterdam, Netherlands
Posts: 1034
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue Jun 8th, 2010 03:04

Quote

Reply
Trevor,

a paper on DRIP205 just came out:
The Transcriptional Coactivator DRIP/Mediator Complex Is Involved in Vitamin D Receptor Function and Regulates Keratinocyte Proliferation and Differentiation

PMID: 20520624

Frans



____________________
Burn-out/nervous breakdown Jan01 125D 48 25D8.48 Ph1Nov06 ModPh2Jan07 Ph2Apr08 Cipramil Seroquel NoIRs lite exp r/t work cover up 25D3.9(Oct07)
luxman
Member


Joined: Fri Dec 18th, 2009
Location: Luxembourg
Posts: 85
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat Apr 21st, 2012 05:07

Quote

Reply
Just wondering, after some years: is there any in vitro or in vivo evidence published anywhere on the agonistic behaviour of Olmesartan on the VDR? I suspect that would be a significant milestone, and it could silence a lot of the naysayers.



____________________
MP Mar'09 (break since Oct'13) | Undiagnosed | Asymptomatic, previously 24/7 dizziness, GERD, GI complaints, weakness, sciatica | Last 25D13.8 (Jan10)

 Current time is 15:25
Page:    1  2  Next Page Last Page  



* We can help you understand chronic disease, but only your physician is licensed to give you medical care *

Powered by WowBB 1.7 - Entire site Copyright © 2004-2017 Autoimmunity Research Foundation, All Rights Reserved
Click here to view our PRIVACY POLICY
Page processed in 0.0943 seconds (35% database + 65% PHP). 18 queries executed.