On November 13, 2004, a group of fortunate AMWA-MAC
members met at the Hall of the States near Union Station in Washington,
DC, to attend presentations by three speakers described as "esteemed
and engaging experts" from different fields in genetics. They definitely
lived up to the advance billing.
Robert Nussbaum, MD (http://www.genome.gov/10000360),
is the president of the American Society of Human Genetics, chief
of the Genetic Disease Research Branch of the National Institutes
of Health's National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI), acting
chief of the NHGRI's Inherited Disease Research Branch, and head
of its Inborn Errors and Cell Biology Section. As one of the other
speakers (Barbara Bowles Biesecker) said during her own presentation,
Dr Nussbaum is "an artist at making complex scientific information
easy to understand."
By way of background, Dr Nussbaum led the audience
through a brief version of Genetics 101‚an information-dense review
of the basic rules of heredity, their historical development, and
the structure of the genome.
One particularly effective series of slides (there
were many) showed part of the Gettysburg Address embedded in a continuous
mass of apparently random letters. When Lincoln's words were highlighted,
it was easy to pick them out of the background "noise" and identify
the famous speech, but in the unhighlighted version, it was virtually
impossible to glean any content from the letters on the screen.
Similarly, in the genome, sections of coding information (exons)
are embedded in a lot of other genetic information that needs to
be spliced out (introns). Dr Nussbaum explained that only a small
fraction of the DNA coding ends up in the messenger RNA (mRNA);
the introns have to be removed so that what is left can be read
in a "1:1 linear manner" to make proteins.
Dr Nussbaum emphasized that mutations (changes
in DNA sequence) "can affect any and all steps in the process of
gene expression." "Murphy's Law really does apply." He said we should
think of the degree of effect of mutations as a full spectrum, ranging
from "highly deleterious" (lethal) to "innocuous" (neutral).
In genome research, "making sense of sequence"
is accomplished by comparison to known sequences. In Dr Nussbaum's
words, the researchers "can infer genotype based on homology to
previously analyzed genes of known function in related organisms."
Using the enzyme enolase as an example, Dr Nussbaum showed how certain
areas of the gene are highly conserved (with hardly any difference
between yeast and higher species, indicating little change over
perhaps a billion years of evolution) and how others are far less
conserved (enolase genes from different species show clear differences
in these regions). In another striking graphic sequence, we saw
how the highly conserved areas of the gene were those that coded
for the active site pocket of the enzyme product. (Picture the symbols
morphing from one slide to the next, retaining color so you can
see the relationships.) Dr Nussbaum also showed us that the amino
acid sequence of the enolase itself is far more highly conserved
than the DNA sequence that codes for it. This is because genetic
code is redundant. Although there are only 20 amino acids, there
are 64 codons (the three bases that serve as the words of our genetic
code and are in turn made from combinations of the four bases that
constitute our genetic alphabet).
Many people have heard that sequencing of the
human genome is complete, so they don't understand why researchers
are spending tax dollars analyzing sequences of other species, especially
those to which we are not closely related. Dr Nussbaum explained
that although geneticists now know how to read the human exons,
the challenge is figuring out how to read the remaining DNA‚including
introns (genetic material between the coding regions [exons]) and
sequences in the 80% of the chromosomal DNA that is not contained
within genes. In order to do this, researchers need to compare human
genome sequences to sequences from species that allow them to identify
the function signal we get from noncoding regions of the genome.
The optimal species for comparison would be neither too similar
nor too dissimilar‚and marsupials seem to be the best candidates.
(For more information on why, go to www.genome.gov and search on
"marsupial.")
Picking up where Dr Nussbaum left off, Jennifer
Puck, MD (http://www.genome.gov/10000786),
talked about gene therapy for immunogenetic disorders. Dr Puck is
chief of the NHGRI Genetics and Molecular Biology Branch and head
of the Immunogenic Genetics Section. She is also an editor of the
authoritative text Primary Immunodeficiency Diseases, A Molecular
and Genetic Approach, published by Oxford University Press. Dr Puck's
clinical group conducts gene therapy for patients with x-linked
severe combined immunodeficiency (XSCID) and still cares for the
first American gene therapy patients.
Children born with the genetic defect that causes
XSCID suffer a "profound lack" of T- and B-cell immunity and will
die in infancy unless their condition is diagnosed and normal immune
function is restored. Although XSCID has long been treated by bone
marrow transplantation, problems with imperfect HLA matches "opened
the door" for gene therapy. XCID is a particularly good candidate
disease for a number of reasons: (1) hematopoietic stem cells can
be removed, treated, and reinfused, (2) the XSCID gene product is
expressed in all blood lineages, (3) because of the immune deficiency,
there is no immune elimination of corrected cells, and (4) the corrected
lymphocytes have a selective advantage that allows small numbers
of infused cells to proliferate and correct the immune deficit.
Dr Puck's group and a group of French investigators
(Cavazzana-Calvo M et al., Science, April 28, 2000) have
used gene therapy to treat children with gene therapy successfully.
In the United States, the therapy is reserved for children who have
failed standard treatment (bone marrow transplantation). Two patients
have now been treated and results have been excellent. In France,
where children have been offered gene therapy at an earlier age,
2 who received it before the age of 6 months developed leukemia
27 to 30 months later, apparently because the gene was inserted
(by the retrovirus) at a spot that was harmful, presumably in a
regulatory region for an oncogene. Dr Puck said that no other children
in either study group have developed leukemia and that current thinking
is to offer gene therapy only to children older than 6 months.
The final presentation was by Barbara Bowles
Biesecker, MS (http://www.genome.gov/10001536),
a genetic counselor who is head of the NHGRI Genetics Services Research
Unit and director of the Johns Hopkins University/NHGRI Genetic
Counseling Training Program. Ms Bowles Biesecker spoke about genetic
counseling‚what it is and what it isn't‚and cleared up a number
of misconceptions about what genetic counselors do. Above all, she
emphasized the importance of the relationship between a genetic
counselor and individual clients. Clients may be seeking to use
and understand genetic information for any of many reasons, but
the relationship is paramount.
Ms Bowles Biesecker stressed that genetic counseling
is not a statistical risk service or an attempt to persuade clients
into specific reproductive choices, cautioning that genetic counselors
must be careful not to strip people of a sense of control. She offered
a current definition of genetic counseling as "a psychoeducational
process centered on genetic information," which involves "helping
clients personalize technical and probabilistic information, promote
self-determination, and enhance their adaptation over time."
In addition to being a resource for helping clients
make choices about genetic testing, a genetic counselor can serve
clients by just validating their concerns about a condition or risk,
helping them understand how others have adapted, providing access
to support resources, and simply helping them feel there is somewhere
to turn.
People who want to consult a genetic counselor
can find helpful information at www.nsgc.org.
The American Board of Genetic Counseling website is also a useful
resource: www.abgc.net/genetics/abgc/abgcmenu.shtml.
If you would like to know more about genetics,
you can explore the National Human Genome Research Institute online
at http://www.genome.gov.
Its educational resources (http://www.genome.gov/education/)
include the multimedia talking glossary, featuring comments from
leading experts; the online version of the booklet From Blueprint
to You; and "Exploring Our Molecular Selves," an online multimedia
educational kit.
Anne Stanford
Stanford Scientific Communications
Scottsville, Virginia
|