Wonder if you’ll get Huntington’s disease? Preparing for the big, ‘intensely personal’ decision to undergo predictive testing

One of the most daunting challenges facing families affected by Huntington’s disease involves genetic testing.

Huntington’s is a 100-percent genetically caused disease, and it now can be foreseen – but not yet cured or treated. All humans have the huntingtin gene, which is essential for life. HD’s devastating, ultimately deadly symptoms are caused by a specific mutation (called a “CAG repeat expansion”) in the gene. Definitive testing for HD became available after the historic discovery of the gene in 1993.

Because every child of an affected HD parent has a 50-50 chance of inheriting the expanded gene, the mere decision to test is often frightful. A positive test result for the expansion means not only that the tested person will develop HD, but carries an added burden: the knowledge that both immediate and extended family members are also at risk of carrying the expansion.

Three scenarios

A person showing no symptoms, or suspecting symptoms, undergoes a predictive test, that is, to see whether the individual carries the expansion and therefore might have HD or later develop it. (Diagnostic testing confirms whether a person already displaying symptoms has HD. Prenatal testing determines whether a fetus or embryo carries the expansion.)

These three scenarios were poignantly portrayed in the July 3 ABC News feature “Living with Huntington’s Disease.” The 15-minute program focused on the stories of Scott and Kelsey Porter and Justin Furstenberg, who received his test result on camera (starkly reminiscent of the film The Lion’s Mouth Opens.)

The report’s detailed, deeply personal rendering of the genetic testing process also illustrated how HD families rely on supportive genetic counseling and psychological and medical assistance – as well as solid scientific information – to navigate the many challenges involved.

Scott and Kelsey Porter in a Huntington's Disease Society of America video

According to recommended guidelines, individuals like the at-risk Kelsey must prepare for this procedure by speaking to a genetic counselor and a mental health professional, and should have a support person (such as a spouse or close friend) physically present throughout the process. For testing in the United States, this “protocol” was established by the Huntington’s Disease Society of America (HDSA). It was most recently updated in 2016. Testing centers should do the utmost to ensure confidentiality, especially since news of a positive test can risk changing perceptions in the workplace and elsewhere, even if there are new guarantees against genetic discrimination.

Testing centers often intentionally slow the testing process, so that there is time for the individual to reconsider the decision to be tested, to think about the potential downside of testing, and to prepare for the impact of the result. Because of survivor’s guilt and other psychological factors, a negative test result can also prove traumatic and disruptive to a person’s relationships with family and friends.

In my quarter century of attending the local monthly HDSA support group and advocating for the HD cause, the topic of predictive genetic testing and its many implications has come up regularly. My own family faced all three modes of tests over five years: my mother’s positive diagnostic test in 1995, my positive predictive test in 1999, and my daughter’s negative prenatal test in late 1999/early 2000. (Click here for details of my family’s fight against HD.)

Based on these experiences and my study of the many related issues, this article provides an overview of key steps and resources for people preparing for HD testing, in particular the predictive type.

Helpful HDSA resources

HDSA, in addition to its genetic testing protocol, provides a brochure to HD families, Genetic Testing Huntington’s Disease, that in simple language answers basic questions about the disease, testing procedures, and resources.

The brochure emphasizes a cardinal rule that I learned early in my family’s journey with HD, and which I have repeated to other HD family members coming to grips with disease for the first time:

“The decision to undergo genetic testing is an intensely personal one that cannot be taken lightly. Testing should never be forced on an at-risk individual. There are no ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ answers. Each individual will have to take his/her own circumstances into consideration before making the decision.”

The HDSA family guide to genetic testing (copyright, HDSA)

The HDSA website furnishes valuable information on “genetic testing and your rights,” including the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA). As explained on the site, GINA prohibits “health insurance companies and group health plans from denying coverage or charging a higher premium based on genetic information.” It also “prohibits employers from using an employee’s genetic information to discriminate when making employment decisions about hiring, firing, promotion, or terms of employment.”

In chapter 2 of HDSA’s A Physician’s Guide to the Management of Huntington’s Disease, leading HD specialist Martha Nance, M.D., provides additional critical information about testing and counseling. The chapter includes a detailed medical discussion of HD genetics.

A diagnosis of HD “affects the entire extended family,” Dr. Nance writes. “The person who is diagnosed with HD grieves not only for himself, but also for his at-risk children, and a young adult child caring for an affected parent understands that the parent’s disease could one day affect him.”

Dr. Nance stresses the importance of “accurate information” necessary for families to make “informed decisions” about genetic testing and family, financial, and life planning. Unfortunately, even decades after the discovery of the gene, “misinformation and misunderstandings” about HD genetics are still common, she notes.

(You can also watch a panel discussion titled “Looking to the Future: Life After Testing,” held at HDSA’s 35th annual convention, which took place online last month.)

Moving towards ‘genetic education’

In 2018, the international Huntington’s Disease Youth Organization (HDYO) added to its website a very readable “Genetic Testing Checklist,” covering key topics such as motivation for testing, coping with the test results, the testing process, and key things to do before testing, such as lining up insurance coverage (discussed below). This resource echoes many of the points made in HDSA materials.

In 2019, veteran University of Washington neurologist Thomas D. Bird, M.D., published Can You Help Me? Inside the Turbulent World of Huntington Disease, a book based on his more than 40 years’ experience seeing HD patients and their families. It includes detailed discussion of the many issues involved in what Dr. Bird calls the “genetic testing conundrum.”

Individuals contemplating genetic testing will find many valuable stories in Dr. Bird’s book. He describes the gamut of people’s reactions to testing – from individuals who have tested negative but still require a while for it to “sink in,” to (sadly) the risk for suicide among people testing positive.

“Suicide represents the cause of death in about 5-6% of persons with HD – five times higher than the national average,” Dr. Bird explains. “It can happen at any time but it is most common when a person at risk decides he or she is developing symptoms.”

Dr. Bird observes, crucially, that the “genetic test result is not black and white, all or nothing.” This reflects the latest genetic research on HD, which has demonstrated that the age of onset of symptoms is driven not just by the severity of the mutation but also by modifier genes (click here to read more).

This is why Dr. Bird stresses a comprehensive understanding of genetic counseling.

“Some people don’t like the term counseling,” he writes. “It sounds too much like psychotherapy, and they are wary of that. In fact, genetic counseling does sometimes have a heavy dose of psychotherapy, but it entails much more. Perhaps the best word would be education – genetic education.”

(I will review Can You Help Me? more fully in a future article.)

Ten key steps 

With these resources in mind, I list below ten key steps in preparing for a predictive genetic test and dealing with its short- and long-term consequences. These are my personal thoughts; this list is not meant to be exhaustive or official. Individuals should always consult their physicians. Each individual’s situation is unique.

1. Learn as much as you can about HD by studying the resources cited in this article, as well as others.

2. Join a support group, where you can learn from and share ideas with others confronting HD, as well as from facilitators and health professionals.

3. Contact the nearest HDSA Center of Excellence (or other HD or neurology clinic), where you can obtain information about testing and clinical services. You also can become involved in critical efforts towards treatments such as clinical trials and research studies like Enroll-HD. 

4. Know your rights regarding genetic testing and healthcare access under federal, state, and local law in your country of residence, and, in the U.S., learn about GINA.

5. Obtain life, disability, and/or long-term care insurance prior to testing. GINA does not protect consumers in these areas. In 1999, before testing, I was able to secure a long-term care policy with lifetime coverage. Since then, the long-term care market has gone into crisis, with many fewer policies issued, and far more limited coverage (click here and here to read more). At the time, I found it very helpful to work with an insurance broker recommended by an insurance agent specializing in long-term care who had been a guest speaker at the HD support group.

6. Set up a will, an advanced directive for end-of-life care, and, if appropriate, a living will to help protect assets. Also plan for the potential impact of HD on family finances by consulting a trusted financial advisor.

7. Research and select the testing center for your genetic test, including the cost of the procedure, which can run from a few hundred dollars to more than $1,000. (Some HDSA Centers of Excellence offer free or reduced pricing on testing. One foundation has paid for in vitro fertilization of non-HD-affected embryos but temporarily suspended grants because of the COVID-19 pandemic.) Some HD family members have criticized the quality of guidance provided at some centers. Be your own best advocate, and don’t be afraid to ask questions.

8. Find a trusted family member or friend to be your support person.

9. Build a relationship with a trusted psychotherapist.

10. Become active in HDSA and/or other advocacy organizations.

With potential treatments, an expected boom in testing

As the geneticist who revealed my test results in 1999 stated, “a positive test is not a diagnosis.” Physicians and scientists underscore this point. Like me, many people live years and even decades after their test before symptoms start.

Currently, no more than ten percent of at-risk individuals choose to be tested. The vast majority fear a potentially depressing result, “and there is no means of prevention,” Dr. Bird observes.

However, as clinical trials such as the historic GENERATION HD1 proceed, the potential for the first effective treatments has grown significantly.

Indeed, doctors and HD clinics are preparing for the likely boom in testing for the HD mutation that will occur if GENERATION HD1 or trials of other possible disease-modifying treatments are successful, as people seek to learn their status before starting on a treatment. (Click here and here to read more.)

More than ever, people seeking HD predictive testing and their families will need what Dr. Bird describes as “an experienced, compassionate team to help them through this challenge.”

In the pandemic, we need to rediscover patience and grasp our responsibility

In this time of pandemic, the virtue of patience is paramount. So is the need to grasp our impact on the history of the planet and its effect on our lives. We who are afflicted with rare diseases have already had to learn many hard life lessons, which apply to the vital efforts to confront the coronavirus. 

As we mark Huntington’s Disease Awareness Month, we recall how many in the HD and other neurological and rare disease communities have demonstrated great fortitude and also patience as we await effective treatments. Since learning of my mother’s diagnosis with HD in 1995 and my positive test for the mutation in 1999, I have worried about the inevitable onset of symptoms and yearned for a successful clinical trial to produce a drug to stave off the disease or ameliorate it.

“HD warriors” like my mother and caregiver father (both deceased) have had to confront the disease on a daily basis for a decade or longer. 

Drugs like tominersen, the gene-silencing compound now in a historical Phase 3 clinical trial run by Roche, require painstaking development and often well over a decade to reach the market.

The tominersen project began in 2007, and Roche expects to analyze Phase 3 data in 2022. (Tominersen was previously known as RG6042 and, before that, as IONIS-HTT_Rx.)

The best-case scenarios for an effective and safe COVID-19 vaccine for the general public point to some time in 2021. 

“What people don’t realize is that normally vaccine development takes many years, sometimes decades,” Dan Barouch, M.D., a virologist at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, stated in a news report. “And so trying to compress the whole vaccine process into 12 to 18 months is really unheard-of.”

A vaccine might never be found; after decades of intense research, science still has not developed one for AIDS.

Drug development requires precision and patience.

Possible hope from new drug development approaches

That said, by dint of biomedical progress (but lacking overall preparedness for a pandemic), the current worldwide effort could take place more rapidly than previous drug-development work.

With positive results in the very early stage of its vaccine program, drug maker Moderna, Inc., is using an RNA-based approach to attempt to block the actions of the coronavirus.

Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the developer of tominersen, is also looking into ways its drug technology “could benefit COVID-19 patients, first by looking at our existing pipeline to see if any clinical or preclinical drugs would have a use in treatment in either the disease, or more likely the complications of the disease arising from the acute respiratory syndrome,” Eric Swayze, Ph.D., the firm’s senior vice president of research, wrote in an e-mail to me on May 8. Ionis designs drugs using antisense oligonucleotides (artificial strands of DNA), a form of gene silencing technology.

“In the 2002/2003 SARS epidemic we did done some work with ASOs targeting both the coronavirus itself as well as host factors, and had preliminary hints of activity [effect],” Swayze added. “Because of this, we are making newer generation ASOs targeted to the SARS-CoV-2 [COVID-19] virus as well as host factors that contribute to the infection and disease. 

“We plan to work with collaborators who have the capability to test our lead ASOs in virus cultures. We believe that our recent pulmonary program advances position us to quickly move forward, provided that our drugs look promising. However, we feel this remains a high-risk discovery project, with many challenges ahead.”

Behind the reaction against lockdowns

However, despite the need for a long-term fight against COVID-19, only a few weeks after lockdowns began, tiny groups of purported “protestors” appeared demanding to “open up” states. They were egged on by President Donald Trump, who has declined to marshal national resources against the virus, and organized by conservative groups.

I have wondered: What if Americans had wanted to give up only three weeks after the 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor?

The initial impatience about COVID-19 was clearly politically motivated. Since then, some criticism of lockdowns results from growing economic hardship: with a 14.7 percent unemployment rate, the U.S. has lost the greatest number of jobs since the Great Depression of the 1930s. In addition, many small business owners have had to curtail their work or even shut down completely.

The pain hits professors and students

The economic pain has hit American universities such as my employer, the University of San Diego (USD), which switched to remote, online instruction in mid-March. Confronting an unexpected deficit, the president has announced a 50 percent cut in retirement benefits and a salary and hiring freeze.

There is no consensus nationally on how to resume classes in the fall, with leaders of different campuses struggling with uncertainty. The nation’s largest public university, California State University, for example, has announced, that its campuses will move nearly all instruction online.

With USD’s dependence on tuition for institutional survival and its reputation for high-quality instruction in relatively small classes in small classrooms, the administration has launched a still inchoate plan to reopen for the fall semester early, in mid-August. According to administrators, because of the loss in student fees, going remote again would extend losses by tens of millions of dollars, forcing possible layoffs and furloughs of some instructors and employees, an increased teaching load for the main faculty, and other types of cutbacks.

Many professors, including myself, fear returning to campus so soon; in normal times, packed dorms, classrooms, and other facilities (and student parties administrators can’t control) provide ideal conditions for a virus to spread. Though young people are less likely to suffer from coronavirus symptoms, some do get serious cases, and asymptomatic people can of course spread the virus to others more vulnerable.

Universities and their employees will seek to implement social distancing, testing for COVID-19, and other measures. Ultimately, depending on the course of the pandemic, many might have to resort again to remote learning.

We cannot return to ‘normal’

In fact, three in four Americans have supported social distancing and wearing masks.

Without good health, we are restricted economically, as the HD community knows so well.

I believe that the impatience comes in part from our culture of instant gratification, epitomized by online shopping and overnight delivery. Another part relates to political orientation, with Republicans favoring a more rapid opening than Democrats (for one analysis, click here).

I think many people – myself included – wrongly thought that, after a month or two of lockdown, we would return to “normal.”

However, as New York Governor  Andrew Cuomo put it on April 1, “I don’t think we get back to normal. We get to a new normal.” As a result of the crisis, society will undergo a “transformation,” and we must assure that it be “positive and not negative,” Cuomo urged.

“I fear that the resumption of normality would signal a failure to learn,” commented Pulitzer-Prize-winning medical writer Siddhartha Mukherjee, M.D. “We need to think not about resumption but about revision.”

He added, with reference to how the drive for instant success has exacerbated the pain of the pandemic: “To what extent did the market-driven, efficiency-obsessed culture of hospital administration contribute to the crisis?”

The perspective of Big History

Cuomo echoed the point that professional historians like me make to students and readers of our books: history is ever-changing, often with great progress, but also devastating setbacks, including world wars, plagues, and inhumane practices like slavery.

I teach a course called “Big History: From Cosmos to Cannibals,” which begins with the start of the universe and ends with the dawn of the modern era: Europeans' conquest of the Americas, beginning in the late 1400s and quickly causing epidemics of Old World diseases in which tens of millions of native Americans died in the hemisphere – a very poignant point of comparison with the pandemic this past semester. A field that has emerged recently, Big History embraces the idea that human development must be understood in the context of physics, biology, evolution, and the transition from small bands of hunter-gatherers to cities with millions of people.

Over the past several years, my classes have focused on how we now live in the Anthropocene, an era in which humans have taken control of the earth’s systems (atmosphere, oceans, land, life, and others).

Human agency has led to global warming, probably a more daunting challenge to humankind than coronaviruses, and many other threatening phenomena.

Human control has contributed to the crisis

In fact, some commentators have asserted that the pandemic has resulted from the humans’ super-control of the earth and our encroachment on the last vestiges of nature in areas such as the Amazon rainforest (for some examples, click here, here, and here).

Deforestation (for cash crops and cattle), mining, a growing population, and the expansion of urban areas have put the environment and the species therein under greater stress, making them more susceptible to viruses and zoonosis (jumping of a virus from one species to another, including humans).

Human domination of the planet has intensified over the past several decades. I witnessed the devastation firsthand of the Amazon in 1988 and 1990, during my time in Brazil as a graduate student. I saw gold prospectors who penetrated the deepest recesses of the forest, using clandestine airstrips. I also viewed up close how many square miles of trees had been cut down.

Above, using modern equipment, men prospect for gold by excavating the floor of the Amazon rainforest in Brazil, 1988 (photo by Gene Veritas, aka Kenneth P. Serbin). Below, Gene Veritas (wearing sunglasses) with workers at the mining site (personal photo).

Reconnecting with ourselves, and the planet

In my Big History course just concluded this semester, we were all deeply saddened by the onset of the pandemic. However, in the context of history, a devastating viral outbreak was highly likely. Leading scientists have also warned the world for decades.

The pandemic serves as a global alarm. The Earth is a system, and it is crying out against our dangerous intrusions into rainforests and other attacks on the environment. Ironically, with the decrease in vehicle traffic, the vast reduction in pollution gives us a glimpse of the air quality we once had and must achieve again to stem the tide.

A key lesson of my Big History course is that the modern world led humans to think they were separate from nature, but, in reality, we are ever more interconnected. The pandemic will perhaps force humanity to rediscover our identity (for some, a spirituality) of being one with nature. We are part of the Earth, not over and above it.

As Dr. Mukherjee pointed out, the virus has laid bare many things, such as the inequality of our health system. It has also laid bare our impatience. To overcome the virus, we need to regain patience and, along with it, humility and respect for the planet.

As Dr. Mukherjee and others have urged, we also need to learn from this crisis and make better policy choices for future threats of all types.

(Disclosure: I hold a symbolic amount of Ionis shares.)

Combatting the pandemic, Roche also forges ahead with critical Phase 3 Huntington’s disease clinical trial

Using its expertise to combat a coronavirus pandemic that has left more than 180,000 people dead worldwide and a third of the earth’s people on lockdown, pharmaceutical giant Roche is also forging ahead with its Phase 3 clinical trial for the Huntington’s disease gene silencing drug RG6042, now known by the generic name tominersen.

The final step in a clinical trial program, Phase 3 tests the efficacy of a drug. A successful Phase 3 allows a pharmaceutical company to apply to regulatory agencies for permission to market the drug. In a time of “social distancing” and a shutdown of normal life, Roche and HD clinical trial administrators are seeking to mitigate the risks associated with the spread of COVID-19, the disease caused by the coronavirus.

In an April 20 letter to the global HD community, Roche announced that it had completed recruitment for the trial, GENERATION HD1. A total of 791 symptomatic volunteers across 18 countries have been enrolled, just ten fewer people than Roche projected after the trial got under way last year – almost 99 percent of the target.

“This achievement is a result of the HD community’s commitment from the beginning, and we are very grateful to all trial participants, their families, the clinical trial sites and staff, and the broader HD community who have supported the design, initiation and recruitment phases of the study,” Roche global patient partnership directors David West and Mai-Lise Nguyen stated in the letter.

West and Nguyen reassured the community that “tominersen studies are ongoing at clinical trial sites around the world,” and, in collaboration with local health authorities, “ensuring patient safety and data integrity throughout the studies given the ongoing impact of COVID-19.”

On February 27, Roche announced the generic name for its HD gene-silencing drug candidate RG6042, formerly known as IONIS-HTT_Rx, developed by Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Inc. With assistance from Roche, Ionis ran the successful Phase 1/2a trial for the compound, shown to be safe and tolerable in trial participants. It also lowered the amount of mutant huntingtin protein, a major suspect in the disease, in volunteers’ cerebrospinal fluid. (Slide courtesy of Roche.) 

Aiming to analyze data in 2022

“Given the dynamic situation with COVID-19, we decided to close recruitment at 791 participants globally in order to avoid additional pressure on clinical trial sites who were screening potential participants,” they added, noting that the number of participants is “sufficient” to assess tominersen’s efficacy.

Roche is “working closely with the research teams, trial sites and local authorities to reduce any new risks posed by COVID-19 and ensure the trial can continue as long as it is safe to do so,” the letter stated. Roche advises participants to “discuss individual circumstances with their respective study sites.”

“Where patients and families can no longer go into [the] hospital to receive treatment or assessments, research teams will be in close contact over the phone to monitor their health and discuss any potential adverse events or any other issues,” the letter added.

Roche expects to complete the trial and start analyzing data by 2022, after each of the volunteers has completed the 25-month program involving intrathecal (spinal) injections of tominersen or a placebo, tests, medical evaluations, and digital monitoring, West and Nguyen stated.

If tominersen demonstrates efficacy and safety, Roche will submit applications to national health authorities to obtain approval as a treatment.

“During these exceptional times, we continue to consider how we can best support the community and welcome any suggestions,” the letter concluded.

In an April 21 e-mail to me, West noted that GENERATION HD1 recruitment was “completed within expected timelines,” unaffected by the COVID-19 crisis. In line with plans announced last October, Roche will also extend the study to China “as soon as possible,” West added.

Combatting COVID-19

The April 20 statement on GENERATION HD1 followed a general statement by Roche on March 19 discussing the March 11 announcement of the pandemic by the World Health Organization and the company’s efforts to combat it.

“We recognise that the public and private sectors across the globe need to work together to help effectively manage this developing situation,” said the statement, noting that Roche was engaged in developing a COVID-19 “diagnostics test which was granted Emergency Use Authorization by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.”

Scientists, physicians, and public officials have stated repeatedly that vastly increased testing for the virus is needed in the battle against the pandemic.

Roche also confirmed initiation of COVACTA, a global Phase 3 clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of its rheumatoid arthritis drug Actemra/RoActemra in treating patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. The study started to enroll patients on April 3, with a target of 330 globally, including the U.S., Canada, and Europe.

Roche is also examining other drugs in its portfolio for potential testing to treat COVID-19.

(Click here to read more on Roche’s efforts against the coronavirus.)

A key supplementary trial

The February 27 announcement of the generic name tominersen took place at the 15th Annual Huntington’s Disease Therapeutics Conference, sponsored by CHDI Foundation, Inc., in Palm Springs, CA. (For an overview of the conference, click here.)

Scott Schobel, M.D., M.Sc., Roche’s associate group medical director and medical leader of the GENERATION HD1 effort, introduced the name when presenting the preliminary results of the so-called open label extension study (OLE) study of the compound. For 15 months, Roche continued to give the drug to all of the 46 participants of the successful Ionis trial, completed in December 2017. That same day, Roche posted the slides of Dr. Schobel’s presentation on its website.

The OLE reinforced the findings of the Phase 1/2a trial, which showed tominersen to be safe and tolerable in trial participants. Tominersen also lowered the amount of mutant huntingtin protein, a major suspect in the disease, in volunteers’ cerebrospinal fluid.

Also, when still in progress in early 2019, the OLE led Roche to temporarily halt GENERATION HD1 to redesign it in line with the OLE’s promising early data. 

In the original GENERATION HD1 design, participants would undergo monthly spinal tap (lumbar puncture) procedures over 25 months. One-third of participants would receive tominersen each month and one-third every other month. Another third would get a placebo.

In the updated trial, which resumed in June 2019, Roche decreased lumbar punctures to once every other month over the same period of time. In this revised design, one-third of participants are receiving tominersen every other month and one-third every four months. Another third will receive a placebo every other month. (Click here to read more.)

Less frequent dosing eases the burden on participants, their families, and clinical trial administrators.

The OLE also investigated potential biomarkers (signs of the disease and drug efficacy) for use in GENERATION HD1.

The OLE formed part of Roche’s strategy for skipping the usual Phase 2 trial to test efficacy and entering directly into Phase 3 to confirm efficacy in a larger population (click here to read more).

Scott Schobel, M.D., M.Sc., presenting open label extension study data for tominersen at the 15th Annual HD Therapeutics Conference (photo by Gene Veritas)

The ‘ultimate’ question: efficacy

After his presentation, Dr. Schobel met briefly with HD advocates to discuss his presentation and GENERATION HD1.

For the HD community, the takeaway message was the OLE’s confirmation of a less frequent dosage, and its helpful data for GENERATION HD1. Except for one person who decided to drop out to take a trip around the world, all of the OLE participants had continued taking the drug, putting them now at 20 months of follow-up, he explained.

Roche has great “confidence” in the sufficiency of the less frequent dosing in GENERATION HD1, Dr. Schobel emphasized.

With the OLE, Roche has “been able to learn” and apply it directly to GENERATION HD1 “in a way that we couldn’t have done if did a more traditional drug development path, which we feel great about,” he said.

What remains is the “ultimate” question: will tominersen be an effective treatment?

“We’re well-positioned with GENERATION HD1 to answer that question,” Dr. Schobel concluded.

If the trial is successful, tominersen will become the first treatment to slow, halt, and perhaps even reverse the symptoms of Huntington’s disease. 

(I hope to report soon on other ways in which COVID-19 has impacted the HD community and research.)

(Disclosure: I hold a symbolic amount of Ionis shares.)

Giving back during the COVID-19 pandemic

Many advocates for Huntington’s and other rare diseases work passionately and selflessly for their causes.

Now, as the coronavirus pandemic rages, more and more people around the globe want to give back. 

We are all witnessing the testimonies of the doctors, nurses, and other healthcare workers who offer front-line care for the patients hit with COVID-19, the disease caused by the virus.

As a Huntington’s gene carrier who lost his mother to the malady, I, too, want to help – in part because the crisis has postponed or forced online so many aspects of the HD cause (more on this in an upcoming article).

HD activists can and should do their part to help alleviate this crisis!

Preparing for a surge of patients

Worried about the flood of reports about shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE), I reached out to Yale University class of 1982 colleague and freshman roommate Peter S. Kieffer, M.D., an emergency room pediatrician, to see if I could help, perhaps by organizing an online campaign to support him and his institution. Dr. Kieffer works at HSHS St. John’s Hospital in Springfield, IL. An assistant professor at the Southern Illinois University School of Medicine, he also advocates for the chronically mentally ill through Independence Center. 

In 2014, after decades out of touch, Dr. Kieffer wrote in an e-mail that he had discovered this blog and my family’s struggle against HD.

“My heart goes out to you and your family as I have been long aware of the challenges of Huntington's disease, its genetic transmission, and the implications of early testing but have never known anyone personally with the diagnosis,” Dr. Kieffer wrote.

Since then, he and his family have donated generously to the Serbin Family Team in the annual Hope Walk of the San Diego Chapter of the Huntington’s Disease Society of America (HDSA). Several years ago, they visited us during their vacation in the area.

In his response to my March 28 e-mail, Dr. Kieffer explained that “physicians in rural Illinois have had more time to prepare for COVID-19 than our colleagues in big cities.”

“Numbers were small, now cases are becoming more frequent, and we are preparing for a surge in the next few weeks which could very easily surpass the ICU bed and ventilator capacity of our two hospitals,” he wrote. “However, Governor [J. B.] Pritzker's early shutdown may help blunt that curve. Although COVID-19 typically sickens children with less severity, they could still pass it to a white-haired pediatrician like myself! Fortunately, we still have enough PPE for what we need.”

So far, Dr. Kieffer has treated a young child who was a “Patient Under Investigation,” although tests have not yet confirmed COVID-19 in any of his patients, he wrote in an e-mail today.

Dr. Kieffer agreed to contact me should his institution need aid. I know that I personally cannot send PPE or medical equipment, but raising awareness about the local predicament and raising funds could be a way to assist.

Peter S. Kieffer, M.D. (photo by Southern Illinois University School of Medicine)

Donating critically needed blood

There are other ways I - and you - can help now.

After seeing an American Red Cross blood drive appeal on TV a couple weeks ago, I scheduled a donation for March 30. 

Last week, I suspended my minimal meat diet to raise the iron levels in my blood, as recommended by a Red Cross employee, who set me up for a “power red” donation (double the number of red blood cells).

That employee also told me of a critical shortage of blood, as reported by the Red Cross and in the media (click here to read more).

At the donation center, an employee took my temperature at the door, to make sure I had no fever and, therefore, possible COVID-19 symptoms. Donors were spaced about eight feet apart, to avoid contamination, and the nurses and other workers wore not only the typical gloves, but also masks.

Unfortunately, in a pre-donation pin-prick blood test, I fell just shy of the necessary iron level for a power red.

However, I was able to make a simple “whole blood” donation.

Gene Veritas, aka Kenneth P. Serbin, at an American Red Cross blood donation center in San Diego (photo by Gene Veritas)

Running risks for the common good

On the way home I thought: in any public place, we all run the potential risk of contracting the coronavirus, even at a facility like the Red Cross. 

I washed my hands very thoroughly, twice at the facility, then again at home. None of the donors, nor I, wore a mask. However, I may on future trips to public places, given the increasing number of reports about their effectiveness in blocking droplets that might contain the virus.

Like so many other HD gene carriers, I’ve spent many moments monitoring myself for symptoms. Now, I’ve started doing that for the virus.

However, physicians like Dr. Kieffer, first responders, grocery store workers, and so many others risk their health daily for the common good.

We all need to embrace the spirit of Dr. Kieffer’s words to me, echoing one of the signs at the Red Cross: “Thanks so much for your life-giving donation!”

Above, Gene Veritas' blood pack, and below, Gene Veritas in a donor chair at the American Red Cross (photos by Gene Veritas)