Recent research has brought forth significant advancements in the development of a universal antivenom for Australian snakebite victims. The groundbreaking study, led by Glanville and his team, utilized a combination of an antibody and a toxin inhibitor called varespladib, which is already in use in Australia. This innovative cocktail expanded protection against venom from two notorious snakes: the taipans and tiger snakes. Furthermore, the introduction of a second antibody, SNX-B03, derived from a single source (Friede), provided comprehensive protection against four snake species, including the notorious mulga, or king brown snake. However, it offered only partial protection against death adders, highlighting ongoing challenges in developing a truly universal solution.
Glanville emphasized the relevance of their study, particularly given Australia’s vast array of neurotoxic elapid snakes. He pointed out that since the cocktail demonstrated effectiveness against multiple Australian snake species, it could serve as a broad solution to counteract elapid venoms. The research findings, published in Cell, underscore the potential for constructing a universal antivenom; however, the path forward is intricate and requires further exploration and validation.
Contrastingly, Professor Bryan Fry from the University of Queensland expressed skepticism about the treatment’s effectiveness. He pointed out that Friede’s method of self-experimentation, predominantly with venom from exotic and non-Australian species, could lead to limited cross-reactivity with Australian snakes. Fry’s concerns are rooted in the "patchy" immunogenic response expected due to the specific nature of the venoms involved. As a result, he cautioned against over-optimism regarding the treatment’s broad applicability to the diverse snake populations within Australia.
Moreover, Fry noted the ethical implications of injecting venom into humans, asserting that no institutional ethics board would have sanctioned such a practice under controlled scientific settings. Friede’s self-administration of venom ceased in 2018, which coincided with the commencement of research into his blood’s properties. This raises important questions about the safety and ethical dimensions of utilizing unique antibodies derived from unconventional sources, suggesting a need for stringent protocols in the future.
In light of this study, an Australian veterinary professional reached out to Glanville following a presentation on their findings, expressing interest in trialing the new treatment in canine patients. The proposal stems from the anatomical and physiological similarities between dogs and humans, which could provide invaluable data on the antivenom’s efficacy. Although trials have not yet been confirmed, this represents a promising avenue for further investigation and underscores the urgency for versatile treatments that can cater to diverse circumstances surrounding snakebite incidents.
Current antivenoms are often species-specific, with limited applicability against a broader range of snakes. In Australia, the Commonwealth Serum Laboratories produces antivenoms using venom extracted and processed through meticulous methods involving horses, but these remain costly and complicated. Given that snakebite victims frequently lack knowledge of the snake species responsible for their bites, the development of a universal antivenom could have critical implications. Nevertheless, Fry noted the improbability of completely replacing existing antivenoms due to the vast complexity and variability of venoms. Despite advancements, traditional antivenoms remain essential, particularly in regions like sub-Saharan Africa and Southeast Asia, where snakebites pose severe health risks, claiming up to 137,000 lives annually. The findings underline the pressing need for innovative yet reliable solutions in addressing snakebite challenges globally.
