Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Researchers Use 'Decoy' Molecule to Treat Cancer

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the as-good-as-the-real-thing dept.

Jerry Rivers writes "The Globe and Mail is reporting that scientists in British Columbia have successfully used a 'decoy' molecule to shrink advanced prostate tumors. Citing a paper published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the the Globe story explains how the researchers are the first to find a way to block the process of androgen reception in cells and prevent, a key trigger in the onset of prostate cancer."

16 of 40 comments (clear)

  1. Too late but in time by SteveAstro · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I lost a couple of close relatives to prostate cancer, from whom I learned a lot and who always had time for me.

    These things are always too late for someone we loved, but hopefully in time for others.

    Steve

    1. Re:Too late but in time by ShawnX · · Score: 2

      My dad is in his late stages of prostate cancer. If only they'd just try them on our loved ones with their consent. :(

      --
      Everyone wants a Tux in their life.
  2. Only problem is.. by EveryNickIsTaken · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Sad thing is that *if* a treatment ever makes it to the market, it won't be until 5 or 10 years from now.

    1. Re:Only problem is.. by Teun · · Score: 2, Informative

      Sad thing is that *if* a treatment ever makes it to the market, it won't be until 5 or 10 years from now.

      All too true, litigation after (sometimes perceived) errors by scientists and drug companies has caused reluctance to make new medicines rapidly available.

      But in cases of terminal illness such reluctance has more than once been overruled as a potentially failed treatment is never worse than the alternative.
      From TFA:

      But Dr. Sadar said the researchers are confident that their findings will quickly lead to a human drug that, while it might initially be used to treat advanced prostate cancer patients, might eventually be developed for use at earlier stages, to avoid prostate surgery.

      "I don't think we're years and years away from it," she said of the creation of a drug. "Now that the paper has just come out there will certainly be pharmaceutical companies that will be jumping on this. I believe this is a paper, or work, that will cascade, to have very rapid screening against this therapeutic target," she said.
      --
      "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
    2. Re:Only problem is.. by Wilson_6500 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      .... litigation after (sometimes perceived) errors by scientists and drug companies has caused reluctance to make new medicines rapidly available.

      And then people complain that doctors have some kind of conspiracy to hold back new medications. It's a sad, vicious cycle.

      (Please note: I'm not accusing anyone in this discussion of this. I'm speaking only of majority or vocal minority opinion. It's only understandable to wish that a cure had come just a few years sooner.)

  3. Another Canadian research breakthrough by Sunburnt · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This seems to be a trend; the most exciting oncology news I've recently seen came out of Alberta.

    Is cancer research a major industry in Canada, or is this an abnormally productive period for their universities? It seems like a lot of recent discoveries in that field have come from my Frozen Northern Neighbor.

    --
    Tags != Comments, and -1 (Troll) != -1 (I Would Respond Angrily To This Poster So They Must Be Trolling)
  4. "the the Globe story explains" by BladeMelbourne · · Score: 5, Funny

    "the the Globe story explains"

    I thought it was impossible to stutter when typing. Once again, Slashdot has taught me something new.

  5. Article by The+Step+Child · · Score: 4, Informative

    Here's a link to the abstract from the original paper:

    http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abstract/104/4/133 1

  6. Soon, soon, soon.... by blankoboy · · Score: 3, Insightful
    that seems to be the word uttered in many of these 'cure' articles. I really wish they wouldn't build up false hopes for those suffering from these horrible diseases. If you want venture capital support, surely there's got to be a better way to go about getting it.

    We had X-Prize for getting into space. Can we not get C-Prize started to find a cure for cancer? With all the hacking skills in the tech world I am certain we could nip cancer in the bud if that talent was applied to hacking the disease.

    1. Re:Soon, soon, soon.... by Joebert · · Score: 2, Funny

      I really wish they wouldn't build up false hopes for those suffering from these horrible diseases.

      This from someone with advertisements for a pocket pussy on the site in their signature !
      Thanks, that's the funniest thing I've seen in quite awhile.

      With all the hacking skills in the tech world I am certain we could nip cancer in the bud if that talent was applied to hacking the disease.

      All that lacks is a leadership plan. ;)
      --
      Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
    2. Re:Soon, soon, soon.... by blankoboy · · Score: 3, Funny

      This from someone with advertisements for a pocket pussy on the site in their signature ! Thanks, that's the funniest thing I've seen in quite awhile. I have yet to hear of anyone contracting and STD or cancer from a pocket vagina ;)

      All that lacks is a leadership plan. ;) Indeed. Bill & Melinda get on it post haste!
  7. A little more info by DrKyle · · Score: 4, Informative

    They used a truncated portion of the steroid receptor that makes the cells divide, it would competitively inhibit the real receptors from triggering cell division.

    They managed to test against human tumors which had been xenografted into mice, they packaged their new therapeutic transgene into a modified lentivirus then injected the virus directly into the tumor site.

    While this result is promising, it suffers from the same drawbacks as many gene therapies: we can figure out what to put into the cell to fix it, but the big problem is finding a very effective vehicle (virus) to target a high proportion of the required cells.

    1. Re:A little more info by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      And as always, it is a great time to be a mouse with cancer.

      The real irony is when we succeed in wiping out cancer in mice a full decade before we do it for people.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
  8. In Perspective by RonBurk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    All new methods of interfering with cancer are welcome news; only the significance varies.

    a) This is a mouse study. A required early step for a cancer treatment, but by no means indicative of significance. We have many, many treatments that cure cancer pretty well in lab mice.

    b) The line of attack here is interfering with a growth factor. Unfortunately, cancer is generally good at mutating and "learning about" new growth factors. Hence, the saying "prostate cancer doesn't kill people -- prostate cancer metastasis kills people." It would be unsurprising if this technique joined the (already swollen) ranks of treatments that can successfully lower PSA without actually significantly reducing the number of patients who die, or significantly extending their lives.

    c) On the plus side, keep in mind that prostate cancer is a rather indolent cancer (compared to, say, breast cancer). If you ain't got it, the tedious and ancient prescription of eating your vegetables, exercising, and not getting fat are a really good bet for decreasing the odds you'll ever die from it. We now overdetect prostate cancer (find/treat lots of cases that were never going to actually kill anyone), so don't get too anxious about the statistics that say you're pretty likely to get it in your lifetime. You're way more likely to get thyroid cancer -- without ever knowing it or suffering any ill effects from it.

  9. Simple Dichloroacetate vs. patentable molecule by gd23ka · · Score: 2

    http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/01/1 7/1913210

    Slashdot already covered Dichloroacetate an easily synthesizable
    compound and FDA authorized drug that "restarts" the deactivated mitochondria in cancer cells which in turn "recognize" the cell as malfunctioning and trigger the cell destruction mechanism.

    The only major drawback of DCA is of course that it is priced way too low for the occasion (people desperate for their lives) and is probably even easier to make than aspirin. Oh and it isn't patentable.

    I am disgusted as you are.

  10. Re:moo by xilmaril · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As a half-corillary I think it is better than AIDS treatments. Most of that is completely preventable. Just don't have sex, not a problem of /.ers, or use protection, and don't share needles.
    unless you were born with it, or you have no real sex education. (see major portions of africa)

    I know you mean that it's completely avoidable for slashdotters and people in wealthy societies, and I agree, but I just had to throw that out there.