Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

First Whole Cancer Genome Sequenced

Posted by timothy on from the gee-gnome-sounds-like-a-good-open-source-project dept.

dooling writes "A paper detailing the sequencing of the first human cancer genome will be published in the 6 November 2008 issue of Nature. This is not only the first cancer genome published, it is the first female genome as well. You can read the paper's abstract, DNA sequencing of a cytogenetically normal acute myeloid leukaemia genome, or the story in Science News. This issue of Nature also has articles on the sequencing of the first African and Asian genomes. The sequencing in all three articles was done using the Illumina Genome Analyzer, one of the massively parallel, next-generation genome sequencing platforms."

8 of 115 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Next gen sequencers are fucking awesome by Corpuscavernosa · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Just wait until nanopore sequencing really takes off. Now that shit is awesome.

    --
    We figured out a long time ago that it's easier to elect seven judges than to elect 132 legislators.
  2. That's nice but... by the_humeister · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There's always a "but." They sequenced an FAB classification M1 AML. That's nice, but these things tend to have a heterogenous genetic makeup. It'd be nice if they sequenced more of those things and compared them as well.

    1. Re:That's nice but... by samgeribo · · Score: 4, Interesting
      I'm also concerned that these might be mutations in the hematopoietic stem cell that don't "drive" the disease. The lengthy points at the end debunking this possibility aren't convincing to me. Here are the 1st two (FTA):

      1) "genetic instability does not seem to be a general feature of AML genomes."

      Are they on crack? Perhaps I don't fully understand the context of this statement; genetic instability and evolution are seen in most cases of AML.

      2) "Alternatively, all may have occurred simultaneously in the same leukaemia-initiating cell, but only a subset of the mutations (or an as-yet undetected mutation) is truly important for pathogenesis (that is, disease 'drivers' versus passengers). Although we suggest that the latter hypothesis is very unlikely on the basis of our current understanding of tumour progression"

      Simultaneously occurring? Again, this flies in the face of common knowledge. The theory is the hematopoietic stem cell is extremely long lived and only divides once a year and so has plenty of time to accumulate genetic mutations. This explains both the average relapse time of one year and also the genetic homogeneity of the leukemic clone. Thus many of their new found eight mutations may be accidental and not disease causing.

      Does anyone have any new light to shed on this? I am not a doctor and would benefit from some guidance on this issue.

  3. Re:Population and cancer by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I can't help but think that cancer is acting as a brake on the population explosion.

    Umm, no.

    Cancer, in general, happens to people well past the age of reproduction. Which means it has little, if any, effect on population growth rates.

    If there are diseases you'd like to keep around to prevent overpopulation, may I suggest lobbying to return Smallpox to the wild instead? Or just become a pro-AIDS activist, since the latter seems to be doing a good job of cutting into African population growth.

    Seriously, some of you people scare me....

    --

    "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  4. Re:Population and cancer by MadAhab · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But at most linearly, and not much - because of increase survival times, as opposed to the geometric effect of birth rates.

    On that note, countries with long lives tend to need to support a fair amount of old people, which makes kids expensive, and keeps birth rates down.

    Countries where birth rates are high and where life spans are short have a strong correlation. And they keep growing.

    Compare, say, any European country or Japan or coastal US vs any sub-Saharan African country.

    And as someone with a spouse with cancer, I have to say go fuck yourself.

    --
    Expanding a vast wasteland since 1996.
  5. Two genomes from the same person by jfengel · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The Science News article says that they sequenced both a cancer cell and a non-cancer cell from this woman. So we can specifically say "these are the bases that are different" and from there (with luck) to "this is the mutation that happened".

    That should prove quite illuminating.

  6. Re:Population and cancer by MrMista_B · · Score: 5, Funny

    Okay, so... are you volunteering yourself as the first to be killed in the name of population control?

    How about a random lottery? Every couple years, we chose one in a hundred thousand people, and kill them.

    Or what about shutting down hospitals? If we get rid of all the doctors, I'm sure the reduction in population growth will make you very happy.

    While we're at it, instead of incarcerating murderers, how about we reward them? After all, they're helping curb population growth.

    Or you know what? Fuck you.

  7. Re:Population and cancer by lysergic.acid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    or just raise education levels. Japan has negative population growth, and it's not due to government intervention.