Slashdot Mirror
Common Diabetic Drug Fights Cancer Stem Cells
SubtleGuest writes "In the latest issue of Cancer Research, a breakthrough study shows that Metformin, a cheap and common diabetic medicine, kills cancer stem cells — the cells postulated to be responsible for tumor resistance and recurrence after chemotherapy (research abstract here). It has been known that diabetics taking Metformin experience lower cancer rates, and now it is apparent why that may be and how it may apply to non-diabetics as well. When combined with Doxorubicin to kill non-stem cancer cells, the results are nothing short of astonishing: total remission in a mouse xenograft model. The results are achieved at levels below the dosage needed for diabetic control, opening many new avenues in cancer treatment and prevention."
that's stops people from posting off topic first posts.
I wish I was a mouse. Then I'd get all the good cancer treatments.
How metformin affects cancer isn't certain, but one possibility is that it deprives tumor cells of sugar.
It's a slippery slope. If we allow this treatment to go through, what next? Take away their caffeine?
What use is there in victory if we destroy all we stand for?
I think we shouldn't get overexcited yet; these results have only been shown in a mouse xenograft model i.e. a mouse that has human tissue transplanted. Normally these mouse models are completely immunodeficient or else they wouldn't be able to accept a human transplant. Translating these results into some meaningful treatment for normal adults is highly likely to face a lot of roadblocks and complexities. The human immune system alone is much more complex than the mouse immune system, so you have to remember that animal models more often than not don't translate into meaningful human results. Sometimes they do, and that why model organisms exist, but I'm not putting my eggs in this basket just yet; when I see double blind randomized controlled human trials show positive results then I might believe this has potential to work.
You also get to be whacked on the head and then cut up in the interests of research. This doesn't happen if you're human, Chinese criminals excepted.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
... and Metformin was one of the first drugs I tried. Too bad it made me feel HORRIBLE .
Not just all caps horrible, but bold and italic horrible, too. Fever, nausea, chills, cramps, and headache. We even tried ramping up the dose, starting in very small amounts, to no avail. Only afterward did the doctor tell me that a significant fraction of the population has the same reaction.
(I finally broke down and just took insulin and Actos. Works great to control blood sugar. Also works great for gaining weight.)
I can see the fnords!
Our intrepid CEO comes up with a plan. "Let us hire some PR firms to funnel money to our usual shills in the media. Project finding cure for cancer as the major motivation for so many young people to choose medical career and be a general do goody nobody etc etc. So let us paint this cure for cancer in the blackest possible terms. Let us get some astro turfers and scare the politicians that we have not (yet) bought. On the double. I want the cure for cancer canceled by the end of this week. Let us pull it together. We need to save our way of life. OK executive flunkies? Now Scram. My tee time is in 20 minutes. Where is my helicopter?"
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
It's worth mentioning that low-carb diets have also been shown (at least preliminarily) to restrict tumor growth. See http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1662484,00.html. I wonder whether part of Metformin's effect might be related to it's lowering of blood sugar, above and beyond the direct biochemical mechanism mentioned in the article.
"He who would learn astronomy, and other recondite arts, let him go elsewhere. " -- John Calvin, commenting on Genesis 1
It will no longer be cheap, and no longer be common.
When modding "Informative", please make sure it both has a source and IS actually informative.
I never quite understand these stories; maybe it's because I have difficulty grasping the complexities of medicine (as many people do and aren't aware they do), but doesn't it seem like the discovery of a treatment and the implimentation of a treatment have become abnormally distant from one another? Far beyond what proper testing and trials should mandate?
Is this a patent problem?
A legal one?
It's starting to seem like we've all but halted the advance of medicine while we try to extract as much profit from each new discovery as possible, nevermind that real people are dying in the meantime. How long is it before this drug treatment is avaliable? 2025?
Again, I have little grasp of medicine, so maybe I'm being paranoid. Can anyone give greater perspective on my concern?
Caffeine is my anti-drug!
Duranin - A NWN2 Roleplaying Persistent World
". . . shows that Metformin, a cheap and common diabetic medicine . . ."
Sweet! Now they can re-brand it as an expensive and elite cancer medicine after they pull Metformin off the market.
Sweet informative mod.
there is no such thing, as by definition stem cells must faithfully reproduce their genome. in cancer nearly each cell has its own genome, therefore there is little to no faithful reproduction and hence there can be no true stem cells.
metformin treatment will make the inevitable splash in the media along with whatever 'cancer gene' is found next week. will it lead to better treatments? doubtful. look at how well anti-angiogenesis drugs have worked in humans, and how well they worked in mice. in mice they worked well enough for a nobel prize. in humans they work for about two weeks before resistance is aquired
Doctor #1: "Is this going to be a stand-up fight, Sir, or another bug-hunt?"
Researcher: "A Xenograph may be involved..."
Doctor #2: "It's a bug hunt."
I read this item immediately after reading the A Genetic Fountain of Youth article in Technology Review. There on page two:
The new study also implicated the protein AMPK, a component of the TOR pathway even further downstream than S6K1, as a key potential drug target. The role of AMPK is especially intriguing because it is activated by metformin, a widely prescribed drug for treating type 2 diabetes. Withers says this means it may be possible in the next few years to design clinical trials that would test metformin's ability to prevent or treat age-related diseases.
To err is human. To arr is pirate.
Now I can get rid of cancer AND my liver :D
A Freudian Typo?
I know I know, it's Slashdot and we don't do that here. But if you had...
A clinical trial testing metformin alone in early-stage breast-cancer patients, after they have had surgery and chemotherapy to treat their tumors, is being sponsored by the National Cancer Institute of Canada and could begin enrolling patients next year, said Jennifer Ligibel, a breast-cancer doctor at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston. The idea is to see if metformin is effective in preventing the cancer from recurring. U.S. cancer researchers are participating.
And...
In the report, being published in the Oct. 1 edition of Cancer Research, a journal of the American Association for Cancer Research, researchers said the combination of metformin and doxorubicin killed both regular cancer cells and cancer stem cells.
In contrast, doxorubicin alone had limited effect on the stem cells.
And...
Several recent studies have observed the drug's potential effects against cancer.
One study from M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, for instance, found that diabetic patients treated with metformin were less likely to develop pancreatic cancer than those who weren't taking the drug for blood sugar.
So to summarize, they're already past the mouse studies. They're moving to humans within the year. And we already have studies that noted that human patients who take the drug have lower incidence of cancer.
It really does look like a fairly promising thing.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
I knew there had to be an upside to being a type 2 Diabetic, I just couldn't see it for all the drugs I have to take.
Why bother
Well, I'm no biomedical researcher, but my understanding is that diet studies are notoriously hard to do. It's generally not possible to do a double blind diet study on humans (although some interesting, but not truly "double blind", studies have been done on rats and mice by infusing food directly into their stomachs.) Humans aren't going to put up with what would be required. So, the best bet is probably longitudinal studies. What's interesting is that, at least from what I've read, most of the longitudinal studies that were supposed to confirm the lipid hypothesis (i.e. "fat is evil")--such as the Framingham Heart Study, MRFIT, etc.--have failed to do so in any substantial way. Unfortunately, this failure to support the lipid hypothesis seems to be regarded as the study being a failure! Hardly scientific. What IS clear to me, based on a truly excessive amount of reading but no professional qualifications, is that the proposal that dietary fat is the root of all dietary evils is probably not correct. If nothing else, the link between excessive consumption of carbohydrate and insulin resistance seems clear, and the effectiveness of carb restriction in treatment of type 2 diabetes has been conclusively established over the past few years.
"He who would learn astronomy, and other recondite arts, let him go elsewhere. " -- John Calvin, commenting on Genesis 1
I'm on the lookout for that invisible lab worker.
Clean that kitchen now damnit.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
the post above you,
http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1390159&cid=29617123
mentions that metformin doesnt cause low blood sugar