Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Repurposing Drugs To Tackle Cancer (theguardian.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the all-purpose-cleaner dept.

sackvillian writes: Many Slashdotters are aware of the infamous thalidomide birth defect crisis. What might come as a surprise is the incredible success that thalidomide and some analogs have recently found as treatments for cancer, ulcers, lupus, and more. In fact, thanks in part to their success, there's a growing research movement that's attempting to treat cancer with other existing drugs that are commonly used for totally unrelated conditions. Drugs as common as aspirin, which is in the early stages of a clinical trial that will involve over 10,000 cancer patients, are being used. As described in the article written by The Guardian, at least one major international collaboration has taken this approach: The Repurposing Drugs in Oncology (ReDO) project. However, as most of the drugs are long since off-patent, researchers are having to be creative in obtaining funding for their work. Last week, Vice President Joe Biden unveiled a public database for clinical data on cancer that aims to help researchers and doctors better tailor new treatments to individuals.

6 of 53 comments (clear)

  1. You know, we'd study it, but... by Overzeetop · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "We'd study these things, but nobody is going to get filthy rich off of it so there's no real incentive to spend the money."

    Wait - how much money is spent by the government and NFP cancer foundations on research? And we can't get a share of that to study promising medicines?
    Damn, we really are fucked as a society.

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    1. Re:You know, we'd study it, but... by dave420 · · Score: 2

      America has the healthcare system it deserves, it seems. If "politics as team sport" is more important than "functioning government", this is the sort of crap that will plague the US for generations. If a demonstrably good idea is despised because of which political team suggests it, the system is a failure, and democratic in name only.

    2. Re:You know, we'd study it, but... by ChrisMaple · · Score: 2
      Many disease research charities are founded and partly funded by relatives or the spouse of a victim. They advertise and hold fundraisers to obtain more money; much of the money comes from ordinary people and mid-sized businesses. More money is always useful, but many charities don't urgently need big-money donors.

      No one who truly cares about other people is rich at that level.

      I don't have much good to say about Bill Gates, but some of his charitable contributions are substantial.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
  2. Re:Cancer, like AIDS, is Gods... by Narcocide · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Finding a cure for either will violate His plan for the human race.

    Unless his plan is to test if we're stupid enough to believe that shit.

  3. Re:Thalidomide by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 3, Informative

    Thalidomide is still manufactured because it is now a standard treatment for leprosy.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pu...

  4. Re:Outcomes by cryptizard · · Score: 2

    That seems pretty dangerous. If you start a study with a ton of variables and no concrete hypothesis you end up with a situation like this: https://xkcd.com/882/