Slashdot Mirror
Scientists Selectively Trigger Suicide In Cancer Cells (scitechdaily.com)
Long-time Slashdot reader Baron_Yam quotes SciTechDaily:
A team of researchers at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine reveals the first compound that directly makes cancer cells commit suicide while sparing healthy cells. The new treatment approach was directed against acute myeloid leukemia (AML) cells but may also have potential for attacking other types of cancers.... AML accounts for nearly one-third of all new leukemia cases and kills more than 10,000 Americans each year. The survival rate for patients has remained at about 30 percent for several decades, so better treatments are urgently needed.
The team's computer screened a million compounds to determine the 500 most likely to bind to the "executioner protein" in cells. They then synthesized them all in their lab and evaluated their effectiveness.
The team's computer screened a million compounds to determine the 500 most likely to bind to the "executioner protein" in cells. They then synthesized them all in their lab and evaluated their effectiveness.
With a 1/3 death rate, some side effects would likely be acceptable. That being said, the reason chemo patients lose their hair is because chemo kills all fast growing cells. Viagra also affects cells in other areas like the eyes. Triggering cell death could get really bad in a hurry if it unintentionally killed all of a class of cell in the body vital to survival.
Would it be grants from the U.S. Government by any chance? Kinda sounds like it.
From http://www.einstein.yu.edu/new...:
Funding for this research was provided by the National Cancer Institute (NCI), part of the National Institutes of Health (R01CA178394), and awards from the Sidney Kimmel Foundation for Cancer Research, the Gabrielle’s Angels Foundation for Cancer Research, and the Pershing Square Sohn Cancer Research Alliance. Partial support was also provided by the Albert Einstein Cancer Center, which is funded by the NCI.
I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop. The one where the protocol is patented and licensed to a private company that will charge obscene amounts of money for the medicine.
Your tax dollars working hard for you.
Yeah, I must admit that whenever I read articles like that, I'm like "they cured cancer again?". Oh, and let me guess, it also charges you up in 5 minutes and triples your range?
We've made a little progress over the decades, but nowhere near what you'd expect from all the articles about revolutionary new treatments.
If I read the article correctly, this compound can only trigger cell death in a cell already primed to die - the problem with cancer cells being they get primed but resist reception of the final 'go' signal. It really shouldn't kill any cells that aren't going to off themselves shortly anyway.
Then again, IANA oncology researcher.
It's almost like it's a non-trivial problem that exists in many distinct forms for every tissue present in the human body.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
We've made a little progress over the decades, but nowhere near what you'd expect from all the articles about revolutionary new treatments.
Breast cancer survival rates have tripled. Rates for some other cancers have improved even more.
There is much work to be done, but many "revolutionary new treatments" are indeed revolutionary. Other cancers are succumbing to steady incremental progress.
But I suspect that improvements in breast cancer survival are mostly due to better early detection.
Early detection works better because mammograms have improved in both cost and accuracy, especially at distinguishing between malignant tumors and benign growths. Why have mammograms and other diagnostic tools improved? Answer: research.