If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox News)   Scientists create drug that "has killed every kind of cancer tumor it has come in contact with". Still no cure for.....um, hold that thought   (foxnews.com) divider line 32
    More: Spiffy, tumors, cancer tumors, cure, blood cells  
•       •       •

14494 clicks; posted to Main » on 04 Apr 2013 at 9:03 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-04-04 03:00:01 AM
4 votes:
Now what does it do to HEALTHY cells. We already had HF.
2013-04-04 09:18:29 AM
3 votes:
Oh, yeah, let's mess with CD47. You know, the protein screwed up in some autoimmune diseases, like the one I'm dying of, where my body takes the "do not eat" label off of healthy lung tissue. That's a GREAT IDEA. What could possibly do wrong?
2013-04-04 09:15:29 AM
3 votes:
Somebody have the actual research linked?

static.neatorama.com
2013-04-04 08:30:15 AM
3 votes:

MidnightSkulker: Science reporting goes like this:
Paper: "We found a small but measurable positive effect of substance X in this extremely narrow animal model."
Media: "CANCER CURE FOUND"


Paper: "We actually cured cancer.  All of it."
Media: "Team of scientists die in lab explosion"
2013-04-04 01:21:56 PM
1 votes:

LabGrrl: hstein3: I don't suppose you petitioned the company to appeal to said decision, did you?  Can't say how it would turn out, but you never know when it comes to this sort of thing.

Oh yes. Rejected at three different levels, the last one with the threat of revoking my coverage altogether. It could make a grrl go tin foil hat.
/Some of the questions from the interview with the first rare disease doc only made sense if I'd been a spy.


If you have any money at all, lawyer up. one $500 phonecall from an atty can make a miraculous attitude adjustment for a provider. Alternatively, a $250 conversation with an attorney will give you a much better idea of where you stand legally- insurance companies love to threaten, bluff, intimidate, lie, cheat and stonewall, but more often than not, you are actually much more in charge than they would like you to know. Persistence and not letting them drive the conversation is key.  Its far more important that you get the correct treatment than you get it paid for, you know. they can hound you for money for the rest of your life, and that's unpleasant, but I believe the alternative is worse.

Alternatively, try to not die until 2014 and Obamacare should kick in and you can essentially choose your own provider and tell the provider to suck it.
2013-04-04 12:03:20 PM
1 votes:

hstein3: I don't suppose you petitioned the company to appeal to said decision, did you?  Can't say how it would turn out, but you never know when it comes to this sort of thing.


Oh yes. Rejected at three different levels, the last one with the threat of revoking my coverage altogether. It could make a grrl go tin foil hat.
/Some of the questions from the interview with the first rare disease doc only made sense if I'd been a spy.
2013-04-04 11:56:34 AM
1 votes:

LabGrrl: I literally have appointment in one week, so, fingers crossed. My rare disease guy is crap, so my local pulmo is trying to step up his game (he does research, but until recently not on this.) My insurance company refused to pay for a dude at a schmancy institute who was willing to foot the bill for most of my treatment in his study...his hospital would still be charging for lab work, etc., they preferred to send me only an hour away to a place that charges them more. Best healthcare in the world...USA! USA!


I don't suppose you petitioned the company to appeal to said decision, did you?  Can't say how it would turn out, but you never know when it comes to this sort of thing.

Radak: jaybeezey: And it should be available in 10-15yrs to the ultra rich.

Good, because that's when I'm planning to get cancer.

/and I have some time to work on the ultra rich part


That's actually part of the problem with biologic therapies such as monoclonal antibodies.  They're incredibly expensive to produce (and are likely to remain so for the life of the drug), so these therapies don't help nearly as much as you might hope.
2013-04-04 11:25:37 AM
1 votes:

hstein3: That's disappointing to hear.  Rare, unnamed autoimmune condition is the sort of thing that should make most scientists start asking for blood and tissue samples.  I wish I still had connections at a university so I could at least point you at somebody, but these things are always complicated.  Methotrexate is nasty stuff, it's part of the reason we're working on RA.  I hope you (and your doc) find something better in the future.


I literally have appointment in one week, so, fingers crossed. My rare disease guy is crap, so my local pulmo is trying to step up his game (he does research, but until recently not on this.) My insurance company refused to pay for a dude at a schmancy institute who was willing to foot the bill for most of my treatment in his study...his hospital would still be charging for lab work, etc., they preferred to send me only an hour away to a place that charges them more. Best healthcare in the world...USA! USA!
2013-04-04 11:16:33 AM
1 votes:

LabGrrl: hstein3: As far as your own case goes, is your case written up in any medical journals?  As an immunologist, I'm incredibly curious.  (Also sympathetic.)

Only 2 lines in a metastudy...Since we haven't found a good treatment, I'm boring reading. More treatments for autoimmune diseases are an awesomesauce thing. I've already washed out of azathioprine, CellCept and some other immunosuppressant. I'm at 'stable' on high dose steroids and mtx, but they are crap drugs...the side effects are almost as bad as not breathing.
A lot of people think having a rare disease doc is like House, but in my experience they don't care what you have or why you have it, only if their drug of choice is working.


That's disappointing to hear.  Rare, unnamed autoimmune condition is the sort of thing that should make most scientists start asking for blood and tissue samples.  I wish I still had connections at a university so I could at least point you at somebody, but these things are always complicated.  Methotrexate is nasty stuff, it's part of the reason we're working on RA.  I hope you (and your doc) find something better in the future.
2013-04-04 11:06:12 AM
1 votes:

hstein3: As far as your own case goes, is your case written up in any medical journals?  As an immunologist, I'm incredibly curious.  (Also sympathetic.)


Only 2 lines in a metastudy...Since we haven't found a good treatment, I'm boring reading. More treatments for autoimmune diseases are an awesomesauce thing. I've already washed out of azathioprine, CellCept and some other immunosuppressant. I'm at 'stable' on high dose steroids and mtx, but they are crap drugs...the side effects are almost as bad as not breathing.
A lot of people think having a rare disease doc is like House, but in my experience they don't care what you have or why you have it, only if their drug of choice is working.
2013-04-04 10:45:14 AM
1 votes:

Jument: Skarekrough: So, can I start smoking again or not?

This. I just got back from Italy. Everyone there smokes like a chimney. A true cure for cancer will be huge money, and personally I would probably take up occasional smoking again.


Best evidence seems to be that it's okay to occasionally smoke cigarettes, as long as you smoke some weed every week to clear the tar out of your lungs.  However, if you ever fail to clear any tar out of your lungs, at some point you'll probably get cancer.

//Semi-serious
2013-04-04 10:38:33 AM
1 votes:

LabGrrl: The harder question is not how do we make it not temporary, but how do we make it temporary.


True, again, assuming we correctly manage to identify the cause.  The biggest issue, from my perspective, that cancer has is that it's a true disease of symptoms, most of the symptoms being caused by the autoimmune response to the corruption.  It's dangerous to associate "treating tumors" with "stopping cancer", because all cancer has a cause, known or unknown.  We freak out about things that are "cancerous" because they skew your statistics.  Cancer causing means we think this thing causes the type of damage that sometimes doesn't get repaired and sometimes causes cancer.  The "cure" for cancer isn't killing tumors, it's correctly killing only unsalvageable cells and somehow resetting the other cells back to correct genetic strings.  A "cure" for cancer would be one that actually makes cancerous cells correct again.
2013-04-04 10:32:19 AM
1 votes:

Vodka Zombie: Cancer will never be cured.  In America, cancer is just too much of a welcome cash cow for just about every facet of the American health care/health insurance industry, and finding an easy cure would cost them billions in profits.  It's much better for them to convince you that you're going to die and subject you to an obscenely expensive regimen of treatments and medications and surgeries that can bleed every last penny from your bank accounts.



No. When you take their student loan payments out of their monthly salary, a good deal of the laboratory staff around the world make less than minimum wage. While PIs can rake in the dough (and not all of them, by a long shot) your techs, lab assistants, chemical handling people and even laboratory managers live the lush lifestyles of the ten-thousandaires. Some of them make as much as four tens. And that's terrible.

If the people handling the data weren't often on food stamps, it would be possible to believe they've all bought into a plan to keep the cures down....but do you really believe that no one making a lush 26k a year but in on the great secret cure would've gone "Hey, Mr. Jobs, for 2 million dollars I'll give you this cure..."

Hell, half the techs I know would give you their data for a beer and a new pair of shoes.
2013-04-04 10:24:08 AM
1 votes:

Mr Guy: The real problem with curing cancer is what happens when you don't remove the original source.  What happens when you don't find the virus, or the microscopic radioactive particle, or the genetic damage?  The thing about cancers that it's not just a "disease", it's a description of a particular way in which the body can kill itself if your basic units of life get corrupted.  Tumors aren't much more than human pearls, and there's a flaw that must be removed in there somewhere.  How could a drug like this not be temporary?  Seems like it could only be permanently effective for cancers caused by known virus infections.  Otherwise, what stops whatever damage caused the tumor from just doing it again?


The harder question is not how do we make it not temporary, but how do we make it temporary. Once your body is making antibodies, it doesn't often 'forget' how to make those antibodies (there are exceptions). If it's making antibodies to something it is encountering all the time, it is probably not stopping. The promise of "it will only temporarily target a protein that your body is using in places other than the cancer, and it won't go anywhere else" is a pipe dream.
It's a good premise: Tell the body to kill off the cancer the way it kills off all the other misfiring cells. The problem is that the science of killing cancer is better by far than the science of fixing a screwed up immune system. (We literally have about 6 drugs, and another 3-4 antibodies, that work on autoimmune diseases, and the gentlest of them is still a liver-killer that has cancer as a side effect.) Until we are funding research on fixing out-of-control immune systems better, it's nuts to invest in drugs with out-of-control immune systems as a side effect.
Right now, we have cancer treatments that cause severe autoimmune diseases, which are treated by drugs which cause cancer. That is a problem.
2013-04-04 10:17:33 AM
1 votes:
Well since everyone is debating what might be in the article what the conspiracy theory nuts are already here, here's the link to the PNAS article, it's open access so you can read it (and possibly thinks) for yourselves.

/Research how does it farking work?
2013-04-04 10:02:14 AM
1 votes:
Best lab related April Fools ever... The i can only imagine the delivery at Make-A-Wish.

"Great news, Timmy; we've developed a cure for your terminal lymphoma!"
"Horray, i'm going to live long enough to be friends with my younger brother!"
"Just kidding, April Fools!"

Classic.
2013-04-04 09:55:49 AM
1 votes:

LabGrrl: blipponaut: LabGrrl: Oh, yeah, let's mess with CD47. You know, the protein screwed up in some autoimmune diseases, like the one I'm dying of, where my body takes the "do not eat" label off of healthy lung tissue. That's a GREAT IDEA. What could possibly do wrong?

You're really dying of some disease related to this? I'm sorry to hear that.

I've a form of Interstitial Lung Disease so rare it has no name. Almost all the other patients developed it at 65, and I got it at 37. We literally have no idea how my long my lifespan could be, but yup, it's thought to be related to CD47 (primarily because it's unresponsive to treatments for CD40-related disease.) My body om nom noms my lungs (and other tissues) because it doesn't recognize the signal *not* to.

Long story short, all these 'new' cancer drugs that use the immune response have a slow, lingering, painful death from rare autoimmune diseases as a potential side effect. Just think, the experimental procedures keeping me alive could keep them alive, too. yay.


It seems some of your lung cells are genetically flawed to not produce, or have lost the ability to produce, CD47 which would explain why they are the only organ affected by your condition.

This in completely different than a drug that would temporarily suppress CD47 in order for the immune system to see and destroy cancer cells.  Other cells in the body might be destroyed as well but there are thousands of times more of those cells than the cancer cells.  The hope is for a temporary hit to those cells but that replacement healthy cells will be created.  That fact this has been successful in animal studies that contain human cancers is very promising.  The next huge step will human testing.  Will the drug not work?  Will the brain, heart or some other critical organ be affected and not easily recover.   Will the cancer keep coming back?

The answers will not be known for at least 5 years, maybe 10.
2013-04-04 09:46:21 AM
1 votes:

Alonjar: Or, you know... this new research could give them better understanding of CD47 manipulation, which could lead to a cure or fix for your problem.

NO WAIT YOU'RE RIGHT!  STOP.  STOP.  EVERYBODY STOP.  HALT THE RESEARCH!  LabGrrl on fark says its not a good idea!

Phew, that was a close one.  Zombie apocalypse averted!


Oh, honey, if I wanted you to put on your tin foil hat, I'd show you that a couple of those papers on CD-47 have my name on them, or my name in the works cited...because my lab was working with those antibodies.

Or, I'd show you the correlation between laboratory work and autoimmune diseases...

Those can tin foil hat you pretty fast.

There are many, many treatments that we have that kill 'every kind of cancer tumor.' The trick is NOT KILLING THE PATIENT.

/If I was against research, I would not be allowing myself to be a human scid mouse so my treatment might save a cancer patient's life.
//The correlation between lab staff and autoimmune disease is generally believed to be from solvents but that should never stop a good tin foil hatin'
///hatters gotta hat
2013-04-04 09:39:30 AM
1 votes:

Feepit: Is this the same study posted to Fark several days ago?

*checks link*

Yup! Same exact one.


So you are telling me there has been a recurrence of the cancer article
2013-04-04 09:35:12 AM
1 votes:
And if it does really work, this is the last we'll ever hear of it.
2013-04-04 09:34:45 AM
1 votes:

give me doughnuts: Edsel: As usual, the media takes a lab discovery and runs with it... Will be really curious to see what the effects on healthy tissues are. Unless there's a way to target this only to cancer cells, may be pointless.

There are already several ways to specifically target cancer cells. If one of them can be adapted to work with this treatment, then it should leave healthy tissues alone.


Sure... but you have to target it such that when it gets to the tumor, it still works to block the CD47 protein. Can be done, but technically challenging. Especially if this is going to be a panacea for all types of tumors. Some are easier to target than others. Looks like their drug as currently formulated isn't specifically targeted, it just blocks CD47 everywhere.

Monkeyfark Ridiculous: "Although macrophages also attacked blood cells expressing CD47 when mice were given the antibody, the researchers found that the decrease in blood cells was short-lived; the animals turned up production of new blood cells to replace those they lost from the treatment, the team reports online today in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. "

I know it's only mice so far but this sounds promising.


Very promising if the only collateral damage was to blood cells. Will have to see what effects it has on healthy tissues in humans. I.e., if it just gives macrophages free rein to go buckwild and attack all your organs, that would suck. Hopefully it works in humans as well as it does in mice.
2013-04-04 09:31:41 AM
1 votes:

blipponaut: LabGrrl: Oh, yeah, let's mess with CD47. You know, the protein screwed up in some autoimmune diseases, like the one I'm dying of, where my body takes the "do not eat" label off of healthy lung tissue. That's a GREAT IDEA. What could possibly do wrong?

You're really dying of some disease related to this? I'm sorry to hear that.


I've a form of Interstitial Lung Disease so rare it has no name. Almost all the other patients developed it at 65, and I got it at 37. We literally have no idea how my long my lifespan could be, but yup, it's thought to be related to CD47 (primarily because it's unresponsive to treatments for CD40-related disease.) My body om nom noms my lungs (and other tissues) because it doesn't recognize the signal *not* to.

Long story short, all these 'new' cancer drugs that use the immune response have a slow, lingering, painful death from rare autoimmune diseases as a potential side effect. Just think, the experimental procedures keeping me alive could keep them alive, too. yay.
2013-04-04 09:21:38 AM
1 votes:

Archae hippy: Killing cancer cells is easy (see the first few posts, or boobies or what ever).

Blocking HUMAN CD47 makes implanted HUMAN tumors more susceptible to the mouse immune system.  Normal MOUSE cells are also more susceptible, but much less so.  I hate cancer, but this extremely preliminary.


So, logically, if we remove the cancerous tumor from a human, and replace it with a tumor from mice, this may work great!

I'm not even an MD.  I know, right?
2013-04-04 09:21:14 AM
1 votes:

LabGrrl: Oh, yeah, let's mess with CD47. You know, the protein screwed up in some autoimmune diseases, like the one I'm dying of, where my body takes the "do not eat" label off of healthy lung tissue. That's a GREAT IDEA. What could possibly do wrong?


You're really dying of some disease related to this? I'm sorry to hear that.
2013-04-04 09:17:03 AM
1 votes:
Killing cancer cells is easy (see the first few posts, or boobies or what ever).

Blocking HUMAN CD47 makes implanted HUMAN tumors more susceptible to the mouse immune system.  Normal MOUSE cells are also more susceptible, but much less so.  I hate cancer, but this extremely preliminary.
2013-04-04 09:11:08 AM
1 votes:
Isn't hemp oil this miraculous cure?
2013-04-04 08:52:44 AM
1 votes:

I_Am_Weasel: Sgygus: Cyanide?

No. Apparently it's  silica gel.

FTA:The drug works by blocking a protein called CD47 that is essentially a "do not eat" signal to the body's immune system


Wait, you're not supposed to eat that? Why wasn't I warned??!11?!
/so thirsty now
2013-04-04 08:41:27 AM
1 votes:

Sgygus: Cyanide?


No. Apparently it's silica gel.

FTA:The drug works by blocking a protein called CD47 that is essentially a "do not eat" signal to the body's immune system
2013-04-04 06:37:21 AM
1 votes:
Science reporting goes like this:
Paper: "We found a small but measurable positive effect of substance X in this extremely narrow animal model."
Media: "CANCER CURE FOUND"
2013-04-04 04:03:17 AM
1 votes:
These announcements always sound great, but the devil is in the details...like previous comments have noted.

Hopefully this time it is different and they are truly on to something.
2013-04-04 02:52:42 AM
1 votes:
Polonium?
2013-04-04 02:13:31 AM
1 votes:
Cyanide?
 
Displayed 32 of 32 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report