Promising cancer research from MIT?

[Beerball]

What say the scientific types?

[BillsFanNC]

I went and read the abstract at Cell and this is more of a method paper describing a new way to screen chemotherapuetic drug candidates. I think the BBC article is correct, it's way too early to tell as many promising agents have been developed over the years in animal models or culture only to fail under the rigor of human clinical trials, if they even get that far. This new drug does reduce the proportion of cancer stem cells by >100 fold when compared to paclitaxel, a chemotherapuetic drug currently used on human patients.

[/dev/null]

I wish this was around when my Mom needed it

[Wacka]

What usually happens is that the scientific paper discusses a model or new finding. The press gets hold of it and hypes it up, and people think a cure is just around the corner. The process from discovery to drug takes a long time, even if it makes it that far.

[Steely Dan]

What usually happens is that the scientific paper discusses a model or new finding. The press gets hold of it and hypes it up, and people think a cure is just around the corner. The process from discovery to drug takes a long time, even if it makes it that far.

 

This article talks about how the press hypes things up and what the reality is.

[Wacka]

The problem with cells getting resistant to chemo is a naturally occurring pathway that gets amplified. Cells have pumps to remove toxins from their interior. At first, the chemo gets in and kills the cells. Then one or a few tumor cells amplify the gene for the pump (sometimes hundreds of copies). As soon as the chemo enters, it gets pumped out of the cell and cannot kill it.