Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New cancer therapy holds potential to switch off major cancer types

princeton.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 111 posts

Re: New cancer therapy holds potential to switch off major cancer types

#31

Post by [deleted] »

Retric wrote: post #23
bedobi wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know nothing about biology, medicine or evolution, but I don't think that's how it works. Lots of people inherit and pass on all kinds of bad genes that do terrible things to them, even kill them. And for such people, switching them off would be better pretty much irrespective of any side effects. (to the degree there even are any side effects at all)

It’s one thing for a “bad” gene to stick around for a few generations or even spread through a species. It’s wildly different for a “bad” gene to be shared by species who’s common ancestor was 60+ million years ago. On that timescale anything conserved is doing something useful.

[deleted]

Re: New cancer therapy holds potential to switch off major cancer types

#32

Post by adamredwoods »

coffeemug wrote: post #25
xiphias2 wrote: post #21

What takes years to develop for the human trials to start? Is it about optimizing the delivery system, or finding the right targets to test on in bigger animals first? There are so many people closecto dying in cancer, that finding volunteers for a Phase 1 test should be easy.

Acquiring endless regulatory approvals.

I don't mind that it takes a little proof to convince regulatory boards to approve medicines for Phase I trials, but these days Phase I trials are fairly quick to get (assuming you can sell the doctors and patients on it).

My guess for the delay is production process and delivery mechanisms. There are delivery mechanisms where the combinatory effects lead to some serious toxicity.

Plus, how long do mice live for? I'm sure they are still taking down observations and collecting data. The article submission may be to help with funding.

Re: New cancer therapy holds potential to switch off major cancer types

#33

Post by sharkweek »

xiphias2 wrote: post #21

What takes years to develop for the human trials to start? Is it about optimizing the delivery system, or finding the right targets to test on in bigger animals first? There are so many people closecto dying in cancer, that finding volunteers for a Phase 1 test should be easy.

I have a friend who about 15 years ago was told he was going to die from melanoma in about a year.

Within that first year he was put on a trial that added another 2 or so years to his life. Then during that time another experimental treatment was created and tested on him and that gave him another couple of years. A decade and a half later here we are, he still has cancer but his family (wife and two kids) has got to keep him around a while longer.

He’s been “patient one” on a number of studies, some have helped him extend his life expectancy, others have done nothing. Sometimes he has the mental and physical energy to start a trial and other times he does not.

The cancer has never gone away, and there have been so many moments of false hope that I’m never really sure where he sits mentally anymore (he really doesn’t want to talk about cancer when we’re together and I don’t think anyone can blame him) but I know he’s grateful for the chance to add more time onto his life when the experimental treatments are available.

Re: New cancer therapy holds potential to switch off major cancer types

#34

Post by wyattpeak »

xiphias2 wrote: post #21

What takes years to develop for the human trials to start? Is it about optimizing the delivery system, or finding the right targets to test on in bigger animals first? There are so many people closecto dying in cancer, that finding volunteers for a Phase 1 test should be easy.

The article seems to suggest that they only just found a compound which will interfere with the gene's action. So up until now, there was nothing to test.

The 2014 result only showed that gene editing before birth might prevent cancers.

Re: New cancer therapy holds potential to switch off major cancer types

#36

Post by verve_rat »

steve76 wrote: post #29
xiphias2 wrote: post #21

What takes years to develop for the human trials to start? Is it about optimizing the delivery system, or finding the right targets to test on in bigger animals first? There are so many people closecto dying in cancer, that finding volunteers for a Phase 1 test should be easy.

From the article: "yet it doesn’t seem to be important for normal development" Gene space is huge. My cancer is cured, but now I'm dying of mange. So that's why that mouse kept licking itself. Big ask for someone else. They have trouble getting blood thinners, statins and beta blockers right. And there's no genetics there. It's stuff people ate out in the woods for hundreds of thousands of years. > There are so many…

Wait what? Trails aren't free to participants? That alone is going to majorly bias the results.

Here take this medicine, we are fairly confident it won't kill you. Here is your $100k bill. Oh? Can't afford that? No trial for you!

Re: New cancer therapy holds potential to switch off major cancer types

#37

Post by ProjectArcturis »

csdvrx wrote: post #8
nielsbot wrote: post #6

"Because while it’s important to show that mice born without MTDH are resistant to cancer, that doesn’t help patients, whose genes can’t be rewritten ." ...yet Wonder if we'll look back at this and think "how quaint".

Actually, we can: I think we already have working gene therapy for several diseases. Just look at the current list on wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_therapy#Treatment_of_gene...

Huntington's is an invariably fatal disease, which is caused by the repetition of a single gene, which overexpresses a single protein. It's about as simple as genetics get. When we've cured that, I'll say we have working gene therapy.

Re: New cancer therapy holds potential to switch off major cancer types

#39

Post by tharkun__ »

steve76 wrote: post #29
xiphias2 wrote: post #21

What takes years to develop for the human trials to start? Is it about optimizing the delivery system, or finding the right targets to test on in bigger animals first? There are so many people closecto dying in cancer, that finding volunteers for a Phase 1 test should be easy.

From the article: "yet it doesn’t seem to be important for normal development" Gene space is huge. My cancer is cured, but now I'm dying of mange. So that's why that mouse kept licking itself. Big ask for someone else. They have trouble getting blood thinners, statins and beta blockers right. And there's no genetics there. It's stuff people ate out in the woods for hundreds of thousands of years. > There are so many…

You seem to be getting downvoted. Not sure why.

I've had someone in the family who got cancer. It was basically how you said it would be. They lived their life to the fullest, not thinking about the untreatable cancer. Do whatever is fun and makes you happy.

At some point it got bad. No more living your life. There were bad moment. There were better moments. There were worse moments. I only saw it from afar until the very end. The last bit must have been hell for the closest family. It really is just dying. Slowly. Painfully. And all society and doctors try to do is to prolong the suffering.

I'm being unfair to some people. I do know the palliative care team did their best. All volunteer doctors. Power to them.

Re: New cancer therapy holds potential to switch off major cancer types

#40

Post by AlchemistCamp »

droopyEyelids wrote: post #27
coffeemug wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Acquiring endless regulatory approvals.

I wonder how much of our regulation around medicine is wasteful, vs regulation that came about in response to some sort of malfeasance.

Most of it is probably both.
Post reply on HN