CRISPR tech selectively shreds cancer cells, including "undruggable" cancers

Post by epihelix » Sat, Jun 13, 2026, 7:33 AM UTC

amluto wrote: post #194

MontyCarloHall wrote: post #70

The idea of using CRISPR/Cas to detect tumor-specific mutations that aren't necessarily oncogenic and then kill the cell is not a new one [0, 1, 2]. However, previous studies used Cas9, which just damages the DNA at the target site; this uses Cas12a2, which is far more destructive because it shreds the chromatin in the cell once activated by detecting the target sequence. As with any cancer treatment, it's likely the…

Surely a far simpler way to evolve resistance would be a trivial mutation in the p53 transcript that the guide RNA is looking for.

Post by epihelix » Sat, Jun 13, 2026, 7:55 AM UTC

hummuscience wrote: post #192

Apparently this group was a bit late. Here is the first group with the same approach https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-026-10466-y

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Jun 13, 2026, 8:24 AM UTC

est31 wrote: post #183

In order to kill all cancer cells in the body, it probably needs to be delivered to every single cell in the organism, and scan the nucleus of that cell. Viruses usually don't infect every single cell, just a small percentage. So one needs to figure out a delivery method that is efficient enough, and that doesn't elicit an immune response. But I guess one can analyze the cancer in the lab and figure out which recepto…

Post by liveoneggs » Sat, Jun 13, 2026, 12:06 PM UTC

r58lf wrote: post #146

himata4113 wrote: post #129

Does anyone know a website where I can see/read of how many cancers (and their variants) we've effectively solved, have drugs to negate their effects, have experimental drugs for and uncurable cancers? I think that graph would be awe inspiring looking at the past decade of advancements. What's more crazy is that we're slowly going from millenia, to decades, to likely years in the near future from being presented a bi…

It's not as great as you might think, despite all the stories you see like this one. That's because most of the stories are in cells (this one) or mice. The big success story, about 20 years old now, is testicular cancer. You can have metastatic testicular cancer with tumors all over your body (like Lance Armstrong had) and they can cure it. They use platinum based chemotherapy and it's not really well understood why…

Post by dmbrThnYou » Sat, Jun 13, 2026, 12:47 PM UTC

yelling_cat wrote: post #182

dmbrThnYou wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a good article with a good point. As a caregiver impatiently waiting for Daraxonrasib, I can at least acknowledge that the institutional machinery is going as fast as it can. I've litterally witnessed a trial patient in the first cohort of a drug (that went no further) be rushed from infusion to the hospital; the trial process cannot be sped up from its current state without endangering lives.

> As a caregiver impatiently waiting for Daraxonrasib Same here. Are you and your care recipient familiar with the Optune Pax device that the FDA approved in February? https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-appr... My father's been using it since April. It's a little cumbersome and only improves overall survival rates by about two months over chemo alone, but we're hoping that it helps him remain rel…