A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.
rule #1: be kind
It has the potential to do away with chemotherapy, surgery and radiation treatment.
I read that as: Will never reach the market because it threatens a multibillion dollar industry.
But srsly, glioblastoma is a really nasty motherfucker with a very low patient survival rate, so if they've really managed to cure it that's a huge milestone.
Too bad we got a Sociopathic Oligarchs as HSS, who thinks mRNA vaccines should be banned. Cancer is better than...well, whatever is wrong with mRNA vaccines.
amazing. i can already hear the anti vax crowd seething lol
I'm gonna be watching with popcorn when anti-vaxxers get cancer and definitely 100% will take this vaccine.
I mean, if it's true and not just shit science reporting that I assume it is.
Rfk is about to wake up and fire everyone doing this research.
When we say "healthcare" we mean caring for the health of healthcare corporations.
Conservatives will somehow find a way to level this as devil worshiping blasphemy and let their children die of brain cancer instead.
Previous research has focused more on homing in on a target or tailoring a vaccine specific to a patient's own cancer profile.
"This study suggests a third emerging paradigm," said study co-author Duane Mitchell, MD. "What we found is by using a vaccine designed not to target cancer specifically but rather to stimulate a strong immunologic response, we could elicit a very strong anticancer reaction. And so this has significant potential to be broadly used across cancer patients – even possibly leading us to an off-the-shelf cancer vaccine."
So... Kinda triggering your own auto-inmune response. But I'd be wary of trouble with overtly aggressive auto-inmune responses, as we already have quite a few diseases coming from these, as well.
I guess if I was gonna die and absolutely wanted more time I would make the trade off for living with lupus
living with lupus
As someone with an autoimmune disorder, I'm honestly not all that sold on whether that's a good tradeoff.
Yay, you're not acutely dying of cancer, but now your body is attacking your internal organs and depending on how shitty your luck is, you can eg. look forward to liver and/or kidney transplants (possibly more than once, too)
I'll read the publication in the coming days and report back, but don't get your hopes up. There's a "breakthrough" in cancer research every few months and it leads to nothing. And this study was done in mice which are a bit different to humans (citation needed)
They cured hair loss in mice at least twenty times now and we still have bald humans
They should probably find a way to turn humans into mice. It's a shame to leave billions of dollars on the table like that.
Might be a good concept for a sci fi story actually, probably a comedic one. Scientists learn how to cure any disease and reverse aging, but only for mice. Conveniently for plot reasons, they also figure out how to turn people into mice and back. You can get any disease cured or become young again...but you have to spend three months as a mouse.
I think this is overly negative. There have been multiple significant advances in cancer treatment over the past 10 years. It just depends which type you get.
Maybe overly negative by saying they come to "nothing", but if you trace those advances back to their initial press release stage, they generally way ovehype it.
Here we have what is being heralded as maybe a universal response to any and all cancer. That would be a shockingly amazing deviation from basically all the cancer research to date. It's possible and wonderful if true, but generally the research falls short of the initial press coverage, even if it amounts to something.
while you're not wrong i do want to reiterate that mRNA vaccines are likely going to be how we treat and cure cancers so there is precedent at least for this to be massive news. if not this there will likely be a real announcement one day.
The likelihood that all cancers express a common surface marker that is never expressed by any non-cancerous cell seems pretty low. Not a cancer biologist, but there's all kind of different genetic paths to cancer - why would they all cause some specific molecule to be expressed and why would no other cell ever use it?
Your instincts are correct. The approach in the paper is more complicated than this. Here is the abstract:
Abstract The success of cancer immunotherapies is predicated on the targeting of highly expressed neoepitopes, which preferentially favours malignancies with high mutational burden. Here we show that early responses by type-I interferons mediate the success of immune checkpoint inhibitors as well as epitope spreading in poorly immunogenic tumours and that these interferon responses can be enhanced via systemic administration of lipid particles loaded with RNA coding for tumour-unspecific antigens. In mice, the immune responses of tumours sensitive to checkpoint inhibitors were transferable to resistant tumours and resulted in heightened immunity with antigenic spreading that protected the animals from tumour rechallenge. Our findings show that the resistance of tumours to immunotherapy is dictated by the absence of a damage response, which can be restored by boosting early type-I interferon responses to enable epitope spreading and self-amplifying responses in treatment-refractory tumours.
Hopefully, the researchers will be fully employed by the EU. I wouldn't trust the US to not fuck up this miracle.
What is the catch?
We'll find out in 30 years
It causes cancer.
Whatatweest!
A fellow Robot Chicken connoisseur, I see! You have very good taste.
Any cancer? How does this work with people who have gene mutations that suppress cancer-fighting defence systems.
E X T E R M I N A T E^/s^
I can't want to never hear about this again
CIA hitmen:
While the formulation isn't unlike the Covid-19 vaccine, which uses lipid nanoparticles to deliver the genetic instructions to the body, it is still somewhat different. Instead of the drug encoding a virus protein, it sends a message to the immune system to rally the troops. It essentially tells the body to produce certain proteins that stimulate the immune system – including a protein within cancer cells known as PD-L1 (Programmed Death-Ligand 1), which makes tumors become more visible to immune cells.
TLDR: they are finding that it’s more effective to make cancer more visible and have the body’s immune system do its thing.
In this study on mice...
Took them 7 paragraphs to get around to mentioning that.
I want to believe.
mRNA vaccine research in America? don’t need that, cancel the funding!