As the compound is already patented, her team will probably have to design something slightly different to be able to patent it as a new drug.
Taxol, developed by U.S. National Cancer Institute researchers and manufactured by Bristol-Myers Squibb in 1993, had annual sales of $1.6 billion at its peak in 2000.
Or they can license the patented drug to let Bristol-Myers Squibb recover their investment and let this breakthrough treatment get throught the FDA much quicker and out to cancer patients years earlier, thus saving many lives that otherwise would be lost waiting for a new non-patented version to be developed and run through the FDA trials.
I'll defer to the scientists on what is best for the patient, but this just sounds like greed getting in the way of good medicine. (Not that I don't suspect that Reuters is spining this to make bigPharm look bad.)
1 posted on
02/04/2007 11:45:53 AM PST by
anymouse
To: anymouse; neverdem
2 posted on
02/04/2007 11:49:06 AM PST by
Jedi Master Pikachu
( WND, NewsMax, Townhall.com, Brietbart.com, and Drudge Report are not valid news sources.)
To: anymouse
What works on animal cells doesn't always work on human cells. But it could.
3 posted on
02/04/2007 11:52:48 AM PST by
Jedi Master Pikachu
( WND, NewsMax, Townhall.com, Brietbart.com, and Drudge Report are not valid news sources.)
To: b_sharp; neutrality; anguish; SeaLion; Fractal Trader; grjr21; bitt; KevinDavis; Momaw Nadon; ...
FutureTechPing! |
An emergent technologies list covering biomedical research, fusion power, nanotech, AI robotics, and other related fields. FReepmail to join or drop. |
|
|
|
4 posted on
02/04/2007 11:52:54 AM PST by
AntiGuv
("..I do things for political expediency.." - Sen. John McCain on FOX News)
To: anymouse
There was a movie about a similar scenario.
![](http://i19.tinypic.com/2ljgeww.jpg)
To: anymouse
Interesting. I wonder how many of science's greatest discoveries were "accidents". Assuming it proves to be safe and effective, I hope this gets on a fast track through whatever route they take it and it gets to patients quickly.
6 posted on
02/04/2007 11:54:29 AM PST by
GBA
(God Bless America!)
To: hocndoc; AntiGuv
Medical science research ping.
7 posted on
02/04/2007 11:57:18 AM PST by
anymouse
To: anymouse
I don't see how it can be patented anyway now that it has been described in print. You can't patent something that is already in the public domain.
8 posted on
02/04/2007 11:59:05 AM PST by
Kirkwood
To: anymouse
Or they can license the patented drug to let Bristol-Myers Squibb recover their investment... Bristol-Myers Squibb doesn't necessarily have anything to do with this drug. The report rather confusingly mentions Taxol, which BMS makes, but the drug in question here is "a compound called a PPAR-gamma modulator," which is something else.
That said, it's always useful to remember that "may" means "may not" and so far the cure for cancer's been discovered every two months for the last twenty years.
13 posted on
02/04/2007 12:37:11 PM PST by
Grut
To: anymouse
WOOHOOO
2nd cure for cancer in a month - wheres my smokes!
16 posted on
02/04/2007 1:21:49 PM PST by
spanalot
To: anymouse
"The co-author on my paper said,' Did I hear you say you killed some cancer?' I said 'Oh', and took a closer look." Classic.
17 posted on
02/04/2007 1:27:43 PM PST by
Egon
("If all your friends were named Cliff, would you jump off them??" - Hugh Neutron)
To: anymouse
"........they have discovered a new way to attack tumors that have learned how to evade existing drugs."
Does this refer to tumors already in a person or is it talking about the ones formed initially?
How would a tumor develop a resistence to a cancer treatment unless the cancer had been previously exposed to the drug. If that's the case, cancer would have to be a disease that's transmitted from person to person.
20 posted on
02/04/2007 2:00:35 PM PST by
em2vn
To: anymouse
21 posted on
02/04/2007 2:03:13 PM PST by
diamond6
(Everyone who is for abortion has been born. Ronald Reagan)
To: anymouse
A question for all my fellow Freepers: After reading this article about finding a cure for Cancer, the question just popped into my head, being a cancer survivor myself also my wife has worked for an Oncologist for 14 years and I just asked her. In these tests, how do they give the mice the different forms of Cancer? My wife could not answer the question and she told me to drop it because she did not want to get freaked out.
22 posted on
02/04/2007 2:16:19 PM PST by
rambo316
(The Blessed Mother is Queen of heaven and earth.)
To: anymouse
cancer cells eventually evolve mechanisms to pump out the drugs You'd best take that sentence out. Believing that cells evolve is religion.
23 posted on
02/04/2007 2:47:47 PM PST by
narby
To: anymouse; All
Some time ago, someone posted a link to an animation of the internal workings of a cell. It was absolutely fascinating.
I didn't bookmark it, and I cannot find it. Anyone help me out?
29 posted on
02/04/2007 8:33:13 PM PST by
Jotmo
(I Had a Bad Experience With the CIA and Now I'm Gonna Show You My Feminine Side - Swirling Eddies)
To: anymouse; All
Some time ago, someone posted a link to an animation of the internal workings of a cell. It was absolutely fascinating.
I didn't bookmark it, and I cannot find it. Anyone help me out?
30 posted on
02/04/2007 8:33:24 PM PST by
Jotmo
(I Had a Bad Experience With the CIA and Now I'm Gonna Show You My Feminine Side - Swirling Eddies)
To: anymouse
Just an observation,.
If they could make this compound with a limited lifespan,
then inject directly into the tumor, it seems possible so long
as it doesn't kill everything else it contacts due to the body's own abilities
to attack anything obscure.
I appreciate any cancer breakthrough.
God Bless America,
MaxMax.
32 posted on
02/04/2007 10:15:38 PM PST by
MaxMax
(God Bless America)
To: anymouse
Every now and then in pharmacological research, failure leads to success. IIRC, the drug company SK&F was near bankruptcy and they were testing a new drug as a heart medication. It failed miserably, but it seemed that some in the test group also had ulcers, and the new medication seemed to help them quite a bit. That medication later became known as Tagamet, and quite literally saved the company, and went on to be one of the best selling drugs in history.
Mark
35 posted on
02/04/2007 10:27:21 PM PST by
MarkL
(When Kaylee says "No power in the `verse can stop me," it's cute. When River says it, it's scary!)
To: anymouse
...but this just sounds like greed getting in the way of good medicine. Along with death and taxes...that is one thing you can always count on.
Do some reading on dichloroacetate. It's being looked at as a new cancer treatment as well.
DCA attacks a unique feature of cancer cells: the fact that they make their energy throughout the main body of the cell, rather than in distinct organelles called mitochondria. This process, called glycolysis, is inefficient and uses up vast amounts of sugar.
Let's watch and see how quickly this compound comes through trials and gets approved by the FDA.
To: anymouse
which were originally derived from Pacific yew trees. I seem to recall that. The Pharmeceutical company planted huge numbers of seedlings of an endangered yew species, and then the greenies sued to keep them from using the trees.
48 posted on
02/05/2007 3:46:57 PM PST by
lepton
("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson