Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Cancer breakthrough stuns scientific world
itechnology ^ | September 05 2002 at 08:26PM | Steve Connor

Posted on 09/10/2002 7:16:04 PM PDT by mjp

Cancer breakthrough stuns scientific world

September 05 2002 at 08:26PM

By Steve Connor

Scientists have successfully destroyed cervical cancer cells using a revolutionary new technique which is being hailed as one of the most important developments in medicine for decades.

The technique, called RNA interference (RNAi), completely eliminated all the cancer cells growing in a test tube yet left healthy cells unharmed. The scientists called the results "absolutely remarkable".

As the findings were released on Thursday, it emerged that another team of researchers were planning the world's first clinical trial of the technique, this time on a group of Aids patients. The trial is expected to begin within the next two years.

'I've been in research a long time and this was fantastic' RNAi works by "silencing" harmful genes. Excited scientists believe it could be used to turn off the genes of infectious viruses or human tumour cells that have turned malignant, rendering them harmless.

A study published yesterday in the journal Oncogene demonstrated that RNAi efficiently switched off the genes of the human papiloma virus, which triggers cervical cancer in women. All cancerous cells growing in a test tube died, leaving normal cells untouched.

Professor Jo Milner, who led the investigation at the University of York, said that in her long career as a cell biologist she had never before witnessed such a powerful anti-cancer agent which was so highly specific at targeting tumour cells.

"The successful elimination of the cancer cells, without adverse effects on normal cells, is absolutely remarkable. I've been in research a long time and this was fantastic," she said.

Milner's team targeted the RNAi against two genes of human papiloma virus. By silencing one gene, the tumour cells stopped growing. By silencing the other, all the cancer cells "committed suicide".

Because the treatment had no effect on uninfected human cells, this is strong evidence that RNAi would be unlikely to produce the harmful side-effects seen when other cancer treatments are used on patients.

Milner said she intended starting clinical trials as a potential treatment for cervical cancer within five years. Cervical cancer is the second-most-common form of female cancer, killing 1 250 British women a year.

"Our work has identified a novel agent with major therapeutic potential for the treatment, and possibly the prevention, of human cervical cancer," Milner said.

Cervical cancer is caused when human papiloma virus attacks natural proteins in the body which are vital for the suppression of cancer. RNAi effectively restores this natural cancer-suppression by attacking the virus. - Independent Foreign Service


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: cancer
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-127 next last
To: TIGHTEN
What about those that engage in risky lifestyle behavior and contract aids because their poor choice? Should chronic alchoholics be placed at the head of the line for liver transplants?
101 posted on 09/11/2002 11:47:12 AM PDT by semaj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: ALS
The Medical Community are not as interested in curing cancer as we are.

They are interested in studying cancer. The difference is huge, and the results are a massive fraud of the masses.

Thomas Edison, if alive today, would be studying the possibility of a light bulb and would still be applying for government grants instead of selling product.

PhD-types are trained to be self-absorbed a$$holes who can't fathom the existence of something they can't understand. This precludes them from being useful towards solving problems such as death by cancer.

102 posted on 09/11/2002 11:50:58 AM PDT by Enduring Freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Enduring Freedom
PhD-types are trained to be self-absorbed a$$holes who can't fathom the existence of something they can't understand. This precludes them from being useful towards solving problems such as death by cancer.

OK, so who would be good at "curing cancer?"

Semi-retired lumberjacks? Yourself?

103 posted on 09/11/2002 11:54:23 AM PDT by andy_card
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: chachacha
Absolutely right. I know him!

So you'd like to think. I really know him. God says you are just a poser who likes to pretend you hang with his posse.

104 posted on 09/11/2002 12:01:24 PM PDT by tortoise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: andy_card
I'm well aware that the fruit fly embryo was the source for the RNA used in the fruit fly phase of the experiments. I'm also suspicious that the human embryo will be the source of thr RNA to be used in the human trials (as different from the 'beaker' phase).

Frankly, your opinion of me means nada to me, but thanks for the energy anyway.

105 posted on 09/11/2002 12:06:07 PM PDT by MHGinTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
I'm also suspicious that the human embryo will be the source of thr RNA to be used in the human trials (as different from the 'beaker' phase).

Why? That makes no sense. These were human cancer cells they were experimenting on. I think you're paranoid.

Frankly, your opinion of me means nada to me, but thanks for the energy anyway.

Well, your paranoia means nothing to me, so I guess we're on the same page now.

106 posted on 09/11/2002 12:20:13 PM PDT by andy_card
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: 537 Votes
Perhaps, but public clamor shouldn't be the determining factor.

Uncountable numbers of people are dead who never knew that medicines existed or were available elsewhere but not here. Dead men tell no tales.

107 posted on 09/11/2002 12:44:20 PM PDT by Protagoras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: chachacha
Who would he give the cure to?

You can pretend all you want, but it's not a game. Sick people receive help. Sinners receive undeserved grace. Even you.

108 posted on 09/11/2002 12:48:40 PM PDT by Protagoras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
How will the RNAi be derived?... From human embryos?

The RNA will come from the specific target cells in the adult.

109 posted on 09/11/2002 3:20:18 PM PDT by realpatriot71
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: realpatriot71
Thank you for the rational reply! I had hoped the RNA for treating cervical cancer would be derieved from the target cervix, the target throat tissue, the target lung tissue. I still do not fully understand how the fruit fly embryos were source for the siRNA, for RNAi testing the interference with PV lifecycle in the fruit fly.
110 posted on 09/11/2002 3:31:17 PM PDT by MHGinTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: mjp
bttt
111 posted on 09/11/2002 3:37:37 PM PDT by Pagey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VetoBill
I know there are some legitimate clinical trials needed, but often it seems the FDA is so afraid a drug/medical method is going to kill someone they would rather let those people die.

The FDA's mission was to make sure treatments were "safe and effective". Now they're more concerned with the level of control they have and how much instant data companies should provide for them.

112 posted on 09/11/2002 4:32:52 PM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Chemist_Geek
Yeah, but OTOH, patients used to be sold snake oil and dropped dead more from the "med" than the illness...

That was true before the 30's. There used to be a guy who sold radioactive water as a "health tonic".

There's no reason for the FDA to block product improvements just so data can be available for inspectors at a moments notice. The auditors could wait a day or two.

113 posted on 09/11/2002 4:37:52 PM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: realpatriot71
For instance (if you already know this - forgive me) about 2 years ago during retroviral gene therapy trials a young man suddenly died. I personally think that stopping all such trials was a mistake, but care needs to be taken. Don't you think?

Most companies have already put several hundred million dollars into safety trials before NDA submission. Once the NDA is sent to the FDA, companies have 7 years to regain their investment plus any profit before they lose ownership and the generic manufacturers can start selling the product. When there's no longer a profit, there will no longer be any new drugs. Why do you think two-thirds of new drug submissions are reformulated drugs rather than new drugs?

Unfortunately people can die in trials. Sometimes it results from the effect of the drug, but many people in trials are dying already anyway. Biology being what it is, its not always possible to know how individuals will react to a drug in advance, because people carry so many mutations.

114 posted on 09/11/2002 4:45:36 PM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: ALS
Give it to a pile o' patients. If they are cured the testing is complete. Next step would be over the counter.

That's illegal. The disclaimers are for the lawyers. Health care companies are sued hundreds of times every day.

115 posted on 09/11/2002 4:47:12 PM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: 537 Votes
I understand where you're coming from, but bureaucracies have a way of fast-tracking things when there's enough public clamor.

You mean like AIDS drugs during the Clinton presidency?

116 posted on 09/11/2002 4:48:37 PM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: andy_card
Cancer will be cured by private industry long before funded institutions. Like the Human Genome Project, private industry with brute force robust testing will hone in on promising cures without 'understanding' the personality of the bug at a pace far beyond that of the institutional deadweight.

Accidents and cross-discipline discoveries are the source of much of the world's breakthroughs because pompous idiots with PhD's cannot fathom the reality of a phenomenon without accepting that they don't know why it occurs. Much better to dismiss or bury useful effects they can't explain - makes them feel in control. Thinking inside the box is the epitome of a PhD's paradigm.

Thomas Edison built a light bulb without knowing 'why' - the fact is, it worked, and the world was better for it.

Whenever you hear in the future the phrase 'scientists are at a loss to explain it', my point will reverberate through your thick skull.

117 posted on 09/13/2002 2:29:11 PM PDT by Enduring Freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: Enduring Freedom
Cancer will be cured by private industry long before funded institutions.

And you know this because...? By the way, have any suggestions for the Lotto?

Like the Human Genome Project, private industry with brute force robust testing will hone in on promising cures without 'understanding' the personality of the bug at a pace far beyond that of the institutional deadweight.

Actually, the NIH finished before Celera Genomics, but that wouldn't matter to you.

Accidents and cross-discipline discoveries are the source of much of the world's breakthroughs because pompous idiots with PhD's cannot fathom the reality of a phenomenon without accepting that they don't know why it occurs.

You're an idiot. The folks who work for pharmaceutical and biotech firms have just as many advanced degrees as those who work for government and university laboratories.

Thomas Edison built a light bulb without knowing 'why' - the fact is, it worked, and the world was better for it.

Actually, he did know why it worked.

Whenever you hear in the future the phrase 'scientists are at a loss to explain it', my point will reverberate through your thick skull.

Huh? There are lots of things that scientists don't understand. The point of science is to seek to explain them. What do you have against ordinary human curiosity? What have YOU got to hide?

118 posted on 09/13/2002 10:21:51 PM PDT by andy_card
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

Comment #119 Removed by Moderator

Comment #120 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-127 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson