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
"Martha? It's me; you didn't dump that ImClone, did you?"
Therefore, they do not deserve a second choice to live over those that did not make a choice to die.
Sounds logical and fair to me.
Who is G-d? Actually It should all be caps. "GOD" Say It GOD!
Lets pretend GOD is giving injections to cure cancer and the first in line is a practicing gay who got aids from his ALTERNATIVE LIFE STYLE. The next person in line was one who did not practice this ALTERNATIVE LIFE STYLE and listened to what GOD preached against.
Who would he give the cure to?
Lets let GOD sort it all out.
Unless the one you know G-d can do it. I doubt it.
Time flies like an arrow.
Fruit flies like a banana.
I don't recommend one group of people using force to prevent another group of people from doing whatever they think is in their own best interests to save their lives.
For what it's worth, I am opposed to the use of illicit drugs as well as intravenous Draino drips.
I just don't advocate the use of force to prevent adults from doing either one.
More lives have been lost due to government interference than have been saved. That includes the FDA and the WOD. And others.
Drosophilia, eh? Seems fitting that the first test subjects would be AIDS patients then if the "cure" is extracted from Fruit Fly eggs.
(you know, the greatest good for the greatest number?)
I am in complete agreement with you here. I don't think one group of people should keep another group of people from a new drug. However, as physician in training, I can say that I wouldn't personally use a certain substance medically until I knew it was safe to give to my patients.
Oh, great. Now you tell me...
(Squeaking sound as BtD hurriedly turns off IV valve...)
LOL!
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.