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
Because HIV is a retrovirus.
Now I ask this; if a person is terminal, how do you make that worse if their desire is for an experimental drug?
Huh? Actually, this technique was invented in a lab, by human beings. And if you think all good things come from God, then He must also be the cause of Ebola, leprosy and hemophillia.
For me it will be an issue of how far along the research is. If the research looks good, but the drug isn't "official" yet, I would give my patient the drug, if they asked (and myabe I'd even bring it up), as long as they understood it was still "experimental".
I don't think I could, in good faith, give an experiemental drug to someone right out of the first cell culture experiments.
Nope
Maroon.
Me either, but all of this is quite beside my point. About which we apparently agree. Namely that the decision should be made by the patient. The doctor should make his own decisions too.
Don't get me wrong, the poor little, innocent babies and all the individuals who were infected intentionally by these immoral individuals that carry the behavioral disease, AIDS, should be helped. But that is it.
Thank the FDA on your way out.
I understand where you're coming from, but bureaucracies have a way of fast-tracking things when there's enough public clamor.
Brilliant. Drosophila is a fruit fly. Unless fruit flies exist in the gut of human embryos, I think you're nuts.
God a she? I seem to remember that somewhere in the Bible Jesus called God "Father." Silly me ... I guess I misread that. < /sarcasm >
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.