Images via LA Times and Nature.
Stem cell finding will lead to a “paradigm shift” in cancer treatments
There's been a heated controversy in cancer research over the past several years about the alleged presence of cancer stem cells that fuel tumour growth. But now, new research conducted by three independent teams has confirmed the existence of these "master builder" cells — a discovery that will likely lead to completely new forms of therapy for cancer patients.
Therapists are often frustrated when, after chemotherapy sessions, they see a tumor in their patient shrink, only to grow right back. This has led to the suggestion that there must be some kind of cell that drives tumor growth — and that the identification of these cells could hold important clues for future cancer treatments.
And indeed, these undifferentiated proto-cancer cells have now been discovered, the details of which were published in the journals Nature and Science. Writing in the LA Times, Rosie Mestel and Eryn Brown explain:
All three studies used molecular tricks that allowed scientists to mark certain tumor cells with bright colors. When these marked cells divided, all of the daughter cells were similarly colored. This permitted the researchers to see whether any old cell in a tumor can continue to fuel its growth or if only a subset of cells is responsible.
The three groups used different experimental approaches and different kinds of cancer, but all of them found the latter to be true.
The three research teams used different experimental approaches and different kinds of cancer, and each one of them confirmed the existence of cancer stem cells. They tested their hypothesis on mice with glioblastoma (cancer in the brain), intestinal cancer, and skin tumors.
And according to Nature's G. Driessens, this discovery is set to be a game changer:
It is too soon to know whether these results - obtained for tumours of the brain, the gut and the skin - will apply to other cancers, says Luis Parada at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas, who led the brain study. But if they do, he says, "there is going to be a paradigm shift in the way that chemotherapy efficacy is evaluated and how therapeutics are developed". Instead of testing whether a therapy shrinks a tumour, for instance, researchers would assess whether it kills the right sorts of cell.
Similar Content
Comments
This is exactly what we need in our world!! Another cure for a supposedly incurable disease! Now, we have to find a way to make sure the capitalist insurance corporations do not capitalize on our deaths by skyrocketing this breakthrough when it becomes available to the public in a working form.
If it's being researched in the US, sadly corporations already have their hands all over it through funding. Government and Taxes in US / Canada do not fund this kind of stuff, so no, it wont be over the counter, it will be a lifetime of money one can make.
Show me that it *needed* embryonic stem cells, Dan.What the *non* crazy *ss rgoieilus fanatics do is constantly lie about stem cells and stem cell laws.a0a0 They tell us that scary anti-progress religionists simply want people to die.a0a0 They tell us that stem cell research is illegal in the US, which is an outright lie.a0a0a0 No variety of stem cell research is illegal in the United States if you want to pay for it.a0a0a0 The only restriction at all is on using tax money, my money, to pay for embryonic stem cell research that uses new stem cell lines other than the existing lines grandfathered in.a0a0 It is ALL about getting the government to pay for it.a0a0 So illegal means, can't get funds from the public teat. Being able to grow blood cells is fabulous.a0a0 I don't know why it's more efficient in a vat than growing it inside humans but lets assume that it is.a0a0 Wouldn't the most logical thing to do be to grow blood for the person who needs it from their own stem cells?a0a0 And if you can use someone else's, why not from cord blood?a0a0 Why?a0a0 Because embryonic stem cells are sexy and there is a big push to show those benighted religionists what for.But we are going to be facing ALL the consequences and permutations of our bio-medical advancement and we desperately need to work out sensible ethics that can be applied to genetic manipulation and experimentation with and on human beings.a0a0 Not just simple and easy things like clones, but chimera and genetically modified humans.a0a0a0 There has got to be a difference between cloning an organ (which researchers are doing with mice and such) and creating a unique combination of human or partially human DNA and then cutting it to pieces, or creating a viable clone and destroying it for science.a0a0a0 Refusing to take seriously the concerns of those opposed to creating and destroying embryos is likely to put other, even more valuable, research back who knows how far because there will be no way but banning all of it to differentiate between not-human blob in a lab dish and treat like a human experimental subjects.a0a0a0a0 Define, strictly, NOW, who is a person and must be treated as one IN THE LABORATORY, and we can go on.a0a0a0 Try to insist that only stupid people care about this and that it matters not at all what is created and destroyed in a lab dish and that anything in a lab isn't really human; and the only thing that will keep us from the worst sorts of experimental abuses is going to be putting a choke hold on human research altogether.Which would be a pity.
Show me that it *needed* embryonic stem cells, Dan.What the *non* crazy *ss rgoieilus fanatics do is constantly lie about stem cells and stem cell laws.a0a0 They tell us that scary anti-progress religionists simply want people to die.a0a0 They tell us that stem cell research is illegal in the US, which is an outright lie.a0a0a0 No variety of stem cell research is illegal in the United States if you want to pay for it.a0a0a0 The only restriction at all is on using tax money, my money, to pay for embryonic stem cell research that uses new stem cell lines other than the existing lines grandfathered in.a0a0 It is ALL about getting the government to pay for it.a0a0 So illegal means, can't get funds from the public teat. Being able to grow blood cells is fabulous.a0a0 I don't know why it's more efficient in a vat than growing it inside humans but lets assume that it is.a0a0 Wouldn't the most logical thing to do be to grow blood for the person who needs it from their own stem cells?a0a0 And if you can use someone else's, why not from cord blood?a0a0 Why?a0a0 Because embryonic stem cells are sexy and there is a big push to show those benighted religionists what for.But we are going to be facing ALL the consequences and permutations of our bio-medical advancement and we desperately need to work out sensible ethics that can be applied to genetic manipulation and experimentation with and on human beings.a0a0 Not just simple and easy things like clones, but chimera and genetically modified humans.a0a0a0 There has got to be a difference between cloning an organ (which researchers are doing with mice and such) and creating a unique combination of human or partially human DNA and then cutting it to pieces, or creating a viable clone and destroying it for science.a0a0a0 Refusing to take seriously the concerns of those opposed to creating and destroying embryos is likely to put other, even more valuable, research back who knows how far because there will be no way but banning all of it to differentiate between not-human blob in a lab dish and treat like a human experimental subjects.a0a0a0a0 Define, strictly, NOW, who is a person and must be treated as one IN THE LABORATORY, and we can go on.a0a0a0 Try to insist that only stupid people care about this and that it matters not at all what is created and destroyed in a lab dish and that anything in a lab isn't really human; and the only thing that will keep us from the worst sorts of experimental abuses is going to be putting a choke hold on human research altogether.Which would be a pity.