To wonder if I just helped to cure a cancer...

[TheWonderfulFanny]

Following a link from the midwife story I came across this article about a Swedish researcher who needs a miniscule £1 million to get a cancer-eating virus through initial testing and into human trials.

So I bunged some money over via paypal and am now feeling less guilty for spunking £70 on ankle boots I don't need earlier today.

A couple of extracts from the article -

"More people have full-blown neuroendocrine tumours (known as NETs or carcinoids) than stomach, pancreas, oesophagus or liver cancer. And the incidence is growing: there has been a five-fold increase in the number of people diagnosed in the last 30 years"

"a cancerous cell is immortal; through its mutations it has somehow managed to turn off the bits of its genetic programme that enforce cell suicide. This means that, if a suitable virus infects a cancer cell, it could continue to replicate inside it uncontrollably, and causes the cell to 'lyse' ? or, in non-technical language, tear apart. The progeny viruses then spread to cancer cells nearby and repeat the process. A virus becomes, in effect, a cancer of cancer. In Prof Essand's laboratory studies his virus surges through the bloodstreams of test animals, rupturing cancerous cells with Viking rapacity"

Care to join me? Seems extraordinary that they should be so close to something that could have saved Steve Jobs' life - and could still save the writer's friend - and there's no funding because it's not commercial enough...

If the technology is so promising, then someone will make a patentable version (as suggested) and it will get taken forward. I am afraid the guy comes across as not knowing a thing about drug discovery. Publishing without a patent if a pretty fundamental mistake. About a million to get through Phase II? Don't think so. Lots of academics think their work will lead to a groundbreaking new anti cancer drug. Some will, most won't go anywhere. This sounds very much like it won't.

Breastmilk is also a likely cancer killer that needs more research!

Steve Jobs spent a long time experimenting with alternative therapies before he accepted conventional treatment. I don't think that helped him. Sad but true. I have given monthly to Cancer Research ever since I started earning a regular wage.

Lemon juice was also a 'miracle' cure for cancer according to a global email that I recieved.

and vitamin B17 was a 'cure' for cancer. Administered by injection.

Let's hope he gets the funding! My biggest fear is cancer. It's such an insidious disease and nothing would give me more pleasure than to think of cancer cells being 'ripped apart' by this virus in the same way cancer rips apart people's lives.

Who says B17 isn't a cure? Isn't that the cyanide in apricot seeds that protected the Hunan tribes from developing the disease?

Well, I'm not going to donate because I already donate to cancer research, but if there is even the tiniest possibility that it will work than its worth investigating. I wish him well.

Thank you for reminding me about this article - I was meaning to donate! Very convincing i thought.

If it's that great, why haven't BigPharma got hold of it?

there are alot of cancer charities, if they thought this was going to be sucessful they would of backed it up.

According to the article, big pharma aren't interested because he's already published it and so it can't be patented = no money in it. For what it's worth, I'm a virologist and the science behind this is sound as far as I can tell from the article. I've had one too many vodkas to start reading the original research now but I'll probably have a look at it tomorrow and report back.

I'd have thought that BigPharma could still use it via Orphan Drug, and then just extend the licence. I'm sure that if this is as big as he'saking out, the utterly limitless Pharma coffers would have opened to establish a path through patent issues.

queenstromba - have already donated simply because the article was so inspiring but would love to hear what you think - thanks.

There are a few charities who are doing big work in a small way.

I became aware of this this charity recently, via a friend.

I will admit to not knowing enough about the science behind it, but it seems similar to the one in the Telegraph (and I am too tired to read through that article properly, will do so tomorrow).

I find the premise 'if it were worth anything then big pharma would be on it' rather worrying.

Sounds promising.

We have a family history of pancreatic cancer, basically you get that and your fucked. The survival rate after 5 years is something like 5%......can't understand why it gets so little publicity when it's literally a silent killer, the symptoms are the type you'd ignore.....until you go bright yellow because of jaundice, course, by that point it's too late.

sayers - yup pancreatic cancer is neglected publicity wise. The pancreas is so deep in the body the symptoms are ignoreable until it gets too bad to cure.

There is a huge difference between cutting edge science and 'alternative' therapies such as B17. Through my talks with the science editor Susan Watts at Newsnight they recently ran an item on immunotherapy and the problems of funding research and clinical trials. Virotherapy, which this article deals with, is slightly different, but some interesting work there too. It hasn't so far had the results that immunotherapy has had. Immunotherapy involves engineering immune cells to recognise different cancer antigens. Prof Car June in the US struggled to get funding but managed to get funding for a small 3 man [with advanced, refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia] clinical trial from a private charity last year. He put 2 men in complete remission, the 3rd, [they all developed fevers when the engineered immune cells were reintroduced to the body] was treated with steroids for the fever, and so the immune cells were suppressed. He had a partial remission. You can read about the work here:

www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/08/110810141248.htm

People were hugely sceptical about his work and immunotherapy for a long time, but now Novartis are falling over themselves to work with June, and he has just signed a big deal with them. It is hoped that he wsill developlhis work for solid tumours too. Other immunotherapy researchers are still struggling to get enough funds for small clinical trials. Prof Brad Nelson in Canada is currently developing a vaccine for ovarian cancer [which enables immune cells to recognise the antigens created by ovarian tumours] www.genomebc.ca/media/news-releases/2011/bc-scientists-closing-in-on-vaccine-for-ovarian-cancer/

Cancer Research UK fund Dr Robert Hawkins, who was featured on the Newnight programme. he is only working with a few patients so far but has some good results. CRUK have just been given a 20 million pound anonymous donation to further research immunology, I hope it is spent well.

I think a paradigm shift is slowly slowly happening, but it starts in small academic labs and then has to filter down through the medical community. Drug based research will never cure cancer, and many of the most innovative drugs developed recently [millions spent on them] have only increased life expectancy by a matter of weeks. Something needs to change.

They've had some staggering results with immunotherapy for pancreatic cancer here Sayers

www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/05/22/pancreatic-cancer-vaccine-shows-promise-in-human-trials

the year long survival rate [and this is people with advanced pancreatic cancer] was 86% which is unusual. Trial only recently up and running.

And Steve Jobs did loads of stupid stuff before turning to proper cutting edge medical research. Bit worried that people might think that virotherapy and immunotherapy are any thing like acupuncture and spiritualism.

There is plenty of research available for cancer prevention, little though is in the public domain and vast amounts are ignored.

Whilst research for treatments to cure cancer are wonderful, we need to realise that there is far more we can do ourselves to prevent cancer.

oh jesus please. Children get cancer, young people who have no foreseeable risk get cancer. Cancer is the number one killer of children in the developed world. Eating healthily and not smoking is crucial obviously. But still a cure for the number one killer in the world is paramount.

Ivykaty I have a rare form of cancer - there is fuck all I could have done to prevent getting it.

Yes prevention is good but that doesn't negate the need for a cure. It is massively simplistic to say prevention is all.

These links are really Interesting .

the wonderful thing about immunotherapy is it can be tweaked to attack an ever adjusting and mutating cancer. Drugs can often knock back a cancer, but then the cancer adapts to become resistant. [not always but often] Virotherapy runs this danger too. Immunotherapy and cancer vaccines [not the cervical cancer vaccine, that operates on the traditional premise of signalling a virus to the immune system] can keep being adjusted to target the cancer as it changes.

I hope you are feeling ok Gigondas. Good luck with treatment.

Gigondas - I said there is far more we can do to prevent cancer - not we can prevent caner full stop. I lost my mum to ovarian cancer, by the time we knew she had it it was to late to cure.
research to find a cure is good, but also looking at ways to prevent some forms of cancer would be good, putting 100% into a cure and nothing into prevention is not a good way to go about things imo

I hope you are feeling ok Gigondas. Good luck with treatment.