A Virus that Attacks Brain Cancer 131
Ponca City, We Love You writes "In the past few years, scientists have looked to viruses as potential allies in fighting cancer. Now researchers at Yale University have found a virus in the same family as rabies that effectively kills an aggressive form of human brain cancer in mice. Using time-lapse laser imaging, the team watched vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) rapidly home in on brain tumors, selectively killing cancerous cells in its path, while leaving healthy tissue intact. 'A metastasizing tumor is fairly mobile, and a surgeon's knife can't get out all of the cells,' says Anthony Van den Pol, lead researcher and professor of neurosurgery and neurobiology at Yale. 'A virus might be able to do that, because as a virus kills a tumor cell, it could also replicate, and you could end up with a therapy that's self-amplifying.' It's not yet clear why VSV is such an effective tumor killer, although Van den Pol has several theories. One possible explanation may involve a tumor's weak vascular system. Vessels that supply blood to tumors tend to be leaky, allowing a virus traveling through the bloodstream to cross an otherwise impermeable barrier into the brain, directly into a tumor."
is this an "I am Legend" promo? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:is this an "I am Legend" promo? (Score:5, Informative)
I don't think that this will lead to a zombie plague, though--I think it's more likely if something goes wrong that the patient would die of encephalitis or something similarly unpleasant.
A 'zombie-like' state would require the virus to target fairly specific areas of the brain--temporal lobes and the like, if I'm remembering my brain geography correctly. Though, of course, this depends on whether you want to produce the 'traditional' shambling-servant type, or the hip new raging maniac type.
Still, if it's a choice between possible death and even more possible death, or between possible zombification and likely death, I'd take the risk. Brain tumors can really mess you up, y'know?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:is this an "I am Legend" promo? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:is this an "I am Legend" promo? (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh, and FDA inspectors (at least the rank-and-file that I've encountered) are known for being very scrupulous -- they follow an strict inspection procedure that is openly published for examination, and are not allowed to accept even a cheap lunch.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I didn't work for cancer treatment but for XRay imagery used in cardiac and vascular surgery. They perfectly knew (and so did our FDA contacts) how much radiation the patients will receive and that it will harm or kill a minor percentage of them (there are studies that show a proportional link between small dose radiation exposure and the statistical increase in cancer risk), but for each victim of the exposure, there were hundreds more people surviving the surgery than with open chest version (a
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
You use about the same procedures for someone who has a severely infectious disease as one who has a suppressed immune system.
Re: (Score:2)
You mean soldiers in full-body hazard suits, martial law, nuking of hopelessly infected cities...?
Re: (Score:1)
"First you kill the brain, then you kill the Ghhooulll."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1d4YOWWbS0 [youtube.com]
-Creature Feature
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:is this an "I am Legend" promo? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:is this an "I am Legend" promo? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Because we can use the virus to kill the cancer, then bacteria to kill the virus, then worms to eat the bacteria, birds to eat the worms, cats to eat the birds, dogs to eat the cats, and gorillas to kill the dogs. Don't worry, the gorillas won't be a problem because they'll eventually freeze* to death.
*Note: does not apply to tropical climates
Re: (Score:2)
beat me too it (Score:3)
and add one more movie to your list : i saw that bad 2004 "doom" movie starring the rock last night on tnt, and i was having flashbacks to the movie's dialogue with this story
Re:beat me too it (Score:5, Funny)
You see, I, the great Doctor Alexander von Hubris, have found a means by which to re-animate dead cells! But those foolish, short-sighted politicians cut my funding! My colleagues called my research "irresponsible" and "dangerous". And the ethics review panel called my experiments "troubling" and "unnecessarily painful". The fools! They laughed, they all laughed!
But now, I can cure all diseases, because I have now found a way to bring dead tissue back to life! Yes, certain... shall we say, sacrifices... had to be made, but it was all in the name of science! And now, now I have found that which mankind has always dreamed of: a path to immortality. And nothing, I tell you, nothing can possibly go wrong! Tonight, I will test my technique on myself, and then you will see, you will all see!
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Repairman Jack? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Pretty much. (Score:2)
Viruses mutate and become things you do not expect them to. Known fact. To proceed with a cancer-killing virus is to drive all of humanity over one long IED-infested road of epidemiological Russian Roulette.
Of course, nano-robots can bring about the gray goo scenario, but that's more easily controlled than, say, a runaway virus. Nano-robots c
Followed by... (Score:2)
(I just had to).
Good news and bad news (Score:5, Funny)
Patient: And the bad news?
Doctor: We gave you rabies.
Re:Good news and bad news (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, wait...
Cure (potentially) worse than the disease? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes...and it may also mutate, and you'd wind up with a virus that has developed a taste for healthy brain cells. Granted, the chances are slight, but they're not nonexistent. Don't get me wrong...as the husband of a brain cancer victim, I find this development very exciting. I just have a habit of looking on the darker side of things.
Re: (Score:1)
Also worth considering is how well this virus is attacked by the immune system, or by antiviral drugs--because, after all, once you've gotten the tumor out, you'd probably want to get rid of the virus as well.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
To do this in a normal human being, the virus would have to be engineered in such a way that the immune system somehow let's it go.
Now we have a virus that is engineered to avoid a human immune response. Throw in a dose of your mutation where it attacks human
Re:Cure (potentially) worse than the disease? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Chemotherapy already suppresses normal immune response. Combine chemo and this, and you may have an effective treatment regimen for difficult tumors...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Cure (potentially) worse than the disease? (Score:5, Informative)
Viruses that attack tumors (oncolytic viruses), have been studied for years and there is a whole list of them
Outside the brain most viruses can be handled effectively by the immune system, especially if primed against it (thats why small pox, rabies etc. vaccines exist). Yes, yes, I know HIV and HCV aren't. They're exceptions.
Re:Cure (potentially) worse than the disease? (Score:5, Interesting)
As it stands, if you get a glioblastoma, you're dead. It may take a year, but more likely you have a lot less, and it won't be quality time either, it will be a quick trip down the road toward being a non-responsive vegetable.
So if the cure kills you, no big deal. Your chances are pretty non-existent either way. Most cancer "cures" are really just a test to see if your normal healthy cells are able to take more punishment than the cancer cells. With a GBF, you're just prolonging the process.
And if it does become airbone? (Score:2)
The individuals, terrorists, or nations that launch the weapon would probably immunize themselves, and then spread it. By the time the virus is detected by the host nation, it would be too late.
Lets be real, theres not enough focus on preventing biological warfare, or bioterrorism, and we all know that it's possible. Just look at what happened in the recent Ricin scare.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
So yes, this is great news.
However, haven't we heard this before working on the same tumor, o
Re: (Score:2)
And yea, 3 years, Jesus. My mother lasted 3 weeks; when they removed the tumor (which was horrifying big...I talked to the Doc before the operation, and he showed me the MRI, and you get that progression of slices of the brain, and it was like, "Ugh...UGH...damn...Damn...DAMN!" It was literally the size of my fist, and it spread out everywhere.) the brain didn't redistribute the fluid correctly, and then she had a pretty serious stroke...
We co
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
This explains why the deadliest viruses mutate in hospitals, where it's full of various chemicals that attempt to keep the environment clean (i.e. kill them).
If the therapy doesn't include forcefully attempting to eradicate the virus, but instead let it peacefully co-exist with the healthy part of the body, then it'll be completely harmless and the probability i
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
from http://www.emedicine.com/MED/topic2692.htm [emedicine.com]
"Surviving" isn't necessarily a good thing either. I'd certainly give it a shot, even given a 5% chance of
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
[fda.gov] http://www.fda.gov/Fdac/features/2000/500_gene.html [fda.gov]
What's the relevance? The article is about virus therapy, the FDA link is about gene therapy? Gene therapy is generally delivered through the use of modified viruses. (Virii? A pox on you, I say!)
I remember hearing about the Pennsylvania case when it happened, as it sent shockwaves throu
Re: (Score:1)
Bioweaponry (Score:2)
What weapon could be better than a weapon which can infect a nations leaders and drive them all insane?
These insane leaders would still keep their power, and would pass laws which are less and less sane, and do things which are less and less sane.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
That's pretty cool, and I hope it's life saving. (Score:3, Funny)
On a tangent, it upsets me when people talk about how the government shortchanges the field of stem cells, when practically nobody is talking about zombie-centric methods of treatment. I swear, you have all these good ideas and can back them up with sound science, and it is as if no one is listening.
Oh well, maybe one day we can grow up in a world where somebody can truthfully say, "... if it wasn't for the walking dead, I wouldn't be here!"
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Virus - Tumor - Immune System (Score:2, Insightful)
Human cells in mice? (Score:3, Interesting)
If this does end up working, the procedure would have a substantial problem. It would need to be performed on an immuno-suppressed people or else the virus is 'stamped out' before it has a chance to mount an effective attack on the cancer.
Re:Human cells in mice? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The virus might attack the primary tumor in mice as a result of its having been surgically disrupted during transplantation. That doesn't affect metastases though. Also, the virus might attack normal human cells while leaving normal mouse cells alone, but someone else pointed out that it d
Re: (Score:2)
Yet another cancer treatment... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It *is* profitable to cure someone who has a cancer you can't treat.
Probably for technical reasons (Score:2)
That said though, if many of our food items were new today, the FDA would ban them.
then I say let's make it profitable! (Score:5, Funny)
In the end the hunter gets a happy picture of a bald person with a dart in their ass as a trophy and the patient gets their expensive treatment. We could handle vaccinations for poor 3rd world kids the same way. Next time Angela Jolie goes to bumbuck nowhere I say we hand her a rifle with MMR shots.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I hate to sound jaded, but it *is* more profitable to treat a disease than cure it.
By and large this is just simply not true, though it gets repeated so much that it becomes "common knowledge" much like the old wives' tale that you'll get pneumonia by going out in the cold (it may make an existing infection worse, but unless you're exposed to the disease itself you won't get it). In most cases, you can charge quite a bit for a real cure, and besides that the insurance companies will refuse to pay for a m
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
If that was true there would be no reason for legislation allowing the government to federalize vaccine production.
That is a singularly bad example. Most of the vaccines that truly require funding by the government are for rare diseases - anthrax, for example, or smallpox (which we still stockpile even though it has been eliminated in the wild for 30 years). For diseases like that, their incidence is so low that they don't make much sense as "investments" - remember that drugs and vaccines have a definit
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Sure there would be...To give the rest of us a reason to believe that the government has our best interests in mind.
"I'm from the Government and I'm here to help you."
Yeah right. :-)
Re: (Score:1)
He discovered that you can cure cancer by alkalinizing the body.
Why, then, are we still suffering?
Turns out poor Dr. B got slammed by the medical establishment because he was jeopardizing corporate profits.
As an example, cesium chloride is VERY effective in alkalinizing the body. It was written that if you have a terminal case, and have only 30 days to live, cesium could save your ass. Alk
Didn't Dr. House know this already? (Score:1)
Dr, House rocks!
780 days too late... (Score:5, Interesting)
I believe that 6,000 to 12,000 people are diagnosed with this every year and the death rate for GBM is 100% with an average LE of only 4 - 18 months with successful treatment. All joking aside, anything that can help is welcome.
This is not the first virus found that can kill cancer. The "Reovirus" (commonly found in human respiratory and enteric tracts) also seems to work pretty well. See the following: Curing Cancer? Patrick Lee's Path to the Reovirus Treatment [uwaterloo.ca] and Reovirus to target cancer [bbc.co.uk]
Re: (Score:1)
Looks promising...
I don't think so (Score:1, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, that wouldn't really be helpful would it. :-) I would imagine that things like this are worked out through testing.
INAV, but I think a virus can only penetrate cells if there's a specific active "pathway" it can use. For example, the Reovirus uses an active Ras pathway and it seems that man
other cancer-killing virii (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Wouldn't it be the kicker if we learned the secret to stopping aging (and staving off death for a few hundred years) right after we released a virus that targeted immortal cells? That would be awesome. It would be like "hey we found the fountain of youth, but the Drs that came before us figured out how to k
Re: (Score:1)
Captain: What happen? (Score:1)
Evolutionarily speaking (Score:3, Interesting)
This development makes me wonder whether we already have other natural, benign viruses helping us out.
Re:Evolutionarily speaking (Score:4, Insightful)
I for one welcome our new viral overlords. (Score:1)
Zombies? (Score:2)
Anyone here ever played "Stubbs the Zombie". That was one funny game.
A dream come true. (Score:1)
Hold on a second... (Score:1)
Horses (Score:2)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vesicular_stomatitis_virus [wikipedia.org]
Finally! (Score:2)
Finally those poor mice will be free from the scourge of human brain cancer!
whatcouldpossiblygowrong is for once apropriate (Score:1)
Live viruses have been used for medical purposes already though. Vaccina, a strain of virus related to smallpox, is administered to vaccinate against smallpox. More importantly, I've heard about attempts to treat brain tumors by applying modified herpesvirus to infect the tumor cells, then using an anti-herpes medic