Brain Tumor Vaccine Shows Promising Results 62
ScienceDaily is reporting that a new vaccine used in the treatment of a cancer found primarliy in the brain is showing promising results after an initial trial at the University of California. "Of the 12 patients being treated, eight can currently be evaluated for overall survival, while four are still receiving treatment. Seven out of the eight patients have exceeded the historical median benchmark of 6.5 months survival from time of recurrence. The investigators will continue to follow the patients for overall survival. Based on these results, a larger, multi-center phase 2 study is planned for late 2007."
IT'S NOT A TUMOR!! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1, Redundant)
I'm a tumor I'm a tumor; I'm a tumor,
I'm a tumor I'm a tumor; I'm a tumor,
I'm a tumor I'm a tumor; I'm a tumor,
Tumor. %
It had to be sung.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:"an initial trial at the University of Californ (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
UCSF is an incredible place that only does medical research. There is no undergrad program. One of the best hospitals in the country. You should check out the amount of NIH funding they get.
Re:"an initial trial at the University of Californ (Score:4, Informative)
No. It's called "UC Berkeley". The "University of California [university...fornia.edu]" is a system of Universities handled by one accrediting body.
Referring to any individual UC campus as "The University of California" is simply inaccurate, regardless of what others might say [slashdot.org], unless you are explicitly talking about the UC system.
Of course, slashdot "editors" don't actually edit, even if they knew things like this, which I don't think they do (based on their own story submissions.)
So we the people have to notice things like this - but of course I got modded offtopic, even though my comment is about the story (well, actually the story submission.)
Further proof that the slashdot moderation system does not work.
As if we needed any.
Now, if you are in a given town, one colloquially refers to the local college as "the UC" or "UC". I grew up in Santa Cruz, so UC Santa Cruz was simply abbreviated to "UC". But that's not a proper usage, it's shorthand. If I was speaking for the benefit of an audience, I would always refer to it at least as "UCSC".
Re: (Score:2)
The UC system is broken down like the poster said. UCLA, UCSD, etc. They are also frequently described as "UC San Diego, UC Santa Cruz, UC Irvine."
USC is not part of this state system.
Re: (Score:1)
Vaccine? (Score:5, Insightful)
Any of you bright science boys or girls know what the difference is between a "vaccine" and any other drug you might use to treat a diease? Just wondering.
Re:Vaccine? (Score:4, Informative)
The vaccine is made from the previously cut-out cancer cell of that patient,
and is used to prevent recurrence.
Immune response booster (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Vaccine? (Score:5, Insightful)
A vaccine is any substance that stimulates your immune system to attack a pathogen specifically. It stimulates what is known as the adaptive immune system, which is the part of the immune system that recognizes a specific infection. For example, you may be infected with Hepatitis A, and that generates a nonspecific inflammatory response. Later on, your T and B cells "learn" to specifically begin attacking the Hepatitis A virus. If you get infected with Hepatitis B, you still have the nonspecific inflammatory response, but your learned response against Hepatitis A doesn't help here; it's very specific for Hepatitis A.
In contrast, most drugs don't prime your immune system against specific proteins on the pathogen. Chemotherapy drugs tend to just kill rapidly dividing cells non-specifically; you get nausea because the normal cells in your gut are also killed. There are some drugs such as monoclonal antibodies that can specifically attack and kill the pathogenic cells, but they don't work by priming your immune cells.
It's a misconception that all vaccines prevent you from getting the disease. The BCG vaccine for TB doesn't really prevent you from getting infected with TB chronically; it prevents you from getting a really severe kind of acute TB. In fact, some vaccines are actually administered after you've already been infected. For example, the rabies vaccine causes a brisk immune response against rabies. You usually receive it *after* you've been bitten by a rabid animal, so there is already rabies virus replicating within your cells. It helps you clear the virus that is already there.
I hope this helps.
Insightful! (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
You must be new here
"You've got a chart filling a whole wall with interlocking pathways
and reactions to shock and the researcher says "If I can just control
this one molecule/enzyme/compound I'll stop the whole negative
physiologic cascade of post haemorrhagic shock." Yeah, right."
Meaningless Statistics (Score:5, Informative)
As for the statistics, the fact that 7/8 have exceeded the historical median survival is fairly meaningless. I'm sure that historical literature could be produced to provide equivalent results in a single small study. Also, at a single site, you have no insight into the selection criteria for the patients enrolled... Were they selected because they were highly likely to survive (e.g., early stage disease)? Is the investigational site vested in the therapy (likely the case, at least for a principal investigator)?
Will be interesting to see what phase 2 studies bring - hopefully it works out as well as they describe here, but if history is any judge, that is probably not going to be the case.
Re:Meaningless Statistics (Score:5, Interesting)
It means something to me (Score:1)
Re:A pre-emptive 'you insensitive clod' comment... (Score:4, Insightful)
-Rick
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Because construction (halliburton) and oil (everyone) companies don't profit from curing cancer.
In fact, the latter causes cancer, even directly from refinery emissions.
There's lots of things we don't do because there's no way to make money on them, or because we're making money on the status quo. For example, legalization of drugs.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Really, our society has advanced to the point where we have the resources to do a lot of great things that will benefit everyone. We just seem to lack the will. And while it's nice to think private industry will do it, they're not going to cure cancer, because a cancer cure won't make them rich.
Yes, money will solve everything. (Score:3, Interesting)
>Really, our society has advanced to the point where we have the resources to do a lot of great things that will benefit everyone. We just seem to lack the will. And while it's nice to think private industry will do it, they're not going to cure cancer, because a cancer cure won't make the
Re: (Score:2)
>Granted, you've proved yourself to be a complete idiot, but a great many researchers (and not merely those itching for grants on a personal level) have stated that they could probably cure X,Y or Z disease (cancer is often mentioned) with a certain amount of money and that the only thing holding them back is the necessary funding to move forward as quickly as society would like.
Really. Pray tell, show me how money is going to get you through Phase I, I
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Cell Phones (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
Nice (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My mother-in-law was diagnosed with a rare type of glioma a month ago. My wife and I were expecting it to be a benign tumor. We were devastated by the diagnosis.
Any new ca
Re: (Score:2)
It's not rare enough (Score:1)
I'm assuming that metastatic cancer is already high on the priority list anyways.
Cautious Optimism (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
In my case, after the resection of my tumour (a gangliglioma) nearly 3 years ago, my prognosis does not anticipate any further development for the forseable future. However, there is no way to fully discount the possibility of a recurrence, so I do like to keep tabs on the field. If something starts to redevelop, I'd sure like to know of alternative treatments so I don't have to get any more holes drilled into my skull!
BTW, this work sounds related to that done by my neurosurgeon Dr Linda Lia
Re: (Score:1)
Other vaccinations for cancer (Score:4, Informative)
This vaccination to treat brain tumors sounds similar to earlier research for treating skin cancer with vaccination [nih.gov].
I am a colon cancer patient myself, having been through surgery, radiation, immunotherapy, and three kinds of chemotherapy over the past three years. Last fall I was contacted by NIH about participating in a new trial to test customized vaccinations for metastatic colon cancer. The protocol is pretty scary. First they extract white cells from your blood stream. Second, they knock out your immune system with some nasty chemotherapy. Meanwhile in the lab they genetically modify the white cells to recognize your tumors. Finally, they reinject you with the modified cells to establish an immune system that will attack the cancer.
Ultimately I was rejected as a participant due to characteristics of my tumors. I was disappointed not to be able to receive a possibly miraculous treatment, but it was also a relief to avoid a nasty ordeal.
I am also watching with interest a different type of vaccination treatment. Researchers are vaccinating subjects against CEA [cancer.org], a common protein involved in colon cancer and other cancers. It's potentially much simpler, since the vaccination is against CEA in general rather than having to be customized for each patient.
AlpineR
Oh, so THAT's what Phase 2 is! (Score:2)
Hilarity! (Score:2, Flamebait)
Of the 12 patients being treated, eight can currently be evaluated for overall survival
That's the politest way of saying "They're dead" that I've ever heard.Read the Article (Score:3, Insightful)
What I get from that is that they can't include 4 of them in the results yet. I don't see