Anti-Cancer Agent Stops Metastasis In Its Tracks

Anomalyst writes "Mice were implanted with cancer. The control group died as tumors metastasized. The experimental group was treated with macroketone and survived a normal lifespan. While the cancer was not cured, metastasis was significantly (over 80%) inhibited. Even after metastasis had begun and additional cancers developed, macroketone inhibited subsequent metastasis. The original article is in Nature behind a paywall."

Re:Dear Scientists and Researchers

[the biologist]

The reason to not talk about something when the publication is pending is to avoid having your work scooped by another researcher, not due to contract obligations with the journal.

The only time an academic researcher is free to talk about their work is once it has already been published and their name is permanently associated with the results.

Re:Side effects

[inf4mia]

The FDA plods along for 10-20 years before blessing treatments for terminal patients. That's *totally* inexcusable.

If the FDA were a private company, congress would be holding hearings and people would be literally calling for their heads.

Actually I wish they'd go more into side effects

[NotSoHeavyD3]

I mean if the side effects are really as non-existant as it sounds in the article(but it probably isn't.) that makes me wonder about something. Could pretty much every healthy adult just take this medicine daily? Seriously, if there was a pill that you could take every morning and the end result of taking it was you can't get cancer and it had minimal side effects I think alot of people would take that as a preventative. (Even if the medicine was 5-10 dollars a day. I know I would if there was something like that and it had been tested thoroughly.

Been there, done that, got the poster and t-shirt.

[Sans_A_Cause]

Hate to be a buzzkill, but I've cured cancer in mice dozens of times with experimental agents.

None of those agents have ever cured cancer in humans. Most of them have done nothing in clinical trials. Survival rates for lung cancer, for example, haven't changed since the 1960s.

The lack of new cancer drugs has gotten so bad that some drug companies want to move the goalpost. Instead of objective goals like increased survival, the increase in more subjective things like "quality of life" is touted as the benefit of the drug.