Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Science

James P Allison and Tasuku Honjo Win Nobel Prize For Medicine (theguardian.com) 54

An American and a Japanese scientist have won the 2018 Nobel prize in physiology or medicine for discovery of a revolutionary approach to cancer treatment. The Institute -- 50 professors at the Stockholm facility -- chose the winners of the prize honoring research into the microscopic mechanisms of life and ways to fend off invaders that cut it short. From a report: James Allison and Tasuku Honjo will share the 9m Swedish kronor (roughly $1 million) prize, announced by the Nobel Assembly at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm. The two scientists have been awarded the prize for their discovery that the body's immune system can be harnessed to attack cancer cells.

The immune system normally seeks out and destroys mutated cells, but cancer cells find sophisticated ways to hide from immune attacks, allowing them to thrive and grow. Many types of cancer do this by ramping up a braking mechanism that keeps immune cells in check. The discovery is transforming cancer treatments and has led to a new class of drugs that work by switching off the braking mechanism, prompting the immune cells to attack cancer cells. The drugs have significant side effects, but have been shown to be effective -- including, in some cases, against late-stage cancers that were previously untreatable.
The physics prize is to be announced Tuesday, followed by chemistry. The winner of the Nobel Peace Prize will be named Friday. No literature prize is being given this year.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

James P Allison and Tasuku Honjo Win Nobel Prize For Medicine

Comments Filter:
  • by markdavis ( 642305 ) on Monday October 01, 2018 @06:39AM (#57402656)

    >"The immune system normally seeks out and destroys mutated cells, but cancer cells find sophisticated ways to hide from immune attacks"

    That is strange wording. Cancer cells are not autonomous, learning, clever, and planning. They are just mutations that "happen", randomly due to replication errors and external events (like radiation, viruses, and chemicals). Sometimes there just happen to be cells that mutate in a way that the immune system doesn't recognize. We all have cancer cells in our bodies, probably all the time, and normally they are caught and killed by our immune systems. The above statement makes it sound like they are planning something with a "will" :)

    • by Nidi62 ( 1525137 )

      >"The immune system normally seeks out and destroys mutated cells, but cancer cells find sophisticated ways to hide from immune attacks"

      That is strange wording. Cancer cells are not autonomous, learning, clever, and planning. They are just mutations that "happen", randomly due to replication errors and external events (like radiation, viruses, and chemicals). Sometimes there just happen to be cells that mutate in a way that the immune system doesn't recognize. We all have cancer cells in our bodies, probably all the time, and normally they are caught and killed by our immune systems. The above statement makes it sound like they are planning something with a "will" :)

      Look at "find" not in the sense of "seeking out", but rather "stumbled upon". As you say, we have mutated or cancerous cells in us all the time, but our body kills most of them. Only the ones that hit the mutation lottery get the chance to kill us. Although, as for having a will, since some cancers can be made up of cells from all over the body (gotta love those pictures of tumors with hair, teeth, etc), if one develops with brain tissue is there a chance for some rudimentary brain activity?

      • Sounds like a good start to a Sci fi movie where the cancer brain is able to take over cognitive functions and starts screaming at the cancer clinic " Stop trying to kill me!" :0

    • by Tx ( 96709 )

      Seems fine to me.

      Sophisticated
      adjective
      1. [...]
      2.(of a machine, system, or technique) developed to a high degree of complexity.

      The method only has to be complicated to be appropriately described as "sophisticated", it does not matter how the aforesaid complex method was arrived at; intelligence is not required. Evolution comes up with plenty of sophisticated solutions without using intelligence.

    • by sjbe ( 173966 ) on Monday October 01, 2018 @07:56AM (#57403018)

      That is strange wording. Cancer cells are not autonomous, learning, clever, and planning.

      It's not strange wording at all. Sophistication is a statement of what something is, not how it was arrived at. Things don't have to have intelligent thought behind them to be sophisticated. Trees do not have what we regard as intelligence but you'd be hard pressed to argue that a tree leaf isn't an astonishingly sophisticated thing. Enormous sophistication and complexity can arise from very simple processes and evolution - no clever learning or planning required.

      • >It's not strange wording at all. Sophistication is a statement of

        I was more targeting the word "find" as odd, not "sophisticated." "Find" implies it was looking or trying. It is more like "happen" or "occur" or something like that.

    • Too bad I already posted something. This is a +1 insightful .
  • This morning they announced a two year prison sentence for rape, against the husband of one of the Swedish Academy members, that scandal is the reason there will be no Literature price this year.

    Terje

    • by Anonymous Coward

      No, the reason is that the Academy which gives out the literature award has been infested by petty, arrogant academics who have been institutionalized to the point where they've lost sight of anything other than their own egos.

      It will be interesting to see if this conviction could possibly clear things up. In a reasonable world it would weaken Horace Engdahl - who have defended Arnault to the death and pretty much is the entire reason for the gridlock - enough to make him take his leave. Unfortunately witho

    • I saw "no literature prize" and wondered what dead writer the Norwegian Nobel Institute was considering. The Institute doesn't award posthumous prizes, which is why it withheld its Peace Prize in 1948 in memory of Mohandas Gandhi.

      • by Anonymous Coward

        I saw "no literature prize" and wondered what dead writer the Norwegian Nobel Institute was considering. The Institute doesn't award posthumous prizes, which is why it withheld its Peace Prize in 1948 in memory of Mohandas Gandhi.

        Well, the Norwegian Institute doesn't award the literature prize so it doesn't really matter who they consider.
        Besides, there have been other occasions when no prize was awarded, sometimes for the reason that they didn't think anyone deserved it.

  • No literature prize is being given this year

    They should really start reading slashdot.

  • by DCFusor ( 1763438 ) on Monday October 01, 2018 @09:14AM (#57403468) Homepage
    What's the point of mod points when an entire article has zero on-topic posts? An argument between sock puppets, probably the same idiot, someone else whining about another prize, or lack of, and nothing about the guys who won the prize for doing something decent - and difficult, which might save lives.
    .

    What a bunch of losers. Which I at least know how to spell.
    .

    How about some info on how they managed to get immune system to discriminate well enough between cancer and normal cells (which have nearly the same DNA) well enough to make this more good than harmful? What about reasoned discussion of this and alternate approaches? Not here. Disgusting.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      How about some info on how they managed to get immune system to discriminate well enough between cancer and normal cells

      The Nobel prize is typically awarded long after the science around it is hyped. It is not even uncommon that the academy awards people for "the wrong research" if the groundbreaking research was too controversial.

      If you are interested in the subject you should check the older Slashdot articles about it where people who knows more about the subject have posted their comments:
      Drug Turns Immune System Against All Tumor Types [slashdot.org] (2012)
      Killing Cancer By Retraining the Patient's Immune System [slashdot.org] (2013)
      'Living Drug' Tha [slashdot.org]

    • Not here. Disgusting.

      And here you are, adding to the problem.

      You want info? Google's right over there. Look it up and supply a comment that actually helps fix the problem you are so upset about.

  • Can medicine not actually *cure* anything anymore? This seems like something someone should have got a pat on the head and a "good job" from their research lead on, not a fuxxoring Nobel Prize. Note that they didn't give one in literature this year. Good. When there aren't Nobel-worth advances, then there shouldn't be Nobel prizes. Giving them out anyway waters them down (as if the stupid Peace Prizes to genocidal politicians weren't bad enough). From my lay perspective medical advances in the last 30 years
    • From my lay perspective medical advances in the last 30 years have been weak, AF.

      Over the last 30 years, average live expectancy has gone up by 5 years.

      The only thing they seem to have become really really good at is billing.

      That is an American problem. It doesn't much affect the other 95% of the world.

      • Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • So, they cured cancer/malaria/AIDS in Europe? Oh, wait, you spouted some ridiculous bullshit about "life expectancy" instead of any real evidence or thought. I've lived in Europe before myself (Norway). I remember people waiting months to see a specialist, in the second richest country (per capita) in Europe. So, yeah, they couldn't figure out the billing or the actual care, either. I'm not exactly itching to sign onto that garbage. The only difference between strutting doctors that are full of shit over th

Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (10) Sorry, but that's too useful.

Working...