? about Cancer

[ADMIRALSTOCKDALE]

why is it that there has been such little progress in terms of treating and curing this disease? nowadays, an HIV breakthrough seems rather commonplace. gains are made and treatments evolve. why doesn't that happen with cancer (or does it)? it's just very surprising to me that people are still getting radiation and chemo after all of these years.

 

[accuratehorn]

I'm no expert, but I think there has been a lot of progress. Some forms of cancer are highly survivable now. There just isn't a magic pill or injection to cure every type of cancer, but genetic research sounds very promising-there are some real breakthroughs being made, according to news articles.
I think we will see big gains within a few years.

 

[MilkmanDan]

What accurate said. The treatment protocols are continually evolving.

If you want to read more, St. Jude does a great job of documenting their progress in saving children's lives.

 

[rickysrun]

No expert and I didn't stay in a holiday inn express either, but I would venture to guess that since there are so many types of cancer that can attack so many parts of the body that it may be hard to have a silver bullet. At the same time, I would guess that cancer survivor rates have increased significantly over the last decade. My dad is a 2 time survivor and one of my friend's mom has beat breast cancer now 3x.
I think like Magic Johnson with HIV and Lance with cancer, they are no more important than someone else with their given diseases, but what they can do with the platform can't be understimated.

 

[NEWDOC2002]

Ultimately the key will be genetics. Keep in mind cancer is really just your own cells gone crazy and growing without control. It's hard to control that without killing the rest of the cells that are behaving.

We find the key to turning off the genetic triggers that cause these cells to proliferate beyond control...we cure or stop cancer.

 

[ADMIRALSTOCKDALE]

interesting stuff.
i guess you all are right about survival odds, but it still seems like it's a cut it out, radiate it, chemo approach and that does not seem to have evolved over time.

 

[ADMIRALSTOCKDALE]

nice, blackman.

 

[rhorn27]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[kgp]

We have also gotten better at prevention and early identification. Summing up:

1. We prevent more cases
2. We find the cases that are there sooner
3. We more accurately distinguish the nature of the cancer
4. The surgeries are less radical
5. The drugs are more targeted
6. There are more drug choices
7. The radiation is delivered less traumatically
8. RF ablation has come into use
9. Embolic therapy has come into use
10. Survival rates are up

It sounds to me as though we are doing pretty well.

 

[Uninformed]

The basic problem with cancer is that the cells are very similar to other cells in your body. It is very difficult to kill cancer cells without killing normal cells at the same time.

 

[Natron]

I see that pancreatic cancer didnt make their list of improvement.
That one is a *****, something like 10% survival

 

[Bevo Incognito]

I think, too, that the environment itself is growing more toxic all of the time. We're being exposed to ever increasing amounts of carcinogens.

The other day I noticed on my shampoo that it has "ingredients known to the State of California to cause cancer."

I can guarantee you that whatever my great grandparents used did NOT contain these ingredients.

 

[pulque]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[MilkmanDan]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[Perham1]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[Perham1]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[Uninformed]

^^^
Whether we talk about proteins involved in mitosis/growth/proliferation, differentiation, cell attachment & migration, cell implantation, whether we talk about cell signaling, gene regulation, cell cycle, whether we talk about tumor suppressor genes, oncogenes, gene repair, whether we talk about BCR/ABL, HER2/neu, p53, ras, myc, VEGF, EGFR, the problem in drug development remains the same, killing cancer cells without killing normal, healthy cells.

The first chemotherapeutics killed all fast growing cells. There was a very limited therapeutic window between the drug being effective enough to kill cancer cells but not being too toxic that it would kill healthy cells. As time has progressed, we have used our increased knowledge of the biology of cancer and cell homeostasis and have used that knowledge to kill cancer cells more specifically. Drugs like herceptin which specifically kill cells over-expressing HER2/neu and, Gleevac which inhibits tyrosine kinase, and erbitux which specifically targets EGFR are now coming to market. These are just the tip of the iceberg and many more will come to market in the next few decades.

With that said, the largest improvements in cancer incidence, morbidity and mortality are through health initiatives and improved screening. Much of the sequela of cancer could eliminated by more systematic efforts to reduce tobacco use, improve diet and physical activity, reduce obesity, and expand the use of established screening tests. Almost 200,000 cancers in the US this year can be attributed to smoking and 600,000 can be attributed to poor nutrition and physical inactivy. That is roughly half of all cancers in the US could be considered preventable.

Americans' risk of dying from cancer continues to decline and the rate of new cancers is holding steady. Recent articles show observed cancer death rates from all cancers combined dropped 1.1 percent per year from 1993 to 2002. Declines in death rates reflect progress in prevention, early detection, and treatment. Some cancers have been more easily managed than others. Some of the reasons may include the fact that some cancers aren't recognized by humans (for reasons such as lack of pain receptors in an area of the body) until they have spread wildly or attacked a major organ, the origination of the cancer cells are in an area that can't be easily removed without killing the host, and the speed or location of metastasis.


Anyway, back to cooking breakfast....