Scientists discovery antibody that kills prostate cancer

[kpete]

Source: Raw Story/Agence France-Presse

Scientists discovery antibody that kills prostate cancer

By Agence France-Presse
Monday, December 28th, 2009 -- 7:25 pm

Scientists discovery antibody that kills prostate cancerUS researchers have found an antibody that hunts down prostate cancer cells in mice and can destroy the killer disease even in an advanced stage, a study showed Monday.

The antibody, called F77, was found to bond more readily with cancerous prostate tissues and cells than with benign tissue and cells, and to promote the death of cancerous tissue, said the study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science (PNAS).

When injected in mice, F77 bonded with tissue where prostate cancer was the primary cancer in almost all cases (97 percent) and in tissue cores where the cancer had metastasized around 85 percent of the time.

It recognized even androgen-independent cancer cells, present when prostate cancer is incurable, the study by researchers at the University of Pennsylvania showed.

Read more: http://rawstory.com/2009/12/scientists-discovery-antibody-kills-prostate-cancer/

[Skittles]

1. off to the Greatest Page

:thumbsup:

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DavidDvorkin]

2. Wow!

[truthisfreedom]

3. Wow. That's promising. Nice news!

Thanks for posting!

[DCKit]

4. Those socialist, government funded scientists are at it again.

Being "of a certain age", this is huge news.

[JDPriestly]

24. Actually, U. of Pennsylvania is a private university.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Pennsylvania

[cap]

30. but that research is funded by the government

I know, I worked on grants at their medical school when I was a student.

[zbdent]

43. and, being private ...

they'll demand that they get all the profits ...

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

50. It's not quite that simple....

Since the government funded the research, there are restrictions on how the proceeds from patent licensing can be spent. Specifically, any revenues that arise from federally-sponsored research (other than the inventor's share) must be used for further research and education. Most universities have patent policies that require a portion of the royalties be paid back to the inventor -- otherwise nobody with a patentable idea would EVER want to work at a university research lab.

[derby378]

79. Look at it this way, guys...

This is an American discovery. With the hits that basic R&D has taken in our country over the last decade, I'm just glad we scored this one.

[donquijoterocket]

84. or a private one either

It's my understanding that the majority of private research labs are but a short step up from the plantation; that any ideas are all belong to the company unless you've negotiated some agreement in advance. People and ideas alike are chattel. Regardless,if true this is a major step. Just having had a friend emerge from the current regime of treatment for that disease I'll consider any possible improvement a significant step.

[Beetwasher]

87. It Depends On Their Contract

But yeah, in general that's how it works. I've seen contracts where the gov't retains all the rights. A lot of it depends on the type of research (among other things).

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

88. Government retains all rights if it's a contract....

The NIH makes a distinction between a grant (which is a financial support mechanism) and a contract (which is a procurement mechanism). If you're working on a contract with the government, anything you create becomes the government's property. If you're working on a grant, then the requirements of the Bayh-Dole Act apply.

[Beetwasher]

89. Yes, That's How It Generally Works At NIH

Technically an NIH NGA is a contract and those are all standard.

Regarding this particular research, if it's federally funded, it was probably funded through NIH (probably an R01), but I wasn't speaking only about NIH policy.

[JDPriestly]

91. Thanks for setting me straight on that. Interesting. We shall see.

[FarLeftFist]

5. Incredible breakthrough

[zbdent]

44. somewhat off topic, but I find it interesting to see a comment on a prostate discussion

by a poster with the word "Fist" in the name ...

:evilgrin:

[bertman]

78. Somebody grab the hook!

[glinda]

6. So how long will they sit on this one and how unaffordable will it be?

[TZ]

38. Biopharmas are doing tons of research in this area

Mine is doing antibody research with ovarian cancer. But hey, I guess getting ready to start HUMAN clinical trials with our antibody is sweeping it under the rug!

[AzNick]

7. It will be swept under the carpet by the drug industry nt

[CreekDog]

15. As you so uninformed that you think pharmaceutical companies only make drugs?

:eyes:

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[momto3]

49. You do realize that without biopharma most cancer drugs would not exist?

There are very few academic laboratories that have the funding to push through new drugs from discovery to the benchside. Once a potential drug target is found, the patent is usually sold to a biotech firm that has the capacity to do the human clinical trials.

Everyone likes to bash biopharma. But, we would pretty much be in the dark ages without them.

[TZ]

60. Yep.

They often are the "brawn" ie production facilities and employee knowledge and "gruntwork" to the Academic brain.

[liberalmike27]

68. It is true

That there isn't much money in curing sickness, only in managing it.

Let us chalk it up to another flaw in capitalism. Much better for them to keep you sick, and give you just enough medicine to keep you alive, and using the medicine. Curing you? Well, that'd just be crazy to avarice filled folks who only have their bottom line in mind.

[WriteDown]

83. Is your name Tor? What are your feelings on hot water?

TOR: Do you use hot water in the shower?

GEORGE: Yes.

TOR: Stop using it.

GEORGE: ..Okay.

KRAMER: I'm off hot water.

TOR: Kramer tells me that you are interested in an alternative to surgery.

GEORGE: Yes, yes I am.

TOR: (Blows into George's face) I think we can help you. See, unfortunately, the medical establishment is a business like any other business. And business needs

customers. And, they want to sell you their most expensive item which is unnecessary surgery.

GEORGE: (Still on the showers) Can I use hot water on my face?

TOR: No. You know, I am not a business man. I'm a holistic healer. It's a calling, it's a gift. You see, it's in the best interest of the medical profession that you remain

sick. You see, that insures good business. You're not a patient. You're a customer.

[denem]

8. Cancer has been (capital c) Cured in mice ad infinitum. It's routine.

Big tumors, little tumors. Countless breakthroughs have led to nothing, Interferon being the most infamous example. As Judah Folkman, a leading oncologist said: 'If you are a mouse with cancer, we can take good care of you'.

[MannyGoldstein]

10. +1 nt

[TZ]

33. Actually Interferon has all sorts of wonderful uses

Including keeping my personal disease, Essential Thrombocythemia, a blood malignancy under control. And its a god send for people with Hepatitus C.
If you don't know there are lots of promising discoveries going on in cancer immunogenetics in particular, you aren't paying attention

[ieoeja]

56. My brother's Hep C viral count has been ZERO for a few months now.

Thanks to the Interferon injections over (I think) 24 weeks. He has been med-free for a few months now and the viral count is still zero.

[TZ]

61. Its potent stuff.

I'm doing very well on it myself.

[momto3]

41. Very true.

All of the anti-angiogenic drugs have also been a great disappointment in people although they showed great promise in mice. Mice are our primary source of initial screening for new drugs, yet have proven over and over again to not be reliable indicators of how a drug will work in people.

[d_r]

53. Yes but

We are also very good in causing cancer in Mice

[Djarun]

9. I thought it was all about the treatment not the cure.

[AllyCat]

11. This is wonderful news.

Not to be a downer, but how do we now keep this out of the hands of the soon-to-be empowered pharmaceutical companies that have no competition from generic manufacturers on biologic meds?

[TZ]

58. They already have this kind of research on going!

GAAAAH! In fact biopharma FUNDS and cosponsers a lot of this research in ACADEMIC settings. FYI, do some research on generic drugs..They are not always the same or work as well as the patented stuff!!

[AllyCat]

100. Nothing is always. But it often is and gives some competition and choice

I have no issue taking ibuprofen instead of Motrin, for example. I know they do this and have for a long time. My question was how to keep this kind of research for people and not profit. The fact that this health care bill sets them up to have NO COMPETITION means no one will even try, leaving biologics out of reach of most people and insurance plans denying coverage of these kinds of drugs.

[MorningGlow]

12. K&R in memory of my favorite uncle

Uncle Frank went from a smiling man with twinkling blue eyes who loved life, laughing, eating and drinking, and golf (not necessarily in that order) to a pain-wracked skeleton, wasting away over eight tortured years, because of that damned disease. Please let this discovery lead to its eradication. Please.

[Divine Discontent]

13. so could somebody stop the drug companies from keeping this from being released once it gets to

the form of a treatment/pill? Cause you know they'll have it for themselves, but continue like there's no cure.

[JenniferJuniper]

16. Yup. Can't have an actual cure. Gets in the way of treatment.

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[superconnected]

72. and how do you feel about the oil industry. Do you know how dishonest even drug trials have

shown to be in the pharma industry.

[TZ]

75. Uh I work with the FDA on a daily basis

I know what the regulations are and I know how drug trials are run. In fact I'm working on a bunch of data from various trials right now
Want to tell me how you "know" drug trials are dishonest? Because I can assure you, most clinical trials I have seen have THE highest standards..INCLUDING stopping or putting a trial on hold if there is even a hint of a health issue with a patient.
So Dr. Google, how do you know what happens are you teh PSYCHIC? Or do you have a Phd in paranoia and bullshittery?
And WHAT THE FUCK does the Oil industry happen to do with biopharmaceutical research of which I happen to be a professional in?

[JenniferJuniper]

77. Ah, yes. One must butter one's bread!

But before you start calling others "illiterate idiots", it's generally a good idea to brush up on some basic grammar, punctuation, and spelling rules.

(And heaven help us if you truly are a bio-pharmaceutical researcher!)

[superconnected]

101. Gee, you are missing a lot. How about.. uh... Aspartame! (among thousands)

[momto3]

42. In truth, there probably will be no cure for cancer.

Cancer can develop in so many different ways that a "one size fits all" type of cure, even for specific types of cancer, is not feasible. Even after surgical removal of a tumor and extensive chemotherapy/radiotherpay (which are the only treatment options available today), there is always a chance of recurrence. The prevailing hope in the cancer research community is to get cancer to the point of a chronic disease. One that can be treated and controlled.

I liken cancer to evolution within ones own body. The cancer cells quickly "evolve" to overcome the treatments we throw at them. This is pretty simplistic, but it is the general idea. Therefore, no simple cure.

[kimmerspixelated]

93. There are many hushed- up cures for cancer.

BigPharma has to keep quiet and squash any info they find leaking out because it will cut into their cancer INDUSTRY profits. Cancer " research" is controlled as well. They make just enough progress to keep the funding coming. Synthetic chemicals are never the answer for the body or the earth. And they can't patent nature. Oh, you probably want to know a cure they hushed up:

Vit. B17 http://rationalargumentator.com/B17Cancer.html

[jeff47]

97. Facts help with conspiracy theories.

For example, they can indeed patent nature. After all, to make an actual drug out of a compound found in nature, one must process it, and that processing can be patented.

Do you really think that all 6 billion people on the planet now, and the untold billions who lived on the planet before us just happened to not eat a miracle cure for cancer?

[superconnected]

102. If you read the news, it gets cured all the time - in reputable labs.

Google it yourself, and then question where the cure is. These people are speaking from what they've read in the news. You're speaking from ignorance of that information. Look it up yourself or keep sounding like an 8 year old with your "conspiracy theorist" retort. It's a lot like the "anti-american" retort of the Republicans of the 2000's. It requires no thought, just name calling. And no, I don't plan on doing your homework for you.

[TheWraith]

80. How about you can the ignorance?

Who do you think funds a crapload of this research? Where do you think most of the medical world's breakthrough treatments come out of? Try to keep your criticism of the pharmaceutical industry grounded in reality instead of New World Order black-helicopter conspiracy theory bullshit.

[winyanstaz]

14. K & R...good news :)

I wonder if this would help people with breast cancer too...but its probably way too soon to tell.

[sakabatou]

17. I await actual clinical trials in humans before partying

[salguine]

18. Even if it's successful, they'll figure out a way to price the treatment out of reach of

everyone but the wealthy. The shitty insurance you're about to be forced to buy probably won't cover it. I fucking hate this country sometimes.

[TZ]

36. Actually if proven successfull

Insurance will cover it. Why does anyone thing someone would produce a drug that no one can pay for? Bad business and really shitty logic. Oh and producing these drugs isn't cheap. Its not this 1000 percent mark up people think it is.

[burning rain]

99. It'll be affordable, alright.

In well-off countries other than the US. Here people of modest means will be begging their doc for samples or maybe their church will have bake sales to raise the money to buy it for them. Others will just have to go without.

[namvet73]

19. Good news. Go to...

MEXICO!

Saw a piece by PBS News correspondent, Ray Swarez that people are going to Mexico for treatment they can't afford here.

Preview: When Americans Head to Mexico to Avoid Healthcare Costs
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2009/12/preview-americans-head-south-to-avoid-healthcare-costs.html

You hear a lot of bad things about Mexico, but I wonder how their longevity compares with that of the U.S.

[TZ]

40. There is also less regulation of the medical industry

Considering how the woos whine about our FDA here, I'd like to hear what they think about going to a country that has FAR LESS stringent regulation on medical research.

[momto3]

45. +1

There are plenty of stories of people that have gone to Mexico for medical care and have received the wrong drugs, wrong surgical procedure, etc... due to the lack of regulation.

[burning rain]

20. Good news.

Hopefully treatments for humans will result from this research, and will be affordable in countries other than the US.

[Kablooie]

21. Those mice get the best treatment. Why don't they ever use it on people?

[JDPriestly]

22. Good for the University of Pennsylvania.

[Tanelorn]

23. I wonder

how long from discovery to treatment? The lag seems to be 5
-10 years.

[momto3]

48. Yes, usually 5-10 years.

It has to go through phase I, II and III human clinical trials generally before it can be certified by the FDA. Although, I think there may be a way to speed up the process. It has been a while since I have been involved in this aspect of drug discovery.


BTW - Welcome to DU!!

[goclark]

26. Great News! Seems to me that since GW waved goodbye

the Scientist have been making miracle finings
!

What a joy this can be to so many.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. 
[link:www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules.html|Click
here] to review the message board rules.

[harun]

28. A big rec.

[Kip Humphrey]

29. must be nice to be a mouse!

[zbdent]

47. yeah, but think about it ...

that finger really is huge ... as if it didn't seem that way to us larger humans!!!

[Tripmann]

31. Outstanding!

[DailyGrind51]

34. And, maybe, antibodies exist which attack other cancers!

[TZ]

37. Yes, or can be designed that way

Monoclonal antibodies in the treatment of cancer is a HUGE area of research right now. Working on it myself, as a matter of fact.

[DailyGrind51]

71. As a cancer survivor myself, I thank you for your research.

[momto3]

46. There is a tremendous amount of research in this field.

The key is to find a marker that is present on the cancer cells that is not present on normal cells.

[SharonAnn]

69. One of these types is in Phase 2 testing on Melanoma with great results.

As soon as they get through the testing and data validation, it will probably be developed for market (assuming the studies validate success).

Phase IV melanoma was a quick killer. Usually less than 2 months? The new drug may either cure it or at least minimize it enough that it extends life a long time.

Check Plexxikon for further info on mutated BRAS melanoma. That's about 60% of melanomas.

[TZ]

74. I've heard there are some good results with melanoma tumors

in this area. Going into Phase 2 is promising. Lets see what happens in Phase 3 though thats pretty critical.

[Christa]

39. Off to the greatest page with this news. nt

[caseymoz]

51. Hope it works in human trials.

It isn't a breakthru till it does.

Now if they could only find something like this for breast cancer.

[onlyadream]

52. Does that mean that prostate cancer is a virus??? nt

[TZ]

59. No.

Cancer tumors are usually caused by the human immune system being tricked into thinking the cells belong. These antibodies have been "taught" that these tumors are invaders that need to be destroyed.
Cancer in many cases is a caused by some malfunction of the immune system.

[lonestarnot]

54. Great news!

:applause:

[freddie mertz]

55. As someone with a history of this in my family... I am hopeful. nt.

[PatrynXX]

57. Misspelled ?

thats what caught my eye to this story. now was that discovery intentional or not

[tridim]

62. Does anyone else remember the Canadian research that determined that a cheap, common drug..

killed cancer? I think it was posted on DU about two years ago, but I haven't seen anything else about it since.

Edit: Found it..

http://www.thedcasite.com/

It's still the real deal, and still ignored apparently.

[TZ]

64. Uh yeah.

I'm not going to get my scientific info from a website pushing that "cheap common drug". Find me peer reviewed data from a legitimate journal and we'll talk.
BTW.."To avoid any legal issues, we must state we are not doctors and cannot give medical advice.

DCA has not been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of cancer. It can be prescribed "off-label" by your physician."
Proscribing something off label is how we get nightmares like Thalidomide.
Yeah. Not what I'd call really trustworthy info.

[tridim]

66. The research was done at the University of Alberta..

That site is just the PR face for the research.

Here's the university site:
http://www.dca.med.ualberta.ca/Home/index.cfm

[TZ]

73. I still don't like what I read at that site

It smacks of internet/snake oil bullshit. Telling people they should get a unregulated drug prescribed off label is JUST asking for horrendous problems. Its highly unethical too.
And it looks like from all the links..its not being "ignored" either.

[tridim]

76. Strange response..

University medicine is one of the only trustworthy sources left in the entire field. Why are you throwing this research under the bus like a big-pharma would?

[TZ]

81. If you read my response

You will see WHY I am criticizing this WEBSITE and its propaganda (because that is what it is). I've worked with academic institutions quite a bit. In fact, most research now is done with both public and private work. The pharmas run the clinical trials often for the academic institution.

Are you seriously telling me you think telling people to take an unregulated EXPERIMENTAL drug (which btw Insurance WON'T pay for) thats never been through serious clinical trials is okay? Testing a drug is one thing...telling desperate people to "try this drug, even though we aren't doctors and it could kill you because we don't know the side effects" is OKAY? Thats probably the most morally rephrensible thing as a researcher I can think of. Thats why that site is non-trustworthy. There is a reason the phrase "snake oil exists". I bet you the people who did the research wouldn't approve of this either. I often find that quacks and people out for a profit exploit research like this.

[tridim]

86. I wish my friend who died of brain cancer had known about it and tried it.

Maybe she wouldn't be dead today?

[skids]

103. Well, to be fair...

...at least it's a drug that has been through enough trials to be legally prescribed for something.

Though there could be differences in the dosages needed, of course.

It's irresponsible, but significantly less so than pushing, say, a completely untested berry extract.

Academics could do a tremendous service by writing (or if written, promoting) more summary papers that inform the public of what is being done and what the roadmap looks like when such research hits the media. Then the black helicopter crowd would have a harder time claiming things like this are being suppressed.

[TheWraith]

82. It's easy to talk shit about a miracle drug.

There's lots of exaggerated claims out there on the internet about everything from holistics to the power of prayer. Doesn't make them reliable. One study from one lab at a university isn't the same thing as a broadly proven scientific consensus that something's effective, and until that happens distrust is the order of the day.

Seriously, do you think that the pharmaceutical industry wouldn't be interested in a drug that cures cancer? You know how many prescriptions they'd sell of that?

[tridim]

85. I think a cancer cure would be the pharamaceutical industry's worst nightmare.

If this drug works, they will certainly try to stop it. Not a doubt in my mind.

This drug is NOT holistic, not prayer, and not just a silly internet rumor.

[earth mom]

94. I totally agree with you-the pharma giants do NOT want to cure cancer.

And thanks for posting those links upthread.

I'm reading Suzanne Somers book on cancer right now and it has lots of great info too.

I think the biggest mistake people make is to put every drop of trust into the medical INDUSTRY-an INDUSTRY that works overtime to protect their unethical profits.

[TheWraith]

98. Explain WHY, without invoking tin foil hats.

I have news for you: cancer is not a moneymaking illness for drug manufacturers. They're not getting wealthy off it. The only ones who make significant money are the oncologists. But you're bound and determined to assume some kind of overarching conspiracy responsible for hiding the cures for all known diseases--apparently because there's no such thing in the world as whistleblowers, or independent research, or any of that good stuff. :eyes:

[BrklynLiberal]

63. Wow. Sure hope this is available to all soon.

[TZ]

65. Its gotta go through clinical trials first

Thats at least 5 years of research ahead.

[newtothegame]

67. Yeah but are they D or R? We need to know whether to rip them apart or not. n/t

[BolivarianHero]

70. BUT CIENSE IZ TEH ANTEKRIS!!11!11!!!!

J33BUS WIL COM DONE FORM HEVIN 2 KAS ALL TEH SIGNINTITS N2 TEH HELLZ!!1!!11!! REPINT MERIKA!!!

[valerief]

90. Good news for the elites who will benefit from it. Labor will continue to be

machines for the pharmaceutical and related industries.

[skepticscott]

92. But hey, science is just another belief system, right?

I'm sure prayer or crystals or some infinitely diluted naturopathic bullshit would have done just as well...

:sarcasm:

[DavidDvorkin]

96. After my wife had a mastectomy

a woman she knew, a self-described healer, told her, "It's too bad you didn't come to us first. We could have taken care of that for you."

[bergie321]

95. Does it involve

Putting $1 million in a blender and drinking it? (South Park reference)