HEALTH A Cancer 'Vaccine' Cured 97% of Tumors in Mice. What's That Mean for People?

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://www.livescience.com/62161-cancer-vaccine-trial.html

A Cancer 'Vaccine' Cured 97% of Tumors in Mice. What's That Mean for People?

By Rachael Rettner, Senior Writer | March 29, 2018 07:13am ET

A promising new cancer "vaccine" that cured up to 97 percent of tumors in mice will soon be tested in humans for the first time — but experts say that we're still a long way off from this type of drug being prescribed to cancer patients.

Researchers from Stanford University will test the therapy in about 35 people with lymphoma by the end of the year, according to SFGate, a local news outlet in San Francisco. The treatment stimulates the body's immune system to attack cancer cells. In studies in mice with various cancers — including lymphoma, breast cancer and colon cancer — the treatment eliminated cancer tumors in 87 out of 90 mice, even when the tumors had spread to other parts of the body, the researchers said.

Dr. Alice Police, the regional director of breast surgery at Northwell Health Cancer Institute in Westchester, New York, who was not involved in the study, said that the news of a human trial to test this treatment is "exciting." However, she cautioned that results in animal studies don't always translate to people.

"We've been able to cure a lot of cancers in mice for a long time," Police told Live Science. What's more, the current human trials are for patients with lymphoma, and so it could be many years before doctors know if this treatment works for other cancers, such as breast and colon cancer, Police said. [10 Do's and Don'ts to Reduce Your Risk of Cancer]

A cancer vaccine?
The new treatment is not technically a vaccine, a term used for substances that provide long-lasting immunity against disease. But the treatment does involve a vaccine-like injection, SFGate reported. (According to the American Society of Clinical Oncology, a "cancer vaccine" can refer to a treatment that's used to prevent cancer from coming back and destroys cancer cells that are still in the body.)

Instead, the treatment is a type of immunotherapy. It contains a combination of two agents that stimulate T cells, a type of immune cell, to attack cancer. Normally, the body's T cells recognize cancer cells as abnormal and will infiltrate and attack them. But as a tumor grows, it suppresses the activity of the T cells so that these cells can no longer keep the cancer at bay.

The new treatment works by reactivating these T cells. Researchers inject the "vaccine" directly into the tumor. The two agents in the treatment work synergistically in activating the T cells. Because these T cells were already inside the tumors, they have essentially been "prescreened" by the body to recognize cancer-specific proteins, the researchers said.

In the animal studies, injecting the treatment into just one tumor worked to eliminate tumors in other parts of the body (so-called metastatic cancers). This occurs because active T cells migrate to other parts of the body and destroy tumors that have spread.

In a study that was published Jan. 31 in the journal Science Translational Medicine, scientists gave the treatment to mice that were genetically engineered to develop breast cancer in all 10 of their mammary pads. The drug was injected into the first tumor that appeared in the animal, and the researchers found that the treatment also prevented the occurrence of future tumors in many cases, the researchers said.

Promising immunotherapies
Immunotherapy is not new; indeed, several other immunotherapies have been approved for treating cancer. For example, a treatment called CAR T-cell therapy, which was recently approved for some types of leukemia and lymphoma, involves removing certain immune cells from patients' bodies and genetically engineering those cells to fight cancer.

Compared with CAR T-cell therapy, one advantage of the new treatment is that it doesn't require doctors to remove and customize the patient's immune cells for fighting cancer, the researchers said. "We're attacking specific targets without having to identify exactly what proteins the T cells are recognizing," Dr. Ronald Levy, a professor of oncology at Stanford University School of Medicine and the senior author of the Science Translational Medicine study, said in a statement.

It's also interesting that the work may have implications for colon and breast cancer, two cancers for which there are currently no immunotherapies, Police said.

"We've [gone] one step further down the road" to an immunotherapy for these cancers, Police said. "But it's [still] a long way to go."

The new trial is a phase I study, which means it will test only the safety of the treatment and is not designed determine how effective it is.

Original article on Live Science.

Author Bio:

Rachael Rettner, Senior Writer
Rachael has been with Live Science since 2010. She has a masters degree in journalism from New York University's Science, Health and Environmental Reporting Program. She also holds a Bachelor of Science in molecular biology and a Master of Science in biology from the University of California, San Diego.

Rachael Rettner, Senior Writer
 

Dennis Olson

Chief Curmudgeon
_______________
It means nothing. There’s no money for Big Medicine in a cancer vaccine. Only in treatments.
 

Kronos

Veteran Member
It means nothing.

There’s no money for Big Medicine in a cancer vaccine. Only in treatments.

Well, a 'vaccine' can be made mandatory... Side effects meh.

Big Pharma aint what I grew up with.

1950's: What's the only occupation that aims to put itself out of business? Medicine!

Ya, not any more.
 

jazzy

Advocate Discernment
i would not touch it with a 10 ft pole and ive had cancer.

you can cure your own cancer.
take decent precautions in your life but
if you get cancer, kill it with cannabis

1/2 oz dry cannabis with 5T coconut oil and some lecithin will make one months worth of cancer paste medicine.
cannabis kills cancer.

you just got to learn the right amount and the right way to use it.
 

Pinecone

Has No Life - Lives on TB
You guys are too cynical. This is wonderful news for people with metastatic cancers. Immunotherapies, and biotherapies are not the harsh chemotherapies which are so destructive. Immunotherapies (or biotherapy according to an oncology nurse) like Rituximab can have few side effects and can keep cancer at bay, extending not just life but quality of life and hope for a more normal life and life span. From this article, this "vaccine" is not like the one that would be used for the general public to prevent cancer, but for someone with cancer. Big difference! I can't see it being pushed on everyone like other true vaccines. The cost of this treatment will no doubt be astronomical, so no worries about it not making it to the public should it be effective in people, but the fact that it has an effect of several cancers will make it more cost effective for the pharmaceutical company. For those families dealing with cancer, this is the hope that is needed to face the difficult physical and emotional challenges that only those who face this beast can know. Not everyone can deal with their cancers on their own. Only the person facing the beast can make the very difficult choices of how to treat their cancers.
 

ShadowMan

Designated Grumpy Old Fart
Treating cancer is good. A "real" vaccine against cancer is better....however, wouldn't it be better to figure out what causes cancer in the first place to avoid the whole thing all together? What causes the human body to get our of wack in the first place?
 

medic38572

TB Fanatic
It means much much money to save their lives if they even are able to bring it forth and the FDA approves it for human use.
 

Pinecone

Has No Life - Lives on TB
Treating cancer is good. A "real" vaccine against cancer is better....however, wouldn't it be better to figure out what causes cancer in the first place to avoid the whole thing all together? What causes the human body to get our of wack in the first place?

I don't think there is one answer to this, unfortunately. I don't trust the HPV cancer vaccine, either, so I guess I'm cynical, too. But, I do have room in my heart for hope.
 

Rayku

Sanity is not statistical
Treating cancer is good. A "real" vaccine against cancer is better....however, wouldn't it be better to figure out what causes cancer in the first place to avoid the whole thing all together? What causes the human body to get our of wack in the first place?

Maintenance vs cure. Maintenance = money. Cure = much less money.
Their is no big money in curing a disease.

However, look at the abstract of this. How do you create a vaccine without knowing the cause of what the vaccine is for?
 

Donald Shimoda

In Absentia
I'd sign up to be a human guinea pig for the trials...

Howdy, Folks!

I'm averse to surgery.


Peace and Love,

Donald Shimoda
 

Attachments

  • Watch Me.jpg
    Watch Me.jpg
    23.2 KB · Views: 181

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Treating cancer is good. A "real" vaccine against cancer is better....however, wouldn't it be better to figure out what causes cancer in the first place to avoid the whole thing all together? What causes the human body to get our of wack in the first place?

Well between all the new chemical compounds out there, the likely polio vaccine/SV40 FUBAR and people just living longer because of better overall health care and thus having time to "develop" cancer instead of dying of heart disease or TB if you're around longer you've got more of a likelihood to catch "something"....
 

Melodi

Disaster Cat
Your not going to understand how without knowing why.

That isn't always true in medicine, my husband has told me there are a quite a number of things that they know "work" for various health issues, but the science has yet to explain exactly WHY they work.

Over time, as science improves, more such puzzles are solved but there are still plenty of them out there...
 

Sleeping Cobra

TB Fanatic
What's That Mean for People?..................

The little people are not allowed to be cured of cancer. Continue taking chemo and radiation. Make cancer treatment centers richer. I will keep it a secret FASTING cures cancer and many other things.
 

flying screwdriver

Veteran Member
This is NOT a vaccine, the science writers chose a POOR choice of words to describe the therapy.

This is also not a 'chemotherapy' either.

This is inducing a T-cell mediated immunity with an injectable agent. It is only one of an entire new class of agents that either induce an adaptive immunity attack on cancers (T-cells), or an innate immunity induced attack (macrophages; neutrophils).

For those fighting cancers, do your homework. There are multiple FDA approved drugs for treatments of specific cancers that are being investigated due to broad ranging effectiveness against other cancers.

Think 'off label prescribing' and 'right to try'. A LOT of new developments in the last two years, and even in the last 6 months, and a LOT are already FDA approved for either a specific cancer or other condition.

This.is just another development in a rapidly growing field.
 
Last edited:

marymonde

Veteran Member
I don't think there is one answer to this, unfortunately. I don't trust the HPV cancer vaccine, either, so I guess I'm cynical, too. But, I do have room in my heart for hope.

The long term side effects need to be studied first, so you have reason to be cynical. The HPV vaccine was pushed through without long term studies, and now Merck comes out and warns that the vaccine can increase your risk for cervical cancer.

https://web.archive.org/web/2010070...l-may-cause-increased-risk-of-cervical-cancer

Warning, Gardasil may cause increased risk of cervical cancer

Wur child a vaccine that caused an increased risk of cancer? That may be exactly what you are doing when you consent to Gardasil.

According to Information the manufacturer of this vaccine presented to the FDA prior to approval, if a person has already been exposed to HPV 16 or 18 prior to injection Gardasil increases the risk of precancerous lesions, or worse, by 44.6%. (See VRBPAC Background document, bottom of page 13) This documentation was presented on the 18th of May 2006.

That statement bears repeating, if you have been exposed to HPV 16 or 18 prior to injection and take the vaccine, you increase your risk of precancerous lesions, or worse, by 44.6%.

Is this information advertised? No! This information was actually presented to the FDA by Merck. It came from their own safety trials. The FDA did not respond by recommending screening for HPV prior to vaccination. The FDA did not even demand a warning be included in the package insert.

Now, Merck's research is indicating that Gardasil may also 'provide cross-protection' against other strains of HPV that are closely related to HPV 16 and 18. (see this article on Medpage Today) This means prior exposure to these additional strains may pose an increased risk for cervical cancer also, if combined with vaccination.

No one appears to be concerned with the increased risk of vaccination combined with prior exposure, as long as you take the vaccine. You will see no advertisements indicating the possibility of increased risk of the very cancer this vaccine is supposed to help you avoid.

Government officials will not be informed of the potential danger. They will be told HPV is the most common sexually transmitted virus in the country and that it must be eradicated. They will be told this vaccine should be mandatory.

As a consumer, you must protect yourself. If you are sexually active or suspect you may have been exposed to HPV, ask your doctor to screen for HPV prior to taking Gardasil. If he, or she, does not know why, educate them. After all, it is your future at stake.

44.6% increased risk of cervical lesions/cancer; or HPV screening before consenting to vaccination -- it is your decision. Please, make it an informed one.
 

flying screwdriver

Veteran Member
This is not a vaccine. Nor is it for healthy people to prevent cancers.

And for those that need this, 'long term side effects' are highly preferred over death.

Discussion of other issues with vaccines and chemo treatments are not comparable to this, which is an immunotherapy when a person has gone beyond what Nature can already do.

Yes it has hazards, but once again I point to that 'death' factor being a pre-existing hazard to the people that need this type of treatment.
 

LightEcho

Has No Life - Lives on TB
I don't understand the response from all of you here. Yes, I get it. There is reason to distrust pharma as they are profit motivated. But did any of you actually read the article?

I work in this industry so I have insights as to how they work. This is STANFORD UNIVERSITY. It is NOT pharma. There have been billions of dollars put into cancer research and all sorts of treatments have sprung out of this. I am not impressed with the results, however, since we should have a far better understanding and treatment by now.

But this sounds like a very good thing to check out. It seems they figure that tumors or cancers have a way of allaying T-cell alert and blend in with normal cells. This treatment seems to reactivate or alert the T-cells.

Caution is fine, but taking a false position based on incorrect information is just as bad.
 

marymonde

Veteran Member
LE, you’re right, if someone has a projected negative outcome on their life expectancy from cancer, it may be something promising for them where there’s no hope. I suppose using the term vaccine puts a red flag up for many. Right now it’s in the University’s hands, but once it goes into development, that’s when profit margins will come into play. God only knows what will happen from there. To be continued....
 

flying screwdriver

Veteran Member
I don't understand the response from all of you here. Yes, I get it. There is reason to distrust pharma as they are profit motivated. But did any of you actually read the article?

I work in this industry so I have insights as to how they work. This is STANFORD UNIVERSITY. It is NOT pharma. There have been billions of dollars put into cancer research and all sorts of treatments have sprung out of this. I am not impressed with the results, however, since we should have a far better understanding and treatment by now.

But this sounds like a very good thing to check out. It seems they figure that tumors or cancers have a way of allaying T-cell alert and blend in with normal cells. This treatment seems to reactivate or alert the T-cells.

Caution is fine, but taking a false position based on incorrect information is just as bad.

AMEM. What he said.

Good info is being buried with fear and misunderstanding.

There are a lot of people here that need some good info FAST.
 

Doat

Veteran Member
TPTB are trying to figure out how to reduce the global population not how to sustain it. Never make it to the populace.
 

flying screwdriver

Veteran Member
YES!!!!

And they also need a way to winnow the wheat from the chaff and the outright tares and snake oils.

Yes, my peeve is that some of these recent developments are being obscured by three differing sets of opinions.

1 - those that totally distrust anything that medical research puts out. Dump the baby with the bathwater. Profits and politics are major issues that obscure real advances. That from someone still alive using treatments affected by both, using developments that were new in 2001.

2 - those that promote only 'natural' approaches to treating cancer. Yes, that is an extremely valuable discussion, especially for prevention. But when we fail to get ahead of it, nature needs HELP. (full disclosure I availed myself to all, both the homeopathic and allopathic approach).

3 - those that confuse the matter with totally unrelated treatments with their own unrelated issues, or experience, to attack all new developments without understanding either.

I neither trust, or discount, Merck Pharmaceuticals or Mike Adams Natural News (as examples). I study both the medical and the natural.
 

FaithfulSkeptic

Carrying the mantle of doubt
The ONLY way the average public will every see a "cure" for cancer is if we first find a cure for greed. I'm not holding my breath.
 
Top