• Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    It has the potential to do away with chemotherapy, surgery and radiation treatment.

    I read that as: Will never reach the market because it threatens a multibillion dollar industry.

    But srsly, glioblastoma is a really nasty motherfucker with a very low patient survival rate, so if they’ve really managed to cure it that’s a huge milestone.

  • BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    2 days ago

    Too bad we got a Sociopathic Oligarchs as HSS, who thinks mRNA vaccines should be banned. Cancer is better than…well, whatever is wrong with mRNA vaccines.

  • vga@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    I’m gonna be watching with popcorn when anti-vaxxers get cancer and definitely 100% will take this vaccine.

    I mean, if it’s true and not just shit science reporting that I assume it is.

  • GargleBlaster@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    190
    ·
    3 days ago

    I’ll read the publication in the coming days and report back, but don’t get your hopes up. There’s a “breakthrough” in cancer research every few months and it leads to nothing. And this study was done in mice which are a bit different to humans (citation needed)

    • iopq@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      90
      ·
      3 days ago

      They cured hair loss in mice at least twenty times now and we still have bald humans

    • OpticalAccount@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      41
      ·
      3 days ago

      I think this is overly negative. There have been multiple significant advances in cancer treatment over the past 10 years. It just depends which type you get.

      • jj4211@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        2 days ago

        Maybe overly negative by saying they come to “nothing”, but if you trace those advances back to their initial press release stage, they generally way ovehype it.

        Here we have what is being heralded as maybe a universal response to any and all cancer. That would be a shockingly amazing deviation from basically all the cancer research to date. It’s possible and wonderful if true, but generally the research falls short of the initial press coverage, even if it amounts to something.

    • dogerwaul@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      3 days ago

      while you’re not wrong i do want to reiterate that mRNA vaccines are likely going to be how we treat and cure cancers so there is precedent at least for this to be massive news. if not this there will likely be a real announcement one day.

      • tburkhol@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        3 days ago

        The likelihood that all cancers express a common surface marker that is never expressed by any non-cancerous cell seems pretty low. Not a cancer biologist, but there’s all kind of different genetic paths to cancer - why would they all cause some specific molecule to be expressed and why would no other cell ever use it?

        • AmidFuror@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          22
          ·
          3 days ago

          Your instincts are correct. The approach in the paper is more complicated than this. Here is the abstract:

          Abstract The success of cancer immunotherapies is predicated on the targeting of highly expressed neoepitopes, which preferentially favours malignancies with high mutational burden. Here we show that early responses by type-I interferons mediate the success of immune checkpoint inhibitors as well as epitope spreading in poorly immunogenic tumours and that these interferon responses can be enhanced via systemic administration of lipid particles loaded with RNA coding for tumour-unspecific antigens. In mice, the immune responses of tumours sensitive to checkpoint inhibitors were transferable to resistant tumours and resulted in heightened immunity with antigenic spreading that protected the animals from tumour rechallenge. Our findings show that the resistance of tumours to immunotherapy is dictated by the absence of a damage response, which can be restored by boosting early type-I interferon responses to enable epitope spreading and self-amplifying responses in treatment-refractory tumours.

    • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      Eh a lot of them save some lives. Its just cancer is really good at killing people and there are a lot of types of cancer

    • Dudewitbow@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      3 days ago

      It’s why I start following it myself when it gets to the human trial stage and less the breakthrough stage. There, you make the assumption that they have a plan and are much more confident in the product.

      • Canonical_Warlock@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        ITER is still well under way as far as fusion goes. I doubt room temp super conductors will ever be a thing though. If we can get a metalic material which superconducts above the boiling point of nitrogen then that will be world changing enough.

          • nymnympseudonym@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            Look at CFS SPARC, not ITER

            They will have an actual functioning fusion machine with Q>10 by end of this year thanks to high temperature superconductors that were not available when ITER started

            https://cfs.energy/

            • HugeNerd@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 days ago

              Yes, I’m sure something as simple and resource-light as a fusion reactor will be exactly the thing we’ll be able to build when the oil runs out.

              • untorquer@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 days ago

                Oil/LNG not likely to be exhausted in our lifetime, nor do we seem to have the global political willpower to do enough about climate change or perturb capital. Furthermore, the article talks about a lack of VC finding making it unlikely to be viable in the mean time. This is the basis of the sardonic statement in agreement with your comment but also intending to cast a political light on the concern from my end.

                • HugeNerd@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  Oil/LNG not likely to be exhausted in our lifetime,

                  Indeed not, but that EROEI is going towards 1, and maybe even <1. That’s not the same type of civilization any more. One sends people to play golf on the Moon to impress the neighbors.

                  The other densifies its cities in desperation hoping the food doesn’t run out.

  • SabinStargem@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    93
    ·
    3 days ago

    Hopefully, the researchers will be fully employed by the EU. I wouldn’t trust the US to not fuck up this miracle.

  • PlantDadManGuy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    2 days ago

    Conservatives will somehow find a way to level this as devil worshiping blasphemy and let their children die of brain cancer instead.

  • catty@lemmy.worldBanned
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    2 days ago

    Any cancer? How does this work with people who have gene mutations that suppress cancer-fighting defence systems.

  • Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    While the formulation isn’t unlike the Covid-19 vaccine, which uses lipid nanoparticles to deliver the genetic instructions to the body, it is still somewhat different. Instead of the drug encoding a virus protein, it sends a message to the immune system to rally the troops. It essentially tells the body to produce certain proteins that stimulate the immune system – including a protein within cancer cells known as PD-L1 (Programmed Death-Ligand 1), which makes tumors become more visible to immune cells.

    TLDR: they are finding that it’s more effective to make cancer more visible and have the body’s immune system do its thing.