I am an amateur who is fascinated with the implications of accelerating technological change. Some are challenging--more and more jobs potentially obsolesced by automation of various kinds. Some are pretty unambiguous good news, with likely new cancer treatment techniques at or near the forefront. There has been quite a bit written on the nascent but growing use of autoimmune techniques to attack cancers, for example.
Now, there are two new announcements regarding techniques in their early stages, with very impressive potential outcomes. One involves the use of a blood test to identify existence of a tumor. At least in trials, the tests unambiguously differentiate between blood from a patient with certain types of tumors and those without.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2015-02/24/c_134013415.htm
In the other, really promising treatment options for pancreatic cancer are becoming available, also in tests.
The research, published in esteemed science journal Nature on Thursday, examined the variations in the genome present in 100 pancreatic adenocarcinomas the type most frequently diagnosed.
This allowed the cancers to be further divided into four categories: stable, locally rearranged, scattered and unstable.
Several of the cancers were also found to have mutations amenable to treatment with drugs used for other cancers, and not at present for pancreatic cancer. In addition, two novel gene mutations were observed which may offer leads for new approaches to treatment.
Adjunct Associate Professor Nikolajs Zeps of the University of Western Australia said on Friday the study was a good illustration of the power of biobanks linked to genomic sequencing... |
(link)
With pancreatic cancer currently having a 5-year death rate of 95%, this is potentially huge. If it can be linker to earlier detection, even huger. Most pancreatic cancer isn't diagnosed until stage 3, as I understand it.
Link - (
New Window )
Link - ( New Window )
Problem is.. the science is good, but the test hasn't gained much traction in the US for reasons unknown, despite it being successful in a 10,000 patient study. Politics? Who knows.