Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Wednesday January 30 2019, @12:34AM   Printer-friendly
from the you-say-MuTaTo,-I-say-MuTayTo dept.

Accelerated Evolution Biotechnologies Ltd. (AEBi) is making some grandiose claims regarding a new approach to fighting cancer they have been developing dubbed "MuTaTo" (multi-target toxin).

"We believe we will offer in a year's time a complete cure for cancer."

most anti-cancer drugs attack a specific target on or in the cancer cell, [Dr. Ilan Morad] explained. Inhibiting the target usually affects a physiological pathway that promotes cancer. Mutations in the targets – or downstream in their physiological pathways – could make the targets not relevant to the cancer nature of the cell, and hence the drug attacking it is rendered ineffective.

In contrast, MuTaTo is using a combination of several cancer-targeting peptides for each cancer cell at the same time, combined with a strong peptide toxin that would kill cancer cells specifically. By using at least three targeting peptides on the same structure with a strong toxin, Morad said, "we made sure that the treatment will not be affected by mutations;

He continues

"The probability of having multiple mutations that would modify all targeted receptors simultaneously decreases dramatically with the number of targets used. Instead of attacking receptors one at a time, we attack receptors three at a time – not even cancer can mutate three receptors at the same time."

It seems there is a new cancer cure regularly, but hope springs eternal, in this case the research is out of a petri dish and into animal testing.

Morad said that so far, the company has concluded its first exploratory mice experiment, which inhibited human cancer cell growth and had no effect at all on healthy mice cells, in addition to several in-vitro trials. AEBi is on the cusp of beginning a round of clinical trials which could be completed within a few years and would make the treatment available in specific cases.

What say you? 'We're saved!' or 'wake me when it gets through Phase III clinical trials'?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by RS3 on Wednesday January 30 2019, @01:12AM (5 children)

    by RS3 (6367) on Wednesday January 30 2019, @01:12AM (#793859)

    We now have a direct right to try treatments, but it does not mean healthcare providers are forced to give you the treatment, it just means the governmental (FDA, etc.) regulations have been relaxed.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 30 2019, @01:19AM (4 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 30 2019, @01:19AM (#793861)

    You want to be able to *force* a doctor to give you some wierd ass treatment? Im not in favor of the fda having any role in assessing efficacy whatsoever... but that is way beyond how dumb I thought people could get.

    • (Score: 2) by RS3 on Wednesday January 30 2019, @02:00AM (3 children)

      by RS3 (6367) on Wednesday January 30 2019, @02:00AM (#793866)

      > You want to be able to *force* a doctor to give you some wierd ass treatment?

      I wrote no such thing. I don't quite understand your response but I'll chalk it up to you being AC. Ironic you calling me "dumb".

      That you somehow misunderstood what I wrote, then replied based on your incorrect belief, is a great example of where so much strife comes from in today's world.

      • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 30 2019, @02:09AM (2 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 30 2019, @02:09AM (#793867)

        We now have a direct right to try treatments, but it does not mean healthcare providers are forced to give you the treatment

        • (Score: 2) by RS3 on Wednesday January 30 2019, @02:48AM (1 child)

          by RS3 (6367) on Wednesday January 30 2019, @02:48AM (#793873)

          My statement stands. No further meaning (that you seem to read in) is meant nor implied. I'm not responsible for your imagination. I don't know what world you live in, but I bet you're a frustrating person to be around if you extrapolate that way.

          Perhaps your difficulty is that you're looking at it as you quoted it, rather than in the context of what I was responding to?

          Perhaps you have logical problems? You do understand the statement: "all horses are animals, but not all animals are horses"??

          • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 30 2019, @02:15PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 30 2019, @02:15PM (#794049)

            Why did you bring up the possibility that "healthcare providers are forced to give you the treatment"? Why contemplate this unless you thought it was desirable for some reason?

            Perhaps people want to buy a sex change operation and pay with gold their grandfather bequeathed to them. In that case I can imagining wanting to "force" the doctor to do something.