Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Saturday October 21 2017, @12:09AM   Printer-friendly
from the a-third-chance-at-life dept.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved a gene therapy for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (blood cancer):

The Food and Drug Administration on Wednesday approved the second in a radically new class of treatments that genetically reboot a patient's own immune cells to kill cancer.

The new therapy, Yescarta, made by Kite Pharma, was approved for adults with aggressive forms of a blood cancer, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, who have undergone two regimens of chemotherapy that failed.

The treatment, considered a form of gene therapy, transforms the patient's cells into what researchers call a "living drug" that attacks cancer cells. It is part of the rapidly growing field of immunotherapy, which uses drugs or genetic tinkering to turbocharge the immune system to fight disease. In some cases the treatments have led to long remissions.

"The results are pretty remarkable," said Dr. Frederick L. Locke, a specialist in blood cancers at the Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, and a leader of a study of the new treatment. "We're excited. We think there are many patients who may need this therapy."

He added, "These patients don't have other options."

About 3,500 people a year in the United States may be candidates for Yescarta. It is meant to be given once, infused into a vein, and must be manufactured individually for each patient. The cost will be $373,000.

Also at The Associated Press, CNN, and STAT News.

Previously: FDA Approves a Gene Therapy for the First Time
FDA Committee Endorses Gene Therapy for a Form of Childhood Blindness


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This discussion has been archived.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: 4, Interesting) by fritsd on Saturday October 21 2017, @09:51AM

    by fritsd (4586) on Saturday October 21 2017, @09:51AM (#585612) Journal

    That is an interesting way to put it, but essentially I can see nothing wrong with what you say. Maybe it's just a difference in viewpoint.

    So why does the USA have a large army, again? That also costs every taxpayer money, for unclear benefits:

    Indeed. I'm just not sure that's a good way to do things at all. You're essentially laying a monthly bet down that you will get foreign bandits on the border, and terrorists. Most people won't, therefore it does not make financial sense for anyone without a history of expensive gang warfare or terrorist attacks on their family to support the current system. It doesn't even do the most good for our proud nation like our more jingoistic types would prefer. It penalizes most people for the safety of a small minority.

    FTFY.

    That's *an* argument for pacifism; I didn't claim that it was a *good* argument :-)

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=1, Interesting=1, Total=2
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4