[removed]

Paywall? Jump it here: Vaccine doubles brain tumour survival rate in medical breakthrough
https://archive.ph/ybwbd#selection-1291.0-1291.149

[removed]

It makes sense that this works best on a long scale. The biggest problem with cancer is its ability to spread to other organs in the body. So a vaccine would teach the body to attack the cancer when it spreads and before we can detect it.

[removed]

I am happy to see this. My grandfather died from a glioblastoma. 20 years later his doctor treated a famous baseball star with the same condition and he lasted the same amount of time. Seemed like no progress has been made so this is great news.

Survival rate for patients, not survival of the tumor

The thing about brain cancer is that it rarely spreads to other organs

[removed]

[removed]

Headline very poorly worded Who doesnt want their brain tumor to survive longer

how does it pass the blood brain barrier ?

[removed]

Yeah my father passed away last year from glioblastoma, I remember this trial. I remember doing research and finding it but he elected not to do it. It makes me sad to know it really could have helped him.

So instead of dying quickly and fairly painlessly, like my father did 4 yrs ago, you get to have a prolonged (5 yr?) dying period on chemo. Sounds just great. He chose surgery which removed his ability to speak and by the time it healed he had three more tumours. ' Prolongs dying term ' is a better headline.

Don’t worry. Recurrent glioblastoma usually survives as long as the patient.

My father too, about 5 years ago. Horrible way to die.

This is a vaccine; for it to work you need to have a working immune system, which chemo more or less destroys

So it kills you but you'll survive the brain tumor?

What a breakthrough!

Sorry if i sounded negative, but it is a severe and quicky spreading cancer. Is it the case the vaccine is given before the cancer is detected ie as with covid vaccines, to slow its progression if you get it? If so, when would it be offered and to whom? Obviously that's a risk decision and I would be a candidate given my father died from it. Also my point really is that living with glyioblastoma growing in your brain for many years doesn't sound like a pleasant end of life journey.

[removed]

That title had me on a roller coaster of emotions

?? You get to live twice as long with the vaccine then without it. Why the irony?

Can we not just cure aging already. If we cured aging we wouldn't need to treat all of those complicated symptoms like cancer.

Does it matter which vaccine you are given? The flu one for this year work?

Just as long as it’s got microchips and fauchi’s blood in it you should be fine.

Don't forget epstein's seed

[removed]

The vaccine would at least be given at early detection, prior to chemo. As molecular diagnostics improve, perhaps sooner. These 2 links easily define symptoms, location, spread, diagnostics, current treatments. Don't delay.

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/glioblastoma/cdc-20350148

https://www.aans.org/en/Patients/Neurosurgical-Conditions-and-Treatments/Glioblastoma-Multiforme

Added: Easier reading. Click topic, scroll to see. https://braintumor.org/events/glioblastoma-awareness-day/about-glioblastoma/ Tumor Metabolism is interesting.

The problem with aging, -HDsp-... is that it starts very early... like when you're born, or maybe before. It just goes faster the longer you spend on reddit. Cancer doesn't care.

But in thispike.-yonder-, it does recur and may also appear in the spine.

No not realy we know what causes aging we can artifical age rats and restore sight loss from agin in rats. Aging happens through the continued destruction and reconstruction of the epigenome. There is a lot to it but basicly it dictates what cell is wich. The epigenome fragments more and more the more it gets reconstructed and by braking it artifical over and over again scientists where able to artifical age a rat. We know that if that process is reversed the cell reverses it's age by apling 3 of the 4 methods of turning a cell back into a stem cell. This was tested by apling this method to the retina of a rat that had previously gone blind from old age.

So what keeps us back? The methods of Appling cell therapy ofcourse it is compleatly absurd to try and apply cell therapy like that to each cell in a human body. So what we need to figure out is does this work in humans and how to apply it faster and to more cells. I honestly do not what to die of old age if we are this close to curing aging.

Ahhh Rats. Errata. We just start to get smart at 60-80. We'd have a better society if we lives healthier for longer.

Honestly seeing these posts gets me so emotional, to know how many holes of medicine are slowly being filled.

This makes me both happy and sad to read. My mom was diagnosed with glioblastoma in 2013, and tried to enroll in a vaccine study but they didn't have enough material from the resectioned tunor to create the vaccine samples (or at least that's roughly what I remember the vaccine trial representative telling us). She died in 2018, which is more time than many glioblastoma patients get but I can't help but wonder if it would have been different if she'd been able to participate in the trial and had gotten the vaccine.

[removed]

Not really. The biggest problem in this case still is the brain tumor itself, regardless of metastasis. This vaccine will only extend your life for a few months on average.

Same here, also 5 years ago. My condolences

I can’t help but cheer for an underdog

My dad got diagnosed in 2014 and died in 2017. Every headline like this regarding glioblastoma makes me both happy, and then sad, and then a bit guilty for being sad about inherently good news. It's a weird mix of emotions.

Thank you for your reply and the readings. I do remember this information from 5 years ago but rereading brought back the quick defeat we were facing. My father was 80 and quickly became directionless as his first symptom. A week later 2 large tumors were found. A $10k operation to remove them, yes we have health insurance here in Australia, and a month later he died with two more growing. Perhaps the removal prevented a harsh death as his was painless, to watch anyway. What I didn't know was the mean age at diagnosis is 64! So at my age of 62, your comment 'don't delay' seems reasonable, is that what you meant? For this 'early intervention' idea to work, as with all cancers, I need to: have immediate relevant brain scans based on my family hx, have said scans ? yearly, stay vigilant for symptoms.. not easy as reduced executive functioning is insidious, and at the first sign of a tumor, get access to the vaccine. The window of opportuniy to get this vaccine seems very small, but the research results say it is achievable. I've never been convinced about delaying inevitable death, especially from brain tumors, but that is a more philosophical question. When I'm faced with the decision I may alter my view. Sorry for the rant.

You're really overly optimistic. Short answer. We cannot cure aging. Even if we could, we cannot cure these diseases yet either. Imagine the richest person alive, what they wouldn't do to live longer (not even forever just longer) and yet, rich people die just like everyone else. There are efforts being made to cure diseases and aging, but they're not there yet. Also curing aging would not cure someone with cancer, it might lower prevalence if we kept everyone at a young enough age, but cancer even strikes children, so curing aging doesn't equal curing cancer.

That is true but one of the biggest risk factors for cancer is age so if we can reverse the biological clock cancer would become very very rare. Also from what I read is that futurologists believe (no idea what that is I asume some kind of scientist) that we might be able to make an affordable cure for aging by 2050.

Not at all, your concern is warranted. We all need to find out what's in our food and what's in our DNA. Also, I was spell corrected from "likely" to "at least". I meant likely. I would say, don't believe the first things you read on Google as there is much misinformation and dated information on most things. Gliomas of all types have disrupted lives of athletes in their 20's and glioblastoma are indeed a part of pediatric practice. A regressive study I saw did not include numbers from smaller medical practices, only large hospital consortiums. It does seem that males are more susceptible.

So yes, if you are generally healthy and enjoying life, see if there is a molecular diagnostic test available and note your family history. I would say to everyone that If you are having headaches, calendar them as compared to activity and diet. It may not just be that old shoulder injury or whatever you stuck into a couple days ago. Best.

Reading The first 4 words I was about to be like oh fuck lmao they were right

Brain tumor survivor rate. No wonder I don’t trust what people write.

[removed]

I watched a tv program on a vaccine in Japan. There is a doctor working on a it

since 1991. He used a edited herpes simplex virus to attack the brain tumor. The program was on a NPR station.

[removed]

Yea but they'll want an arm and a leg for it. (The bot wants more words from me so I will now explain that this is a joke relating to prices for medical treatment being extremely high and the companies that make these treatments know that you're going to die if you don't take it so they'll charge you out the anus to fix a tumor on the other end.)

My fiance works in cancer research and I was talking to the head of their research department recently since I was curious about some tech I'd been reading about. He mentioned there hadn't been a meaningful change to glioblastoma survival rates since he entered the field 35 years ago.