Comments
casualLogic t1_j0z1nyf wrote
So, kinda what Cuba's been doing for YEARS?
FuturologyBot t1_j0z2vtm wrote
The following submission statement was provided by /u/chrisdh79:
From the article: Researchers from Mount Sinai have shown that a therapy using talquetamab, an off-the-shelf drug known as a bispecific antibody, can be enlisted to kill multiple myeloma cells (a type of white blood cell) that can build up in the bone marrow and form tumors in bones. The therapy destroys cancerous cells in 3 out of 4 patients, and side effects, while common, are not severe.
The drug was tested in both phase 1 and phase 2 trials — the phase 1 trial established the safety and established a recommendation of two doses, whereas the phase 2 trials tested the effectiveness on 143 patients treated on a weekly dose and 145 patients treated at a higher biweekly dose.
The overall response rate was 73%, said Ajai Chari, study author. Around a third of the patients in both groups had a complete response — there was no detection of any myeloma-specific markers after the treatment. Almost 60% had a “very good partial response”, which means that the cancer was substantially reduced but not to zero.
“This means that almost three-quarters of these patients are looking at a new lease on life,” said Chari. “Talquetamab induced a substantial response among patients with heavily pretreated, relapsed, or refractory multiple myeloma, the second-most-common blood cancer. It is the first bispecific agent targeting the protein GPRC5d in multiple myeloma patients.”
The results are particularly exciting because patients who receive standard therapy for myeloma have a very high rate of relapse — and the more they relapse, the worse the prognosis becomes. But the success of talquematab was even seen in participants who were resistant to all other approved therapies, which makes this approach particularly promising. The researchers described this strategy as “bringing your army right to the enemy.”
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/zqoave/experimental_treatment_destroys_cancerous_bone/j0yx14v/
[deleted] t1_j11thed wrote
I love seeing these break through news articles where they find some kind of mysterious substance or plant that cures a cancer by 400%. Then you never hear anything about it again. How is the science we do even still called "science" might as well call it "funded research that shall be covered up"
Outrageous_Ad4916 t1_j121kxm wrote
Wow.
This could've saved my father's life had it been available back then.
But I'm happy others will benefit.🥹
Sithlord_unknownhost t1_j12bw0b wrote
I donno. about twenty years ago read about breakthroughs in the fight against leukemia, now I'm taking one of them for leukemia. Still alive.
bran_dong t1_j13rep0 wrote
ive spent 10 years hearing about new battery technology and new cancer treatment techniques on this subreddit. and 10 years later i still watch my family members die from cancer, and i still have to charge my cell phone every day. starting to think this subreddit is full of shit.
[deleted] t1_j14quju wrote
[deleted]
lt_dan_zsu t1_j14v501 wrote
That's because science journalism isn't very good. Cancer is never going to be cured, new cancer treatments just add to the laundry list of treatments that we can employ which increase survival rates incrementally over time. Cancer is a diverse group of illnesses that share some things in common, so a treatment for one isn't always going to be a treatment for another. Cancer is also often lifelong illness. We have no real good ways of removing all cancer from your body in many cases, and even if you appear to be "cured" it may very well come back at a later date.
This article's headline implies that this cancer was cured in 73% of study participants. If you actually look at the results of the study, about 70% had at least partial response, and about 30% of those that had a response had a complete response (meaning there is no evidence a tumor is still present). Additionally, this is only measuring short term responses (less than a year), and a later study will need to be published on long term response. So you have a treatment that we know short term leads to partial or complete remission most of the time. That doesn't generate as many clicks as "new treatment destroys bone cancer cells in 73% of patients" though.
AsuhoChinami t1_j1ddimg wrote
My grandmother's breast cancer went into remission in 1980 and it never returned for her remaining 34 years of life. Weird... it's almost as though cancer isn't as completely untreated as you say...
chrisdh79 OP t1_j0yx14v wrote
From the article: Researchers from Mount Sinai have shown that a therapy using talquetamab, an off-the-shelf drug known as a bispecific antibody, can be enlisted to kill multiple myeloma cells (a type of white blood cell) that can build up in the bone marrow and form tumors in bones. The therapy destroys cancerous cells in 3 out of 4 patients, and side effects, while common, are not severe.
The drug was tested in both phase 1 and phase 2 trials — the phase 1 trial established the safety and established a recommendation of two doses, whereas the phase 2 trials tested the effectiveness on 143 patients treated on a weekly dose and 145 patients treated at a higher biweekly dose.
The overall response rate was 73%, said Ajai Chari, study author. Around a third of the patients in both groups had a complete response — there was no detection of any myeloma-specific markers after the treatment. Almost 60% had a “very good partial response”, which means that the cancer was substantially reduced but not to zero.
“This means that almost three-quarters of these patients are looking at a new lease on life,” said Chari. “Talquetamab induced a substantial response among patients with heavily pretreated, relapsed, or refractory multiple myeloma, the second-most-common blood cancer. It is the first bispecific agent targeting the protein GPRC5d in multiple myeloma patients.”
The results are particularly exciting because patients who receive standard therapy for myeloma have a very high rate of relapse — and the more they relapse, the worse the prognosis becomes. But the success of talquematab was even seen in participants who were resistant to all other approved therapies, which makes this approach particularly promising. The researchers described this strategy as “bringing your army right to the enemy.”