4 ms·

“died on Dec. 27, 20 months after being diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. He was 63.” A form of cancer where we have made almost zero progress. What’s it going

“died on Dec. 27, 20 months after being diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. He was 63.” A form of cancer where we have made almost zero progress. What’s it going to take to get more research? It has already been 10 years: https://www.cmu.edu/randyslecture/ https://www.cmu.edu/randyslecture/

hprotagonist 9y ago
it’s not like people aren’t trying. it’s just a real bastard of a disease.
- melling 9y ago
  I didn’t say people weren’t trying. I was asking for more research. Pancreatic cancer is not generously funded. Most would argue that it’s underfunded. https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/06/cancer-funding-does-it-add-up/ https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/06/cancer-funding-doe... https://www.cancer.org/research/currently-funded-cancer-research/grants-by-cancer-type.html https://www.cancer.org/research/currently-funded-cancer-rese...
  - gone35 9y ago
    It's not just funding. For one, the dynamics of the known molecular pathways involved are complex [1], and so far non-trivial to manipulate. Furthermore, even with an actionable mechanism, targeting the tumor itself is highly non-trivial, due to physiology alone. (See e.g. [2]). [1] http://www.jcancer.org/v07p1497.htm http://www.jcancer.org/v07p1497.htm [2] http://www.nature.com/articles/nrclinonc.2016.119 http://www.nature.com/articles/nrclinonc.2016.119
Gatsky 9y ago
It's a difficult problem etc etc The real answer is that the life sciences are currently in a medieval phase. It's like doing physics without algebra or calculus. We should certainly not expect any regular progress. It is extraordinarily inefficient.
- pvaldes 9y ago
  I understand what you are trying to say. Yes. This is a sort of a dark age for all science related. A few well supported islands in an ocean of hostile politics
ekianjo 9y ago
Problem is also that it is not easy to diagnose in early stages, so you end up with most patients diagnosed in stage 4.

hprotagonist 9y ago

it’s not like people aren’t trying. it’s just a real bastard of a disease.

melling 9y ago
I didn’t say people weren’t trying. I was asking for more research. Pancreatic cancer is not generously funded. Most would argue that it’s underfunded. https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/06/cancer-funding-does-it-add-up/ https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/06/cancer-funding-doe... https://www.cancer.org/research/currently-funded-cancer-research/grants-by-cancer-type.html https://www.cancer.org/research/currently-funded-cancer-rese...
- gone35 9y ago
  It's not just funding. For one, the dynamics of the known molecular pathways involved are complex [1], and so far non-trivial to manipulate. Furthermore, even with an actionable mechanism, targeting the tumor itself is highly non-trivial, due to physiology alone. (See e.g. [2]). [1] http://www.jcancer.org/v07p1497.htm http://www.jcancer.org/v07p1497.htm [2] http://www.nature.com/articles/nrclinonc.2016.119 http://www.nature.com/articles/nrclinonc.2016.119

Gatsky 9y ago

It's a difficult problem etc etc The real answer is that the life sciences are currently in a medieval phase. It's like doing physics without algebra or calculus. We should certainly not expect any regular progress. It is extraordinarily inefficient.

pvaldes 9y ago
I understand what you are trying to say. Yes. This is a sort of a dark age for all science related. A few well supported islands in an ocean of hostile politics

ekianjo 9y ago

Problem is also that it is not easy to diagnose in early stages, so you end up with most patients diagnosed in stage 4.