4 ms·

Non pay walled: http://sci-hub.tw/http://emboj.embopress.org/content/early/2018/06/06/embj.201899815# http://sci-hub.tw/http://emboj.embopress.org/content/early

by dagoat 8y ago

Non pay walled: http://sci-hub.tw/http://emboj.embopress.org/content/early/2018/06/06/embj.201899815# http://sci-hub.tw/http://emboj.embopress.org/content/early/2... highlight: A549 CDDP-resistant cancer cells showed reduced tumor growth and longer survival in response to periodic fasting cycles (24 hours of water only twice a week). In contrast, CDDP-sensitive tumors were not affected by these 24-hour fasting cycles. Because previous results indicated that 2–3 consecutive days of fasting were effective against a wide range of cancers, particularly in combination with chemotherapy (Lee et al, 2012; Bianchi et al, 2015), it would be important to test these longer fasting periods on A549 and other CDDP-resistant cancer

brfox 8y ago
That paper is a mini review of this paper which actually has the data in it: http://emboj.embopress.org/content/37/14/e98597 http://emboj.embopress.org/content/37/14/e98597 In there, they did work on A549 cell lines and showed that removing nutrients from the media decreased their growth rate. They also showed that putting these human cell lines into immune deficient mice and doing a couple 24hr fasts per week had a small (p=0.03) effect on the tumor growth rate (Fig 2). But in the in vivo study, it appears they didn't directly compare A549 vs cisplatin resistant A549 - they seemed to have run 2 studies both vs control. There are literally thousands of papers showing drugs or treatments which can cure lab mice of "cancer" and many more which can kill cell lines in vivo, but only a tiny percentage of those work in patients. There is a reason this is not in a higher profile journal.