4 ms·

A lot of chemotherapy is untargeted. The entire body is poisoned, and the cancer cells are more susceptible, for various reasons (weakness during cell division,

A lot of chemotherapy is untargeted. The entire body is poisoned, and the cancer cells are more susceptible, for various reasons (weakness during cell division, which they do far more frequently than healthy cells, among other reasons). Hair loss, skin/nail problems, digestive tract problems, etc. These are all fast-growing cells. It's almost impossible to target cancer cells and not affect normal cells, because cancer cells aren't all that special.

giantg2 6y ago
Yeah, but recent trends seem to be toward more targeted approaches. Seems a bit odd to be studying non-targeted approaches if there are a lot of newer targeted approaches emerging and in research that wouldn't have the same side effects.
- caymanjim 6y ago
  Cancer isn't one disease. Targeted treatments take a long time to develop, and only cure one type. The vast majority of cancers are still treated using a sledgehammer approach. I had lymphoma, and took both a general poison (bendamustine) and a very narrowly targeted monoclonal antibody (rituximab). The bendamustine kicked my ass a bit because it's simply poison. The rituximab hardly had any side effects at all, because it only targeted specific cell types (both healthy and cancerous cells of that type, but still focused). The idea that there is or ever will be a "cancer cure" is a popular misconception. There are hundreds--if not thousands--of cancer variants. The more targeted the treatments are, the fewer patients any one treatment can help. It takes a decade or more and hundreds of millions of dollars for each targeted treatment. There's still an enormous need for broad-spectrum treatments in addition to targeted ones.
  - giantg2 6y ago
    They are working on genomic treatments. These operate within the same framework but can have thousands of variants. It's conceptually similar to the mRNA covid vaccine. The framework has been figured out and tested, then it's only a matter of days to create the vaccine once you have the target genetic signature.

giantg2 6y ago

Yeah, but recent trends seem to be toward more targeted approaches. Seems a bit odd to be studying non-targeted approaches if there are a lot of newer targeted approaches emerging and in research that wouldn't have the same side effects.

caymanjim 6y ago
Cancer isn't one disease. Targeted treatments take a long time to develop, and only cure one type. The vast majority of cancers are still treated using a sledgehammer approach. I had lymphoma, and took both a general poison (bendamustine) and a very narrowly targeted monoclonal antibody (rituximab). The bendamustine kicked my ass a bit because it's simply poison. The rituximab hardly had any side effects at all, because it only targeted specific cell types (both healthy and cancerous cells of that type, but still focused). The idea that there is or ever will be a "cancer cure" is a popular misconception. There are hundreds--if not thousands--of cancer variants. The more targeted the treatments are, the fewer patients any one treatment can help. It takes a decade or more and hundreds of millions of dollars for each targeted treatment. There's still an enormous need for broad-spectrum treatments in addition to targeted ones.
- giantg2 6y ago
  They are working on genomic treatments. These operate within the same framework but can have thousands of variants. It's conceptually similar to the mRNA covid vaccine. The framework has been figured out and tested, then it's only a matter of days to create the vaccine once you have the target genetic signature.