3 ms·
Good for these scientists, but… First they have to make something that works in a whole cancer cell. If they get that far, you then have to show it works in a
by rgmerk 3y ago
Good for these scientists, but…
First they have to make something that works in a whole cancer cell.
If they get that far, you then have to show it works in animals.
If it works in animals, you then have to do phase 1, phase 2, and phase 3 clinical studies in humans.
Things fail at all three steps along the line.
Even in the highly unlikely event that everything went right from here it’s likely at least a decade from any clinical application. The odds of this particular approach being the one that leads to the blockbuster drug are very small.
(Note: not an expert on medical science, but married to a medical scientist who works in the drug discovery pipeline).
- j45 3y agoAll true. Still need an initial attack vector and those are valuable.
- mike_hock 3y agoThen she has probably also told you that it's normal for scientists to publish these initial findings so the rest of the world can build on them. "This is not a viable drug and may never become one" doesn't need to be restated every time something gets reported. We know.
- rgmerk 3y agoShe’s also told me (and I know from other fields) that promising results in individual proteins are a dime a dozen, and generally not worth paying attention to unless you’re one of the very few scientists working in that specific field.