Treating pancreatic tumours may have revealed cancer's master switch (economist.com)

139 points by andsoitis 5 hours ago

gcanyon 2 hours ago

As is often the case, the title is hyperbolic. The discovery applies to 20% of tumors, and "one of cancer's significant defenses" or "a key weakness of cancer" would be more accurate.

That said, I'll happily take "we discovered a key weakness in 20% of cancers," please and thank you.

basisword 2 hours ago

What does this mean in layman's terms? How will this potentially help me if I get cancer?

epistasis 2 hours ago

Cancer is not one thing, it's a huge zoo of many many many ways that cells start to break the social contract and divide in an uncontrolled manner.

One of the most commonly observed broken mechanisms is mutation in the gene KRAS that turns this on/off growth switch into the permanently on position.

This has been known for decades, of course. And there have been huge amounts of effort to try to develop drugs that target KRAS in cancer, but for decades it's always been thought of as 'undruggable' because of the difficulty of finding any molecules that would affect it.

This new drug, that finally treats KRAS mutated cancers, goes about it in a new way. Instead of trying to gum up the works of a single protein by sticking a small chemical in it, it effectively "glues" the KRAS protein to another protein, CypA, which keeps the switch away from reaching the normal areas where it's "on switch" activity works.

So this new drug means two things: 1) a lot of the most difficult to treat cancers are now far more treatable, and in the next 1-5 years clinical trials will tell us which cancers this particular drug works well for, 2) there's an entire new class of drug activity that everybody is chasing at this very moment, so in 5-25 years we'll likely have a huge number more of these sorts of treatments.

bad_username 2 hours ago

oh_my_goodness 2 hours ago

dyauspitr an hour ago

redleggedfrog 2 hours ago

siva7 an hour ago

It won't help... mind you this is an article from the economist. There is no such thing as a cancer "master switch", that would equal a disease master switch and that point we have solved biology.

sarchertech an hour ago

GaggiX 2 hours ago

One of the many therapies that are being developed so that you can survive longer even with the most lethal tumours.

pdar4123 2 hours ago

Please remember that science is under attack in the United States - new proposals would gut the nih even beyond the horror that is ongoing. As a scientist I am horrified and I truly hope that we don’t abandon the usas historically strong investment in the future.

fillskills 28 minutes ago

Kindly share more details

SubiculumCode 17 minutes ago

1. Trump has been trying to cut Science budgers by larger percentages for a while now. Congress has not let them.

2. NIH funding notice of awards has slowed to a crawl since Trump did not get his wish to cut Science funding.

3. Putting scientific funding under political control, instructing them to ignore the reviews conducted by peer scientists.

4. Have practically made international collaborations on grants impossible. An expert in Canada or Europe that would be great? Pretty much, too bad.

5. Pushing policies that make grants cancelable at any moment without need to have a justified reason, including potentially for exercising free speech, disagreeing with Administration doctrine, etc, or because you're ugly. This and the funding uncertainty makes planning difficult...just like business, stability/predictability matters.

6. Pushing policies that prevent funds to help cover costs of dissemination, including conference costs.

gavinray 2 hours ago

To offer context for others:

The bigger deal about this is that KRAS was considered an "undruggable" target.

Recent advancements have allowed us to design biologics to do things we previously thought impossible, which broadens the horizons for other treatments in the future.

Baby steps.

Nippon_anzai an hour ago

What's next then?

SubiculumCode 12 minutes ago

Other cancers, obesity, name it.

ispeters 3 hours ago

fhdkweig 3 hours ago

The relevant line is:

"oncologists went wild over the results of a drug called daraxonrasib."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daraxonrasib

plmpsu an hour ago

Does anyone have a link to the conference session?

variety8675 3 hours ago

The study this article references is here: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06625320

btown 33 minutes ago

Another ongoing HN thread from yesterday around some exciting cancer treatment breakthroughs, this time with a CRISPR Cas12a2 mechanism: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48505231

This subthread there is a fascinating explainer about one user's journey into funding and incentivizing research into their own rare form of blood cancer, and how they are able to push forward the state of the art: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48506997 - something of a modern-day (and more accurate) Lorenzo's Oil!

an0malous 2 hours ago

I’m surprised Michael Levin’s research hasn’t expanded much beyond a certain YouTube media bubble. They’re able to start and stop cancer growth with only voltage changes between cells, likewise they can also trigger regeneration or anatomical changes using voltage changes. His research seems to suggest a lot of important anatomical plans are stored in an electric field around the body, not in the DNA. This model’s explanation for cancer is that some cells become disconnected from this field and start growing independently of the overall body plan.

neonstatic 2 hours ago

I love his work (even though I know little more than what he says in interviews). I am also surprised it's not more widely known / applied. I am very skeptical of conspiracy-minded thinking, so I'd much rather assume his and his team's work hasn't reached escape velocity from obscurity. Especially with larger industries, it takes time and significant breakthroughs to become "a household name", so to speak.

DivingForGold 3 hours ago

Thanks for posting useful link !