[HN Gopher] Unconventional Case Study of Neoadjuvant Oncolytic V...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Unconventional Case Study of Neoadjuvant Oncolytic Virotherapy for
       Breast Cancer
        
       Author : Amezarak
       Score  : 79 points
       Date   : 2024-09-06 16:20 UTC (2 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.mdpi.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.mdpi.com)
        
       | v3ss0n wrote:
       | Really facinating. Using Virus to cure cancer.
       | 
       | Just like from I Am Legend movie.
       | 
       | ``` The movie opens with a scene of Dr. Alice Krippin, who
       | created the virus to cure cancer, discussing her work. Krippin
       | states that 10,009 clinical trials were completed and all of the
       | participants were successfully cured. However, it is later
       | discovered that the virus is lethal.
       | 
       | A genetically modified measles virus kills most humans and turns
       | some people into mutant creatures.
       | 
       | ```
       | 
       | I hope it wont end up like `I Am Legend` movie. How long those
       | research are being there , the movie script is a coincidence?
        
         | aplummer wrote:
         | This is the real world where science has redefined life
         | expectancy and saves millions of lives a year, not a fictional
         | will smith movie.
        
         | folli wrote:
         | That's not the point, oncolytic viruses have been researched
         | since the 1950s.
         | 
         | The fascinating thing is that this has been done in a self-
         | experiment with viruses grown in her own lab.
        
       | ldayley wrote:
       | This is a fascinating area of research in general, but what's
       | notable here is that the researcher herself was afflicted with
       | the tumors and self-administered these experimental treatments!
        
       | folli wrote:
       | The science is not new, but the reason why this paper is raising
       | some eyebrows is the following:
       | 
       | Institutional Review Board Statement
       | 
       | This is a case of self-experimentation. As such, it does not
       | require ethics committee review [33,34,35]. The study was
       | feasible only due to the unique situation in which the patient
       | was also an expert virologist. The patient was fully aware of her
       | illness as well as of available therapies, and as a scientist in
       | the field of virology, she was aware of the potential of
       | oncolytic virotherapy. After two recurrences of the same tumour,
       | she wanted to try an innovative approach in a scientifically
       | sound way. Her oncologists (the leading oncologists in Croatia
       | for breast cancer) accepted to monitor the progress of the
       | treatment, primarily with the aim of discontinuing the injections
       | and intervening with conventional therapy if there were untoward
       | effects or if the tumour progressed.
        
         | kortex wrote:
         | Definitely eyebrow raising but I'm always a fan of a bit of
         | "mad scientist" self-experimentation (within reason), whether
         | it be Barry Marshall chugging H. pylori or Thought Emporium
         | giving himself lactase gene therapy.
        
       | pazimzadeh wrote:
       | > The patient, who is also an expert virologist, anticipating
       | that the recurrent tumour would be of TNBC phenotype for which
       | therapies of only limited efficacies exist, informed her
       | oncologists that she was going to treat this tumour by the i.t.
       | administration of viruses similar to oncolytic viruses (that were
       | in clinical development for BC) before undergoing any other
       | treatment.
       | 
       | Really smart to use the viral therapy before chemotherapy, since
       | chemotherapy dampens the immune system, and the immune system
       | probably promotes further tumor clearance once the tumors soften
       | and are full of viruses.
        
         | trhway wrote:
         | Yes, the catch-22 mentioned in the article is that the clinical
         | studies are done on late stage patients with usually at that
         | point severely damaged immune system which of course wouldn't
         | produce desired effect especially if it is about using virus to
         | cause flooding of the tumor with the immune response cells and
         | not about virus directly attacking cancer cells. Also in the
         | metastatic late stage one can imagine it isn't really possible
         | to inject each tumor.
        
       | Galatians4_16 wrote:
       | Cool, but how can we hack this?
        
         | seism wrote:
         | With a Hackathon! And a couple of cohorts, just to be on the
         | safe side.
        
       | Filligree wrote:
       | So the treatment worked, and she appears to be recovered from
       | what might otherwise have been treatment-resistant, fatal cancer.
       | 
       | But she was only able to do so because of having the skill and
       | access needed to self-administer the cure. How many people die
       | every year because we don't dare risk any deaths from uncertain
       | treatments like these? Sure, they aren't ever going to be
       | perfect, but- what's the _net_?
        
         | admissionsguy wrote:
         | For this reason I have mixed feelings concerning Richard
         | Scolyer's glioblastoma treatment. On one hand it's great that
         | he has possibly found something that works and will in time
         | become the new standard of care. At the same time it is
         | disturbing that thousands of patients who are not renowned
         | scientists have to die without a chance to try the same
         | treatment.
        
           | teyc wrote:
           | You make a good point. Could there be a case for new ethical
           | considerations to be made. The issue is patients are very
           | vulnerable and no one really knows how bad the downside may
           | be. A prolonged agonising or disabling death can be far
           | worse.
        
           | melling wrote:
           | It is disturbing. For some reason it's not disturbing enough
           | that we spend more to try and cure these diseases.
           | 
           | The Last Lecture was given almost 20 years ago. Pancreatic
           | cancer is just as deadly today.
           | 
           | https://youtu.be/ji5_MqicxSo?si=bn6VBPaWraUfO-zC
        
         | daveguy wrote:
         | There is a lot of leeway (in the US) for treatment of terminal
         | diseases with the Right to Try Act:
         | 
         | https://www.fda.gov/patients/learn-about-expanded-access-and...
        
           | o11c wrote:
           | And unfortunately, that leads to a _lot_ of wasted money. It
           | 's practically a scam, preying on the helpless.
        
             | Laaas wrote:
             | It's a scam to be able to try experimental treatments for
             | your otherwise fatal disease?
        
         | arcticbull wrote:
         | The counter-argument is "how many more would die if we just let
         | desperate people yolo on themselves." Which brings us back to
         | the current compromise solutions.
        
           | BriggyDwiggs42 wrote:
           | We probably should let them if they've exhausted other
           | options right?
        
             | melling wrote:
             | Let them what? Enroll in a clinical trial? Buy drugs from
             | some website?
             | 
             | Get a PhD to try and cure their own disease?
             | 
             | https://www.wired.com/story/sleep-no-more-crusade-genetic-
             | ki...
        
               | wslh wrote:
               | I believe the main point is to allow the patient to
               | choose from a set of treatments. Correct me if I'm wrong,
               | but isn't this already happening at some level, where
               | patients receive treatments that are in advanced stages
               | of drug trials?
               | 
               | I imagine there could be other options available, and
               | many times the issues are related to logistics,
               | bureaucracy, and corruption. For instance, many people
               | around the world go hungry due to logistical challenges
               | (e.g., political interference) [1].
               | 
               | It seems we accept the status quo, while some companies
               | are sending cheaper spacecraft into space.
               | 
               | [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/NoStupidQuestions/comments/z
               | ye4gm/w...
        
               | melling wrote:
               | People can enroll in clinical trials.
               | 
               | https://clinicaltrials.gov/
        
             | bawolff wrote:
             | I think the main worry is scam artists who essentially pray
             | on desperate people with "cures" that do nothing at best
             | and shorten their lives at worse.
             | 
             | I'm fine with letting people try whatever they want if
             | there are no other options (their life, although informed
             | consent is tricky) however i dont think we should allow
             | marketing such things to patients or allow anyone making
             | money off it.
        
         | melling wrote:
         | I think I've been hearing this argument for the last 40 years.
         | How many miracle cures have we missed? None
         | 
         | If you really want to cure cancer, and other diseases like ALS,
         | etc, invest the money and resources necessary to do it.
        
       | nyanpasu64 wrote:
       | Who was injecting the tumor? I'm squeamish enough I can't imagine
       | being able to inject myself, let alone into a tumor...
        
       | TexanFeller wrote:
       | This is particularly interesting to me because someone very close
       | to me is in treatment for fairly advanced BC. While it might not
       | be in time to help her, it's exciting that someone is finally
       | trying something very different than the normal approaches.
       | Breast cancer treatment has continually advanced, but with only
       | slow incremental progress, and where treatment is now still feels
       | extremely primitive. In addition to having potentially life
       | threatening or quality of life destroying side effects most
       | normal treatments provide only moderate increase in lifespan
       | unless you're lucky enough to have early chemo clear it 100%. As
       | I understand it hormone blocker therapy and the *mab drugs used
       | in stage four usually lose effectiveness as the cancer mutates,
       | such as to not depend on the presence of hormones to grow.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-09-08 23:00 UTC)