I know that these kind of write-ups by universities tend to overstate the importance of research. However, it's nice to see a write up that at least on the surface goes into some fairly interesting detail and actually does NOT seem to overstate the significance or imply this will result in a single cure for cancer in just a few easy steps.
It’s nice to read these articles as someone with advanced stage testicular cancer and a 50% 5 year survival. Current treatment is chemo + surgery.<p>Really appreciate all the smart people in this field. Thank you for the work you do!
I really enjoyed this episode of Peter Attia's podcase: <a href="https://peterattiamd.com/keithflaherty2/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://peterattiamd.com/keithflaherty2/</a>. They spend a lot of time breaking down the difficulty in cancer treatment, changes over the past decade, the importance of multimodality therapy, and a lot more. A highlight was Attia's analogy to explain antigen presentation.
[not what the article is about, but related topic]<p>I first heard of dichloroacetic acid about 15 years ago - a cheap drug that also killed cancer cells by allowing mitochondria to induce apoptosis in the cancer cells and not in healthy cells.<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dichloroacetic_acid#Cancer" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dichloroacetic_acid#Cancer</a><p>It doesn't appear to have gotten a lot of research into what would be a safe dosage, seemingly because it's an old drug that can no longer be patented.
It seems like every week there is a new story about some strategy or breakthrough that holds promise to treat or cure cancer, yet we're still stuck with the same treatments, mainly chemo, surgery, and radiation, and generally low survival rates for advanced cancers. Immunotherapy has been hyped for decades yet far from being a cure. Maybe one day it will happen.