PDA

View Full Version : cheap safe drug that kills most cancers?


jones
Jan 30th 2007, 11:45 PM
check out this article that a buddy sent my way....

----------------------------------

cheap safe drug kills most cancers (http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn10971-cheap-safe-drug-kills-most-cancers.html)

It sounds almost too good to be true: a cheap and simple drug that kills almost all cancers by switching off their “immortality”. The drug, dichloroacetate (DCA), has already been used for years to treat rare metabolic disorders and so is known to be relatively safe.

It also has no patent, meaning it could be manufactured for a fraction of the cost of newly developed drugs.

Evangelos Michelakis of the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Canada, and his colleagues tested DCA on human cells cultured outside the body and found that it killed lung, breast and brain cancer cells, but not healthy cells. Tumours in rats deliberately infected with human cancer also shrank drastically when they were fed DCA-laced water for several weeks.

DCA attacks a unique feature of cancer cells: the fact that they make their energy throughout the main body of the cell, rather than in distinct organelles called mitochondria. This process, called glycolysis, is inefficient and uses up vast amounts of sugar.

Until now it had been assumed that cancer cells used glycolysis because their mitochondria were irreparably damaged. However, Michelakis’s experiments prove this is not the case, because DCA reawakened the mitochondria in cancer cells. The cells then withered and died (Cancer Cell, DOI: 10.1016/j.ccr.2006.10.020).

Michelakis suggests that the switch to glycolysis as an energy source occurs when cells in the middle of an abnormal but benign lump don’t get enough oxygen for their mitochondria to work properly (see diagram). In order to survive, they switch off their mitochondria and start producing energy through glycolysis.

Crucially, though, mitochondria do another job in cells: they activate apoptosis, the process by which abnormal cells self-destruct. When cells switch mitochondria off, they become “immortal”, outliving other cells in the tumour and so becoming dominant. Once reawakened by DCA, mitochondria reactivate apoptosis and order the abnormal cells to die.

“The results are intriguing because they point to a critical role that mitochondria play:

they impart a unique trait to cancer cells that can be exploited for cancer therapy,” says Dario Altieri, director of the University of Massachusetts Cancer Center in Worcester.

The phenomenon might also explain how secondary cancers form. Glycolysis generates lactic acid, which can break down the collagen matrix holding cells together. This means abnormal cells can be released and float to other parts of the body, where they seed new tumours.

DCA can cause pain, numbness and gait disturbances in some patients, but this may be a price worth paying if it turns out to

be effective against all cancers. The next step is to run clinical trials of DCA in people with cancer. These may have to be funded by charities, universities and governments: pharmaceutical companies are unlikely to pay because they can’t make money on unpatented medicines. The pay-off is that if DCA does work, it will be easy to manufacture and dirt cheap.

Paul Clarke, a cancer cell biologist at the University of Dundee in the UK, says the findings challenge the current assumption that mutations, not metabolism, spark off cancers. “The question is: which comes first?” he says.

Melody
Jan 31st 2007, 02:32 AM
Certainly sounds encouraging. I just hope the scam artists don't take it and run with it.:no:

Corbin
Jan 31st 2007, 02:55 AM
i dont feel like reading it, but i will say this. there has been lots of cures for cancer, but they have all been stoped by high power cuz theres no money in a cure. if you read the book "Natural Cures "they" dont want you to know about" you will see that there has been lots of cures for things that are "uncrueble" a doctor made a liquid that would destroy cancers tumors in 60mins or less, and it only cost about 10$ to make, anyone could have got it. but it was hiden and suppressed by the drug companys and money makers.

jones
Jan 31st 2007, 09:44 AM
yes, i deffinitally believe in some cases diseases are more profitable industries researching the cure than actually helping people with it... which is sad that its come to this, but there are also things like the internet that balance that out...

which is exactly why i posted this... any step in the right direction is a good one no matter how small...

so again, gatta love the internet... secrets can't be kept forever...