I'm very pleased to see this viewpoint. The breast cancer 'conversation' has indeed changed from the 1970s but it's also morphed into a perverted kind of awareness that has commercialized and branded a serious disease beyond recognition. The discussion needs to change again and reel the merrymakers back to reality. I don't disagree that we must embrace and celebrate the successes --- but as you point out, the promises have been oversold. People don't like to think of recurrence and remain blissfully unaware that this can even happen from a Stage 0 or Stage 1 diagnosis because metastasis is not fully understood. I hope that you and your colleagues continue to right the ship.
As you pointed out Dr. Len, the implications of the research "also points out the incredible complexity of the disease." The research is incredibly complex. One of the questions raised about separating the real signals from the background "chatter" is that patients will think because they are being completely genotyped, this will give all the answers needed for information in significant drug selection value.
What is more important than what genes are in the DNA, is what genes are actively making RNA, which RNA is actively making protein, which protein is being turned off or turned on, and how all of the proteins in the cell are interacting with each other. The only way to get the latter information, which is ultimately what you want, is to treat the patient with phenotype analysis.
Yes, the research is exciting, but as you have said, the path remains long and arduous. The American Association of Cancer Research (AACR) is the premier cancer research organization for basic and translational research. Their focus is often geared toward PhD level scientific discovery. Their meetings provide the most informative insights into therapy options that may not arrive in the clinical arena for many years.
At a recent AACR meeting, one laboratory oncologist commented that he was not sure he heard the word "chemotherapy" a single time. That is, all of the alphabet soup combinations that make up sessions at other venues, are nowhere to be found at the AACR meeting. Instead, targeted agents, genomics, proteomics and the growing field of metabolomics reign supreme.
Much like genomics aims to unravel the structure of the genome, metabolomics focuses on understanding the many small molecule metabolites that result from a cell's metabolic processes. For research, the study of metabolomics provides the means to measure the effects of a variety of stimuli on individual cells, tissues, and bodily fluids.
By studying how their metabolic profiles change with the introduction of chemicals or the expression of known genes, researchers can more effectively study the immediate impact of disease, nutrition, pharmaceutical treatment, and genetic modifications while using a systems biology approach.
As you pointed out Dr. Len, the implications of the research "also points out the incredible complexity of the disease." The research is incredibly complex. One of the questions raised about separating the real signals from the background "chatter" is that patients will think because they are being completely genotyped, this will give all the answers needed for information in significant drug selection value.
What is more important than what genes are in the DNA, is what genes are actively making RNA, which RNA is actively making protein, which protein is being turned off or turned on, and how all of the proteins in the cell are interacting with each other. The only way to get the latter information, which is ultimately what you want, is to treat the patient with phenotype analysis.
Yes, the research is exciting, but as you have said, the path remains long and arduous. The American Association of Cancer Research (AACR) is the premier cancer research organization for basic and translational research. Their focus is often geared toward PhD level scientific discovery. Their meetings provide the most informative insights into therapy options that may not arrive in the clinical arena for many years.
At a recent AACR meeting, one laboratory oncologist commented that he was not sure he heard the word "chemotherapy" a single time. That is, all of the alphabet soup combinations that make up sessions at other venues, are nowhere to be found at the AACR meeting. Instead, targeted agents, genomics, proteomics and the growing field of metabolomics reign supreme.
Much like genomics aims to unravel the structure of the genome, metabolomics focuses on understanding the many small molecule metabolites that result from a cell's metabolic processes. For research, the study of metabolomics provides the means to measure the effects of a variety of stimuli on individual cells, tissues, and bodily fluids.
By studying how their metabolic profiles change with the introduction of chemicals or the expression of known genes, researchers can more effectively study the immediate impact of disease, nutrition, pharmaceutical treatment, and genetic modifications while using a systems biology approach.
No comments:
Post a Comment