Thoughts?: futurism.com/neoscope/cance... - Advanced Prostate...

Advanced Prostate Cancer

23,510 members28,871 posts

Thoughts?

Yzinger profile image
10 Replies

futurism.com/neoscope/cance...

Written by
Yzinger profile image
Yzinger
To view profiles and participate in discussions please or .
10 Replies
MelodyCat profile image
MelodyCat

First, let me say that I am pleased that something other than surgery, chemo and radiation is being researched. mRNA holds some promise here but there are a few challenges relevant to PCa. PCa is resistant to immunotherapy because it doesn’t posses many Tcell receptors which support an immune response. That doesn’t mean it won’t work but it may not be robust. PCa is classified as a solid tumor which also makes it harder to combat…but not impossible. The biggest problem is that advanced PCa is “heterogeneous” meaning that multiple cell lines will exist all at the same time. mRNA is more of a lock and key approach that matches an antibody to a specific DNA/RNA. Maybe they will be able to manufacture multiple versions at one time. I think the best news is for the guys with neuroendocrine exposure since the SOC approaches don’t work well but this might. Even better if they can target the cells lines that are stem-like/senescent that are the real drivers of metastasis. End metastasis and dying from this disease may go away!

Another even more promising approach uses portions of existing proteins called peptides. Cell penetrating peptides could be developed that target only cancer cells and transport cytotoxic payloads and/or perturb these cells on their own. Certain peptides possess a positive surface charge whereas cancer cells have a negative membrane charge due to lipid inversion. Talk about selectivity! Nothing has made it to clinical stages, for reasons that would be controversial, but innovation is hard to keep down. I am really hoping for the word “cure” to replace treatment someday and also hope to be alive when it does.

MrProstate profile image
MrProstate in reply toMelodyCat

You sound like you may have a medical background of some kind.

Why is it that research seems so frustratingly disjointed.

One lab observes that prostate cancer cells that have been genetically altered so as not to produce exosomes can elicit immune responses and immune memory even against wild type cancer cells. Even their transient presence is enough to achieve this.

Another lab is investigating T cells for immunotherapy. Why not use CD 4 and CD 8 positive t memory stem cells from peripheral bloodstream and expose them to such exosome deficient cancer cells?

Interestingly the prostate cancer exosomes express high levels of PD1 unlike the cancer cells . When one considers that each cell can produce as much as 10000 exosomes that traffic to lymphatics is it any wonder that checkpoint inhibitors don’t work.

Teach T memory stem cells to recognise as yet unidentified proteins and peptides by exposing them to “naked cancer cells “ ie exosome deficient cells.

Exosomes cause epigenetic changes in cells. In my view whatever epigenetic reprogramming is been done to immune cells by cancer exosomes it can’t be a good thing.

Using T memory stem cells from peripheral bloodstream means they are less likely to have been damaged by exosomes . They are also less likely to be exhausted particularly since they are undifferentiated cells.

MelodyCat profile image
MelodyCat in reply toMrProstate

My education is all in finance and my interest in cancer started with trying to find companies investigating novel cancer therapies which grew into a multi-decade interest in the subject as a forever science nerd and friendships with local researchers. I am intrigued by cancer’s wiley multiple defense mechanisms and would love to crush all of them!

I like your focus on exosomes, since they appear to be responsible for cell-to-cell communications and connection to angiogenesis/mets under hypoxia and more. Employing CD4 and CD8 glycoproteins with memory stem cells sounds enticing as well. Defeating cancer requires a multi-disciplinary approach. I get frustrated by how few times PCa cells have been subjected to ADT prior to testing (especially with nutraceuticals) and the overuse of short term testing with TRAMP mice.

You are right in that the research efforts are disjointed. Labs do not collaborate accross or within labs. Part of the reason is that research has become, in many ways, a publishing effort rather than a solutions effort. This is confounded by funding by organizations that either are less informed or don’t really have motivations for cures. Think of the impact on industries, Social Security and pensions if a cure for most cancers is acheived. Just sayin’? Innovation, stymied by an education system that doesn’t encourage independent thought, will still prevail but a slowed rate.

MrProstate profile image
MrProstate in reply toMelodyCat

“research has become, in many ways, a publishing effort rather than a solutions effort. This is confounded by funding by organizations that either are less informed or don’t really have motivations for cures.”

My sentiment exactly.

Ian99 profile image
Ian99

It’s always encouraging to read about PCa vaccine research. The sheer complexity of it is daunting, as evidenced by posts from MelodyCat and MrProstate. I hope one day to see a means of personalising treatment. Thanks for posting.

NecessarilySo profile image
NecessarilySo

How about fighting cancer with cancer... getting cancer cells to mutate into normal cells. It's a thought.🙃

TuffNuttoCrack profile image
TuffNuttoCrack in reply toNecessarilySo

newatlas.com/cancer/cancer-...

Yzinger profile image
Yzinger in reply toTuffNuttoCrack

Fascinating. It seems to me we are seeing more and more "hopeful" articles.

NecessarilySo profile image
NecessarilySo in reply toTuffNuttoCrack

Amazing!

Professorgary profile image
Professorgary

Very interesting article. Last fall my psa and alp were rising. I was getting xgeva every three months. A month after the shot alp was in mid 60s, mid 70s two months after shot and mid to high eighties on the day of the injection just before injection. It was December and first results were metabolic profile that showed my alp that should have been mid 80s was actually 63. PSA test showed a 30% drop as well. I then found out through research that the spike protein in the Sars 2 vaccine for covid kills prostate cancer cells. I had my covid shot 5 weeks earlier. When I mentioned it to my mo he told me it was an outlier and that happens. Yes it does but the drop in alp makes me doubt it was just an outlier. Rest assured when I get my next covid shot I’ll be watching. I guess I’ll have to send an email to Duke University Hospital and inform them that my mo says the spike protein from the sars 2 vaccine doesn’t kill prostate cancer calls.

Not what you're looking for?

You may also like...

Night Thoughts

Due to heart issues that began 2 years after RALP in 2015, I decided to hold on therapy and didn’t...
Beach18 profile image

Radium223 thoughts?

Radium223 instead of Cabitaxcel, since my mets are in the bone - and doxetaxcel did not prove...

Morning thoughts

Everything is a blessing, The morning light on the face of my wife and her sleepy smile when I...
Todd1963 profile image

Your thoughts?

Hi: I'm 63 and a 7 year PC survivor (Gleason 7). Over the past 7 years I've had surgery,...
Pwjpp55 profile image

An thoughts

I am wondering. Saw 1000mg / day Zytiga standard and also men who do and have found effective 1...
katartizo61 profile image

Moderation team

Bethishere profile image
BethishereAdministrator
Number6 profile image
Number6Administrator
Darryl profile image
DarrylPartner

Content on HealthUnlocked does not replace the relationship between you and doctors or other healthcare professionals nor the advice you receive from them.

Never delay seeking advice or dialling emergency services because of something that you have read on HealthUnlocked.