good read New Yorker

Worth the read

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/09/11/cancers-invasion-equation

Denis

Curing cancer would destroy the medical services industry...The most profitable real estate in medicine is the Chemo Lounge or infusion center..

nepol said...
gosh darn it Fairwind don't sugar coat it tell it like it is!!!! NEPOL

He doesn't make this specific analogy, but I read it like this: 20 guys are exposed to ragweed. Five of them have an allergic reaction, but 15 don't. Similarly, 20 guys have Gleason 9 cancer. Five metastasize and 15 don't.

Did the guys that metastasize have something different in their bodies/immune systems? Of was it just that their cancer was more aggressive? He's advocating studying both sides of the equation.

"Evidence suggested, for example, that most men with prostate cancer would never experience metastasis. What made others susceptible? The usual approach, Welch knew, would be to look for markers in their cancer cells—to find patterns of gene activation, say, that made some of them dangerous. And the characteristics of those cells were plainly crucial. Pienta was arguing, though, that this approach was far too narrow. At least part of the answer might lie in the ecological relationship between a cancer and its host—between seed and soil."

"Most Men" are diagnosed with Gleason 6 grade cancer...Therefore, most prostate cancer victims never suffer metastasis..Unfortunately, this does not hold true for G-8, 9, 10 patients. In this case, it would seem the "seed" plays just as important a roll as the soil..

Good article!

In a general way, it raises the question about all cancers, not just PC. We've all known families where it seemed as if everyone died young of cancer of one kind or another. Why? And we all know other families where everyone seems extraordinarily long lived and who never seem to get any form of cancer. Why again?

What is going on with both groups? It has to have something to do with their individual family gene pool--not only on the genetic makeup that makes cancer more likely (like the presence of BRCA2), but also the individuals immune system. Makes sense to me.

Fairwind said...
"Evidence suggested, for example, that most men with prostate cancer would never experience metastasis. What made others susceptible? The usual approach, Welch knew, would be to look for markers in their cancer cells—to find patterns of gene activation, say, that made some of them dangerous. And the characteristics of those cells were plainly crucial. Pienta was arguing, though, that this approach was far too narrow. At least part of the answer might lie in the ecological relationship between a cancer and its host—between seed and soil."

"Most Men" are diagnosed with Gleason 6 grade cancer...Therefore, most prostate cancer victims never suffer metastasis..Unfortunately, this does not hold true for G-8, 9, 10 patients. In this case, it would seem the "seed" plays just as important a roll as the soil..

Very good point. But still, a small % of those G8-10s never met, or at least never advance clinically far enough to suffer greatly(maybe a very small % ? ), and still end up dying of something else. What is up with those guys?

EDIT: OOPS, I see Michael-T already asked the same question, maybe others also.

Post Edited (BillyBob@388) : 9/13/2017 12:25:28 PM (GMT-6)