So your corresponent was able to spend most of the past 36 hours at the prostate cancer-specific component of the “Celebration of Science” event in Washington, DC. It was interesting to observe (from a prostate cancer viewpoint) just how hard the Prostate Cancer Foundation (PCF) is now “pushing” the research community toward “quantum leaps” in their thinking.
With something like 120 young researchers, their mentors, and other speakers at the prostate cancer component of the meeting, the focus was almost exclusively on encouraging radically new ways to look at the development and management of prostate cancer … complete with presentations as varied as the following:
- One by Carl June (from the University of Pennsylvania) on the bioengineering and use of therapeutic T-cells; Dr. June and his colleagues first reported the clinical application of such science and bioengineering to effectively treat a patient with chronic lymphocytic leukemia in August 2011.
- One by Jay Schnitzer, the Director of the Defense Sciences at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), on how DARPA approaches innovation and examples of some of their more recent successes (including a four-legged “Cheetah” robot that can run at nearly 30 miles an hour — and climbing). Don’t forget that DARPA’s predecessor (ARPA) was the organization that initiated the development of the Internet … initially called ARPANET.
- Another by Charles Sawyers of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center on the process of innovation in cancer drug development. (Dr. Sawyers is the “creator” of enzalutamide — a.k.a. MDV3100 — which was approved by the FDA just a few days ago for the treatment of metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer, but this is actually the third cancer drug that Dr. Sawyers has helped to create and bring to market.)
The clear message from PCF to the researchers it is funding was ‘We have no interest in “me too” science. We want to fund concepts that are way “out of the box” in order to make truly major advances in the prevention, accurate diagnosis, and effective treatment of prostate cancer.’
It is also worth noting that the prostate cancer events were just one piece of the whole, three-day “Celebration of Science” event (coordinated by the Milken Institute and Faster Cures), that was designed to send a clear message to Congress that cutting funding for scientific and medical research would be a total disaster — economically, scientifically, and medically.
Editorial note: Prostate Cancer International thanks the Prostate Cancer Foundation and its senior staff for inviting us to these events.
Filed under: Uncategorized |
THE "NEW" PROSTATE CANCER INFOLINK 
Please tell me why more research is not being done into the work by Royal Raymond Rife.
Isn’t it fascinating about using of therapeutic T-cells in the University of Pennsylvania for advanced chronic lymphocytic leukemia? The university has also engineered T-cell trials underway for other leukaemias, as well as lymphoma, mesothelioma, myeloma and neuroblastoma. This technology is in a very early stage, but very similar to sipuleucel-T (Provenge).
How does the Penn therapy work? The treatment uses a disabled form of the HIV-1 virus to carry cancer-fighting genes into the patients’ T-cells, a type of white blood cell that fights viruses and tumors. It is the exact same process that Dendreon uses for Provenge, i.e. T cells are harvested from patients, antigen-charged T cells are reinfused into patient, and they then begin seeking out and destroying cancer cells.
“After removing the patients’ cells, the team reprogrammed them to attack tumor cells by genetically modifying them using a lentivirus vector. The vector encodes an antibody-like protein, called a chimeric antigen receptor (CAR), which is expressed on the surface of the T cells and designed to bind to a protein called CD19.
“Once the T cells start expressing the CAR, they focus all of their killing activity on cells that express CD19, which includes CLL tumor cells and normal B cells. All of the other cells in the patient that do not express CD19 are ignored by the modified T cells, which limits side effects typically experienced during standard therapies.
“The team engineered a signaling molecule into the part of the CAR that resides inside the cell. When it binds to CD19, initiating the cancer-cell death, it also tells the cell to produce cytokines that trigger other T cells to multiply — building a bigger and bigger army until all the target cells in the tumor are destroyed.”
(See this media release from the University of Pennsylvania.)
Sound familiar? In the case of Provenge (see Sheikh et al.):
“Cytokines produced by activated APCs were present in the culture media of sipuleucel-T, but not control, at weeks 0, 2, and 4 …. Elevated levels of T-cell activation associated cytokines were observed in the culture medium during the manufacture of the second and third doses …. T-cell activation cytokines were not induced when pre-culture cells were cultured with GM-CSF alone.”
This is a new paradigm in treatment of cancer and future of medicine (personalized medicine). I hope Provenge will have the same recognition like Zytiga and Xtandi I think every prostate cancer patient who has castration-resistant prostate cancer should take Provenge. It will remain in patients’ bodies for an extremely long time, maybe the rest of their lives. Now I can see why any revolutionary thing (I think Provenge is revolutionary medicine) that humans create takes time until it is recognized (and that there always will be powers that fight against these revolutionary things).
Prostate cancer patients are very lucky that they already have this treatment.
Well … One reason might be because it doesn’t work, but I am no expert. What we do know is that Rife devices are just a type of radionics device and that radionics was discredited after an extensive investigation by Scientific American before Rife ever started to develop the “Rife Frequency Generator.”
Are there some examples of new research approaches funded by PCF?
Dear Doug:
PCF funded much of the early research into enzalutamide (MDV3100). You can find reams of information about research funded by PCF on its own web site.
John R.:
After his presentation, I actually asked Carl June about the difference between the Provenge process and his technique. Evidently, he removes then engineers the actual T-cells, while Provenge removes then inoculates the dendritic cells, that stimulate the production of T-cells when re-infused … at least that’s what my notes indicate as his response.
I may well have misunderstood Dr. June … or you, but I do not believe they are the exact same processes beyond the technique of extracting one’s own cells and re-infusing them after they have been treated.
John R., Rick D.:
It is my understanding that the processes used by Dr. JUne’s group and by Dendreon are really quite different. The only similarity is that they are both forms of activated cellular therapy, but we are talking about very different cells and very different processes.