Linda on a Thames bridge
Her back is toward Windsor castle.
She looks forward toward Eton College, where the battle of Waterloo was won.
As many of
you know, I am currently in Borrego Springs, CA. Borrego Springs is located in the middle of a
vast park, the Anza Borrego Desert State Park.
Our state park is the largest in the United States, beating out South
Dakota’s Custer State Park by the area of one buffalo wallow. Custer is famous for bison; we are famous for
fossils (including fossil bison). Most
of my social life here in B.S. stems from participation in the ABDSP
Paleontology Society. We are a
more-or-less dedicated group of more-or-less enthusiastic amateurs, who help
the Park find, retrieve, clean up and repair, classify, and catalog – old bones
and such things, which range in age back some 20 million years. I
joined the group ten or so years ago, chiefly because I enjoyed the field work
– hiking all over the desert, looking for fossils. But that was awhile back. Now I have the energy and strength of a
louse, as well as a balance problem that prevents me from clambering around
over rough terrain. I can still work in
the lab and, of course, give geology lectures, but – let’s face it, I am a
determent in the field. Phooey!
Why am I
telling you this? Well, the main reason
is to have something to do until the evening news comes on and I can have my
vodka and grapefruit- juice cocktail. But, also, I experienced an epiphany
yesterday. I went out with a dozen or so
fellow enthusiasts to survey a bleak and seldom-visited place called June Wash. It didn’t take me long to realize that I was
a net loss to the group. Vastly too much
energy was expended in making sure the old man didn’t kill himself. We found almost nothing. Who knows: if the group had been looking for
fossils instead of making sure I was still alive, maybe we would have found the
Park’s first mastodon? Why should you
care? Because I have officially
renounced field work. Instead, I intend
to write more blogs, and cram even more cancer biology down your throats. That’s why.
Okay, time
for Lester Holt*. Heavy biology ahead
tomorrow.
Now is tomorrow, and you are going to be fascinated by the
following biological concepts:
Immune checkpoint
proteins and their inhibitors.
Cytotoxic T
lymphocytes, sometimes known as Killer T cells.
Tumor-infiltrating
myeloid cells.
(And if you quit reading here, you are a wimp.)
This blog was stimulated by an article – “Compugen Presents
New Results Supporting CGEN-15049 as Potential Cancer Immunotherapy Target” -
published in an Israeli business journal which reports on a presentation at a
cancer conference in Banff, Canada. I
didn’t understand it. However, mining
the internet for several hours brought me this far along the path to
understanding:
The natural immune system consists of various cells,
including Killer T-cells, the task of which is to patrol the body and destroy
(“lyse”) any cell it finds there that doesn’t belong. These beat cops of the bloodstream do not
“lyse” normal cells, because these benign cells are covered with something
called a checkpoint protein, whereas nasty invading cells are bare of such
defenses. Maliciously, cancer cells also
can sport these proteins, which are called “checkpoints”, for some reason. A very important checkpoint protein is called
PD-L1, poetically termed the Programmed Death Ligand 1. If you are an innocent little liver cell,
for instance, that finds itself without a coating of PD-L1, you are toast: the
immune system will devour you. Cancers
have plenty of external markers that identify them as something that ought to
be devoured, but they also can produce a plethora of checkpoint proteins that deceive the immune cops and thus allow the cancer cell to avoid death.
Checkpoint inhibitors are designed to reduce the abundance of these
checkpoint proteins, thus allowing the cancer cell to be identified, and eaten,
by such things as our Killer T Cells.
And what of tumor-infiltrating myeloid
cells? Well, the correct answer to that
question is, damned if I know. Myeloid
cells are essential to the production of blood, and these tumor-infiltrating things
are needed for “angiogenesis”, which refers to the construction of blood
vessels throughout the tumor. Kill the
myeloid cells and the tumor dies a horrible death – I guess. So maybe these checkpoint inhibitors do a
number on the myeloid cells, too.
At several
places in all these articles I ran on the observation that, although these inhibitor-based
therapies help, they are not a cure. The thrust of research now seems to be, why? Also, can we fix that?
But to end optimistically: Here is a quotation from the article I will
attempt to send you to: With genetic sampling of individual cancers,
in the future (around 2025) a patient may be able to get custom-crafted
combinations of therapies that rapidly and totally eliminates any particular
cancer.” As I said in an earlier blog: make it so.
Easy reading:
Easy reading:
http://www.openicon.com/biotech/glossary/checkpoint.html
* I like Lester, but I wish it were Brian. Oh, Lord - what a screw-up!
* I like Lester, but I wish it were Brian. Oh, Lord - what a screw-up!
Look at Linda's red hair! Good blog--easy for me to understand with my non-scientific mind.
ReplyDeleteLook at Linda's red hair! Good blog--easy for me to understand with my non-scientific mind.
ReplyDeleteVery interesting interview with a guy who is making important progress in immunotherapy. Read it. You'll be glad you did.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/03/science/arming-the-immune-system-against-cancer.html?smprod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share
More on angiotherapy. Starve the damned things of their blood supply.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.onclive.com/publications/contemporary-oncology/2015/April-2015/Antiangiogenesis-Agents-in-Ovarian-Cancer
More on checkpoint inhibitors. As of today (May 23rd 2015) 32 of you have read this “essay”. For those of you who read below the line “And if you quit reading here, you are a wimp” there will be little new here. For the rest of you, here is a chance to learn something, albeit painfully.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/19/science/human-ingenuity-takes-on-the-bodys-darwinian-ways.html?_r=0
I find much of this essay extremely irritation. Using “Darwinism” to mean natural selection bothers me. I also recoil from regarding natural selection as an “algorithm”. I don’t like the concept of “blindly shuffling DNA letters” to produce all of earth’s 10 million species.” Blindly shuffling” reminds me of a family game of dominoes. Too much cutesy here, for my tastes. But hell, this is a writer for the NY Times and I’m only a small time blogger. So what do I know?
Well, immunotherapy in the form of checkpoint inhibitors doesn’t seem to be on the fast track, more’s the pity.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.onclive.com/conference-coverage/CFS-2015/immunotherapy-not-ready-for-prime-time-in-ovarian-cancer
New article on immunotherapy. Informative, easy to read, but a bit discouraging:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.scientificamerican.com/article/cancer-immunotherapy-the-cutting-edge-gets-sharper/
Another take on immunotherapy
ReplyDeletehttp://alumni.stanford.edu/get/page/magazine/article/?article_id=83001
Much more in checkpoint inhibitors. Useful/
ReplyDeletehttp://www.cancer.gov/news-events/cancer-currents-blog/2015/gulley-checkpoint