Drug takes aim at cancer metabolism, stops most kinds of cancer

 

SLU pharmacology researchers Thomas Burris, Ph.D., and Colin Flaveny, Ph.D., discuss their cancer research. Credit: Courtesy of Saint Louis University In research published in Cancer Cell, Thomas Burris, Ph.D., chair of pharmacology and physiology at Saint Louis University, has, for the first time, found a way to stop cancer cell growth by targeting the Warburg Effect, a trait of cancer cell metabolism that scientists have been eager to exploit. Unlike recent advances in personalized medicine that focus on specific genetic mutations associated with different types of cancer, this research targets a broad principle that applies to almost every kind of cancer: its energy source. The Saint Louis University study, which was conducted in animal models and in human tumor cells in the lab, showed that a drug developed by Burris and colleagues at Scripps Research Institute can stop cancer cells without causing damage to healthy cells or leading to other severe side effects. The Warburg Effect Metabolism -- the ability to use energy -- is a feature of all living things. Cancer cells aggressively ramp up this process, allowing mutated cells to grow unchecked at the expense of surrounding tissue. "Targeting cancer metabolism has become a hot area over the past few years, though the idea is not new," Burris said. Since the early 1900s, scientists have known that cancer cells prefer to use glucose as fuel even if they have plenty of other resources available. In fact, this is how doctors use PET (positron emission tomography) scan images to spot tumors. PET scans highlight the glucose that cancer cells have accumulated. This preference for using glucose as fuel is called the Warburg effect, or glycolysis. In his paper, Burris reports that the Warburg effect is the metabolic foundation of oncogenic (cancer gene) growth, tumor progression and metastasis as well as tumor resistance to treatment. Cancer's goal: to grow and divide Cancer cells have one goal: to grow and divide as quickly as possible. And, while there are a number of possible molecular pathways a cell could use to find food, cancer cells have a set of preferred pathways. "In fact, they are addicted to certain pathways," Burris said. "They need tools to grow fast and that means they need to have all of the parts for new cells and they need new energy." "Cancer cells look for metabolic pathways to find the parts to grow and divide. If they don't have the parts, they just die," said Burris. "The Warburg effect ramps up energy use in the form of glucose to make chemicals required for rapid growth and cancer cells also ramp up another process, lipogenesis, that lets them make their own fats that they need to rapidly grow." If the Warburg effect and lipogenesis are key metabolic pathways that drive cancer progression, growth, survival, immune evasion, resistance to treatment and disease recurrence, then, Burris hypothesizes, targeting glycolysis and lipogenesis could offer a way to stop a broad range of cancers. Cutting off the energy supply Burris and his colleagues created a class of compounds that affect a receptor that regulates fat synthesis. The new compound, SR9243, which started as an anti-cholesterol drug candidate, turns down fat synthesis so that cells can't produce their own fat. This also impacts the Warburg pathway, turning cancer cells into more normal cells. SR9243 suppresses abnormal glucose consumption and cuts off cancer cells' energy supply. When cancer cells don't get the parts they need to reproduce through glucose or fat, they simply die. Because the Warburg effect is not a feature of normal cells and because most normal cells can acquire fat from outside, SR9243 only kills cancer cells and remains non-toxic to healthy cells. The drug also has a good safety profile; it is effective without causing weight loss, liver toxicity, or inflammation. Promising Results So far, SR9243 has been tested in cultured cancer cells and in human tumor cells grown in animal models. Because the Warburg pathway is a feature of almost every kind of cancer, researchers are testing it on a number of different cancer models. "It works in a wide range of cancers both in culture and in human tumors developing in animal models," Burris said. "Some are more sensitive to it than others. In several of these pathways, cells had been reprogramed by cancer to support cancer cell growth. This returns the metabolism to that of more normal cells." In human tumors grown in animal models, Burris said, "It worked very well on lung, prostate, and colorectal cancers, and it worked to a lesser degree in ovarian and pancreatic cancers." It also seems to work on glioblastoma, an extremely difficult to treat form of brain cancer, though it isn't able to cross the brain/blood barrier very effectively. The challenge for researchers in this scenario will be to find a way to allow the drug to cross this barrier, the body's natural protection for the brain, which can make it difficult for drug treatments to reach their target. And, in even more promising news, it appears that when SR9243 is used in combination with existing chemotherapy drugs, it increases their effectiveness, in a mechanism apart from SR9243's own cancer fighting ability. Story Source: The above post is reprinted from materials provided by Saint Louis University. Note: Materials may be edited for content and length. Journal Reference: Colin A. Flaveny, Kristine Griffett, Bahaa El-Dien M. El-Gendy, Melissa Kazantzis, Monideepa Sengupta, Antonio L. Amelio, Arindam Chatterjee, John Walker, Laura A. Solt, Theodore M. Kamenecka, Thomas P. Burris. Broad Anti-tumor Activity of a Small Molecule that Selectively Targets the Warburg Effect and Lipogenesis. Cancer Cell, 2015; DOI: 10.1016/j.ccell.2015.05.007

One Of The Most Important Scientists In The World: “Most Cancer Research Is Largely A Fraud”

 

“Everyone should know that most cancer research is largely a fraud, and that the major cancer research organisations are derelict in their duties to the people who support them.” (source) The above quote comes from Linus Pauling, Ph.D, and two time Nobel Prize winner in chemistry (1901-1994). He is considered one of the most important scientists in history. He is one of the founders of quantum chemistry and molecular biology, who was also a well known peace activist. He was invited to be in charge of the Chemistry division of the Manhattan Project, but refused. He has also done a lot of work on military applications, and has pretty much done and seen it all when it comes to the world of science. A quick Google search will suffice if you’d like to learn more about him. This man has been around the block, and obviously knows a thing or two about this subject. And he’s not the only expert from around the world expressing similar beliefs and voicing his opinion. Here is another great example of a hard hitting quote when it comes to scientific fraud and manipulation. It comes from Dr. Marcia Angell, a physician and long time Editor in Chief of the New England Medical Journal (NEMJ), which is considered to be one of the most prestigious peer-reviewed medical journals in the world. I apologize if you have seen it before in my articles, but it is quite the statement. “It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of the New England Journal of Medicine”  (source) The list goes on and on. Dr. John Bailer, who spent 20 years on the staff of the National Cancer Institute and is also a former editor of its journal, publicly stated in a meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science that: “My overall assessment is that the national cancer program must be judged a qualified failure. Our whole cancer research in the past 20 years has been a total failure.” (source) He also alluded to the fact that cancer treatment, in general, has been a complete failure. Another interesting point is the fact that most of the money donated to cancer research is spent on animal research, which has been considered completely useless by many. For example, in 1981 Dr. Irwin Bross, the former director of the Sloan-Kettering Cancer Research Institute (largest cancer research institute in the world), said that: “The uselessness of most of the animal model studies is less well known. For example, the discovery of chemotherapeutic agents for the treatment of human cancer is widely-heralded as a triumph due to use of animal model systems. However, here again, these exaggerated claims are coming from or are endorsed by the same people who get the federal dollars for animal research. There is little, if any, factual evidence that would support these claims. Practically all of the chemotherapeutic agents which are of value in the treatment of human cancer were found in a clinical context rather than in animal studies.” (source) Today, treating illness and disease has a corporate side. It is an enormously profitable industry, but only when geared towards treatment, not preventative measures or cures, and that’s an important point to consider. Another quote that relates to my point above was made by Dr. Dean Burk, an American biochemist and a senior chemist for the National Cancer Institute. His paper, “The Determination of Enzyme Dissociation Constants (source),” published in the Journal of the American Chemical Society in 1934, is one of the most frequently cited papers in the history of biochemistry. “When you have power you don’t have to tell the truth. That’s a rule that’s been working in this world for generations. And there are a great many people who don’t tell the truth when they are in power in administrative positions.” (source) He also stated that: “Fluoride causes more human cancer deaths than any other chemical. It is some of the most conclusive scientific and biological evidence that I have come across in my 50 years in the field of cancer research.” (source) In the April 15th, 2015 edition of Lancet, the UK’s leading medical journal, editor in chief Richard Horton stated: “The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Science has taken a turn toward darkness.” (source) n 2005 Dr. John P.A. Ioannidis, currently a professor in disease prevention at Stanford University, published the most widely accessed article in the history of the Public Library of Science (PLoS) entitled Why Most Published Research Findings Are False. In the report, he stated: “There is increasing concern that most current published research findings are false.” In 2009, the University of Michigan’s comprehensive cancer center published an analysis that revealed popular cancer studies are false, and that there were fabricated results arising due to conflicts of interest. They suggested that the fabricated results were a result of what would work best for drug companies. After all, a large portion of cancer research is funded directly by them. You can read more about that story here. There is so much information out there, and so much of it is coming from people who have been directly involved in these proceedings. There is really no shortage of credible sources willing to state that we live in a world of scientific fraud and manipulation. All of this can be attributed to the “corporatocracy” we live in today, where giant corporations owned by a select group of “elite” people have basically taken control over the planet and all of its resources. This is precisely why so many people are flocking towards alternative treatment, as well as focusing on cancer prevention. Much of what we surround ourselves with on a daily basis has been linked to cancer. Everything from pesticides, GMOs, multiple cosmetic products, certain “foods,” smoking, and much much more. This is something that is never really emphasized, we always seem to just assume that donating money to charities will make the problem go away, despite the fact that their business practices are highly questionable. That being said, so many people have had success with alternative treatments like cannabis oil – combined with a raw diet or even incorporated into their chemotherapy regimen – that we should not feel as though there is no hope for the future. The official stance on cannabis is a great example of the very practice of misinformation that I’m talking about. Its anti-tumoral properties have been demonstrated for decades, yet no clinical trials are taking place.   Free Happiness Training! Do you want to bring more happiness into your life? Happify's activities and games are based on a decade's worth of cutting-edge research by psychologists and neuroscientists from leading academic institutions around the world. Happify's exercises are personalized directly for you based on your unique goals. If you are looking to bring more peace and joy into your life this year Start out with Happify for FREE!