Cancer Cells Become Normal With a Bit of Tweaking
When certain signals in a cell start to alter and change, the cells undergo unusual levels of growth which result in tumors. That’s all cancer really is…an unusual level of cell growth which results in a growth that can kill a person. There are treatments for cancer, such as radiation and chemotherapy which targets and tries to destroy the cells that are growing in an unusual level. However, that doesn’t always do it and it doesn’t get to the root of the problem: getting control of that signal that alters the growth of the cells.
Using rats, scientists have started to experiment and find a way in which they can find the ideal level of Myc (a signaling molecule that had a direct connection in the growth of cells). Basically, if Myc is too low, the cells start to die out and if Myc is too high, the cells start to grow larger with no control and they become tumors. In the past, scientists had experimented with just turning the Myc molecule off; however, they found that cells actually needed this to survive, so it was proven that turning it off just wouldn’t be a good idea.
What they did realize, though, was that when they tweaked the Myc molecule and just lowered the levels below the threshold that caused tumor growth, the cells actually returned to normal size. For any scientist, this was probably a very exciting thing. The importance of finding this threshold was pivotal because Myc exists in both healthy and unhealthy cells. By figuring out what level was suitable for normal cells and what levels would trigger tumor growth, scientists are now able to figure out a medication that could be used for cancer treatment.
The way I see it, this is a really great way to try and cure cancer. High levels of Myc is the cause of 50% of cancers. If a drug were introduced that somehow lowered these levels below the threshold, the cells would naturally return to normal and start dying normally. However, the thing that scientists need to be careful of is lowering it too much. If the Myc is turned off completely, the cells will die. It’ll be a bit of trial and error I am sure to try and find a way to lower the Myc effectively without lowering it too much.
If you liked this post, consider subscribing to our RSS feed to stay up to date on the latest biological news.
carol hartford Says:
Very interesting article.
Posted on July 3rd, 2008 at 12:41 am
Al Says:
Handy, and way to get a new blog on digg.
Posted on July 3rd, 2008 at 12:50 am
Jacob Says:
Thanks a lot, Carol. Thanks a lot, Al.
Posted on July 3rd, 2008 at 12:52 am
JImmy Johnson Says:
Wow, you just got love tweaking huh? Tweakign is so cool.
JT
http://www.FireMe.To/udi
Posted on July 3rd, 2008 at 12:56 am
Jason Says:
You need to be careful with your writing. The original article states that 50% of cancers have elevated levels of Myc (and it contributes to its carcinogenicity), and you got ahead stating its the cause.
Your simplification of cancer is a bit basic, cancel cells not only proliferate uncontrollably, but they also lose (or become severely altered form) their original function.
You seem to be very enthusiastic, but you need to make sure you’re writing is up to scratch, because at the moment its very basic from a scientific standpoint.
(full disclosure: I’m a biochemist)
Posted on July 3rd, 2008 at 1:04 am
Philip Shropshire Says:
What causes the other 50 percent of cancers?
Posted on July 3rd, 2008 at 1:11 am
Jacob Says:
Thanks a lot, Jason. I’m still trying to figure out what level to write at, whether to make it more detailed (for people like you) or more simplistic for the average arm chair scientist. However, I do appreciate your comments.
Posted on July 3rd, 2008 at 1:13 am
Jeremy Says:
This is a really interesting discovery. Recently there has been many new potential breakthroughs just over the horizon dealing with cancer treatments. It is great to see the diversity of solutions proposed by scientists, with all the eggs not put in one basket per se. I see a very bright future for humanity, and one where science will hopefully eventually be embraced rather than feared. Thanks for the article!
Posted on July 3rd, 2008 at 1:25 am
Nick Says:
As exciting as this is, they need to proceed to combine this approach with the other novel treatments, such as targeted nanolasers and cloning the most potent T cells, to find the most potent combination of the batch.
Posted on July 3rd, 2008 at 1:33 am
Jenna Says:
I was wondering what the paper is? I would really like to look it up.
Someone asked what caused the other 50% of cancers. Many things cause cancer, including environmental factors (like polution, over exposure to carcinogens (read: cancer causing agents like some cleaning prodects, asbestos, etc), sun) and also genetic predisposition. Some people have genes that make them more likely to get cancer. Over years, your DNA (what makes up everything in side of you and makes your proteins keeping you going!) has to be copied a lot. If there is an error in copying (there are millions of letters to copy in the cell making up the DNA) then you can make something wrong and this can cause cancer. p53 is the cell “gaurdian” and looks out for these copying errors. If it finds them it can help to fix it. If this gets damaged (from miscopying or other factors) this is a leading problem in cancer because nothing keeps the cells in check.
This was really interesting and I hope to read the paper!
(note: I’m a biochemistry university student and worked for the cancer society)
Posted on July 3rd, 2008 at 1:41 am
mark Says:
Other than leukemia, around 7 mutations in ones DNA is necessary to present a problem and metastasize . p53 is a huge huge player in cancerous cells, which when mutated the outlook will look grim.
I just found your blog on digg.com and this is tight, i graduated 1 year ago from molecular bio and i sure will come back to see some more news. I realized how much i forgot when i read things like this.
Posted on July 3rd, 2008 at 3:07 am
jonas Says:
Hello! Thank you for your interesting thoughts. Could you please provide links to supporting literature?
Posted on July 3rd, 2008 at 4:09 am
Dr. Dre Says:
Oncogenes oncoginize and Tumor Suppressors get f’d up. Like ya Gate Keeps e.g. masterbrake pfity3 or Tumor Suppressors. Myc, sis, ras, ABL, p27, MSH2, Brca, ect. ect. oh my!!
Posted on July 5th, 2008 at 12:31 am
Ashleyd Says:
yeah this is really great, I guess that means theres going to be new additions of textbooks that i have to buy
AD
http://sensicology.wordpress.com/
Posted on July 5th, 2008 at 7:35 pm
sunny beach Says:
I thought that scientists didn’t know what cause cancer, or thought there was no specific cause, and now this guy is saying its a result of a simple raising of the level of myc in your system. It seems that if true, someone should have thought of this before. All the same, I hope it is.
Posted on July 6th, 2008 at 6:58 pm
lex13 Says:
Gr8 intermediate. is there another more in depth version of this publication avail. yet? If no, then I’d also be interested in the links already requested by Jonas. B4 I forget… thank you Jenna for your plugging in the factors that make up the other 50% of the causes
P.S.
Any links regarding Matrix regenerative tissue??? Particularly regarding its use with treating cancer patients/survivors.
Many Thanks & Best Regards,
Alex
Posted on July 10th, 2008 at 1:31 pm
Health Quiz Says:
Nice post on health in particular on cancer.People need such informative posts on internet.
Posted on July 15th, 2008 at 11:00 am
Massimiliano Says:
Hi all,
yes it is just known that myc it’s an oncogene and so a “stop” of its mutated form could be a good target.
But in my opinion there are other important problems, such to do it in a patient.
Some cacer cell could begin resistant to the hypotetic drug that inibiths myc, and also in trasformated cells not only myc could be mutated.
Myc is a trascription factor, if genes target of myc are also mutated is not sufficient to block myc.
P.s: i find this site with stumble upon, excuse me for my english, i’m italian student
Posted on July 20th, 2008 at 7:45 am