In 1993, my long-term prognosis was terrible. I reassured myself that my prognosis was based on groups of past patients who were in similar situations, and not on Wendy Harphams with blue eyes, brown hair and a freckle on the left elbow.
Now, according to a NYTimes article, scientists are moving closer to developing those needed clones.
Journalist Andew Pollack cautioned readers, quoting Dr. Edward Sausville: “It’s an act of faith to say this is a superior way of proceeding.” The technology requires months to determine which drugs should work well -- time many patients don't have to wait. And the costs are high.
One vignette about a young boy with cancer made me uncomfortable. The boy's parents paid $25K for researchers to test drugs on a mouse with their son's tumor. The good news was that the researchers determined that a cocktail of 4 specific drugs was highly effective, a combination not usually used for that tumor. How is the boy doing?
He hasn't tried the 4-drug combo yet "because he is participating in a clinical trial of an experimental drug. But if that drug does not work, his mother said, 'we have the home run in the back pocket.'”
Next post: Hoping for that home run.