Money spent on cancer reasearch

Discussion in 'Science & Society' started by JoojooSpaceape, Apr 3, 2007.

  1. JoojooSpaceape Burn in hell Hippies Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    498
    first and foremost, to the people of the biology and genetics forum: does anyone know what kind of truth there is to this article , http://www.pnc.com.au/~cafmr/online/research/cancer.html . Certainly, he has plenty of references and sounds honest and sincere in his points (I'm not really focusing on the part about companies and what not) I'd rather more like to know about the prevention of cancer through the control of your environment, not smoking, maintaining a balanced diet. I had always heard that saying "Excess is the road to Cancer", any thoughts on the validity of the statement? Does anyone know a good link for the estimated ammount of money spent total on research on cancer? thanks.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    I found a speech by King George II http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/09/20020918-5.htmlin alluding to an annual budget for federal cancer research of five billion dollars. Considering that in America, the health care industry is well on its way to being socialized, it's likely that this amount is no less than half of the national total.

    The annual budget of the American Cancer Society http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/nov2003/2003-11-04e.asp is less than one billion dollars.

    It seems safe to estimate that the total expenditure on cancer research in the USA is less than ten billion dollars per year. That is chicken feed.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. BenTheMan Dr. of Physics, Prof. of Love Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,967
    I'm surprised MetaKron didn't dig up this article

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    I think if you talk to people working on cancer research, the main reason that progress is so slow is that it's a really hard problem. Just like AIDS research. I'm a bit out of my league, but from what I remember in research talks as an undergrad (lo those many years ago), cancer is a tremendously tricky problem.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,198
    The main point of this post:
    Fantastic, detailed advances are being made in cancer (and other serious medical problems) treatments in the lab now as mankind begins to understand the details of how the body's cells work. We are just starting to undersand.

    At least 2/3 of the drug companies I own* shares in have at least one drug in development for cancer. The cancers cells are rapidly growing and this means a lot of cell division, growth of new blood vessels (for the solid tumor types), relatively great energy requirements, etc. All these processes are now being understood much better (Via the internet, I see the companies present their latest advances at both medical meeting and at investor sponsored conferences - Most of these companies are always in need more money, few have products on the market, but some do self finance by either selling away part of the hoped for future profits or in a few cases, letting others used their drug research and development tools with non-exclusive licenses.

    I obviously can not go into all I have learned about this exciting field, here so will just say a few words about one of the VEGf (Vascular Endothelial Growth factor) approaches. A marketed product (Advastan) is already a big winner in this class.

    I bought company into Eye Tech, as like most of these developers of VEGf drugs it was deep into the science and the first to come to market with a product. There are six main variants of VEGf; they found the one, which is most important for control of the excessive vascularization in the retina, got FDA approval, and marketed it a “Macagen.” ($1000/ shot needed every 6 weeks to avoid going blind - In general I try also to select companies by the criteria that the drug is very attractive to the old and wealthy, as their numbers are growing much faster than the general population and they will pay a lot to not die, etc.)

    To illustrate the risk, Eye Tech no longer exists. - It was bought by OSI Pharmaceuticals (bad move) as soon Advastan hit the market and it acts on all six VEGf receptors. (Eye Tech was careful to avoid this, as the body does need to develop new blood vessels.)

    OSI is trying to recover some of the lost market by saying: "OK use Advastan to get problem under control then switch to Macagen for long term maintance as these patients tend to be old, have weak hearts, etc. and you do not want to make that problem worse by blocking all VEGf as new vessels are needed in the heart, etc. - It is too soon to know if I was wise to quickly sell the OSIP stock I got as part of their buy of Eye Tech, but looks like I was. (OSIP has some other attractive things "in the development pipeline" - might be a good long term hold.)

    Another company I own shares in, hooks a commonly used in cancer treatment systemic toxic to a molecule that is shaped like sugar. The energy hungry cancer cells "up regulate" the intake of sugar, so these "magic bullets" are preferentially taken into cancer cells. (Your will not feel terrible, be sick with hair falling out etc if this gets to market.) Once inside (it is harmless in the blood) an enzyme found only inside cells cleaves off the toxin and the cell cancer dies, but the concentration in healthy cell will be too low to kill them etc. - so it goes in theory. - They will need to get farther along in the clinical trials, then go to FDC etc. - millions more in costs yet, before anything to sell, if ever.
    -----------------------
    *Most of my financial assets are invested outside of the US as I fear the dollar will continue (even accelerate to a "run on the dollar") the current decline in value. I.e. it takes more dollars to buy most of the raw materials and energy supplies, but not much more for labor-intensive products and services. (When you think about this, it is obvious that the full impact of declining dollar is partially masked in society like the US, especially when "negative savings" is still possible, but this can not continue indefinitely.)

    Pension assets I could not get out of US (for tax reasons) are mainly tied now to TIPs which are inflation adjusted US bonds, but I have a significant portfolio of stocks still. Mainly small developmental drug companies, about 30 of them, as many will fail in their efforts for each that gains greatly in value. All were acquired in 2006 and selecting them made me look into the mechanisms by which their "magic bullets" were supposed to work. - It is new field for me and so fascinating that I am glad to be doing this even if I do not make a dime.
     
  8. Faerynght Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    143
    The drug is Avastin (bevacizumab) developed by Genentech which also manufactures bevacizumab. Bevacizumab is designed to bind to and inhibit VEGF, a protein that plays a critical role in tumor angiogenesis (the formation of new blood vessels to the tumor). It was FDA approved in 2004 for use along with 5FU in colorectal cancer and then in 2006 in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel in NSCLC. Genentech developed and manufactures Avastin.
    OSI and Genentech produced Tarceva (erlotinib). Erlotinib is a small molecule human epidermal growth factor type 1/epidermal growth factor receptor (HER1/EGFR) inhibitor which has demonstrated, in a Phase III clinical trial, an increased survival in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. It is very effective in Asian, female, non-smokers. It was also FDA approved for pancreatic cancers.

    It actually looks like Aurora Kinase Inhibitors are showing some success in avariety of cancers.
    From NCI:
    An orally bioavailable, highly selective small molecule inhibitor of the serine/threonine protein kinase Aurora A kinase with potential antineoplastic activity. Auora kinase inhibitor MLN8054 binds to and inhibits Aurora kinase A, resulting in disruption of the assembly of the mitotic spindle apparatus, disruption of chromosome segregration, and inhibition of cell proliferation. Aurora A localizes in mitosis to the spindle poles and to spindle microtubules and is thought to regulate spindle assembly. Aberrant expression of Aurora kinases occurs in a wide variety of cancers, including colon and breast cancers.

    Cancer research is very strong and there are many cause for cell mutation, they hypothesis that environmental, genetics, hormone, immunology and virology all play a factor but no one knows for sure the exact cause of the cell mutation, what pathway signals them to change and become a tumor. The pathology of each cancer is so different and the causes so varied that research is done on so many levels. Not only are they using funding for drugs but also biotechnology, radiation, surgery, vaccines, and a whole list of other modalities. You have the NCI/NIH/DOD/ACS/LLS and many other agencies paying for research as well as industry sponsored trial and development.

    European Resarch
    Published on 07 August 2006
    The European Cancer Research Funding Survey found that, across the EU, the average public spending on cancer research was €2.56 (US$3.30) per person, compared with €17.63 (US$22.76) per person in the United States. As a percentage of GDP, the USA paid four times more on cancer research than the average in Europe. These findings are presented in the Public Library of Science’s (PLoS) Medicine pages.

    Public funding for cancer research – from governments, charities, and European organisations – is crucially important to reducing the cancer burden, according to the survey’s authors, Seth Eckhouse of the European Cancer Research Managers Forum and Richard Sullivan of Cancer Research UK.

    They say this funding, focused on the needs of patients with cancer rather than commercial or economic advantage, is essential to delivering the myriad solutions that cancer demands, from new strategies for preventing it, to therapies and improvements in patients’ quality of life.

    Cancer is one of the biggest ‘disease burdens’ and killers in the EU and internationally. With the ageing population and the continuing impact of tobacco-associated cancers, it is predicted that cancer rates could increase by 50% to 15 million new cases worldwide in the year 2020, note the authors.

    The latest figures by the International Agency for Research on Cancer estimate close to 2.9 million new cases of cancer diagnosed in 2004 and over 1.7 million cancer deaths. This is despite substantial progress through public health measures (i.e. tobacco control) and new treatments.

    “These figures speak for themselves in making the case for a substantial and sustained European approach to cancer through public health measures and research,” the authors note in PLoS. “Europe needs both a strong commercial and a publicly funded (non-commercial) research base.”

    ec.europa.eu/research/headlines/news/article_06_08_07_en.html
     
  9. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,198
    To Faerynght:

    Thanks for a fantastically informative post. - You are extremely welcome here, by me at least. What is your background? Do you work in this area? It is all new to me (and self taught) in the last 12 months.

    One of the companies I have bought shares in has a unique approach to virus therapy. As I understand it, many viruses that replicated inside a cell need to "straighten out" to get out thru the cell wall, perhaps to enter another cell also. The company's approach is to keep them more folded up inside the cell - effectively putting them in jail (at least until the cell they have been replicating in dies and its wall splits or what ever happens to dead cell walls).

    I mention this to further illustrate the point that at the cellular level, it get very complex and there are many different way to attack disease organisms: Their method of getting energy (and molecules if they need to), their method of getting into cells, their methods of replication once inside, their method of getting out of the cells, their method of interfering with the cell's processes, both while inside and also by attachment to special cites on the outside, and probably many other ways I have not the wit to mention.

    Biology is to this century what physics (my field) was to the last. Like physics, it is going to cost a lot of money to learn about nature in this area also. Certainly, the potential benefit for mankind in this area is greater than it was in physics. Unfortunately, the potential for destruction is also greater. Try as it might physics could not make mankind extinct. - I fear biology has this possibility, but fully support your call for more funding of it.

    The capital markets are doing their part and I agree that governments should do more. IMHO, going to Mars is a silly use of the public funds compared to basics research in biology here on Earth. At the very least, the government should not be throwing up obstacles to stem cell research etc.
     
  10. Faerynght Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    143
    Thanks Billy T.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    I work in a cancer center. I am working on grants and contracts and am involved with many pharmaceutical companies, research, private and federal funding. Our center is very dedicated to research in all modalities and all levels from basic science to clinical studies. I have more knowledge of solid tumors, specifically lung and gu malignancies, the Drs. that I worked with both specialized in these disease groups. The vaccine that we are developing in lung cancer is showing exciting results, especially since recurrence in NSCLC is 5 years after resection. We already are testing the prostate cancer vaccine in clinical trials which was developed in another center.

    We currently use stem cells for transplant in our BMT and leukemia population and are also using them in research but hopefully soon we will have better cell lines to work with.

    There are some great sites that are very informative on research being conducted that may be of interest to you:

    discover.nci.nih.gov/

    rex.nci.nih.gov/RESEARCH/basic/lrbge/research.html

    nano.cancer.gov/resource_center/nano_critical.asp

    ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ncicgap/

    ccr.cancer.gov/faculties/faculty.asp?facid=118

    cancerresearch.org/

    web.ncifcrf.gov/

    asco.org

    calgb.org

    I can not post links yet, I hope you find the information contained in these links interesting. ASCO conference is quickly approaching and the website will have postings on results of research which is very new and agents as well that are showing progress and may be coming up on fast track FDA approval. There is some really interesting research being done on cyclooxygenase-2 which looks very promising, celebrex is being used for many of those studies. There are many wonderful advances being made on all fronts of cancer research and hopefully with the development of vaccines, nano drug delivery and detection, more targeted therapies and molecular agents the researchers and clinicians can solve some of the mystery surrounding this disease group.

    The interesting thing with public funding is that it must support all research across the board, they did cut funding by 30% on all grants being funded and 2.37% on all project already funding but Department of Defense seems to have money and is funding many research project fully. Projects must score very well to even get funding these days but I hope things will change in the next few years.

    Sorry this post is so erratic but it is early and I have not had coffee yet. :bugeye:
     
  11. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,198
    To Faerynght (and anyone else interested):

    Thanks for the links. Are you with a private or government “cancer center” or something in between like Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center?

    Some of the companies, working on NSCLC, I own shares in are:

    (1) Exelilis’s drug XL999 (targets VEGF, FGF, PDGF & RET), now in a Phase II with 79 patients, but only 9 were NSCLC cases where it was very effective. (Phase I had 52 patients.) It also gave encouraging responses against AML (14 cases) and Renal Cell carcinoma (11 cases). They had 16 (of the 79) cases with adverse cardiac events, but all were at the higher dose levels and more rapid infusion rates. There seems to be a very therapeutic effect at lower doses where no cardiac events were seen.

    As an investor, I like this company a lot as it has a broad pipeline, has filed (as it said it would) 3NDAs every year recently and has its entire development program well funded with even a positive cash flow, by partnering less that half its pipeline away on very favorable terms (retained at least 50%). Lots more details at www.exelilis.com If you want them.

    (2) Regeneron. Who, with Sanofi-Aventis, are now enrolling a Phase 2 study of patients with advanced ovarian cancer (AOC) and non-small cell lung adenocarcinoma (NSCLA) on one of Regeneron’s drugs.
    Perhaps you can tell me the difference between NSCLA and NSCLC? Which is the bigger problem both in incidence and difficulty for patients etc.

    (3)Vertex. Has three cancer drugs in development: (VX680, a small molecule inhibitor of Aurora kinases, now in “pivotal” PII, and VX667 & VX944, both in P1). Merck is “lead” on their joint development.
    Vertex put HIV drug Lexiva on the market only last November and now gets royalties. (Sold by GKS with 10% of the market already. It is a “second generation” protease inhibitor.) but their big hope is VX950 (now as it gets close to market renamed “Teleprevir”).
    J&J’s subdivision Janssen paid $165 million, up front and pays 50% of development costs, with $380 million in milestone payments yet to come. Vertex retained 100% of US market and gets “mid 20%” royalties on all J&J sales that do not include Asia. VX950 makes Hepatitis C virus undetectable in a few weeks and even after the drug has been stopped for 6 months, the patients remain with no detectable virus! - I.e. it is a cure for Hep C! Vertex is currently in talks with the FDA on the design of a big PIII (Cost of the PIII is why they let Janssen have a little of this potential “blockbuster.”)

    (4) I have small amount (400 sh) of Canadian YM biosciences. I paid $3.60/sh and have taken my lumps as their most advanced drug turned out to not be effective. I was not able to get out quick enough. It is now $1.60/sh, so I will hold on and hope others in pipeline do better. - After just completing my taxes and being forced off the tax table by about $60K in drug company profits. - I need some tax loses. - I almost hope at this point that YMI goes under - at least then I will save the sales commission!

    This is a very interesting new area for me. Because the risk are so great, I am quite diversified. - I own about 25 early stage developers and none of “big Pharma.” I do not understand why Vertex has slumped recently quite significantly. (It is still well above my entry cost as it was one of my first drug buys - I really like a cure for Hep C's potential. Had a close friend die from only Hep B complications.) Do you know anything? Any comments most welcome.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 9, 2007
  12. Faerynght Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    143
    I work in a center within a state university system, so it is in between similar to MSKCC.

    I am very familiar with MK-0457, VX680, as we are one of the Phase II sites in the NSCLA trial. VX-944 is not as well known to me as it deals with hematological malignancies and I am not as versed in this area.

    I checked out the published results on the XL999 by Exelixis, the Phase I looked promising but on the phase two 12 out of 117 experienced cardiac events and then 4 out 14 within one month also had serious adverse cardiac events. Luckily they only suspended enrollment and allowed patients already in treatment to finish if they did not exhibit any sae's.

    I am also very aware of the VEGF Trap by Sanofi, particularly in HRPC. NSCLA is non-small cell lung adenocarcinoma, the most common histologic subtype of lung cancer approximately 50-60% of all cases. Non-small cell lung cancer has at least 3 distinct histologies of lung cancer including epidermoid or squamous carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, and large cell carcinoma. The histology is grouped together because approaches to dx, staging, prognosis, and treatment are all similar and in a small number of patients’ resection is an available option.

    I am unable to comment on any drug development that is not published or public due to having to sign CDA’s with every company we work with at the center, if only I could invest, LOL.

    AACR's annual meeting is next week and some of the abstracts are very interesting and promising. ASCO is in June and there are some really exciting things being discussed at that annual meeting as well, most of the pharmaceutical companies (large and small) will be attending. This will be my first ASCO annual meeting and I am greatly looking forward to it.

    Research is very interesting and drug development is fascinating, I think vertex was hurt due to the suspension of enrollment during a phase II trial but it seems to have some strong support and interest from the large pharma companies. Good luck and keeping researching, you seem to have done well in choosing the companies that have had some pretty successful agents.
     

Share This Page