Jab brought ‘unprecedentedly strong responses’ in patients whose disease had become resistant to chemotherapy and immunotherapy

Jab brought ‘unprecedentedly strong responses’ in patients whose disease had become resistant to chemotherapy and immunotherapy

In an international trial spanning 11 countries, the injection was offered to patients whose cancer had spread or come back and whose disease had failed to respond to other treatments.

In the trial, 102 patients with head and neck cancer, the world’s sixth most common cancer, were given the jab. Tumours shrank or disappeared completely in 43 patients, including 28 whose tumours shrank significantly and 15 who saw them eradicated entirely.

  • PalmTreeIsBestTree@lemmy.worldEnglish
    393·
    2 days ago

    I wish the media would stop calling a shot a “jab”. Ever since COVID everyone calls any kinda shot a “jab”.

  • No1@aussie.zoneEnglish
    82·
    1 day ago

    This sounds great, and I’m happy for those who had good results.

    But what happened to the other 102-43-28-15 = 16 patients? Because if they all spontaneously combusted after taking the treatment, that might change how you view things…

    • Lee@retrolemmy.comEnglish
      9·
      15 hours ago

      I think the numbers are worse. The 43 includes those with tumors that shrank or disappeared. In otherwords: 43 (shrank and disappeared) = 28 (shrank) + 15 (disappeared).

      So what happened to the other 102 - 43 = 59? Still it’s roughly 40% chance of improvement when other treatment methods have failed, which I think a lot of people would be willing to take. I’m often skeptical about early results though.

      • No1@aussie.zoneEnglish
        1·
        6 hours ago

        Yeah, the positi e results suggest it’s worth the risk, but they don’t say anything about the neutral or negative results.

        It might be 40% chance of improvement and.60% chance of death from side-effects

  • Em Adespoton@lemmy.caEnglish
    12010·
    2 days ago

    I guess we can’t expect better than “the jab” from “the guardian.”

    Test subjects were administered Amivantamab.

    • doughless@lemmy.worldEnglish
      442·
      2 days ago

      England has referred to vaccines as jabs long before it started to be used as a pejorative.

      • Nollij@sopuli.xyzEnglish
        71·
        1 day ago

        I remember reading somewhere that (especially) Russian disinformation campaigns learned British English. They, pretending to be American anti-vaxxers, spread it to the dialect of the dumbest Americans.

        ‘Jab’ is basically a case study in skipped localization.

      • blockheadjt@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        214·
        2 days ago

        Nobody is confusing which meaning they meant.

        Use of the word to mean vaccine is just reductive and awfully informal.

      • SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.caEnglish
        44·
        2 days ago

        But this drug is not a vaccine.

        If you do not understand the difference between a monoclonal antibody and a vaccine, fuck off down voters.

      • blockheadjt@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        317·
        2 days ago

        It’s just awfully informal and reductive for something life-saving and sophisticated.

        Imagine a paramedic saves your life and you call them a meatsack.

        • Pissmidget@lemmy.worldEnglish
          21·
          2 days ago

          I would most likely have said they were shocking someone, rather than administering defibrillation, though both are just round about ways of saying they were turning someone’s heart off and on again.

          The fact they administered what I consider a mind blowing treatment by way of jab just goes to show what amazing things humans can do.

      • TheTetrapod@lemmy.worldEnglish
        101·
        2 days ago

        I’ve only heard it in the context of antivaxxers. Apparently it goes back further in the UK, but that’s when it broke containment.

      • altphoto@lemmy.todayEnglish
        34·
        2 days ago

        My parents fucked to have me.

        Vs:

        My parents had sex to have me.

        Or even:

        my parents were on the bed doggy style, when my mom was on hands and knees on the bed while my dad was behind here thrusting his huge penis into her very tight vagina over and over. She loved every second of it and so did he. They loved eachother very much and entrusted eachother enough to allow this raw behaviour into their bedroom each night of every day. As the penis reached climax, it injected billions upon billions of spermatozoids into her vaginal cavity. Each sperm only had one goal… Swim, swim! If the egg is encountered then go into it to inject the DNA that would become me. All but one would encounter they demise.

    • adr1an@programming.devEnglish
      31·
      2 days ago

      Just checked the wikipedia page. This compound is only specific for certain types of tumors (epidermal growth factor receptor, EGFR, exon 20 insertion mutations.)

      I was afraid this could be all fake. But not, is just clickbaity reporting.

      • SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.caEnglish
        3·
        2 days ago

        Cancer is over 300 different diseases. Some are curable, others are not, some drugs works wonders for some types of cancer and do nothing for others.

        Anytime you read “cure for cancer” it will be clickbait bullshit, what the Guardian is famous for.

    • OpenStars@piefed.socialEnglish
      11·
      2 days ago

      Some movies like “I Am Legend” have this as their plot, where it does not end well, so they are already prepared.

      • GraniteM@lemmy.worldEnglish
        2·
        15 hours ago

        I think it’s a zombie book called Feed where the zombie apocalypse is brought about by two generically engineered cures, one for the common cold and the other for cancer. The upshot is that there’s no more common cold and there’s no more cancer, but there is a zombie apocalypse so that’s a bit of a downside.

        • OpenStars@piefed.socialEnglish
          1·
          13 hours ago

          So long as Will Smith is in it - surely nothing can be bad in a situation as long as he is involved? (/s btw 🤪)

    • clucose@lemmy.mlEnglish
      127·
      2 days ago

      Pharma is not about curing people it‘s about constant medication. Otherwise the profits are less.

        • clucose@lemmy.mlEnglish
          1·
          1 day ago

          Do we have a cancer cure vaccine despite all those findings in the past 20 years? Where are all those wonder cures? Probably in some drawer.

          • TAG@lemmy.worldEnglish
            5·
            1 day ago

            There were the cures that worked in theory but did not work in actual cells. There were the cures that worked on mice but did not work on humans. There were the cures that cure cancer but have a higher fatality rate than the cancer. Those cases cover just about every cancer “cure” you read about in the news.

            Then there are all the cures that work for some people some of the time. Big pharma has patented them and is selling them for enough money to cover all of the other cures that did not work (and give everyone a very nice bonus).

            Seriously, if some phara company could cure cancer, why wouldn’t they? They can sell it for 100k per treatment, make enough money for each of the 10 biggest investors to buy a small country, and then close up shop.

  • Tollana1234567@lemmy.todayEnglish
    17·
    2 days ago

    its a biologic medication, the suffix ending with -mab always is associated with biologic. if you have psoriasis they use these kinds to treat them, or an autoimmune disease.

  • Tanis Nikana@lemmy.worldEnglish
    163·
    2 days ago

    But what about all the people who have died from cancer‽‽‽ Is their sacrifice in vain?

    /s of course