This week, the online life sciences magazine The Scientist published an article whose implications for breast cancer research are profound.

Tumor cell lines - living cells taken from tumors and cultured in the laboratory - are the mainstay of cancer research at the most fundamental level, and are used as the model for studying tumor behavior and response to treatment. For the past 25 years, most of the laboratory research into metastatic breast cancer has been based on a single breast tumor cell line known as MDA-MB-435. At least 650 papers have been published on studies involving this cell line. Yet it has been revealed that this supposed breast cancer cell line may in fact not be composed of breast cancer cells at all. Instead, it appears that the cells are derived from melanoma. For 25 years, therefore, breast cancer research using this cell line - and it is one of the most widely used - has been based on an incorrect model. Melanoma-derived tumor cells are not biologically equivalent to breast cancer cells; they have different molecular and genetic characteristics.

Cell lines - even when correctly sourced and identified - are an intrinsically flawed model, and in the past I have often cautioned against the tendency to read too much into the results of cancer research done on tumor cell lines. The inferential leap from Petri dish to living human cancer patient is simply too large: an enormous number of drugs and experimental techniques show significant activity in cultured cancer cell lines, only to exhibit no benefit whatever when given to human subjects in a clinical setting. Furthermore, cell lines can degenerate over time, becoming genetically unstable. But these are relatively small concerns compared to the discovery that MDA-MB-435, the cornerstone of breast cancer research, is not breast cancer at all.

We are constantly being reminded that this is the era of evidence-based medicine. But if the very cell lines which have provided the foundation for breast cancer research for the past quarter century have now been conclusively shown to be melanoma cells, not breast cancer, how solid or trustworthy is the evidence on which current breast cancer treatment is based? Evidence built on such flawed foundations more closely resembles hearsay than science.

A Case of Mistaken Identity by Megan Scudellari. The Scientist, September 16th 2008
http://www.the-scientist.com/news/display/55013/ (registration required)

NEW REPORT LAUNCHED THIS WEEK

This week we are launching a new report in our Cancer Decisions© series - The Radiation Treatment of Gynecological Cancers. (This report covers radiation for ovarian, endometrial, cervical and vaginal cancers.)

You can purchase and download a copy of this useful new report by clicking here.

PHONE CONSULTATIONS

This week we received the following comment from a client who had just had a phone consultation:

"I greatly appreciated my conversation with Dr. Moss - and that is what it was, a conversation. It was a back and forth dialogue, where he was listening to me, not just talking at me, which I feel happens far too frequently in the medical profession. It was clear that Dr. Moss is very knowledgeable about prostate cancer and he also fully recognized the specifics of my case, as opposed to just trying to fit me into a bunch of statistics. Unfortunately, the choice of cancer treatment is not a simple decision to make. Some physicians have spoken to me as if my case is black and white, cut and dried. But I just feel that it is not that simple and Dr. Moss showed me compassion and understanding, as well as providing me with several recommendations, including other physicians to consult." - B. R. September 15^th 2008

 

Clients who have purchased a Moss Report can schedule an appointment for a phone consultation by calling 1-800-980-1234 (814-238-3367 from outside the US) or by submitting a request via email to This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it .

CANCER DECISIONS© AND CURRENT TOPICS© REPORTS AND WHERE TO GO? REPORTS

Reports in our Cancer Decisions© series are designed to provide readers with the detailed information they need in order to make difficult treatment decisions. Currently available are: :

• Radiation and the Treatment of Breast Cancer
• Antioxidants and Cancer Treatment (Combination report)
• Do Antioxidants Interfere with Radiation Treatment for Cancer?
• Overcoming the Adverse Effects of Radiation Therapy
• Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer
• Radiation Therapy for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
  
  And, newly launched this week: Radiation Therapy for Gynecological Cancers (ovarian, endometrial, vaginal and cervical cancer).

These reports can be purchased and downloaded from our Web site, by clicking here.

OR...Please visit our Web site at www.cancerdecisions.com and click on the blue Radiation Reports button.

WHERE TO GO?

Our growing Where To Go? series continues to attract favorable reviews from readers. Already available are Where To Go? - Houston, Where To Go? -Philadelphia, and Where To Go? - Chicago. A Where To Go? - Boston report is due to be launched shortly. These are the first reports in a new series on regional availability of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). For more information, or to order, please click here.

For a list of our Current Topics reports on issues of interest in the field of cancer research and treatment please click here.

OR...Please visit our Web site at www.cancerdecisions.com and click on the blue Current Topics button.