Drug trio found to block tumour resistance in pancreatic cancer
by axiomdata316 on 1/29/2026, 4:11:04 PM
Comments
by: A_D_E_P_T
> <i>Clinical implications: While more research will be needed before trials in humans can begin</i><p>Why? Seriously, think about it. Most people with pancreatic cancer have nothing to lose and many of them have just weeks or months to live.<p>Daraxonrasib, Afatinib, and SD36 are molecules that can already be purchased in bulk, and what's the worst that can happen?<p>Our society's morbid, irrational fear of quack medicine causes orders of magnitude more deaths through therapeutic neglect than it prevents through safety screening. "Better 10,000 die of cancer than 1 person die of fraud/waste/mismanagement or even in failed experiments performed in good faith."
1/29/2026, 8:18:02 PM
by: ngriffiths
IN MICE. (To be fair, also IN SOME OTHER BETTER MICE).<p><a href="https://jamesheathers.medium.com/in-mice-explained-77b61b598218" rel="nofollow">https://jamesheathers.medium.com/in-mice-explained-77b61b598...</a><p>(mostly a joke, but I'd be in favor of adding context to the HN headline if possible)
1/29/2026, 5:33:46 PM
by: jonshariat
I've been playing to much pokemon with my kids, read this as "Dugtrio"
1/29/2026, 5:26:01 PM
by: tansey
For all the folks complaining about "it's only in mice! things never work in humans!" -- I work at MSK and we definitely have seen success treating PDAC in humans: <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06063-y" rel="nofollow">https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06063-y</a><p>"Why don't I see these treatments hitting the general public?" Because trials like these are phase I/II. Then you need a phase III that takes a long time to recruit a large cohort and has overall survival as an end point so you need a long time to measure the actual outcome you care about. And most trials fail in phase III because the surrogate end points used in phase II studies, like progression free survival (ie how long did patients go before their disease advanced in screens), are not necessarily great predictors of improved overall survival.<p>Specifically for cancer vaccines, this paper was a driving force behind MSK establishing a cancer vaccine center to scale up these personalized neoantigen mRNA vaccines. It's very very difficult to do and extremely expensive right now.
1/29/2026, 6:58:54 PM
by: reenorap
I keep reading about these advancements in pancreatic cancer like early detection or possible treatments, but nothing ever seems to make it to daylight. Is there a reason why there's such disparity between this?
1/29/2026, 5:44:03 PM
by: boh
It's funny how many years of "X found to be effective in fighting cancer" stories have filtered through HN and then you never hear about it again.<p>The research at treating mouse cancer has been making great strides--people cancer still has a long way to go though.
1/29/2026, 6:04:44 PM
by: lazarus01
I was wondering what preclinical models meant. It would be more accurate to call it animal models. I read roughly 3% - 5% of compounds move from preclinical cancer therapies to fda approval. That’s a tough success rate.
1/29/2026, 6:04:19 PM
by: apparent
> These agents together were tested in orthotopic mouse models of PDAC, where tumour cells are implanted in a location that closely resembles their natural environment in the pancreas.<p>Ugh, of course: "in mice"!<p>> The combination therapy also led to significant regression in genetically engineered mouse tumours and in human cancer tissues grown in lab mice, known as patient-derived tumour xenografts (PDX).<p>OK, maybe "in human tissue grown in mice" isn't so bad.<p>Fingers crossed. Pancreatic cancer is terrible.
1/29/2026, 6:13:14 PM
by: tiahura
At this point, hasn't every permutation of cancer drug cocktail been tested on mice?
1/29/2026, 7:12:16 PM
by: gus_massa
> <i>The results demonstrated the therapy not only reduced tumour size but also entirely stopped tumour growth with no evidence of tumour resistance for more than 200 days after treatment.</i><p>More details in <a href="https://www.pnas.org/doi/suppl/10.1073/pnas.2523039122/suppl_file/pnas.2523039122.sapp.pdf" rel="nofollow">https://www.pnas.org/doi/suppl/10.1073/pnas.2523039122/suppl...</a> See page 25<p>In mice, N=12.<p>1 survived 200 days without cancer and was euthanized for 'ocular ulcers'.<p>5 survived 50-150 days, without cancer but were euthanized for other health problems<p>6 survived 50-150 days, and still had a smaller tumor and were euthanized for other health problems<p>My take away: Interesting, but the press article is overselling the result by a lot.<p>Edit: Fixed link.
1/29/2026, 6:03:56 PM