This is another huge advance and we really are coming
close to the day when we see the backside of the cancer problem once and for
all. This maps the common pathways and
discovers that for most several things must go wrong genetically. The empirical data hinted at just this as
most victims were often merely more exposed.
The take home of course is to live a life that
generally avoids or at least limits exposure to various toxins. Perhaps easier said than done but still
plausible for most. The bad news is that
it starts with learning how to not overindulge.
Good luck on that unless you already have gun to your head.
I have never been a fan of fanatic regimens because
our body is well able to rest almost everything and makes some use of most
everything and in fact thrives of trying everything. It is excess that can bite us unless indulged
extremely rarely allowing a full recovery.
Gene study uncovers origins of many common cancers
By Kate Kelland
LONDON (Reuters)
- Researchers in Britain have set out the first comprehensive map of mutational
processes behind the development of tumours - work that should in future lead
to better ways to treat and prevent a wide range of cancers.
In a study
published in the journal Nature on Wednesday, researchers who analysed more
than 7,000 genomes, or genetic codes, of common forms of cancer uncovered 21
so-called "signatures" of processes that mutate DNA.
"(This) is
an important step to discovering the processes that drive cancer
formation," said Serena Nik-Zainal of the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute
who worked on the research.
"Through
detailed analysis, we can start to use the overwhelming amounts of information
buried deep in the DNA of cancers to our advantage in terms of understanding
how and why cancers arise."
All cancers are
caused by mutations in DNA occurring in cells of the body during someone's
lifetime.
Scientists are
clear about some things, such as that chemicals in tobacco smoke cause
mutations in lung cells that lead to lung cancers, or that ultraviolet light
triggers mutations in skin cells that lead to skin cancers.
But they have
yet to figure out the biological processes that cause mutations behind most
common cancers.
"We're
beginning to know quite a lot about what the consequences of those mutations
are. But actually we have a really rudimentary understanding of what is causing
the mutations in the first place," said Mike Stratton, the Sanger
Institute's director and the lead researcher on this study.
"And after
all, the things that are causing those mutations are the causes of
cancer."
The team
analysed the genetic codes of 7,042 cases of cancer in people from around the
world, covering 30 different types of the disease, to see if they could find
patterns, or signatures, of mutational processes.
They discovered
that all the cancers contained two or more signatures - a finding that shows
the variety of processes that work together when a cancer develops.
They also found
that different cancers have different numbers of mutational processes. While
two mutational processes underlie the development of ovarian cancer, there are
six behind the development of liver cancer, the researchers said
And some
signatures are found in multiple cancer types, while others are only found in
one type. Out of the 30 cancers, 25 had signatures from mutational processes
linked to ageing.
In a suggestion
of what might be behind many common cancers, the team also discovered that a
family of enzymes called APOBECs, known to mutate DNA, was linked to more than
half of the cancer types studied.
APOBECs can be
activated when the body is responding to a viral infection. The researchers
said it may be that the resulting "signatures" are collateral damage
on the human genome caused by the enzymes acting to protect cells from viruses.
Stratton
described the results as like uncovering the "archaeological traces"
of the many mutational processes that lead to most cancers.
"This
compendium of mutational signatures and the consequent insights into the
mutational processes underlying them has profound implications for the
understanding of cancer."
No comments:
Post a Comment