Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Fixing_The_World t1_jc5njwq wrote

Thank you for sharing.

Taking it a step further, panels of common bacteria could be displayed to a sample of the patient's immune system. We could figure out which elicit the strongest response. Then use the antigens for tumor injection.

What they have done in the paper is a phenomenal idea and so simple.

225

This_is_a_monkey t1_jc6y4o9 wrote

I remember years ago reading an account of a monk who had a tumour on his leg that grew so large it burst through the skin and became infected. Then his immune system destroyed the infection along with the tumour. Was very interesting.

128

AuntGaylesFannyPack t1_jc8fhiz wrote

Any chance you remember his name?

10

This_is_a_monkey t1_jc8vav8 wrote

I don't sorry. It was honestly like ten years ago and it was an anecdotal account that seemed interesting but not significant at the time.

8

luisvel t1_jc8cd3i wrote

And why not inject a mix of bacterial lysates? Seems like a safer cost effective solution.

7

cygnoids t1_jc8nhb5 wrote

My assumption is you need to balance stimulating the immune system and causing a severe infection. I need to read the paper to see if it was full bacterial lysate or if you could take some PAMPs to stimulate an immune response

8

Fixing_The_World t1_jc9i1in wrote

I suspect you could.

However, while a lysate is different, co-infections don't always have an additive effect when it comes to the immune system. One infection can actually dampen another. It could be quite different with inactive antigens though.

Injecting that many different antigens could also cause immune system derangement ending in autoimmunity &/or cancer escape.

Lastly, from a data collection stand point, trying to figure out which lysate/antigen causes high adverse reactions in a mix would be much harder than collecting data on individual types.

This would all have to be tested of course to gain any knowledge on the manner; it is just what came across my head.

4