Working with a line of colon cancer cells, Korean researchers figured out a way to throw a few genetic switches to cause the cells to revert back to a healthy state | The technique could have major implications in the way we approach cancer treatment.

https://newatlas.com/cancer/cancer-cells-normal/

Share.

7 Comments

  1. From the article: Most current cancer research and treatment involves finding ways to kill the rogue cells in our body to bring the disease under control. And there have been impressive strides made in this realm of investigation.

    In traditional treatments though, most of the time, side effects arise because the body winds up losing cellular material and often, healthy cells and tissue die along with the damaged cancer cells. The collateral damage has typically been deemed worth it though, because when a treatment works, the cancer is destroyed and the patient lives.

    Now though, [researchers](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/advs.202402132) at the Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST) have developed a different approach to combating the cells that cause cancer.

    By using a digital model of the gene network of normal cell development, they found several molecules known as “master regulators” that are involved in the differentiation process of the cells lining the intestinal walls. These regulators are known as MYB, HDAC2, and FOXA2 and when they were suppressed in colon cancer cells, the cells switched back to a normal-like state, removing the cancer threat without destroying any cellular material.

    The tests were carried out digitally, through molecular experiments, and in mice.

    “The fact that cancer cells can be converted back to normal cells is an astonishing phenomenon,” said KAIS professor Kwang-Hyun Cho, who led the research. “This study proves that such reversion can be systematically induced.”

  2. So says every single article on cancer, it’s the modern equivalent of “doctors aren’t going to believe this technique for curing cancer”

  3. Interesting article.
    Now as the unofficial grammar police “revert” not “revert back”

  4. Firstly, I thought that cancer was a result of genetic variance or damage in cells. How do the cells ‘revert back’ to something they never were? It’s not like they have a backup copy of the last’s cell’s dna.
    Also, I feel like turning off a handful of genes with such an impact will have side effects toward the function of the cells, possibly in the realm of healing.

  5. Ever since I’ve been an adult and paying attention to the daily news cycle (decades), there’s been a new way to cure cancer and fight cancer but…here we are still talking about cancer. It’s like it’s been the long-play drone-like go-to news bait.

  6. Is it possible to find ways to make healthy cells into cancerous and insert this into an airborne flu-like virus?