The p53 protein has been long-established as a tumor supressor protein
and pharmaceuticals continue to accommodate its role in cancer in many of their
drugs. How do you think the present
study’s findings will most likely affect future drug development? What strategies would you choose to pursue as
the most effective in addressing the p21/PUMA ratio discussed?
As is always the case in biomedical research, new discoveries are constantly being made that affect treatment plans for patients. In this case, additional information to the long known p53 involvement in cancer will in my opinion change cancer treatment courses for patients. Now, with the finding that the p21 to PUMA ratio is also important in tumor suppression, I think drug companies will be racing to develop drugs that promote favorable PUMA to p21 ratios, while ensuring that appropriate p53 levels are maintained. I still think it will be a long time until these drugs actually reach the market though, as the side effects of tampering with these protein ratios is not yet known. As Espinosa stated, though you may want one effect, you may end up with many other unwanted ones as well. Determining what side effects result from newly developed will require more research and time. The time it takes a drug to actually reach the market from development to prescription is a very long period. Nonetheless, this discovery will spark competition between drug companies to develop the most effective drug first.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of the p21/ PUMA ratio, I would of course want to first read the original article to gain a better background regarding how these ratios affect tumor development. Tipping protein ratios and interfering with them is a very delicate issue, as slight differences can cause the body to react in unexpected ways. Thus, I would say more research needs to be conducted to determine what these secondary effects would be. However, the information in this article regarding combining p53 and PUMA/p21 knowledge to create better cancer treatments looks promising.
This article is particularly interesting and applicable to class discussions because it hints at a possible genetic component linking levels of p21 and PUMA. Although the article does not directly address pharmacogenomics, I think the development of a drug that controls the p21/PUMA ratio would definitely require research into the genetic factors that determine p21/PUMA levels. As many of our readings have suggested, pharmacogenomics is the future of drug development. Personalizing medications to reduce adverse drug effects is becoming more and more critical to lowering healthcare costs and improving health outcomes.
ReplyDeleteTo further pursue this research into the p21/PUMA ratio, I would want to determine how the p21/PUMA ratio physiologically affects the p53 protein, thereby down-regulating it. I would then want to study the role of genetic variation in the expression of p53, p21, and PUMA. Using the identification of genetic variations, the p21/PUMA ratio could be altered and personalized in each distinct case. Therefore, each patient utilizing the p53 boosting drug could be tested and given a tailored treatment regime with a specific p21/PUMA ratio.
How do you think the present study’s findings will most likely affect future drug development? What strategies would you choose to pursue as the most effective in addressing the p21/PUMA ratio discussed?
ReplyDeleteI think that these findings will greatly affect the future of drug development because now that the p21/PUMA ratio has been found to be important for the effectiveness of tumor suppressing proteins and drugs, it will be beneficial for drug companies to produce drugs that cater to the balance as well as p53. This is extremely relevant to our recent classes focusing on pharmacogenomics and how it will be essential in the future of drug development.
In order to address the effectiveness of the p21/PUMA ratio, I think that more research will need to be done to find out exactly how the ratio affects the p53 protein. Once this is discovered, it will become easier to develop drugs that directly aim to control the perfect balance of p21/PUMA while also activating p53. With pharmacogenomics becoming a much more prominent field in recent years, drugs have the opportunity to become a lot more effective while creating less side effects for patients and this will be essential to more personalized and productive treatment.
These findings are promising for cancer drug development. This information will prove useful in creating drugs that are more effective and efficient at killing tumors. The p21/PUMA ration is a great find but I think there needs to be research into the other genes that effect tumor growth and cell death. Adverse outcome should be investigated further before we tout a new drug.
ReplyDeleteThe idea of cancer is so personal to so many people, because the horrible disease comes in many forms and still holds so many mysteries as to causes and prevention methods. It is comforting to know that we can use knowledge of genomics to battle cancer, but as we learned in class, making new drugs accessible to large amounts of people is a strenuous and expensive process. Creating more affordable ways to allow greater amounts of people to receive the benefits of new drugs is just as important as putting new drugs on the market. Perhaps in time we will be able to not only utilize our genomics in battling cancer, but also utilize our healthcare system efficiently in allowing everyone a chance to be well.
ReplyDeleteThis article really drives home the importance of pharmacogenomics. This research shows that instead of just targeting one gene, multiple genes must be targeted for the best effects. I think this sheds light on what might be cause of other issues with drugs that are not effective in their treatments. In this case the p53 is a know tumor suppressor, but its effectiveness is determined by the PUMA/p21 ratio which is in turn is controlled by a handful of genes. I think this really goes to show that many genes may be underlying cause of the ineffectiveness of a drug therapy. To address this particular case, more research should be conducted. Furthermore, this case shows that more should be invested in pharmacogenomics.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteI think these findings are fascinating and show a lot of prospect for the future of pharmacogenetics. As they still need to work on the development of a more tailored drug to stop tumor growth, I wonder if eventually they will go even further to create a preventative drug. With genetic screening for pre-phase biomarkers a specified drug that prevents tumors would be ideal for people who show future signs or ancestral history of cancer. Either way, with these new discoveries the future in cancer treatment is bright. To address the ratio I think more research needs to be done on a low risk population or test group to ensure all possible risks are eliminated. Whenever a drug is used in conjunction with another, it increases risk. Since this study suggests using a drug for tumor-suppressor gene p53 as well as a second drug targeting genes that control this p21/PUMA ratio, the risk is amplified and therefore more precautions would need to be taken.
I think that, more than anything else, this article really shows the importance of pharmacogenomics, as earlier mentioned above. I think that scientists and researchers are slowly learning that multiple genes need to be targeted in multiple ways in order to really have a beneficial impact on the patient. I also think it is becoming more and more evident that different people will have different reactions to the same drug due to other factors such as genetic variation and epigenetics. I think that all drugs like these ones should be more fine-tuned in order to benefit the patient. A more accurate ratio needs to be found to ward off tumor cells and I believe that this sort of meticulous fine-tuning on a person-to-person basis will be more common in the future.
ReplyDeleteThe findings have opened up a brand new door to controlling different non-infectious diseases that are gene-linked. These diseases, which have been found to be linked to genes, can now be suppressed and almost eliminated thanks to the research found about the role of P53 and the ability of it's suppression when exposed to the tumor. By focusing on the ratio of p21/PUMA, the drugs will most likely help the drug that is reactivating p53 gene. As a result, more focus should go towards secondary drugs that can help the primary drugs as well as the individual. This secondary drug can help create a hostile environment for the tumor, however what comes to mind is the risk of the damages to the patient. Because there are more drugs required to treat the tumor, this may put a strain on the person's health and overall ability to overcome their cancer if they plan on doing chemotherapy as well. The overall findings can help with diseases such as heart disease, obesity, and other types of cancer. The overall research capabilities has been expanding at an exponential rate. Hopefully, soon, we can apply this knowledge and experience of research in other areas.
ReplyDeleteI think this has great potential to influence the drug industry and out overall health as a result of drugs in a great way. We do not know enough about the study design or other methods to be able to discern whether the results to this study alone would be enough to have evidence to advance pharmacology. I would be interested in knowing how these genes are being investigated, and if they are investigating the genetic sequence as a whole or individual genes and switches.
ReplyDeleteI think the most effective strategy to investigate the p21/PUMA ratio as a result of different switches would be the most difficult one, which would be investigating each switch individually. The most effective strategy would be to turn on the switches that when activated increase the p21 the greatest, and turn off the switches that when turned on increase the PUMA concentration the most. Like someone stated above, there is an increased risk when taking multiple drugs at once, so we need to be vigilant if prescription drugs are how we would go about tipping the scales in the p21/PUMA ratio.
This study, in my opinion, is genomics at one of its finest moments. Cancer is a very tricky disease because of its growth in such a short period of time. It can create tumors and spread through different parts of the body easily. Because of this, the effectiveness of treatments are not always straightforward. I think that this study’s findings on the p 21/PUMA ratio and its effectiveness in the tumor suppressing gene p53 will greatly affect the future of drug development. Now researchers can have a specific target to focus on. Obviously it will take more time in research and development, but I think that this will revolutionize tumor treatments and therapies. I feel that they will be much more effective and possibly even quicker with this second drug that will alter the p21/PUMA ratio. These drugs have the potential to reduce side effects make the tumor treatments more effective. In addition, I think that more research in other drug development will focus on similar strategies. In the end, I think that research in this field will help to make existing drugs stronger. I think that another development that would come about with this study is to potentially make one drug that acted both as a tumor suppressant and had an effect on the p21/PUMA ratio. This way, it would be easier on the patient to take only one drug instead of multiple ones.
ReplyDeleteI am not really one hundred percent sure as to what the best strategies would be best in addressing the ratio that was mentioned in the article. However, I know that there are important steps to take. First of all more research has to be done in this field. Genetic screening has helped the study come this far, and I think it is essential to continue using these screenings to understand how to address the p21/PUMA ratio issue. In the study, the researchers went in and turned offal the genes in the genome to see which ones would have the most effect in altering this ratio. I think that this is a good start since they found some potential genes involved in the ratio. Now I think that testing the suspected genes individually is required.
These findings will open doors to the future drug development. Drug companies can use these new discoveries of the p21/PUMA ratio to develop tumor suppressing proteins and drugs. Researchers will also look into finding other ratio and variables to discover the different types of proteins that can turn off cancer. Pharmacogenomics can incorporate human genome into the research so that drug companies can make drug cater to each individual.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the students above that a genome-wide study would be effective in addressing the P21/PUMA ratio. It could look at what specific genes that will affect the ratio.
The findings in this article will pave the way for future drugs, especially those which target cancer, and those which work at the genetic level. There are many factors that affect tumors, such as the p21/PUMA relationship and their affect on p53 gene, and these findings of interrelatedness will open many doors in the future of drug development. I believe the most effective studies for the p21/PUMA ratio will involve turning off every gene in the human genome. Through this trial and error process, I believe that scientists will be able to discover an effective method to suppress tumors.
ReplyDeleteI believe that p53 is the future for cancer treatment. The association between p21 and PUMA is a large component of this cancer treatment, however, more research should be conducted to see if there are other ways to suppress tumors. The process of developing drugs is a very long and expensive process, so although p53 can play a huge role in cancer treatment, it is going to be years until we begin to see results. An important step in this process is to figure out what adverse side effects occur, and how to prevent those.
ReplyDeleteWhile I’m sure that the processes described were vastly oversimplified, this research seems to have “immense promise” as the article puts it. At the very least, this leads to greater understanding of cancerous tissue and both pharmacogenetics and pharmacogenomics. At best, it leads to great specificity of efficacious, personalized treatment.
ReplyDeleteI’m excited for the proposed next step of “repeating the genetic screen with additional tumor and healthy cell lines to discover which of their newly discovered candidate genes are common controllers of the p21/PUMA ratio across cancer types.” It looks to be an effective strategy that could find an exploitable root cause of many types of cancer. If such a finding exists and can be reached, then this diverse disease won’t be so diverse anymore. Nearly anyone with cancer would have a new, effective option to take. Barring toxicity, genomic-specific side effects, and access, the whole species can ascend to a higher level of treatment together.
As the article stated, killing off tumors by using drugs that turn on p53 will only kill off 1 in 10 tumors and the increase of p53 seems to cause an imbalance in the ratio of p21/PUMA. To prevent the decrease in PUMA, a drug should be made that gives cancer patients increased amounts of active p53 gene as well as PUMA. An alternative way is to have patients take the drug that turns on p53 in the body and have a drug p21 suppressor. However, this could also have side effects such as the inability to create new cells. The ratio between these regulatory factors is very sensitive and up regulating one can cause multiple side effects. The purposed solution is to work at a genomic level where we regulate the expression of the genes that promote the survival of PUMA.
ReplyDeleteThis article brings up an important point in the search for new pharmaceuticals to combat the growing incidence of noncommunicable diseases. It shows that the fight to end diseases like cancer, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease is not as straightforward as we once thought. As many have noted previously, this article shows the increasing need for a pharmacogenomic lens in research laboratories and doctors' offices. If we want to reduce the DALYs from diseases like cancer we need to focus on the big picture rather than each individual gene. If we focus on one gene, such as p53, and ignore genes that code for PUMA, we are not going to get far in the push to reduce the effects of cancer. This article also points out the need for a greater communication among the science and medical communities. Without open communications and honest publishing it will be difficult to move forward.
ReplyDeleteI think these studies will have a large effect on the future of drug development. With these studies, pharmaceutical companies will be racing to see who can develop the better drug. I also think, however, that while this is a great discovery, the potential side effects need to be looked at. We would need to look at how drugs targeting p53 and the p21/PUMA ratio would affect not only the tumor, but all the other cells in our body.
ReplyDeleteI think that in general to ward off tumors we should be looking more to preventative ways to avoid cancer overall, rather than using more drugs that could cause other side effects that could be detrimental to our health. I think Victoria was right in saying that, focusing on one gene will not make a huge difference of the effects of cancer and we need to be looking more at things that will have a larger effect.
It is clear that activation of gene p53 turns off cancer, but simply turning on this gene is not enough to cause tumors to die. It has been found that tumors that die create more PUMA than p21. This study’s findings will likely influence researchers and pharmaceuticals to try to develop a drug targeting genes that control the p21/PUMA ratio, as these genes seem to “fine-tune this p53 effectiveness”. The study will likely lead to the development of drugs that will turn on genes that will cause tumors to create more PUMA than p21, subsequently leading to tumor death. Drugs targeting the p21/PUMA ratio will likely be more effective in killing tumors and ameliorating the effects of cancer than drugs that solely activate the p53 gene.
ReplyDeleteScientists involved in the study have already found a couple dozen genes involved in the p21/PUMA ratio. A strategy I would use to pursue in addressing the p21/PUMA ratio would be to screen these genes in an effort to show which of the genes regulate the “desired, tumor-killing response” and which lead to undesirable side effects. This would be done in an effort to make a more effective and safer drug.
I also believe that these p53 findings will greatly benefit the future for drug development. It is definitely going towards a good direction which may allow research for other tumor suppressing drugs. I think we should also look for other genes in addition to the p21/PUMA ratio. Although the activation of p53 turns of cancer, it doesn't kill off all the tumors. We can't just rely on these few genes.
ReplyDeleteThis study shows promise in cancer research, but the present research does not seem to find a cure for cancer or the next best treatment when specifically targeting the p53 gene. When the p53 gene was targeted, only 1 in 10 tumors were actually killed, which shows a small effect. If technology and research can isolate why it only works sometimes and how to always replicate that, then this could be a viable solution in the pharmaceutical world. However, the question arises about how much money and resources would be needed to investigate this specific therapy, and if it's worth it- are there other treatments that may have better efficacy?
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteI believe this study’s findings will have a huge impact on future drug development. Like they mentioned, they might be able to make drugs that have the desired effect but not the undesired side effects. However, this type of drug development will be dependent on improved genome sequencing methods. Although paying attention to side effects will be beneficial I believe figuring out which of the “couple dozen genes involved” in the ratio of p21/PUMA is most influential in the ratio would be the most beneficial approach. If they are all equally influential then drug developers might be able to concentrate on one or two genes as opposed to multiple ones, which would be much more difficult.
The p53 gene, is a tumor suppressor gene, its activity stops the formation of tumors. If a person inherits only one functional copy of the p53 gene from their parents, they are predisposed to cancer and usually develop tumors in a variety of tissues in early adulthood. However, mutations in p53 are found in most tumor types, and so contribute to the complex network of molecular events leading to tumor formation. The article states,the findings of the the p21 to PUMA ratio is very important in tumor suppression and therefore impact the developments of drugs in the future. Drug companies will develop drugs benefit the ratios of PUMA but also does not cause any unwanted side effects. The article also indicates the amount of information that exists on all aspects of p53 in human cancers is now vast, reflecting its key role in the pathogenesis of human cancers. However I would further study the role of genetic variation in the expression of p53, p21, and PUMA to understand the full scope of this problem.
ReplyDeleteI think that this article just proves the importance of Pharmacogenomics. Spathe study found that the PUMA-p21 ratio is an important factor in determining cancer development along with the p53 gene--information that is totally new to us. With each new discovery, more and more questions open up, even if we don't realize which questions should have been asked until later on. Genetics is no simple thing. I think the existing p53-affecting drugs could be modified further as part of pharmacogenomics to make a favorable PUMA-p53 ratio catered to each persons DNA. Cancer is a complex disorder, and maybe we just can't treat it the same in everyone. As stated in the article, sometimes the p53 drugs work and sometimes they don't. Maybe it's genetics that determines those odds too. I think that more research has to be completed to see what is changing the PUMA-p21, but that this definitely supports the importance of pharmacogenomics.
ReplyDeleteThis article was very interesting. What I found very interesting was the ratio discussed in the article. The fact that the ratio can be measured in tumor cells of patients speaks to the accuracy and correctness of data in this research. This in turn can yield very promising and useful findings in terms of cancer research. The drug discussed seems to be more of a helper, like a secondary drug to aid in the primary drugs purpose. This can open up many avenues in medicine. We may be able to revisit older drugs once thought to be obsolete in today's day and age. Contemporary drugs can become more effective. In terms of the future, more opportunities have been open for effective cancer treatment drug regimens. So in terms of the effects of drug treatment programs and new drugs for cancer treatment, more research must be done. Although this research seems very promising, it still seems to be its infancy. By maintaining solid research and determination, better methods for cancer treatment can be found using this method.
ReplyDeleteThere are always new innovative strategies being utilized to increase drug effectiveness. While at first they seem like a new-window of hope, they can often turn into problems in the future. For example, being able to use more of a drug due to their increased effectiveness seems to only increase resistance of tumor cells eventually. However, once further research is conducted it seems like there is a high potential that this new dynamic of approaching cancer will be effective. Altering the p21/PUMA ratio seems like a viable method.
ReplyDeleteVanessa Merta
ReplyDeleteI found this article very interesting. I did not know much about how genes effect cancer growth, so it was fascinating to learn about how the P53 gene is turned off and on. I think in future drug development, the P53 gene should be a huge focus. Though the scientists doing this research were able to pinpoint P53, only 1 in 10 tumors were actually stopped once the gene was turned back on. This showed that cancer was caused by more than one gene. If scientists were able to perfect this method of turning on and off genes then eliminating diseases like cancer would be an attainable goal. I think another research focus that should come out of this study would be the ability to differentiate between why something has side effects, and the genes that can turn off these side effects. Many drugs have extremely terrible side effects, including current cancer drugs. If we could isolate the effects and side effects of cancer drugs, then the patient fighting the cancer will be, in a way, healthier, and their body will be able to focus on fighting the cancer. I think that if we could eliminate side effects, we will be able to create much more effective drugs.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteDrug developers will most likely continue to investigate the effects drugs have on p21/PUMA ratio. Researchers will target secondary genes to help maximize the effects drugs have on tumor suppression. They will look into drugs that can supplement the activation of the p53 protein by increasing the number of PUMA proteins.
ReplyDeleteI believe that cancer drugs should be given out as separate doses in a treatment plan. By giving patients separate doses, there is room for corrections. One dose will be given to minimize the direct problem, which will be the reactivation of p53. The next will be given to correct for side effects, such as the abundance of p21 proteins over PUMA proteins. By targeting p53 first, the protein can work to suppress some tumors before drugs are introduced to alter protein levels to combat the rest.
Of course, more research has to be done before patients can receive these treatment plans. This research should look into the causes of change in p21/PUMA ratio, and how that connects to the reactivation of p53. As mentioned in the article, researchers should conduct more studies to figure out which genes cause p21 proteins to outnumber PUMA proteins.
This article is very interesting to me in the sense that scientists are able to target specific genes that may have huge impacts on cancer. I believe that if more research is done with the p53 gene, there will be incredible amounts of development in the pharmaceutical industry. If techniques are made to permanently turn on the gene, this could be huge for cancer research. I always am skeptical at the beginning of research but I definitely think that in the future, the p53 gene and the p21/PUMA techniques will change the face of medicine.
ReplyDeleteI think this study will encourage future pharmaceutical drug developers to pursue P53 drug development. As the article stated, the tumors with a larger percentage of PUMA present as oppose to p21 proteins, were the tumors that died off. Furthermore the activation of p53 increases the amount of PUMA present and shifts the p21:PUMA ratio to a medically favorable proportion allowing for the death of tumor cells. In conclusion, drug companies should make drugs that activate these p53 proteins. As with all new discoveries, however, there will probably be negative side effects to drugs that take into consideration the p21/PUMA ratio.
ReplyDeleteWith that in mind pharmaceutical companies and drug creators should pay special attention to sensitive populations such as children and elderly. Special attention is needed here because, in these populations survival rates for cancer are usually lower than survival rates for cancer in populations ranging in the 20 - 50 age range.
This finding could help with forming future therapies that do not cause significant side effects. It gives something to researchers to work with. The hope is to give patients a drug to control the p21/PUMA ratio. Doing research on these three different things will help researchers and medical professional understand what combination ratio of these three are effective for what people. Will the same ratio be helpful for all people, or will it differ?
ReplyDeleteI think what they stated in the article seems to be an effective way to address the p21/PUMA ratio. Trying to find out which of the newly discovered candidate genes have the most control over the p21/PUMA ratio seems to be the best bet right now. The only worry is what side effects could be created with molecularly targeted therapies.
This research will open a host of options to cancer patients that is not only less traumatic than chemo, but it may also be more cost-effective. When altering protein ratios, I'd be sure to review any pertinent literature on p21/PUMA ratios. Altering these ratios should be handled with the utmost caution, which is crucial in effective changes to these two interactions.
ReplyDeleteThe genomic thriller, GRIDLOCK, by Alvin Ziegler has surpassed 5,000 downloads in six weeks.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.amazon.com/Gridlock-Alvin-Ziegler-ebook/dp/B00FQPF0FY/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1389619299&sr=8-1&keywords=gridlock+alvin
Video Book Trailer here:
http://www.alvinziegler.com/