Cancer pill AOH1996 shows promise in annihilating all solid tumours(innovationorigins.com)
innovationorigins.com
Cancer pill AOH1996 shows promise in annihilating all solid tumours
https://innovationorigins.com/en/cancer-pill-aoh1996-shows-promise-in-annihilating-all-solid-tumours/
18 comments
this is super AI-generated. paradoxically, the PR release might be a better link: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/city-of-hope-scient...
Agreed, the author on the linked article is listed as an AI, and the article is just an AI mangling of the PR release. The PR release is directly from the group and the link ought to be changed.
Edit - Here is the FDA record page for the relevant clinical trial: https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05227326?titl...
The press release says they've published a paper today, but doesn't link to it or say where it was published. So if anyone has journal access and can see or share the paper let us know.
Edit2 - The paper is here: https://www.cell.com/cell-chemical-biology/pdfExtended/S2451...
Edit - Here is the FDA record page for the relevant clinical trial: https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05227326?titl...
The press release says they've published a paper today, but doesn't link to it or say where it was published. So if anyone has journal access and can see or share the paper let us know.
Edit2 - The paper is here: https://www.cell.com/cell-chemical-biology/pdfExtended/S2451...
Flagged. This is a source-free article created by an "AI editor" on a fluff website. Please stop upvoting it. The drug is still in Phase I trials and has NOT released any data on the patients yet.
"Percentage of the article that is generated by AI: 63%"
I appreciate the transparency, but just raises questions for me. What parts were generated by AI? What edits were made to correct the AI? Why did they feel AI was necessary?
I appreciate the transparency, but just raises questions for me. What parts were generated by AI? What edits were made to correct the AI? Why did they feel AI was necessary?
That article should be ignored and people ought to read the PR that the research group put out.
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/city-of-hope-scient...
Edit: Or better yet, the paper https://www.cell.com/cell-chemical-biology/fulltext/S2451-94...
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/city-of-hope-scient...
Edit: Or better yet, the paper https://www.cell.com/cell-chemical-biology/fulltext/S2451-94...
[deleted]
Clinical trials on humans described here:
https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/treatment/clinical-trial...
Full paper on the drug here:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6279569/
https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/treatment/clinical-trial...
Full paper on the drug here:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6279569/
That is not the paper mentioned in the press release, that's a different paper on the drug published in 2018 by the same group. The current paper is here:
https://www.cell.com/cell-chemical-biology/pdfExtended/S2451...
https://www.cell.com/cell-chemical-biology/pdfExtended/S2451...
All solid tumors or all solid tumors with a specific mutation in PCNA? Big difference…
My reading is that they believe it works across all solid malignant tumors because malignant tumors necessarily upregulate PCNA (since it's critical to cell division). I think they are also saying that it is agnostic to the particular mutations that upregulated PCNA.
Lk-99 and now this. God the hopium is on insane doses right now
[deleted]