ADVERTISEMENT

Woman who had CAR-T cell therapy for neuroblastoma 18 yrs ago still in remission

Joes Place

HB King
Aug 28, 2003
153,781
167,775
113


Elno and his buddies are shutting down NIH grants for therapies like these this month.

Currently, there are 1873 CAR-T cell studies in the ClinicalTrials.gov database.
Some of them will now shut down.

Others will no longer start now.

 


Elno and his buddies are shutting down NIH grants for therapies like these this month.

Currently, there are 1873 CAR-T cell studies in the ClinicalTrials.gov database.
Some of them will now shut down.

Others will no longer start now.

While you're certainly right in an absolute sense that "some" will be affected, I think you're probably more wrong than right as to CAR-T being a particularly good poster child here. The concept has been proven, products have made it to market (notwithstanding how unbelievably complicated CAR-T is), huge amounts are invested in the platform infrastructure, and this is the primary example of a platform actually holding promise for scalability. Ergo, industry and academia are all in on this. (FWIW, about 100 of the 1800 studies in the db are government funded, about 1/10 of those have been terminated, and another 40 are not recruiting new participants.)
 
While you're certainly right in an absolute sense that "some" will be affected, I think you're probably more wrong than right as to CAR-T being a particularly good poster child here. The concept has been proven, products have made it to market (notwithstanding how unbelievably complicated CAR-T is), huge amounts are invested in the platform infrastructure, and this is the primary example of a platform actually holding promise for scalability. Ergo, industry and academia are all in on this. (FWIW, about 100 of the 1800 studies in the db are government funded, about 1/10 of those have been terminated, and another 40 are not recruiting new participants.)

The point being that many dozens of therapies LIKE this start out as basic science work.
And it can take years (often decades) of investment, before something that is a viable "production" therapy is commercialized.

mRNA vaccines are a perfect example, being funded by federal grants for upwards of 2 decades before Pfizer commercialized one. Now, we have a half dozen or more companies making them.

W/o the funding that is now being removed, stuff like this will no longer happen, because no company will invest 20 yrs of work into something they cannot identify a clear path to commercialization for.

Is this point not clear, or do you simply disagree with it?
 
The point being that many dozens of therapies LIKE this start out as basic science work.
And it can take years (often decades) of investment, before something that is a viable "production" therapy is commercialized.

mRNA vaccines are a perfect example, being funded by federal grants for upwards of 2 decades before Pfizer commercialized one. Now, we have a half dozen or more companies making them.

W/o the funding that is now being removed, stuff like this will no longer happen, because no company will invest 20 yrs of work into something they cannot identify a clear path to commercialization for.

Is this point not clear, or do you simply disagree with it?
No, my point is simply that CAR-T is not a particularly good bloody shirt to wave as to that point.
 
while i'm no vaccine denier, i'm not sure that's the greatest example to introduce to this particular message board. ;)

I'm sure you can identify at least dozen others, though.
Pretty much every standard therapy being used at the Steadman Children's hospital started out this same way, and none of them would exist today w/o the federal "seed" funding working out the details.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT