Re: Scientists have hailed a prostate cancer vaccine

[Guest guest]

This both underlines the work that is being done and the time it takes for drugs to get into general use.

I was on a phase 2 trial some years ago for a siimilar vaccine (Onyvax) which should be well on with phase 3 trials. There are many hurdles to jump and often we are looking at extra time before the more uncomfortable drugs that drastically limit quality of life.

Still we hope for that there is yet more hope for the future with useful research

Scientists have hailed a prostate cancer vaccine

Prostate cancer vaccine 'can stimulate body's own defences'

Scientists have hailed a prostate cancer vaccine which can stimulate the body's own defences against the disease.

By Kate Devlin, Medical Correspondent Last Updated: 12:34AM BST 08 Oct 2008

Extract:

Christian Ottensmeier, professor of experimental cancer medicine at the hospital, said that the vaccine had proved as successful in patients as in the laboratory.

He said: "There were a number of questions that needed answering...Is it safe? We find that yes, it is.

"Does it stimulate the immune system? Again we find that yes, the vaccine does this successfully.

"And does it stimulate the immune system in the way we had predicted in the lab? Yes, it does exactly that."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/3153493/Prostate-cancer-vaccine-can-stimulate-bodys-own-defences.html

Ted

[Guest guest]

What I find interesting about this bit of ‘news’

which refers to some very basic science that could be a long way from being

available, is the mere fact that there is a tacit admission that the immune

system can fight cancer. I have been theorizing on this subject for years and

in the past the concept was rigorously rejected on the basis that the immune

system could not detect cancer tumours and therefore was not a factor in

recovery.

Yet this rejection ignored the demonstrable

issue of spontaneous remission where a tumour literally disappears without

treatment. This has been reported in all types of tumours, including prostate

cancer, but is said to be most common in melanoma. Why? Because you can

actually see a melanoma – and you can see when it is gone. It is very

rarely reported for prostate cancer. Why? Because it is very difficult to

diagnose PCa in the first place with a hit and miss biopsy and therefore

equally difficult to ‘prove’ the absence of prostate cancer if a

subsequent biopsy is negative – it is assumed that the subsequent biopsy

merely missed the tumour with no thought given to the fact that the

tumour might possibly have been adequately dealt with by the immune system. It

is also a fact that the majority of diagnosed PCa is treated in a very short

time frame – about six weeks in the US – and therefore there is

no time for any observation of spontaneous remission.

I wouldn’t recommend anyone to place

a bet on spontaneous remission as being their best option, but for men whose

diagnosis is of an insignificant tumour and who are assessed as being

suitable candidates for Active Surveillance it would seem to be a pretty sound

idea to do everything to boost the immune system’s function and avoid

distracting it with the aim of either containing any further growth or actually

sending the tumour backwards.

All the best

Terry Herbert

I have no medical

qualifications but I was diagnosed in ‘96: and have learned a bit since

then.

My sites are at www.yananow.net and www.prostatecancerwatchfulwaiting.co.za

Dr

“Snuffy” Myers : " As a physician, I am painfully aware that most of

the decisions we make with regard to prostate cancer are made with inadequate

data "

From: ProstateCancerSupport [mailto:ProstateCancerSupport ] On Behalf Of ukfizwit

Sent: Monday, 24 November 2008

6:35 AM

To: ProstateCancerSupport

Subject:

Scientists have hailed a prostate cancer vaccine

Prostate

cancer vaccine 'can stimulate body's own defences'

Scientists

have hailed a prostate cancer vaccine which can stimulate the body's own

defences against the disease.

By

Kate Devlin, Medical Correspondent

Last Updated: 12:34AM BST 08 Oct 2008

Extract:

Christian

Ottensmeier, professor of experimental cancer medicine at the hospital, said

that the vaccine had proved as successful in patients as in the laboratory.

He

said: " There were a number of questions that needed answering...Is it

safe? We find that yes, it is.

" Does

it stimulate the immune system? Again we find that yes, the vaccine does this

successfully.

" And

does it stimulate the immune system in the way we had predicted in the lab?

Yes, it does exactly that. "

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/3153493/Prostate-cancer-vaccine-can-stimulate-bodys-own-defences.html

Ted

[Guest guest]

What I find interesting about this bit of ‘news’

which refers to some very basic science that could be a long way from being

available, is the mere fact that there is a tacit admission that the immune

system can fight cancer. I have been theorizing on this subject for years and

in the past the concept was rigorously rejected on the basis that the immune

system could not detect cancer tumours and therefore was not a factor in

recovery.

Yet this rejection ignored the demonstrable

issue of spontaneous remission where a tumour literally disappears without

treatment. This has been reported in all types of tumours, including prostate

cancer, but is said to be most common in melanoma. Why? Because you can

actually see a melanoma – and you can see when it is gone. It is very

rarely reported for prostate cancer. Why? Because it is very difficult to

diagnose PCa in the first place with a hit and miss biopsy and therefore

equally difficult to ‘prove’ the absence of prostate cancer if a

subsequent biopsy is negative – it is assumed that the subsequent biopsy

merely missed the tumour with no thought given to the fact that the

tumour might possibly have been adequately dealt with by the immune system. It

is also a fact that the majority of diagnosed PCa is treated in a very short

time frame – about six weeks in the US – and therefore there is

no time for any observation of spontaneous remission.

I wouldn’t recommend anyone to place

a bet on spontaneous remission as being their best option, but for men whose

diagnosis is of an insignificant tumour and who are assessed as being

suitable candidates for Active Surveillance it would seem to be a pretty sound

idea to do everything to boost the immune system’s function and avoid

distracting it with the aim of either containing any further growth or actually

sending the tumour backwards.

All the best

Terry Herbert

I have no medical

qualifications but I was diagnosed in ‘96: and have learned a bit since

then.

My sites are at www.yananow.net and www.prostatecancerwatchfulwaiting.co.za

Dr

“Snuffy” Myers : " As a physician, I am painfully aware that most of

the decisions we make with regard to prostate cancer are made with inadequate

data "

From: ProstateCancerSupport [mailto:ProstateCancerSupport ] On Behalf Of ukfizwit

Sent: Monday, 24 November 2008

6:35 AM

To: ProstateCancerSupport

Subject:

Scientists have hailed a prostate cancer vaccine

Prostate

cancer vaccine 'can stimulate body's own defences'

Scientists

have hailed a prostate cancer vaccine which can stimulate the body's own

defences against the disease.

By

Kate Devlin, Medical Correspondent

Last Updated: 12:34AM BST 08 Oct 2008

Extract:

Christian

Ottensmeier, professor of experimental cancer medicine at the hospital, said

that the vaccine had proved as successful in patients as in the laboratory.

He

said: " There were a number of questions that needed answering...Is it

safe? We find that yes, it is.

" Does

it stimulate the immune system? Again we find that yes, the vaccine does this

successfully.

" And

does it stimulate the immune system in the way we had predicted in the lab?

Yes, it does exactly that. "

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/3153493/Prostate-cancer-vaccine-can-stimulate-bodys-own-defences.html

Ted

[Guest guest]

Terry Herbert wrote:

> What I find interesting about this bit of ‘news’ which refers

> to some very basic science that could be a long way from being

> available, is the mere fact that there is a tacit admission

> that the immune system can fight cancer. I have been

> theorizing on this subject for years and in the past the

> concept was rigorously rejected on the basis that the immune

> system could not detect cancer tumours and therefore was not a

> factor in recovery.

....

I'm not an expert in this, but I've done some reading and here

is my understanding of the issues.

All human cells express a " major histocompatibility complex "

(MHC) which is a protein pattern forming an " antigen " on the

surface of the cell that is more or less unique to each person.

Our immune systems learn from earliest development to recognize

that pattern and leave it alone. That's the mechanism by which

our immune system tells the difference between us and invading

cells of bacteria or protozoa, and attack the invaders without

harming our own bodies.

Cancer cells are entirely our own. They have no foreign

components. They have the MHC antigens on their surface. It

was thus only fairly recently that we learned that the human

immune system actually _can_ attack our own cells if they are

cancerous. That was a major discovery in immunology.

As I understand it however, the MHC antigens still pose problems

for the immune system and our immune systems are not as

effective in fighting cancer as we would like them to be. Thus

a lot of the immune system therapies that are being developed

for cancer treatment don't just " boost " the immune system, they

try to sensitize it to some specific antigen found on the

surface of the cancer cell that's not found on other cells and

" train " the immune system to attack it.

Provenge is made by culturing cells from the patient with

prostatic acid phosphatase (PAP) plus chemicals that stimulate

immune system attacks, then re-injecting the product into the

patient. The complex is intended to stimulate the immune system

to grow more killer cells that attack the patient's own cells

that are expressing PAP - i.e., the prostate cancer tumor cells.

Unfortunately, there are problems with therapies like this.

Besides the fact that they are extremely expensive (each

patient's drug is custom made for that patient), the immune

system attacks a cell by injecting it with a " kill " signal.

When a normal cell receives that signal it starts the process of

" apoptosis " , a kind of cell suicide. This often works when the

cell has been infected by a virus or bacterium and has become a

danger to the body.

But, no surprise, cancer cells are mutants. Not all of them

respond to the kill signal. Just as with hormone therapy and

chemotherapy, the treatment kills off those tumor cells that are

sensitive to it but the others eventually multiply and replace

the whole tumor population with immune system kill signal

resistant cells.

So what I expect from the immunotherapies is something like

hormone therapy and chemotherapy. It will prolong our lives.

In some lucky patients it will produce a very long lasting

response. It may kill off a different population of cells from

those killed off by ADT or chemo, producing added months or

years of life. But I think it will probably be very rare for it

to " cure " the cancer.

But, hey, I'm all in favor of new treatments that prolong life.

Alan

[Guest guest]

Terry Herbert wrote:

> What I find interesting about this bit of ‘news’ which refers

> to some very basic science that could be a long way from being

> available, is the mere fact that there is a tacit admission

> that the immune system can fight cancer. I have been

> theorizing on this subject for years and in the past the

> concept was rigorously rejected on the basis that the immune

> system could not detect cancer tumours and therefore was not a

> factor in recovery.

....

I'm not an expert in this, but I've done some reading and here

is my understanding of the issues.

All human cells express a " major histocompatibility complex "

(MHC) which is a protein pattern forming an " antigen " on the

surface of the cell that is more or less unique to each person.

Our immune systems learn from earliest development to recognize

that pattern and leave it alone. That's the mechanism by which

our immune system tells the difference between us and invading

cells of bacteria or protozoa, and attack the invaders without

harming our own bodies.

Cancer cells are entirely our own. They have no foreign

components. They have the MHC antigens on their surface. It

was thus only fairly recently that we learned that the human

immune system actually _can_ attack our own cells if they are

cancerous. That was a major discovery in immunology.

As I understand it however, the MHC antigens still pose problems

for the immune system and our immune systems are not as

effective in fighting cancer as we would like them to be. Thus

a lot of the immune system therapies that are being developed

for cancer treatment don't just " boost " the immune system, they

try to sensitize it to some specific antigen found on the

surface of the cancer cell that's not found on other cells and

" train " the immune system to attack it.

Provenge is made by culturing cells from the patient with

prostatic acid phosphatase (PAP) plus chemicals that stimulate

immune system attacks, then re-injecting the product into the

patient. The complex is intended to stimulate the immune system

to grow more killer cells that attack the patient's own cells

that are expressing PAP - i.e., the prostate cancer tumor cells.

Unfortunately, there are problems with therapies like this.

Besides the fact that they are extremely expensive (each

patient's drug is custom made for that patient), the immune

system attacks a cell by injecting it with a " kill " signal.

When a normal cell receives that signal it starts the process of

" apoptosis " , a kind of cell suicide. This often works when the

cell has been infected by a virus or bacterium and has become a

danger to the body.

But, no surprise, cancer cells are mutants. Not all of them

respond to the kill signal. Just as with hormone therapy and

chemotherapy, the treatment kills off those tumor cells that are

sensitive to it but the others eventually multiply and replace

the whole tumor population with immune system kill signal

resistant cells.

So what I expect from the immunotherapies is something like

hormone therapy and chemotherapy. It will prolong our lives.

In some lucky patients it will produce a very long lasting

response. It may kill off a different population of cells from

those killed off by ADT or chemo, producing added months or

years of life. But I think it will probably be very rare for it

to " cure " the cancer.

But, hey, I'm all in favor of new treatments that prolong life.

Alan

[Guest guest]

Terry Herbert wrote:

> What I find interesting about this bit of ‘news’ which refers

> to some very basic science that could be a long way from being

> available, is the mere fact that there is a tacit admission

> that the immune system can fight cancer. I have been

> theorizing on this subject for years and in the past the

> concept was rigorously rejected on the basis that the immune

> system could not detect cancer tumours and therefore was not a

> factor in recovery.

....

I'm not an expert in this, but I've done some reading and here

is my understanding of the issues.

All human cells express a " major histocompatibility complex "

(MHC) which is a protein pattern forming an " antigen " on the

surface of the cell that is more or less unique to each person.

Our immune systems learn from earliest development to recognize

that pattern and leave it alone. That's the mechanism by which

our immune system tells the difference between us and invading

cells of bacteria or protozoa, and attack the invaders without

harming our own bodies.

Cancer cells are entirely our own. They have no foreign

components. They have the MHC antigens on their surface. It

was thus only fairly recently that we learned that the human

immune system actually _can_ attack our own cells if they are

cancerous. That was a major discovery in immunology.

As I understand it however, the MHC antigens still pose problems

for the immune system and our immune systems are not as

effective in fighting cancer as we would like them to be. Thus

a lot of the immune system therapies that are being developed

for cancer treatment don't just " boost " the immune system, they

try to sensitize it to some specific antigen found on the

surface of the cancer cell that's not found on other cells and

" train " the immune system to attack it.

Provenge is made by culturing cells from the patient with

prostatic acid phosphatase (PAP) plus chemicals that stimulate

immune system attacks, then re-injecting the product into the

patient. The complex is intended to stimulate the immune system

to grow more killer cells that attack the patient's own cells

that are expressing PAP - i.e., the prostate cancer tumor cells.

Unfortunately, there are problems with therapies like this.

Besides the fact that they are extremely expensive (each

patient's drug is custom made for that patient), the immune

system attacks a cell by injecting it with a " kill " signal.

When a normal cell receives that signal it starts the process of

" apoptosis " , a kind of cell suicide. This often works when the

cell has been infected by a virus or bacterium and has become a

danger to the body.

But, no surprise, cancer cells are mutants. Not all of them

respond to the kill signal. Just as with hormone therapy and

chemotherapy, the treatment kills off those tumor cells that are

sensitive to it but the others eventually multiply and replace

the whole tumor population with immune system kill signal

resistant cells.

So what I expect from the immunotherapies is something like

hormone therapy and chemotherapy. It will prolong our lives.

In some lucky patients it will produce a very long lasting

response. It may kill off a different population of cells from

those killed off by ADT or chemo, producing added months or

years of life. But I think it will probably be very rare for it

to " cure " the cancer.

But, hey, I'm all in favor of new treatments that prolong life.

Alan

[Guest guest]

It certainly does sugggest that the immune system can fight cancer.

Ted

>

> What I find interesting about this bit of 'news' which refers to

some very

> basic science that could be a long way from being available, is the

mere

> fact that there is a tacit admission that the immune system can

fight

> cancer. I have been theorizing on this subject for years and in the

past the

> concept was rigorously rejected on the basis that the immune system

could

> not detect cancer tumours and therefore was not a factor in

recovery.

>

>

>

> Yet this rejection ignored the demonstrable issue of spontaneous

remission

> where a tumour literally disappears without treatment. This has been

> reported in all types of tumours, including prostate cancer, but is

said to

> be most common in melanoma. Why? Because you can actually see a

melanoma -

> and you can see when it is gone. It is very rarely reported for

prostate

> cancer. Why? Because it is very difficult to diagnose PCa in the

first place

> with a hit and miss biopsy and therefore equally difficult

to 'prove' the

> absence of prostate cancer if a subsequent biopsy is negative - it

is

> assumed that the subsequent biopsy merely missed the tumour with

no thought

> given to the fact that the tumour might possibly have been

adequately dealt

> with by the immune system. It is also a fact that the majority of

diagnosed

> PCa is treated in a very short time frame - about six weeks in the

US - and

> therefore there is no time for any observation of spontaneous

remission.

>

>

>

> I wouldn't recommend anyone to place a bet on spontaneous remission

as being

> their best option, but for men whose diagnosis is of an

insignificant tumour

> and who are assessed as being suitable candidates for Active

Surveillance

> it would seem to be a pretty sound idea to do everything to boost

the immune

> system's function and avoid distracting it with the aim of either

containing

> any further growth or actually sending the tumour backwards.

>

>

>

>

>

> All the best

>

>

>

> Terry Herbert

>

> I have no medical qualifications but I was diagnosed in '96: and

have

> learned a bit since then.

>

> My sites are at www.yananow.net <http://www.yananow.net/> and

> <http://www.prostatecancerwatchfulwaiting.co.za/>

> www.prostatecancerwatchfulwaiting.co.za

>

> Dr " Snuffy " Myers : " As a physician, I am painfully aware

that most

> of the decisions we make with regard to prostate cancer are made

with

> inadequate data "

>

>

>

> _____

>

> From: ProstateCancerSupport

> [mailto:ProstateCancerSupport ] On Behalf Of ukfizwit

> Sent: Monday, 24 November 2008 6:35 AM

> To: ProstateCancerSupport

> Subject: Scientists have hailed a prostate

cancer

> vaccine

>

>

>

>

> Prostate cancer vaccine 'can stimulate body's own defences'

>

>

> Scientists have hailed a prostate cancer vaccine which can

stimulate the

> body's own defences against the disease.

>

>

> By Kate Devlin, Medical Correspondent

> Last Updated: 12:34AM BST 08 Oct 2008

>

>

>

> Extract:

>

> Christian Ottensmeier, professor of experimental cancer medicine at

the

> hospital, said that the vaccine had proved as successful in

patients as in

> the laboratory.

>

> He said: " There were a number of questions that needed

answering...Is it

> safe? We find that yes, it is.

>

> " Does it stimulate the immune system? Again we find that yes, the

vaccine

> does this successfully.

>

> " And does it stimulate the immune system in the way we had

predicted in the

> lab? Yes, it does exactly that. "

>

>

> <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/3153493/Prostate-cancer-vaccine-

can-stimu

> late-bodys-own-defences.html>

> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/3153493/Prostate-cancer-vaccine-

can-stimul

> ate-bodys-own-defences.html

>

>

>

> Ted

>

[Guest guest]

It certainly does sugggest that the immune system can fight cancer.

Ted

>

> What I find interesting about this bit of 'news' which refers to

some very

> basic science that could be a long way from being available, is the

mere

> fact that there is a tacit admission that the immune system can

fight

> cancer. I have been theorizing on this subject for years and in the

past the

> concept was rigorously rejected on the basis that the immune system

could

> not detect cancer tumours and therefore was not a factor in

recovery.

>

>

>

> Yet this rejection ignored the demonstrable issue of spontaneous

remission

> where a tumour literally disappears without treatment. This has been

> reported in all types of tumours, including prostate cancer, but is

said to

> be most common in melanoma. Why? Because you can actually see a

melanoma -

> and you can see when it is gone. It is very rarely reported for

prostate

> cancer. Why? Because it is very difficult to diagnose PCa in the

first place

> with a hit and miss biopsy and therefore equally difficult

to 'prove' the

> absence of prostate cancer if a subsequent biopsy is negative - it

is

> assumed that the subsequent biopsy merely missed the tumour with

no thought

> given to the fact that the tumour might possibly have been

adequately dealt

> with by the immune system. It is also a fact that the majority of

diagnosed

> PCa is treated in a very short time frame - about six weeks in the

US - and

> therefore there is no time for any observation of spontaneous

remission.

>

>

>

> I wouldn't recommend anyone to place a bet on spontaneous remission

as being

> their best option, but for men whose diagnosis is of an

insignificant tumour

> and who are assessed as being suitable candidates for Active

Surveillance

> it would seem to be a pretty sound idea to do everything to boost

the immune

> system's function and avoid distracting it with the aim of either

containing

> any further growth or actually sending the tumour backwards.

>

>

>

>

>

> All the best

>

>

>

> Terry Herbert

>

> I have no medical qualifications but I was diagnosed in '96: and

have

> learned a bit since then.

>

> My sites are at www.yananow.net <http://www.yananow.net/> and

> <http://www.prostatecancerwatchfulwaiting.co.za/>

> www.prostatecancerwatchfulwaiting.co.za

>

> Dr " Snuffy " Myers : " As a physician, I am painfully aware

that most

> of the decisions we make with regard to prostate cancer are made

with

> inadequate data "

>

>

>

> _____

>

> From: ProstateCancerSupport

> [mailto:ProstateCancerSupport ] On Behalf Of ukfizwit

> Sent: Monday, 24 November 2008 6:35 AM

> To: ProstateCancerSupport

> Subject: Scientists have hailed a prostate

cancer

> vaccine

>

>

>

>

> Prostate cancer vaccine 'can stimulate body's own defences'

>

>

> Scientists have hailed a prostate cancer vaccine which can

stimulate the

> body's own defences against the disease.

>

>

> By Kate Devlin, Medical Correspondent

> Last Updated: 12:34AM BST 08 Oct 2008

>

>

>

> Extract:

>

> Christian Ottensmeier, professor of experimental cancer medicine at

the

> hospital, said that the vaccine had proved as successful in

patients as in

> the laboratory.

>

> He said: " There were a number of questions that needed

answering...Is it

> safe? We find that yes, it is.

>

> " Does it stimulate the immune system? Again we find that yes, the

vaccine

> does this successfully.

>

> " And does it stimulate the immune system in the way we had

predicted in the

> lab? Yes, it does exactly that. "

>

>

> <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/3153493/Prostate-cancer-vaccine-

can-stimu

> late-bodys-own-defences.html>

> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/3153493/Prostate-cancer-vaccine-

can-stimul

> ate-bodys-own-defences.html

>

>

>

> Ted

>

[Guest guest]

Alan,

I think this is a very good description of what they think is happening. Part of the problem is that they have to rethink the way they evaluate the effectiveness of immunotherapy's. The drug models so not work as well with biologics/immunotherapy's.

Kathy

From: ProstateCancerSupport [mailto:ProstateCancerSupport ] On Behalf Of Alan MeyerSent: Monday, November 24, 2008 12:17 AMTo: ProstateCancerSupport Subject: Re: Scientists have hailed a prostate cancer vaccine

Terry Herbert <ghenesh_49optusnet.au> wrote:> What I find interesting about this bit of ‘news’ which refers> to some very basic science that could be a long way from being> available, is the mere fact that there is a tacit admission> that the immune system can fight cancer. I have been> theorizing on this subject for years and in the past the> concept was rigorously rejected on the basis that the immune> system could not detect cancer tumours and therefore was not a> factor in recovery....I'm not an expert in this, but I've done some reading and hereis my understanding of the issues.All human cells express a "major histocompatibility complex"(MHC) which is a protein pattern forming an "antigen" on thesurface of the cell that is more or less unique to each person.Our immune systems learn from earliest development to recognizethat pattern and leave it alone. That's the mechanism by whichour immune system tells the difference between us and invadingcells of bacteria or protozoa, and attack the invaders withoutharming our own bodies. Cancer cells are entirely our own. They have no foreigncomponents. They have the MHC antigens on their surface. Itwas thus only fairly recently that we learned that the humanimmune system actually _can_ attack our own cells if they arecancerous. That was a major discovery in immunology.As I understand it however, the MHC antigens still pose problemsfor the immune system and our immune systems are not aseffective in fighting cancer as we would like them to be. Thusa lot of the immune system therapies that are being developedfor cancer treatment don't just "boost" the immune system, theytry to sensitize it to some specific antigen found on thesurface of the cancer cell that's not found on other cells and"train" the immune system to attack it.Provenge is made by culturing cells from the patient withprostatic acid phosphatase (PAP) plus chemicals that stimulateimmune system attacks, then re-injecting the product into thepatient. The complex is intended to stimulate the immune systemto grow more killer cells that attack the patient's own cellsthat are expressing PAP - i.e., the prostate cancer tumor cells.Unfortunately, there are problems with therapies like this.Besides the fact that they are extremely expensive (eachpatient's drug is custom made for that patient), the immunesystem attacks a cell by injecting it with a "kill" signal.When a normal cell receives that signal it starts the process of"apoptosis", a kind of cell suicide. This often works when thecell has been infected by a virus or bacterium and has become adanger to the body.But, no surprise, cancer cells are mutants. Not all of themrespond to the kill signal. Just as with hormone therapy andchemotherapy, the treatment kills off those tumor cells that aresensitive to it but the others eventually multiply and replacethe whole tumor population with immune system kill signalresistant cells.So what I expect from the immunotherapies is something likehormone therapy and chemotherapy. It will prolong our lives.In some lucky patients it will produce a very long lastingresponse. It may kill off a different population of cells fromthose killed off by ADT or chemo, producing added months oryears of life. But I think it will probably be very rare for itto "cure" the cancer.But, hey, I'm all in favor of new treatments that prolong life.Alan