In our world
nowadays it is virtually impossible to find someone who has not been affected
by cancer in one way or another. There are millions of people diagnosed with
cancer each year and there are countless different forms of treatment between surgery,
chemotherapy, radiation, precision medicine, etc. but are they all really
working? Mina Bissell, of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in
California, says no.
In the article “Mina
J. Bissell: Context Matters” from the Trends
in Cancer journal Bissell shares her revolutionary thoughts on cancer as a
disease, the tumor microenvironment that dictates cancer, and possible
treatment plans for the future. She claims we need to start looking at cancer
as an abnormal organ rather than an assortment of genetically mutated, misfit
cells and has developed sufficient evidence to support the notion that the microenvironment
is responsible for tissue and organ specificity. Since cancer is an
organ-specific disease this means that the key to this devastating disease
could also be hidden in the architecture of these cells and tissues.
 |
| Tumor Microenvironment |
Tumor microenvironment
(TME) is essentially the environment and surroundings that the tumor exists in,
including but not limited to immune cells, blood vessels, lymphocytes, signaling
molecules, fibroblasts, and extracellular matrix (ECM). All of the cells in
your body have the exact same genetic makeup but it is the microenvironment
that establishes context and dictates how those cells develop and express
themselves differently in different tissue. Just as in normal cells, cell differentiation
for cancerous cells is partially affected by the genetic component but that can
only take it so far, at which point the rest is controlled by the context established
by the cells’ surroundings.
Bissell mentions
how some intellectuals are still under the impression that cell context is
irrelevant and that the mutation or overexpression of a single oncogene has
more than enough potential to bestow cancerous cells. In their minds deeper
gene sequencing is the be-all and end-all of curing cancer. She simply deems
this irrational and recognizes how that strategy of treatment is mediocre at
best in some cases and utterly ineffective in others. Bissell and her colleague
David Dolberg conclude that the formation of a tumor is so much more than powerful
oncogenes alone, they need to join forces with numerous other dynamic parts of
the cells’ environments before they can be categorized as truly malignant. Thus,
shedding light on and reinforcing the principle that cancer is an
organ-specific disease because of the tumor microenvironment’s role.
Due to the organ
specificity of cancer the further exploration and understanding of the normal
organ is demanded from science before they have any hope of truly understanding
the cancer of that organ, let alone treatment. There are countless other
attributes that require advanced investigation in the future before scientists
can really get a good handle on the understanding of cancer and its treatment
but Bissell has made some groundbreaking contributions to this fight by pointing
them in the right direction with the context provided in microenvironment.
Bissell calls
upon the upcoming generations of scientists for this prospective exploration and
stresses the importance of everyone in science, young and old, challenging the conventional
way of doing things. She encourages debate and individuality in her students
while also forcing them to approach progressive solutions to seemingly
unsolvable problems. Her biggest piece of advice is, “Question authority, think
for yourselves, don’t become arrogant (it kills curiosity and passion) and look
at your own data as well as others’ data with critical eyes.”
Cancer itself is
an incredibly ugly and seemingly unstoppable disease and any advancements we
have made in the face of this monstrosity so far is incredibly noteworthy. The scientific
and medical worlds have done the best they can to provide solutions to this
problem but there is still so much work to be done.
Reference:
"Mina J. Bissell: Context Matters." Trends in Cancer. 1.1 (2015): 6-8. Web. Accessed 11 October 2015. <http://0-www.sciencedirect.com.library. lemoyne.edu/science/article/pii/S2405803315000205>.
Image Reference:
Tumor Microenvironments: Cell Picture Show. Trends in Cancer Website. <http://www.cell.com/trends/cancer/home>.
As Bissell asserts in her radical hypothesis, if tissue architecture and context are the message, then tumor cells with abnormal genomes should be capable of becoming normal if tissue architecture is restored. We need a method for distinguishing normal versus malignant architecture. Bissell has opened up the world of research to explore a new perspective that growth and malignant behavior are regulated at the level of tissue organization, and tissue organization is dependent on the extracellular matrix and the microenvironment.
ReplyDeleteBissell's idea that we should be looking at cancer as an abnormal organ rather than a group of abnormal cells is very interesting but it definitely makes sense. I wonder if this idea can open doors to new treatment plans that haven't been thought of yet! As we all know development of the structure of organs in our body is extremely delicate and detailed. It is because of this that the architecture may indeed hold the key to cancer. It is interesting that Bissell believes the way intellectuals are looking at cancer may be holding them back from unlocking a cure to cancer. Her idea that tumors are much more powerful than the oncogenes themselves. Her ideas make a lot of sense because we all know cancer to be very powerful and deadly. I believe that we have gone this long without a cure for cancer, why not take a new, refreshing approach?
ReplyDeleteI am interested in what specifically is the context component that contributes the most to cancer. Also I think that this idea of environment will lead into research on metastasis. If the context has such an extreme effect on tumor growth, then what component contributes to metastasis. Why if the tumor cells are happy growing where they are, break off to find a new environment. Or is it that the places mets form are just as suitable as the original environment..
ReplyDeleteThis is an extremely interesting read and I especially enjoyed how Bissell views cancer, "as an abnormal organ rather than an assortment of genetically mutated, misfit cells". That is a very interesting perspective to come from and it shows how much that Bissell put into his research. We need a method for distinguishing normal versus malignant architecture. Bissell has demonstrated new research to explore a new perspective that malignant behavior are regulated at the level of tissue organization. Cancer is something that will always have a lot of funding and that is crucial in the 21st century where a staggering percentage of males (1/2) and females (1/3) will have some form of cancer at least once in their lives. It's also important to point out that only ~5% of cancers are significantly related to genetics, so it is clear that lifestyle choices contribute to the malignant cells and the damage that is correlated within them. I'm interested to see new articles that help to back Bissell's hypothesis in future studies.
ReplyDeleteAs I watched the Ted Talk by Dr. Bissell, what she proposed seemed very interesting. This has helped clarify some of her points, which is very helpful in understanding where her work an ideas fit into modern cancer research. I believe that her idea being as radical as it is is a good thing, as it seems that finding the cure for cancer just may take a shot in the dark. Existing treatments are not as effective as we would like them to be, and have been around for some time with a relatively small amount of improvement, so the introduction of a whole new way to treat cancer might be the first step to the elimination of this problem.
ReplyDeleteThis whole new concept of treating cancer, explained by Dr. Bissel in her article and in the Ted Talk, is very exciting and interesting. Such a drastic change in approach is surprising, yet is probably good since we have been trying to find new ways to treat cancer without any huge advances. However, there have been some advancements in other types of treatment as well. In London, a girl with leukemia deemed untreatable was actually treated using a genome editing technique called TALEN. Scientists used TALEN to edit genes in immune cells, causing them to hunt and destroy the cancerous blood cells. So far, it seems to have worked, however it is too soon to know for sure. Either way, this, and Dr. Bissel's research, show very promising fields of treatment for cancer that may be available. Rather than looking at the cancer cells themselves, maybe it would be better to look at other parts such as the immune cells or the surrounding micro-environment. We need to continue trying new forms of treatment in hopes of someday finding a way to beat cancer.
ReplyDeleteAs I was researching for the term paper, I came across the NOTCH pathway so many times. It really is true that people are mostly focusing on the genetic component. Also most of the research was focused on malfunctions. I came across only one article that was researching how NOTCH helps fight cancer. This article says that the cell type matters when finding out what path NOTCH goes down, I think this applies to what BIssell is sayiing. Just broad sweeping treatment won't work because the idea that "Cancer is cancer" is bogus.
ReplyDeleteI think it is very interesting lo look at cancer in the way that Bissell did with seeing it as a separate organ instead of just a bunch of abnormal cells and to understand that the organ specific location is very important to the spread of the disease as well as the symptoms and treatments to cure the ill. Although we do not know much about cancer yet, we have been working diligently on breakthrough research to make sense of certain cases as well as to continue on with our lives the best we can.
ReplyDelete