- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Cancer breakthroughs
Posted on 2/12/25 at 8:56 am to Giantkiller
Posted on 2/12/25 at 8:56 am to Giantkiller
quote:
Recently lost a friend to cancer and not gonna lie, it majorly bummed me out. Like I usually do with anything, it sent me down a wormhole of information but this time (and not withstanding my loss) I'm feeling a little more positive about where the future leads. For all of you who are struggling with it, I think there's more hope on the horizon.. but reasons to be more positive than ever before.
Obviously they always throw radiation and chemo at the problems, but immunotherapy, precision medicine, CAT-T cell therapy seem to be having some interesting breakthrough's of late. I recently had a physical and during the labs, I was curious as to why they can't find cancer in your blood. Turns out they sort of can with these liquid biopsies. Why they don't screen it along with all the other shite they're looking for, I'm not sure. I guess cost.. But hopefully we're moving to that being kind of routine.
The five year survival rate has risen dramatically. Some childhood leukemias and certain breast cancers are sporting almost a 90% rate. And AI-driven drug discoveries are making it more manageable... even curable than ever before.
Any OT oncologists here? Or others who are more knowledgeable on the subject, give me more reasons to be positive. How far are we away from making cancer less of a big deal?
There is certainly reason to be optimistic- cancer therapies have improved significantly over the last 25 years.
As noted in several posts, cancer is really a multitude of diseases- even the subset of lymphoma comprises approximately 80 types- depending on how you wish to subset.
Essentially all new therapies being developed and approved are therapies targeted to some enzyme or gene. Really no new what are considered traditional chemotherapies are being developed. These new agents still have side effects of course but are generally more tolerable and more effective.
Advances are also being made in blood detection as you noted which will hopefully lead to earlier detection and even further increased cure rates with less therapy. Issue currently really is not cost of the testing- it is accuracy.
An example of cancers which are"less of a big deal" are two chronic leukemias- CLL and CML. Current models suggest survival in these cancers are nearly the same as age matched controls. People still die of these diseases of course- but many have lifelong control and die of other causes. Chemotherapy is now typically not used in either of these diseases- targeted oral therapy mostly. The average 5 year survival of CML before targeted therapy was developed was less than 5 years, with most people dying due to conversion to Acute Leukemia.
0
Posted on 2/12/25 at 9:04 am to Chucktown_Badger
quote:
Chucktown_Badger
All this meaningless jibber jabber just to try and dispute the fact that the leading Oncology maker Roche made $9 billion in profit last year with Oncology drugs being the majority of it. Do they not factor in cost when calculating net profit?
quote:
it usually takes Pharma companies 12-15 years to break even overall on a newly approved drug
No it takes them that long to roll out a new drug from early stages to approval not break even. It cost anywhere from 1 billion to 5 billion to get a new drug to market. Perjeta made Roche 1.5 billion in profits in 2024 alone
Posted on 2/12/25 at 9:05 am to Penrod
quote:And she had two young kids, one 4, the other 2. Both were born with a cesarean, and the second might have opened up to help the cancer grow. Can't imagine, well I can cause I lost my father when I was 12, but to know you aren't gonna see them grow put me and my wife in a tailspin for sure. We still mourn.
That’s heart breaking. Anyone but your child
Posted on 2/12/25 at 9:11 am to jdd48
quote:
not fully convinced that big pharma is not holding back cancer research.
They most certainly are holding back research because they make about a million dollars per cancer patient. Big pharma is some of the most evil entities in the world and they have no interest in actual cures. Only profits matter.
Posted on 2/12/25 at 9:59 am to MRTigerFan
quote:
Big pharma is some of the most evil entities in the world and they have no interest in actual cures. Only profits matter.
If you truly feel this way you have the right to not use any of their products. Send a message my man.
Posted on 2/12/25 at 10:00 am to Howyouluhdat
quote:
Howyouluhdat
You're so lost on so much of this I'm no longer willing to invest my time trying to correct you
Posted on 2/12/25 at 10:04 am to Chucktown_Badger
quote:
Chucktown_Badger
You’re wasting your breath in this thread. Cancer threads have to be the most depressing threads on this site. Sad stories of people losing loved ones and absolute idiots posting nonsense about a subject they have not the slightest understanding of.
Posted on 2/12/25 at 10:19 am to Chucktown_Badger
quote:
You're so lost on so much of this I'm no longer willing to invest my time trying to correct you
It’s not me. It’s raw data. Take it how you want to sweetie but if you believe the most corrupt industry in this country means well for you then you are about as gullible as my 5 yr old
Posted on 2/12/25 at 10:39 am to Howyouluhdat
quote:The poster talked about profit margin of 90% for a company, not one particular drug. For any company, some of their products are going to make money and some are going to lose. Hopefully the ones that make money keep the company in the black. What I posted for Pfizer and Abbvie shows a 7-8% profit margin overall. If not for their money makers, they'd be gone. If they have a big selling drug making a 90% profit they must be losing money on several others.
How are they cherry picked when this whole thread is on cancer
I read your first link, the second didn't seem to want to download. In the first did they take into consideration that less than one out of ten drugs even make it to market. 90+% fail after having money and years invested in them. I don't think it considered that in the roi numbers.
quote:As I've noted above, that isn't accurate.
Oncology drugs are expensive as frick for no reason at all
quote:They can certainly mislead when taken out of context or removed from the full picture. If a company makes a million dollar profit on one product but expenses and losses on other products total $930,000 does the "million dollar profit" tell the whole story?
Facts don’t lie.
Posted on 2/12/25 at 10:53 am to MRTigerFan
quote:
They most certainly are holding back research because they make about a million dollars per cancer patient.
There is value in knowledge, not ignorance. These companies do not hold back research. They absolutely "shelf" assets to maximize patent terms, but they perform the research to know for what indications and when to release those assets.
It doesn't make financial sense to stifle research on their own assets, and they can't control research performed by other companies.
Posted on 2/12/25 at 11:06 am to Jake88
quote:
What I posted for Pfizer and Abbvie shows a 7-8% profit margin overall.
quote:
Pfizer's operated at median gross profit margin of 66.0% from fiscal years ending December 2020 to 2024. Looking back at the last 5 years, Pfizer's gross profit margin peaked in December 2020 at 79.9%.
LINK
Posted on 2/12/25 at 11:08 am to TSmith
quote:PET scan is what you're looking for, and insurance would never cover it because it's nuclear and expensive. I have to fight for my annual scan with BCBS every time now even though I'm a survivor.
There's no substitute for imagery for tumor cancers. Everyone should try to get scanned - a CT, MRI, even ultrasound... something. I wish it were covered by insurance, say, every 5 years or something. Would save many lives.
Posted on 2/12/25 at 11:12 am to Howyouluhdat
quote:
Pfizer's operated at median gross profit margin of 66.0% from fiscal years ending December 2020 to 2024. Looking back at the last 5 years, Pfizer's gross profit margin peaked in December 2020 at 79.9%.
So 66% pure profit until they have to pay those pesky employees and cover other expenses?
I think pharmaceutical companies are shitty, but at least argue in good faith.
Posted on 2/12/25 at 11:16 am to guedeaux
quote:
These companies do not hold back research. They absolutely "shelf" assets to maximize patent terms
I agree with this. But my point remains that often times, curing patients is not their priority.
Posted on 2/12/25 at 11:22 am to Howyouluhdat
quote:Macrotrends
Pfizer net profit margin for the quarter ending September 30, 2024 was 7.16%
quote:
gross profit
quote:
Gross profit is the money a company makes after subtracting the costs directly associated with producing its goods or services, while net profit is the remaining amount after all expenses, including operating costs and taxes, have been deducted
This post was edited on 2/12/25 at 11:25 am
Posted on 2/12/25 at 11:24 am to Wiener
quote:
I think pharmaceutical companies are shitty, but at least argue in good faith.
I’m arguing profits off the drug itself. Did you read anything in this thread
Posted on 2/12/25 at 11:25 am to Jake88
quote:
Jake88
Continues to be a dumbass
Posted on 2/12/25 at 11:30 am to Mingo Was His NameO
He should be arguing using gross profits?
Posted on 2/12/25 at 11:36 am to guedeaux
quote:
They absolutely "shelf" assets to maximize patent terms
Help me understand what you're suggesting here. Because patents get submitted very early on in the development process and the clock starts running then. So no real benefit to slowing the down the process intentionally.
Posted on 2/12/25 at 11:38 am to Chucktown_Badger
It's a shame when the PT cretins infiltrate what should be a good conversation on the OT board.
Page 7 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News