‘Transformational' new breast cancer drug could halt the growth of tumours
The Serena-6 trial found that camizestrant is effective in stopping cancer cells from using hormones to grow. One professor described the drug as representing "a pivotal moment in breast cancer care".
Scientists said the trial marked the first global study demonstrating that early detection of cancer resistance through blood tests can significantly benefit patients.
The study focused on patients with hormone-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer, which accounts for approximately 70 per cent of all cases. The results indicated that patients treated with camizestrant experienced a 56 per cent reduction in cancer progression compared to those receiving standard therapies.
Doctors used a blood test to identify changes in the cancer's DNA, which signal the potential failure of current treatments. Upon detecting these signs, some patients were administered camizestrant, while others continued with their standard treatment.
Those on camizestrant had their cancer stay the same and not get worse for much longer, 16 months on average, compared with about nine months for the others.
The drug was safe for most patients but 1 per cent stopped taking it because of side effects.
More than 3,000 patients from 23 countries took part in the study, which was funded by AstraZeneca and co-led by researchers at The Institute of Cancer Research in London.
Co-principal investigator Professor Nick Turner, group leader in molecular oncology at The Institute of Cancer Research, London, said the drug is 'a pivotal moment in breast cancer care'.
Professor Kristian Helin, chief executive of The Institute of Cancer Research said: 'The results of the Serena-6 trial represent more than a clinical milestone, they represent a transformational shift in how we approach precision medicine.'
About 55,000 women are diagnosed with breast cancer in the UK every year and 11,500 will die from the disease, The Institute of Cancer Research said.
The Serena-6 trial results were to be presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) annual meeting in Chicago on Sunday.
Dr Catherine Elliott, director of research at Cancer Research UK, said: 'This study is a clear example of how blood tests are starting to transform cancer treatment.
'By tracking tiny traces of tumour DNA in the blood, researchers were able to spot early signs of treatment resistance and switch therapies before cancer had a chance to grow.
'It shows how circulating tumour DNA, or ctDNA, could help doctors make smarter, more timely treatment decisions.
'This approach could become an important part of how we personalise care for people with advanced breast cancer.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
35 minutes ago
- Times
How I cut out ‘food noise' and lost 40lbs
Over the past six years I've lost more than 40lb (almost three stone). It has been a long road to find 'peace' with food and my body, and at the age of 47 I have done it at long last. Healing a complicated relationship with food that involved years of binge eating and yo-yoing weight was difficult — but it is beginning to feel less of an achievement now that everyone else seems to be doing it with ease. Watching the pounds melt off people around me thanks to a relatively quick course of Mounjaro or Ozempic, I feel like someone who made careful investments and earned a modest amount of money just as others around me enjoy a lottery win. I've spent most of my life trying to manage my weight and now that I've finally done it, at a time when everyone seems to be getting teenier and teenier, it sometimes feels daft to have done it the 'hard way'. Perhaps it irks me because overcoming disordered eating and yo-yoing weight isn't something that just happens with an injection. It's a huge undertaking and for me it's a process that never really ends.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
DAILY MAIL COMMENT: Keir Starmer must fight for UK drug firms
The life sciences industry is among the brightest jewels in the British economy, generating £100billion a year and employing more than 300,000 people. At its heart is the development and manufacture of pharmaceuticals, notably by AstraZeneca, which spends vast sums on research and is worth £167billion. So, if this hugely successful company were to relocate to the US, it would be a disaster both for the London Stock Exchange and the wider economy. Worryingly, this is not out of the question. AstraZeneca already sells 40 per cent of its drugs to America and, following President Donald Trump 's tariff threat, is ramping up research and production there. While there are no immediate plans to desert the UK, chief executive Pascal Soriot is said to be 'flirting' with the idea. Mr Trump's latest demand that foreign drug companies cut prices to US customers or face penalties may be an added incentive. The Left has always been highly critical of 'Big Pharma', accusing it of profiteering on the backs of NHS patients. Under Jeremy Corbyn, Labour planned to create a state-owned drug manufacturer with the power to override the patents which enable firms to make profits from their research. Only last year, Sir Keir Starmer refused to help fund a new vaccine plant in Liverpool – while pouring public money into our ailing steel industry. This Government must understand that failing to nurture AstraZeneca, GSK and others would be a catastrophic mistake. And Sir Keir should realise that while they say they want to remain in the UK, they may yet change their mind. Car lenders off hook Banks and credit providers will have heaved a huge sigh of relief yesterday after the Supreme Court ruled they will not have to pay compensation to millions of motorists who bought cars on finance without being told the dealers were receiving commission on the loan. The Treasury was also delighted with the result. Had it gone the other way, damages could have been comparable to the PPI scandal, which destabilised the financial industry for more than a decade. The court decided that dealers did not have a duty to act solely for buyers and that commissions were not a form of bribery in the legal sense, as had been alleged. However, it was not a total exoneration. Court President Lord Reed also ruled that excessive commission payments were unfair and ordered one buyer who had been charged 25 per cent of the value of the car to be repaid with interest. This opens the way to further claims. Many brokers and dealers were paid behind-the-scenes commission by lenders to sign buyers up to car finance deals, a practice deemed 'unlawful' by the Court of Appeal in October last year - a decision that was successfully appealed by lenders at the Supreme Court The dealers and lenders have escaped their worst fears, but they do not come out well. They have certainly been guilty of sharp practices even if not illegal ones. The Competition and Markets Authority must now force them to clean up their act. OAPs feel the cold In September, Rachel Reeves promised she would 'put more money in pensioners' pockets'. What she didn't say is that she would take even more out. Research shows pensioner households are an average of £800 worse off after a year of Labour thanks to higher bills – mainly owing to the Chancellor's £40billion Budget tax raid. With more taxes coming down the track to fill Labour's ever-widening financial black hole, the cost of living is set to soar further. For all Ms Reeves' promises, the elderly are in for a bitter winter.
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Trump demands UK pharmaceutical giants to lower drug costs sparking fears NHS could pay the price if they refuse
Donald Trump has demanded UK pharmaceutical giants lower prices for America and suggested charging others to make up the difference. He said if they didn't, the US would deploy 'every tool in our arsenal' to protect families from 'continued abusive drug prices', sparking fears the NHS will end up paying more. Mr Trump suggested he would use tariffs to push through higher prices if countries resisted. In May Mr Trump signed an executive order demanding drugmakers cut US medicine prices to match those abroad. Yesterday in a letter to 17 pharma companies he said he expected them to deliver on measures by September 29. He asked them to apply 'most favoured nation' pricing to Medicaid, the US health programme for people on low incomes. Mr Trump also asked drugmakers to offer new medicines at the same price in the US as in other developed countries. He said: 'Our citizens pay massively higher prices than other nations pay for the same exact pill... subsidizing socialism aboard [abroad].' British pharma companies AstraZeneca and GSK were among the recipients. Others included Eli Lilly, Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer and Sanofi. The UK Government said it would 'continue to work closely with the US to get the best deal for our pharma industry and deliver mutual benefits for both our countries'.
