A model for cancer research and treatment

The huge change in cancer outcomes began with the development of collaborative study groups involving several academic centers back in the 60s. These began oriented toward the study and development of chemotherapy. The pediatricians initiated collaborative groups that were multidisciplinary in composition. I was an early principle investigator member of the only pediatric collaborative group.

When I left the field there was a large network of collaborating institutions across the country and virtually every cancer patient for whom there was no established treatment (or it had failed) was offered participation in a research protocol. Most accepted. The cost of the treatments was born by grants and the institutions. In the case of chemotherapy agents, pharmaceutical companies benefiting from our public supported research supplied them at no cost.

As far as I can tell this research model has now undergone great attrition. I have to say when I see drugs that I did Phase I, II, and even III studies are still (40 years later) standard, I wonder at what appears to be a tremendous slowing of research and the fruits thereof. This a beginning article for validating and exploring the cauese. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9407E2D9113DF936A15753C1A96F9C8B63 I do strongly disagree that it is the lack of volunteers. As one will discover in the text, the greater cause is lack of good studies due to decentralization, privatization of research and the love of money.

In my group the mutual goal was the treatment and alleviation of the symptoms of children afflicted with cancer. We collaborated! We were not secretive lonesome eagles trying to out do the other. I humbly suggest this is a model worthy of being restoredand expanded to early treatment regimes.