I've read that healthy individuals don't get cancer because their body nips it in the bud. Why couldn't we just figure out if people are pre-cancer (susceptible), like pre-diabetes?
I've read that healthy individuals don't get cancer because their body nips it in the bud. Why couldn't we just figure out if people are pre-cancer (susceptible), like pre-diabetes?
Here's some supporting research from a quick search. https://journals.aai.org/jimmunol/article/192/6/2689/1552
Edit: some fun but possibly pontificating tangents
This seems to be part of the reason why vaccines have had relatively poorer efficacy in elderly populations. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3901832/ https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03739-1
I'm hopeful that cancer and immune profiling will be able to be used in tandem to (1) identify cancer early and (2) identify gaps in the immune repertoire to facilitate (3) design of antibodies that specifically target the cancer.
For those not familiar with immunology, the thymus is what populates your immune system with brand new T cells equipped with freshly selected T cell receptors.
This suggests interesting anti-aging opportunities, such as artificial thymi to repopulate your immune system and keep a healthy and diverse repertoire.
In todays polluted world I wonder if we dont get enough omega 3's considering the role's they play and the triterpenoid's seem interesting.
The most surprising results I've seen is with a batch of histidine, but subsequent batches didnt solicit the same results which makes me wonder if the 1st batch was something like histidine dipeptides or some other reason like cellular pools being depleted of something. Considering histidine helps immune cells move through tissue to targets, aging suggests histidine levels are depleting even if an individual is healthy.
Same goes with glutathione, in disease and aging, it also depletes to dangerously low levels, problem is bacterial biofilms love it to reactivate themselves and until recently it was thought supplementing was a waste, but recent studies contradict this idea.
The most recent literature that I'm seeing is showing the most pronounced time of thymus involution occurring around puberty, suggesting a programmed switch from a growing to reproductive phase of life.
"Regardless of the seemingly crucial role of the thymus in preserving homeostasis, its involution in humans and other mammals begins in childhood and peaks around puberty, resulting in an almost completely non-functional organ in aging." https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S156816372...
In this light the following makes sense (stopping or suppressing the switch to a reproductive life). "Castrating rodents before puberty or reducing the levels of sex hormones [e.g., by using Lupron, which desensitizes the luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) receptors] can attenuate or markedly recover the involution process in aging mice."
A much older study with different markers shows something similar: https://www.pnas.org/doi/epdf/10.1073/pnas.070061597