Opinion on md Anderson's "moon shot program" - 1248299

I think it's aggressive marketing/PR. I don't think that the people who generate marketing campaigns for MD Anderson or any other health care institution have any real insight into what is required to cure cancer.

-Dr. West

Interesting to dig a little deeper. The lung section is mostly about molecular profiles. Two aims:
"Integrate molecular profiling in early-stage and locally advanced lung cancer to increase number of patients who are cured by 10-20%" [my italics].
and
"Use molecular profiles from patients to develop lung cancer models that enable the rapid identification of effective new drugs for specific groups of patients.
They also mention another old friend, the BATTLE trial.
The press release is here:
http://www.mdanderson.org/newsroom/news-releases/2012/ut-md-anderson-ca…
and the lung section here:
http://cancermoonshots.org/moon-shots/lung/

I think it's hard to have a frank discussion of this without feeling like a bad guy. I think that there are real, major developments in lung cancer and many other cancers, and I also believe that the momentum is only increasing. However, I'm a little cynical about this progress being captured and owned by an institution, especially if it not coincidentally delivers huge publicity and entails an appeal for people to contribute to the effort.

I think the BATTLE trial is interesting, but I don't think it's remotely unique, and I also think that it was so heavily promoted beyond the benefits of what it practically delivered that I am really weary of hearing about it as if MD Anderson invented the concept of personalized, molecular oncology-defined cancer care. I think if it had come from a less prominent institution, nobody would be receptive to being browbeaten over it.

I think that what makes me less inclined to embrace this is that the efforts and advances in cancer care are going to come from many sources -- many physicians, and patients collaborating as part of self-aggregating groups, and lab science people, and others. I see these kinds of declarations as an opportunistic way for one institution to capitalize and pre-empt what needs to be more collaborative, from a wide range of sources. I also think that it's unfortunate that people might be led to believe that this declaration will clearly lead to measurable impact for current cancer patients, as if that's a realistic expectation. It may, and I'll be happy if it does, but I don't think it's something we can expect.

-Dr. West