Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

AutoModerator t1_jb4zk0p wrote

Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our normal comment rules apply to all other comments.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

Economy_Appearance_9 t1_jb50290 wrote

Does anybody know if this also includes immune therapy resistance? Is there any relationship between quiescence and resistance to other type of immunotherapy?

4

HeTakesYou t1_jb5scfq wrote

Is there a need to test for follistatin before starting chemo treatment? Would high producers respond worse to treatment?

2

Rain_Dont_Pour OP t1_jb61qjr wrote

Replying to damnan99 (#2,172,241)

I believe what they're trying to say is that you would have to create an antibody that would block the action of follistatin so it doesn't bind to the receptor. I think the concept of lowering the levels of follistatin is not feasible, but it could be a possibility that the authors haven't looked into.

From my understanding, they were able to create cells that didn't produce follistatin and that's how they proved that absence of it made ovarian cancer cells more sensitive to chemo.

4

Rain_Dont_Pour OP t1_jb625w7 wrote

Replying to HeTakesYou (#2,173,391)

I'm not sure, I think everyone should receive treatment independently of their follistatin levels. I believe what they're trying to show is that having the high levels of the protein promotes chemoresistance.

2