December 6, 2000

2 min read

Google Logo Add Us On GoogleAdd SciAm

New Drug Beats Leukemia

By Kate Wong

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

Researchers have developed the most effective treatment yet for patients suffering from chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), a cancer of the blood cells that strikes nearly 10,000 adults each year. According to clinical trial findings presented on Monday in San Francisco at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology, the Novartis AG-made drug, STI-571 (or Glivec), sent the cancer into remission in most patients. Although the oral drug has been in trials for only two years, investigators believe it may succeed in ridding the body of the disease long-term or even permanently. Currently the only proven cure for CML is bone marrow transplantation¿a high-risk procedure with a mortality rate of up to 40 percent. Other treatments aim to maintain the health of leukemia patients for as long as possible, but they don't normalize the blood and can have considerable side effects. Glivec, in contrast, has had few reported side effects because it targets the cause of the cancer, without harming other cells

CML patients have a chromosome defect that creates an abnormal protein known as Bcr-Abl, which in turn causes white blood cells to proliferate uncontrollably. Glivec apparently works by blocking the signal Bcr-Abl issues. In clinical trials financed by Novartis, patients in the first phase of CML gained the most benefit from Glivec: 90 percent of the 530 participants experienced remission of their cancer after only six months of treatment. But second-phase subjects still responded impressively: 90 percent of these patients, who numbered 230, also responded positively to the treatment, and remission occurred in 63 percent.

The new drug, which is expected to reach the market in June, may even serve as a model for developing drugs for other types of cancer. "The whole of cancer research has been to identify the differences between cancer cells and normal cells. That's been the goal of cancer research and here it is," Oregon Health Sciences University researcher Brian Druker, the drug's principal developer, said, according to an Associated Press report. "I view it as a new era of cancer therapeutics."

Kate Wong is an award-winning science writer and senior editor for features at Scientific American, where she has focused on evolution, ecology, anthropology, archaeology, paleontology and animal behavior. She is fascinated by human origins, which she has covered for nearly 30 years. Recently she has become obsessed with birds. Her reporting has taken her to caves in France and Croatia that Neandertals once called home to the shores of Kenya’s Lake Turkana in search of the oldest stone tools in the world, as well as to Madagascar on an expedition to unearth ancient mammals and dinosaurs, the icy waters of Antarctica, where humpback whales feast on krill, and a “Big Day” race around the state of Connecticut to find as many bird species as possible in 24 hours. Wong is co-author, with Donald Johanson, of Lucy’s Legacy: The Quest for Human Origins. She holds a bachelor of science degree in biological anthropology and zoology from the University of Michigan. Follow her on Bluesky @katewong.bsky.social

More by Kate Wong

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe