changing tumors microenviroment improves outcomes, study

Hello! Someone else is finally finding this out?

By examining drug-induced cell death events in native-state 3D (three dimensional) microclusters, the functional (cytometric) profiling platform has the unique capacity to capture stromal, cytokines (chemokines), macrophages, lymphocytes, vascular and inflammatory cell interactions with tumor cells, known to be crucial for clinical response prediction.

The microclusters recapitulate the human tumor environment, while the "3D" advancement recreates the extracellular matrix (metalloproteinases). The platform studies cancer response to drugs within this microenvironment, enabling it to provide clinically relevant predictions to cancer patients. It is this capacity to study human tumor microenvironments that distinguishes it from other platforms in the field.

Besides the Kimmel research paper missing clinical proof for the paradigm shift from the old cancer theory to the new cancer theory, glycolysis is anaerobic (without oxygen) and not aerobic (requires oxygen). The Warburg hypothesis was simply that tumor cells had a metabolic abnormality which made them rely more on glycolysis than on aerobic (Krebs Cycle) metabolism. It's actually the principle behind PET scans. You inject radioactive glucose, which is preferentially taken up by tumor cells, as glycolysis can only use glucose to create energy (ATP). Non-tumor (normal) cells use more aerobic, Krebs Cycle activity, which burns fat, in addition to glucose; so the relative uptake of radioactive glucose by normal tissue (compared to tumor tissue) is relatively greater and tumors show up as "hot" spots.