SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " pancreatic " 47 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
Combination nucleic acid therapies: towards personalized cancer treatment
Combination strategies enable simultaneous activation and silencing of key target genes to correct molecular pathways in pancreatic cancer.
Analysts eye RevMed’s pancreatic cancer launch, Merck’s data blitz for Q3 earnings
Bellwether Johnson & Johnson will kick off the third quarter earnings reporting period on Tuesday, with analysts searching for news on business development, launch execution and more.
How Scientists Finally Cracked RAS in Pancreatic Cancer
How a half century of basic science, public funding, and human persistence unlocked a way to target one of cancer’s most elusive drivers — and treat one of its deadliest cancers.
Genialis and Inventia Life Science Collaborate to Link Patient Biology with 3D Pancreatic Cancer Models
Recent advances in targeted therapies for pancreatic cancer have brought renewed attention to the Pancreatic Cancer Action Network.
Genialis and Inventia Life Science Collaborate to Link Patient Biology with 3D Pancreatic Cancer Models
HOUSTON & SYDNEY, September 23, 2026--The Genialis Supermodel and Inventia's RASTRUM 3D cell model platform together will build models of PDAC that better represent tumor biology.
The Liquid Biopsy That Found Pancreatic Cancer Early Has a Bigger Regulatory Problem Than Its Science
PANXEON detects stage 1-2 pancreatic cancer with 87% sensitivity, but FDA's companion diagnostic pathway may be the bigger obstacle to clinical adoption.
ClearNote Health to Showcase Power of 5hmC Signatures for Treatment Monitoring at AACR Conference on Pancreatic Cancer
SAN DIEGO, September 16, 2026--ClearNote Health will present new data for its Avantect® Pancreatic Cancer Test and its Virtuoso® platform at the AACR Conference on Pancreatic Cancer
An administrative gap delays access to new pancreatic cancer treatment
A new wave of illegal fruity vapes, more and more kids on GLP-1s, and other health news from Morning Rounds
New pancreatic cancer drug could add to employers’ health bills
Rasonque’s approval is an exciting development in the fight to cure cancer, but could further challenge employers to carefully manage use.
Decoding DEA action on kratom-related substances
RFK Jr. downplays measles threat, FDA approves pancreatic drug, and more health news from Morning Rounds
Forbes Daily: Nvidia Beats Expectations As Data Center Business Grows
Today’s Forbes Daily covers an AI personal assistant, Meta's $18 billion settlement, FDA approves pancreatic cancer drug, Abercrombie and Fitch's market surge and more.
FDA approves once-daily pill for deadly cancer after patients' survival rates nearly double
Revolution Medicines' Rasonque targets the RAS protein driving 95% of pancreatic adenocarcinoma cases, offering a critical option after chemotherapy fails.
Scientists turn probiotic bacteria into tiny drug factories for pancreatic cancer
Engineered probiotic bacteria were able to infiltrate pancreatic tumors, stimulate cancer-fighting immune cells, and slow tumor growth in animal studies. Even more strikingly, the treatment worked better when combined with chemotherapy, radiation, or immunotherapy.
Aussie icon Johnny Young dead at 79
Australian entertainment legend Johnny Young has died at the age of 79 after a battle with pancreatic cancer.
Spangler's poor health requires urgent testimony, judge rules
Attorneys for the indicted men and the state agree: Sheriff Tom Spangler, who is fighting pancreatic cancer, should testify under oath without delay.
Intermountain Health introduces new pancreatic cancer drug in western Colorado
Cancer center offering first-in-class treatment shown to more than double patients' expected length of life
Cause of death for Ben and Casey Affleck’s mom revealed following pancreatic cancer battle
A cause of death has been revealed for Ben and Casey Affleck’s mom, Chris Affleck, shortly after the Boston family announced that their matriarch had died in June.
COMMENTARY: Science, Not Politics, Must Guide Lifesaving Medical Research
AFRO-AMERICAN – WASHINGTON — A recent announcement regarding a new treatment for metastatic pancreatic cancer, daraxonrasib, has shown it doubled survival rates for patients and reduced the risk of death by 60 percent. This breakthrough stemmed from sustained, peer-reviewed scientific investment.
Palliative Care team manifests dreams of butterbeer and Harry Potter
The Vanderbilt Health Palliative Care team worked magic to make a dream trip possible for a patient with terminal pancreatic cancer.
Scientists discover an unexpected way to make pancreatic cancer cells self-destruct
Researchers tested experimental PCAI compounds against pancreatic cancer cells and found they had powerful anticancer effects. One leading compound blocked more than 90% of cancer cell migration, suggesting it could help prevent the spread of tumors. Rather than suppressing cancer signaling, the treatment hyperactivated key pathways until the cells essentially self-destructed.
New OMB rule could break science in the United States
The drug that saved your mother. The treatment your doctor recommended. The clinical trial that bought someone you love more time. None of it was inevitable. It required a system built to operate outside politics and sustained over decades, because science doesn’t operate on the timeline of a politician. That system is now under direct threat. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has proposed a new rule to regulate all federal grants, not just science, but housing, education, defense, NASA and everything in between, that would fundamentally change how research is conducted in the United States. There have been a lot of fires in the past 16 months, and if everything is an emergency, nothing is an emergency. But this is a very big deal. These rules would strip away the independence that has kept science from becoming a political tool. The good news is there’s still something we can all do. How the grant system was designed to work When I was a new faculty member, I was full of millions of ideas, so I sat down and wrote an NIH proposal. I worked on it for months and thought it was so good. Then I sent it to my mentor. It came back covered in comments. Places where my reasoning wasn’t as airtight as I’d thought, methods that could be stronger, gaps in my thinking that I had been too close to the work to see. It stung, as honest feedback always does, but peer review almost always makes the work better. In fact, it’s the backbone of how American science has functioned for generations. At NIH, submitted proposals go to a panel of scientists who have experience in the field. These are the people who can read research methods and spot their weaknesses, who understand when an experiment is designed well and when it isn’t. Applications are scored rigorously, and often only the top 3-20% of proposals receive funding. The people making funding decisions are required to justify them based on these reviews. To be clear: this is not a perfect system, and good science still goes unfunded more often than any of us would like due to limited resources. There is also criticism that peer review may undervalue bold ideas that are risky but could have high payoffs. But the peer review system is nonetheless a meaningful part of the grant selection process. While thoughtful and careful changes could improve the system, the changes being proposed by OMB will not make things better. The rule that could change everything Through this OMB proposal, the system that helps decide what gets funded is being dismantled. There are many troubling elements buried in this proposal, but three provisions stand out in particular. Each would be damaging alone. Together, they would change what kind of science gets done in America, and who it serves. 1. Political appointees would decide which science gets funded, and peer review would be explicitly sidelined or ignored. The guidelines your doctor follows, the standards that determine what’s in your air and water, the drugs that get approved for your family: all of it starts with a funding decision. Right now, that decision is made by scientists who can evaluate whether the work is actually sound and whether it could move the needle forward. Under this proposal, funding decisions could be made by political appointees. The careful, expertise-driven review process that shapes grant funding would be effectively sidelined. That means that a poorly designed study could get funded simply because someone in a political office liked the sound of it, while rigorous, important work doesn’t get funded because it no longer aligns with the administration’s priorities. In other words, critical work that benefits all of us could now be missed just because it has become politically inconvenient. 2. Grants could be canceled at any point, without warning, in the middle of ongoing work. Say your tax dollars have been paying for a cancer study for two years. The grant was awarded for five years, so the team is mid-experiment. There are three additional years’ worth of answers that could change how the disease is treated for hundreds of thousands of people. With this new rule, the federal government could cancel the remaining funding tomorrow, walk away from the commitment it made with your money, and have no legal obligation to finish what it started. This is a huge waste of money. There are rarely other sources of funding for this work, which means the team, the graduate students, postdocs, and research staff who have dedicated years of their careers to this project could lose their jobs. Patients who have contributed their time to studies may not see it turn into useful learnings for others. Every hour of work already completed could result in nothing useful. Science can take decades to get to tangible outcomes. It needs a stable funding system to flourish. 3. Researchers would have a harder time communicating their findings without pre-approval from the federal government. There is a saying from Sir Mark Walport: “Science isn’t finished until it’s communicated.” Science is no use to anyone if it is kept locked away in the labs that produced the data. The proposed rule could make communicating research findings harder in a number of ways: Make it harder for scientists to widely share their findings in scientific journals. Publication costs, including journal fees that allow for broad public access, could not be paid for by federal funds which is often how scientists pay these costs. Restrict researchers from engaging publicly about how their findings should inform policy or public health guidelines. This would restrict scientists from doing the work that transforms years of lab work into decisions that actually affect people’s lives. Make it harder for scientists to attend conferences. Conferences would now need to be approved by the federal agency at the time of grant award. This disadvantages conferences or publications that are not politically aligned. Conferences are a key way in which scientists learn about work happening in their field so they can collaborate and build on each other’s findings. What good is science with a muzzle? The long-term impact These changes could (and hopefully would) be reversed under the next administration. But by then, damage has been done. Once projects are halted or denied funding by political appointees, people leave their science careers for other paths or even leave the country to do their amazing science elsewhere. You cannot pause a scientific study the way you pause a subscription you decided isn’t useful anymore. You cannot freeze a research team that depends on salaries to feed their families, causing a scramble for replacement funding that, in most cases, simply does not exist. When the money stops, everything stops, and all the work in progress and its potential are lost. Despite all of the language about reducing waste, fraud, and abuse, this new proposed rule increases the administrative burden tremendously. Every researcher watching this unfold will make a rational decision: don’t start anything that will take a decade to finish. This includes not building a team around funding that could vanish, or asking the big questions that need patience and stability to answer. The most consequential science, the kind that produces the treatments and the breakthroughs that reach your doctor’s office twenty years from now, is exactly the science that would be abandoned first. This is still a proposal, so we can all do something Some worry this rule is already a done deal. But by law, OMB is required to open a public comment period. Those comments matter because they inform members of Congress, they can be used in litigation, and they create a public record. So here’s what you can do: Submit a public comment. The public comment period on this proposed change is open until July 13. Anyone can submit a comment, and OMB is required to respond to substantial ones. Each comment must be different to count as distinct; identical comments will be counted only once. Comment as an individual, not on behalf of your organization. Here’s a full resource to help you, with useful examples, but in general: Share a story about how science or federal funding has benefitted you or is involved in your work. Are you or someone you loved a cancer survivor? Do you know someone with Alzheimer’s? Have you received NIH/NSF or other federal funding? All of these can be stories you use to highlight why you care. Explain why you’re worried about these proposed changes. You can use the wording found here or in other resources to help you. Ask them to withdraw this proposed rule. Contact your elected representatives. Congress allocates money to federal agencies to spend, and it has oversight of how that process works. You can let your representatives know this proposed change concerns you and ask them to intervene. There are levers they can push that can help at this moment. Let others know why federal funding matters. This isn’t just about science, but ALL federal grants, including for education systems, defense projects, and more. The process, including the importance of federal funding, is invisible to many. We can all make it more visible by sharing how science benefits us and why we value it. You can also share this article, or any of the resources linked here, to help spread awareness! Bottom line We are quickly losing ground in scientific research in the U.S. More changes, like the proposed rule by OMB, would decimate our ability to conduct research here, leaving us all worse off: fewer treatments for pancreatic cancer, less research on pollution impacts, fewer answers for patients with rare disease, and more unaddressed health needs. The impact will be very real for all of us, regardless of where we stand politically. Using our voices for science is more important than ever. Love, LM Big thanks to Dr. Megan Ranney for reading this over and providing brilliant insights, as always. Dr. Liz Marnik, PhD, is Executive Director of The Evidence Collective at YLE and a science communicator and immunologist working at the intersection of public trust, science, and public health. You can find her on Substack, LinkedIn, Instagram and Threads. Your Local Epidemiologist (YLE) comprises a team of experts, ranging from physicians to immunologists to epidemiologists to nutritionists, working together with one goal: to “Translate” ever-evolving public health science so that people are well-equipped to make evidence-based decisions. The YLE suite of newsletters reaches over 475,000 people across more than 132 countries. This newsletter is free to everyone, thanks to the generous support of fellow YLE community members. To support the effort, subscribe or upgrade below: Subscribe
Scientists finally crack an “undruggable” pancreatic cancer target and nearly double survival
For decades, pancreatic cancer has been one of the most lethal cancers, with few effective treatment options. A new drug, daraxonrasib, targets the KRAS mutation that fuels most pancreatic tumors—something many scientists once thought couldn't be done. In a major clinical trial, the treatment nearly doubled survival for patients with advanced disease and reduced the risk of death by 60%.
One fat helped pancreatic cancer grow while another cut disease in half
A surprising new study suggests that when it comes to pancreatic cancer, the kind of fat you eat may matter more than how much. Researchers found that oleic acid—the main fat in olive oil and several other common foods—sped up tumor growth in mice predisposed to pancreatic cancer, while omega-3-rich fats from fish oil dramatically slowed disease development.
'Transformative' pancreatic cancer drug doubles survival time
People with advanced pancreatic cancer taking an experimental daily pill lived nearly twice as long as those receiving chemotherapy infusions
Experimental drug shows promise against deadly pancreatic cancer
A novel pill helped people with advanced pancreatic cancer live longer, researchers reported Sunday, raising hopes of long-needed better treatments for one of the deadliest types of cancer.
A new pancreatic cancer pill may be a game changer for patients
Daraxonrasib, which nearly doubled patients' survival time, fights the disease in a new way. It bear-hugs a cancer protein that drives cell growth.
‘Landmark’ pancreatic cancer drug keeps patients alive for twice as long
The highly anticipated results of a clinical trial for the pill, daraxonrasib, have been released, giving doctors hope for treating the stubbornly lethal disease.
Pancreatic cancer seemed ‘undruggable,’ then scientists cracked a key target
An experimental pill has shown unprecedented success, upending conventional wisdom about the disease.
Pancreatic cancer seemed ‘undruggable,’ then scientists cracked a key target
An experimental pill has shown unprecedented success, upending conventional wisdom about the disease.
How an ‘Impossible’ Idea Led to a Pancreatic Cancer Breakthrough
The new strategy also holds promise for lung and colon tumors. Here’s how scientists discovered it.
Detroit sports radio host Pat Caputo dies at 67 after battle with pancreatic cancer
Longtime Detroit sports radio host and columnist Pat Caputo has died after a battle with cancer at the age of 67.
Pat Caputo, longtime Detroit sports media fixture, FOX 2 contributor, dies after cancer battle
Caputo, 66, revealed in January that had been diagnosed with stage 4 pancreatic cancer.
Science news: Return of the river-herring run, Musk vs. Altman and new pancreatic cancer drugs
Under the Radar breaks down the latest science and technology headlines, including communities fighting back against data centers, overheated sharks and more
FDA authorizes early access for experimental pancreatic cancer pill
The FDA said the action recognizes the dire need for a drug to improve survival for pancreatic cancer patients, who face the worst survival odds in oncology.
AI Can Spot Pancreatic Cancer Years Before Diagnosis, Study Finds
Catching this deadly disease while it's treatable can save lives.
Pancreatic cancer mRNA vaccine shows lasting results in an early trial
Scientists caution that more research is needed, but nearly all of the patients who responded to the personalized vaccine are still alive six years later.
Experimental drug doubles one-year survival in pancreatic cancer
A new drug that works by making tumors more susceptible to chemotherapy and the immune system has increased survival in those with advanced pancreatic cancer in a trial.
Invention Inspired by California Vacation Earned Him Millions
Roger Adams, creator of Heelys rolling footwear, dies at 71 of pancreatic cancer
Ben Sasse is a true statesman. We need more like him.
Former Republican Sen. Ben Sasse of Nebraska announced last year he was dying of pancreatic cancer. But he's still showing what leadership looks like.
Scientists find the genetic switch that makes pancreatic cancer resist chemotherapy
Scientists have identified a crucial molecular switch that decides whether pancreatic cancer cells resist chemotherapy or respond to it. The key player, a gene called GATA6, keeps tumours in a more structured and treatable form—but it gets shut down by an overactive KRAS-driven pathway. When researchers blocked that pathway, GATA6 levels rebounded and cancer cells became more sensitive to chemo. The discovery could help turn some of the toughest pancreatic tumours into ones doctors can better control.
Immunotherapy plus chemotherapy before surgery shows promise for pancreatic cancer
While the combination did not produce a clear survival advantage for most patients, a notable subset experienced unusually deep and durable responses.
Scientists find nerves actively fuel pancreatic cancer
Scientists have uncovered a hidden partnership between pancreatic cancer and the nervous system. Support cells in the pancreas lure nerve fibers, which then release signals that accelerate early cancer growth. This creates a self-sustaining loop that helps tumors take hold. Blocking the nerve activity significantly reduced tumor growth in experiments, suggesting a new treatment strategy.
Science news this week: 'Cloud People' tomb found in Mexico, pancreatic cancer breakthrough, and the AI swarms poised to take over social media
Jan. 31, 2026: Our weekly roundup of the latest science in the news, as well as a few fascinating articles to keep you entertained over the weekend.
New triple-drug treatment stops pancreatic cancer in its tracks, a mouse study finds
By targeting three key growth pathways at once, researchers eliminated pancreatic tumors in multiple mouse models and prevented the cancer from returning, a promising step toward overcoming treatment resistance.
Ben Sasse announces stage 4 pancreatic cancer diagnosis
The former U.S. Senator and University of Florida President shared a candid message about mortality, faith and family.
Republican former senator Ben Sasse says he has terminal cancer
The 53-year-old — who was one of a handful of Republicans to speak out against Trump during his first term — said in a lengthy social media post he has Stage 4 pancreatic cancer and suggested he doesn’t have long to live.
Former Sen. Ben Sasse announces he has stage 4 pancreatic cancer and is ‘gonna die’
Former Republican Sen. Ben Sasse announced Tuesday that he’s been diagnosed with “metastasized, stage 4 pancreatic cancer, and am gonna die.”