Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Commentary
  • Published:

The Human Cancer Genome Project—one more misstep in the war on cancer

Nature Biotechnology volume 23, pages 535–537 (2005)Cite this article

Strap yourself in and get ready for some serious 'more of the same.' A recent proposal to sequence cancer genomes holds out the promise of personalized cures for each of 50 different cancers. The cost? A mere $12 billion at today's prices1. This human cancer genome megaproject is the equivalent of 12,500 human genome projects and already has the backing of several prominent scientists. Harold Varmus believes that the project could “completely change how we view cancer”1; Eric Lander argues that “knowing the defects of the cancer cell points you to the Achilles' heel of tumors”1; and Francis Collins predicts that he “can confidently tell you that something will happen here”1. More pragmatically, Craig Venter points out that “...it's not clear what answer we'd get; there might be better ways to move cancer research forward”1.

In a nutshell, the megaproject aims to catalog all somatic mutations from primary tumors as the basis for designer drugs to cure most cancers. Success is predicated on the assumption that drugs can be targeted to very specific mutated regions of gene products. However, most patients with a localized primary tumor are cured by surgery and local radiation. It is not the primary tumor, but the metastatic spread of a small population of deadly cells that ultimately compromises a normal tissue or organ, that kills in cancer2 (for an excellent popular account, see ref. 3). Are primary tumors therefore the appropriate focus for such a massive project and are their bulk mutational spectra therapeutically useful?

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Glacial progress.

References

  1. Pollack, A. New York Times, March 28, A1 (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Klein, C.A. Adv. Cancer Res. 89, 35–67 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Leaf, C. Fortune, 149, 76–97 (2004).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. SEER Program (www.seer.cancer.gov) SEER* Stat Database; SEER 18 Regs, Nov 2004 Sub (1973-2002 varying), National Cancer Institute, DCCPS, released December 2004.

  5. Vogelstein, B. & Kinzler, K.W. Nat. Med. 10, 789–799 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. SEER Program (http://www.seer.cancer.gov) SEER* Stat Database; SEER 18 Regs, Nov 2004 Sub (1973-2002 varying), National Cancer Institute, DCCPS, released December 2004.

  7. Sonnenschein, C. & Soto, A.M. Mol. Carcinogen. 29, 205–211 (2000).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Harris, H. Nature 427, 201 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Marx, J. Science 304, 658–659 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Mohsin, S.K. et al. J. Clin Oncol. 23, 2460–2468 (2005).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Hurwitz, H. N. Engl J. Med. 350, 2335–2342 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Ozcelik, C. et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99, 8880–8885 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Bendell, J.C. et al. Cancer 97, 2972–2977 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Hofmann, W.-K. et al. Lancet 359, 481–486 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Schmidt-Kittler, O. et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 100, 7737–7742 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Klein, C.A. Cell Cycle 3, 29–31 (2004).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Samuels, Y. et al. Science 304, 554 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Paez, J.G. et al. Science 304, 1497–1500 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Rajagopolan, H. et al. Nature 428, 77–81 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Barbier, M. et al. Nature 413, 796 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Hahn, W.C. et al. Nature 400, 464–468 (1999).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Akagi, T. et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 100, 13567–13572 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Pollack, J.R. et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99, 12963–12968 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Aneuploidy Conference Abstracts. Cell. Oncol. 26, 171–269 (2004).

  25. Duesberg, P. et al. Cell Cycle 3, 823–828 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Fonseca, R. Blood 102, 2562–2567 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Rush, L.J. Blood 97, 3226–3233 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Duesberg, P. et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98, 11283–11288 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Duesberg, P. et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 97, 14295–14300 (2000).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Al-Hajj, M. et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 100, 3983–3988 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Al-Hajj, M. et al. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 14, 43–47 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Folkman, J. & Kalluri, R. Nature 427, 787 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Vasselli, J.R. et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 100, 6958–6963 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Masters, J.R.W. & Lakhani, S.R. Nature 404, 921 (2000).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Tortola, S. et al. J. Clin. Oncol. 19, 2837–2843 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Fidler, I.J. & Kripke, M.L. Nat. Genet. 34, 23 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Hunter, K. et al. Nat. Genet. 34, 23–24 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Ramaswamy, S. et al. Nat. Genet. 34, 25 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Dick, J.E. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 100, 3547–3549 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Kondo, T. et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 101, 781–786 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Egger, G. Nature 429, 457–463 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Secure Genetics Pty Limited, 19 Bungan Head Road, Newport Beach, Sydney, 2106, New South Wales, Australia

    George L Gabor Miklos

  2. Berkeley Drosophila Genome Project and to the human and mouse genome projects, Celera

    George L Gabor Miklos

Authors
  1. George L Gabor Miklos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gabor Miklos, G. The Human Cancer Genome Project—one more misstep in the war on cancer. Nat Biotechnol 23, 535–537 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt0505-535

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt0505-535

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing