Team:NCTU Formosa/Promotion

Promotion

Be Bald!!

Our team walked out of lab and launched an activity in NCTU. We called it “Be Bald!” In order to inform people the specificity of targeted drug.

We would like to provide a chance for people to see their appearance without hair which is a common cancer image for people. People react to their new look with a sense of weirdness. Meanwhile, we told our testers that cancer patient face the hairless look because of chemo therapy which is the most common therapy. In this way, our team focus on the targeted drug detection which would help a great number of people and lower the damage to human body and thus reduce possibility of hair loss. A lot of people took part in “Be Bald” and told us they felt what we are doing will benefit many people and it’s so important and meaningful. They would love to support us with all their hearts. After “Be Bald”, all of our teammates felt a sense of achievement that we could really help people and this really motivate us and boost our morale.

Biocamp: Promoting iGEM, Synthetic Biology and project to high school students

In the summer, our department held a Biocamp for senior high students. Most of our team members participated in holding the event. The purpose of Biocamp is to let high school students learn about biology and have fun during the process. Three of our teammates designed a lecture to teach them synthetic biology with simple concept. What’s more, we promoted iGEM to them with introducing different iGEM projects, and conveying the essence and values of iGEM that we have realized during the processes. At last we also share our project with them specifically, the main idea of our biobricks and goals. After the lecture, we received some great response from them. All of them were fascinated by the idea of using enzymes and different assemblies of biobricks to create new functions, and interested in participating in iGEM. Hope all of them have the opportunity to become an iGEMer, enjoying the processes just like us

Study on Public’s Recognition of Cancer and Targeted Therapy


On 13th August 2015, a questionnaire was distributed by 14 outstanding personnel of APOllO organization over the internet. The purpose of the survey was to collect and analyze statistics on the public’s understanding of cancer and targeted therapy.

Of those participants, 55.1% are female and 44.9% are male (survey question 1). 3.3% are educators, 74% are students, no medical professionals, 7.2% are service sector personnel, and 5.5% are from other sectors (survey question 2). Overall, the following results cover a total of 568 contributors.

The study was conducted by means of Google Forms posted on the team and personal Facebook pages. The multiple choice questionnaire was generally in true and false format and includes the latest medical statistics.

One significant result of interest is the amount of partakers willing to consider synthetic biology applications (question 16). Only 8.6% of the public disapproves of the research to reduce the time and cost of pre-evaluation for targeted drugs using genetically engineered organisms.

The average score of participants was 51.7%, which meant the majority did not pass the knowledge quiz (a pass was considered above 60%). Based on this survey, the modern society has a low understanding of cancer and targeted therapy.

This survey has helped APOllO interact and inform 568 Facebook users with the latest cancer and targeted therapy information. With the latest product line, APOllO is seeking to improve the cancer treatment process to increase the number of patients willing to use targeted therapy. Our new product not only lowers the cost of diagnosis, it is also a multi-detection platform. With a switch of the scFv antibody on our E. cotectors, we can detect other antigens.

In addition, through the survey’s inquisitive questions, APOllO can help generate the public’s empathy to assist underprivileged families and their loved ones on their voyage to fight cancer—whether through understanding or monetary means.



Figure 1.


Figure 2.

Questions:

1. Select your gender (55.1% female；44.9% male)

2. Select your age range (1.2% ≤ 15; 77.2% 16~25; 7% 26~35; 6.3% 36~45; 6.2% 46~55; 1.9% 56~ 65; 0.2% 66 +)

3. Select occupation (3.3% educator; 74% student; medical professionals; 7.2% service sector personnel; 5.5% other)

4. Have you ever had or known someone that had cancer?

5. Did you know that according to the Ministry of Health and Welfare in Taiwan, for every 5 minutes and 26 seconds a person is diagnosed with cancer?

6. Which of these are cancer treatments? (6% chemotherapy; radiation therapy; 0.2% targeted therapy; 93.8% all of above)

7. Prior to this survey, did you know about targeted therapy?

8. Did you know that the cost of targeted therapy treatments range from 800,000 to at least 2,000,000 NTD (25,000 to at least 62,000 USD) a year?

9. Have you heard of the targeted drugs, Herceptin, Avastin, and Erbitux before?

10. Did you know that sometimes a combination regimen with targeted therapy is more effective than standard chemotherapy treatment (ex. Breast cancer)?

11. Did you know that before receiving targeted therapy treatment, patients have to undergo mandatory assessments?

12. Did you know that the most common diagnostic examinations for targeted medicine are IHC (immunohistochemistry) and FISH (Florescence in situ hybridization)?

13. Did you know that the pre-evaluations for targeted therapy require at least 5 days?

14. Did you know that besides the immense medication fee, the pre-evaluation costs around 800,000 to 2,500,000 NTD (25,000 to 78,000 USD) ?

15. Did you know that without the pre-evaluation, medications may be of no help, therefore wasting an enormous amount of money?

16. If the use of synthetic biology can shrink the pre-evaluation for targeted drugs to 2 hours and reduce the cost of diagnosis, do you think it is worth researching?


Note:

The age range of 66+ is excluded from consideration when selecting the age range with the greatest amount of correct answers for each question, because there are too few participants in that section.

Question 6 was considered a leading question by some participants therefore we did not show detailed results.



Back to Human Practice