SOUTHERN JOURNAL OF SCIENCES

Background: Acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) is a heterogeneous hematological malignancy predominantly affecting individuals under 20 years of age. Traditional chemotherapy, such as clofarabine, has shown efficacy; however, novel immunotherapeutic strategies like tisagenlecleucel (Kymriah®) have significantly altered the treatment paradigm. Aim: This study aimed to perform a comparative analysis of tisagenlecleucel, a CAR-T cell therapy, and clofarabine, a second-generation purine nucleoside analog, evaluating their mechanisms of action, therapeutic benefits, limitations, and clinical applicability across diverse patient populations. Methods: A systematic comparative evaluation was conducted, encompassing pharmacological characteristics, mechanisms of action, treatment protocols, efficacy, safety profiles, and clinical indications of both agents. The analysis considered pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic data and included patient demographic variables. Results: Tisagenlecleucel demonstrated high efficacy in refractory B-cell ALL, with durable responses and a blood half-life of 128 days, but with notable immune-related adverse effects such as cytokine release syndrome. Clofarabine, effective across a broader patient population, acts via multiple antitumor mechanisms but carries significant toxicity risks, including infection and sepsis. Discussion: The therapies present distinct clinical profiles: tisagenlecleucel offers targeted immunotherapy with high specificity but requires specialized infrastructure and management of immune toxicities. Clofarabine is more widely accessible and applicable, but is associated with conventional chemotherapy-related side effects. Treatment accessibility and cost differ markedly between the two. Conclusions: Therapy selection should be personalized based on patient-specific factors and institutional resources. Tisagenlecleucel is ideal for pediatric and young adult patients with relapsed/refractory B-cell ALL in CAR-T-capable centers, while clofarabine remains a viable option for broader ALL populations, particularly when genetic therapies are not feasible. Further research is needed to optimize therapeutic strategies and improve access to advanced treatments.

Background: Drug repurposing offers potential advantages for cancer therapy development, particularly when utilizing medications with established safety profiles and expired patents. While individual repurposed medications have been investigated for oncological applications, comprehensive comparative analyses of research distribution patterns across multiple therapeutic candidates appear limited in the literature. Understanding these patterns may provide insights into research priorities and potential knowledge gaps. Aim: This exploratory study was designed to quantify and compare the volume of scientific literature examining the anticancer potential of eleven selected off-patent medications across different pharmacological classes. Methods: Bibliometric searches were conducted across five databases (Google Scholar, BVS, PubMed, NIH, and Science.gov) using standardized search terms combining each medication name with "cancer" and "cancer treatment." The selected medications included ivermectin, fenbendazole, mebendazole, albendazole, metformin, propranolol, disulfiram, valproic acid, thalidomide, dexamethasone, and hydroxychloroquine. Basic statistical analyses were performed to examine the distribution patterns and correlations within the database. Results: The search yielded 3,226,066 total publications with considerable variation in distribution patterns. Dexamethasone accounted for the largest proportion (1,538,058 publications, 47.68%), followed by metformin (697,172 publications, 21.61%). Some medications with smaller overall publication volumes demonstrated higher proportions of treatment-specific research, such as fenbendazole (87.82%), disulfiram with copper (86.54%), and hydroxychloroquine with zinc (75.21%). The Herfindahl Index indicated a high concentration of research attention (0.2870). Discussion: The findings suggest substantial variation in research attention across the selected medications. While some medications dominate the literature, others with focused treatment-specific research may warrant further investigation. The inverse relationship observed between total publication volume and treatment specificity suggests that research patterns in this field may be more complex than absolute publication counts indicate. Conclusions: This preliminary bibliometric assessment reveals an uneven distribution of research attention among repurposed medications being investigated for cancer applications. These patterns may inform future research prioritization, though further qualitative analysis would be valuable to assess the clinical significance of these quantitative observations.

Background: The American food regulatory landscape has historically been influenced by industry interests, resulting in the widespread use of petroleum-derived synthetic food dyes banned in European countries. Chronic disease rates in American children have increased from 3% in the 1960s to approximately 60% currently, with annual healthcare costs reaching $1 trillion. The appointment of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as Secretary of Health and Human Services marks a paradigmatic shift toward transparency and industry accountability in food safety regulation. Aim: This forum analysis examines Kennedy Jr.'s revolutionary approach to food safety regulation, particularly his confrontational stance against petroleum-based food additives exemplified by his statement, "if they want to eat petroleum, they should add it themselves at home" and evaluates the broader implications for American public health policy and global regulatory standards. Methods: Critical analysis of Kennedy Jr.'s public policy statements, examination of epidemiological data trends, and evaluation of proposed regulatory frameworks through content analysis of official speeches and policy declarations from the Department of Health and Human Services. Results: Kennedy Jr.'s administration targets the systematic elimination of synthetic food dyes through industry partnerships, scientific transparency initiatives, and restoration of rigorous research standards. His confrontational rhetorical approach, compared to Mike Tyson's boxing style, has generated unprecedented industry cooperation with food companies "calling almost daily" seeking compliance guidance. The strategy combines voluntary industry agreements with open-source information databases and enhanced FOIA access. Discussion: This confrontational rhetoric represents unprecedented directness in health policy communication, challenging decades of established regulatory practices. The approach prioritizes scientific transparency over diplomatic language, generating both media attention and voluntary industry engagement that traditional regulatory pressure failed to achieve. Conclusions: Kennedy Jr.'s revolutionary stance may establish new global standards for food additive oversight, prioritizing public health over commercial interests through evidence-based policymaking and industry accountability measures. This paradigm shift from reactive to preventive regulatory models could influence international food safety governance and restore American leadership in global health policy.