The drugs had been under development for years, after all, and nothing really new had changed their status as promising drugs tested only in laboratory mice. Indeed, a dozen similar drugs, already being tested on people, have not lived up to hopes raised in lab experiments. The Times article, however, carefully mentioned that angiostatin and endostatin had not been tested in humans, and that other drugs, spectacularly effective against cancer in mice, proved disappointing when tried in people. But such key points were lost as the story blossomed on television, raising false hopes in millions of patients with cancer and their families. For one, angiostatin and endostatin don't even exist as human drugs.
Researchers have only enough to test on mice.
It may take one year to produce enough for even a few patients. Science's report also mentions a few tidbits that may have escaped wider public note. The two most prominent scientists quoted in the Times story later denied making optimistic statements attributed to them. One was Nobel laureate James Watson, a physician quoted as stating that the drugs would cure cancer within two years. Another was Richard Klausner, National Cancer Institute chief, quoted as stating that NCI is giving the drugs top priority.