Talk:Survivin

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Molecular Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Molecular Biology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Molecular BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject Molecular BiologyTemplate:WikiProject Molecular BiologyMolecular Biology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Genetics task force (assessed as High-importance).

Medicine Start‑class Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Start	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is currently the subject of an educational assignment.

Untitled

Is it really fair to say that inhibiting survivin is not a feasible goal for anticancer therapy? Aurora Kinase inhibitors (especially inhibitors of AurkB) would perform exactly this function by preventing phosphorylation of survivin, thus inhibiting survivin function in its mitotic capacity. Furthermore, just because a proposed therapy would likely damage healthy rapidly-dividing cells certainly has not been a historical reason to preclude its use. 5-FU for example has been highly successful, despite the fact that it prevents mitosis of virtually every cell in the body. In general, the toxicity profile for chemotherapeutics has been caegorically poor- a fact the FDA allows becasue the alternative is almost certain death by untreated cancer. I think the aside about inhibition of survivin not being a practical target should at least be referenced if not removed. Wingsfan6047 (talk) 19:44, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This page is badly written. The science reported is not terrible, in fact much of the results are expected, but it is also not well rooted in scientific literature. The comment about sensitizing cancer cells is a valid line of inquiry, but again, purely speculative in the case of survivin. -b —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.219.235.232 (talk) 23:57, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removed info from Prostate Cancer subsection

The subsection on prostate cancer made reference to dihydrotestosterone being "an exogenous androgen" which is not correct; it is produced in the body from testosterone by the action of the enzyme 5-alpha reductase. Accordingly, I have removed the incorrect wording. Lumberjane Lilly (talk) 12:22, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]