Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Extremely Accurate Nanotech Cancer Test Developed

Posted by Zonk on from the adventures-in-inner-space dept.

Sylvestre writes "Medical News Today reports that Harvard researchers have developed an accurate test for cancer using nanotechnology. From the article: 'Harvard University researchers have found that molecular markers indicating the presence of cancer in the body are readily detected in blood scanned by special arrays of silicon nanowires -- even when these cancer markers constitute only one hundred-billionth of the protein present in a drop of blood. In addition to this exceptional accuracy and sensitivity, the minuscule devices also promise to pinpoint the exact type of cancer present with a speed not currently available to clinicians.'"

7 of 128 comments (clear)

  1. Over the counter? by OwP_Fabricated · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I wonder when we'll be able to buy over the counter cancer tests? We're pretty much there for HIV.

    We're already a society of hypochondriacs. Imagine if you could test yourself at home for every devestating disease there is.

    Of course, I'm getting a ahead of myself. Early detection is the best defense. If this is as good as they say it is, it could save a LOT of lives.

    1. Re:Over the counter? by MBCook · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Hypochondria is a problem thanks to the Internet. There was that article a while ago on Slashdot about how doctors and hospitals don't see people thinking they have cramps or the flu, they get people who think they have appendicitis, cancer, and fatal familial insomnia and other insanely rare disorders. I know I have a bit of this (watch special about rare/deadly disease, start interpreting little things as "do I have this?").

      That said, if these tests were really that accurate and could be done at home, that might help. People who are hypochondriacs could test their blood and find out they DON'T have cancer. After using such a definitive test a couple of times they might very well "get the picture" that their next headache is a headache and not a brain tumor.

      On the other hand, if these things are sold to the public and have much of a false positive rate, that would be a BIG problem.

      --
      Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    2. Re:Over the counter? by DrEldarion · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I think it started even before the internet. I blame the "cleanliness" industry for telling us that EVERYTHING WE EVER TOUCH has to be completely sanitized or the evil germs will get us. In addition to making us completely paranoid, it's hindered the development of our immune systems.

      George Carlin said it the best in his "fear of germs" tirade.

  2. Other uses? by pin_gween · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Wonder if they can adapt this to be an accurate test for prion related disease like BSE (mad cow disiease). If it could be used for both humans AND other animals, the food supply could become safer.

    --
    Ignorance is not a crime; neither should it be a way of life

    Congress control $ = inmates run the asylum
  3. How much? by grogdamighty · · Score: 3, Interesting

    While the advance of medical technology has invariably led to better health and longer lives, I have to imagine that this technology will be cost-prohibitive enough to either lack practicality or to be available to the rich.

    --
    My other sig is funny.
  4. Cool, but useful? Not so sure... by xanthines-R-yummy · · Score: 4, Interesting
    This is really cool technology, and if you read the actual Nat Biotech article, they've improved the sensitivity by a couple orders of magnitude using some kind of lableing process (ie gold)...

    However, using this as a method of detecting cancer might not be so useful. The presence of various markers in the blood is probably normal. What you want to know, is whether or not these markers are present on cells when they should be absent. They claim to be able to detect PICOgrams/mL of a specific protein in the blood. Unfortunately, all males have PSA in their blood and it's the amount that's important, not its presence. That's just for prostate cancer. Unfortunately, the sad reality is that we don't know enough about most cancers for us to know what to detect to be useful.

    I can definitely see this as a useful tool for detecting hazardous chemicals and biologicals agents and scientists are always looking for more sensitive instruments. I think that's why the article appeared in Nature Biotechnology and not Nature. Still way impressive, though.

  5. So we all have cancer now? by HuguesT · · Score: 2, Interesting

    More than likely we all have a few cancerous cells in our bodies right now. The point is that they don't bloom to full-on cancer, they get dispatched by the immune system.

    Will this extremely accurate test be able to tell between unchecked cancer cells and those few cells which the body would take care off naturally? Or are we all going to turn into cancer patients ?