Slashdot Mirror


Nanomedicine Kills Brain Cancer Cells

destinyland writes "Scientists from the University of Chicago and the US Department of Energy have developed the first nanoparticles that seek out and destroy GMB brain cancer cells. Nanoparticles killed up to 80% of the brain cancer cells after just five minutes of exposure to white light, showing the promise of nanomedicine — highly-specific intervention at the molecular scale. Because nanomedicine could repair brain cells or damaged nerve and muscle tissue, the NIH has established eight Nanomedicine Development Centers around the country for their Nanomedicine Roadmap Initiative. Researchers have also used gold nanospheres to search out and 'cook' skin cancer cells with light — 'It's basically like putting a cancer cell in hot water and boiling it to death,' says one researcher. And the NIH Roadmap ultimately predicts 'novel tiny sensors ... that search for, and destroy, infectious agents.'"

19 of 99 comments (clear)

  1. Side effects by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 5, Funny

    Nanoparticles killed up to 80% of the brain cancer cells after just five minutes of exposure to white light

    Side effects may include death of 80% of non-cancer cells.

    1. Re:Side effects by MrMista_B · · Score: 3, Funny

      Citation please.

    2. Re:Side effects by elashish14 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Usually in these cases, the particles are surface-activated to only attach to cancer cells. What this means is that cancer cells typically have unique antigens on the surface and the nanoparticles are treated to bind only to them. And since proteins are very picky when they pick what other things they bond to, there's a low chance that it will find another cell with similar morphology to attach to. Then again, considering how diverse and extensive the body is, I'm sure that there's a chance that it could find some other cell to bind to; but that's purely a statistical argument, I'm not referencing any biological data on that front.

      --
      I have left slashdot and am now on Soylent News. FUCK YOU DICE.
    3. Re:Side effects by Chris+Burke · · Score: 5, Funny
      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    4. Re:Side effects by interkin3tic · · Score: 4, Informative

      The antibody in question binds the EGF receptor. Off the top of my head I can think of..... oh about every stem cell in your body that expresses this receptor.

      If I recall, it's also expressed at much, much, much higher levels in many cancers than it is in normal cells.

      And the abstract to this paper suggests that as well: "Overexpression of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is observed in many cancers, sometimes accompanied by gene amplification." That abstract also suggests that in at least one type of cancer, the more EGFR you have the worse the cancer is. I'm not a cancer biologist and I'm not reading any more than abstracts tonight, but this paper and this paper at first glance seemed to indicate the same thing.

      While the good cells are wearing targets, the bad cells are wearing many more targets, so if your efficiency at hitting targets is lower than 100%, you're going to be killing more bad cells than good cells.

      The author's system is great in a petri dish, but there's a reason it's published in a low tier journal.

      And that reason is probably the following: the 80% of cells in a dish is probably not that impressive compared to developed drugs, however this was just a proof of concept. The wright brothers only flew a few hundred feet. There are undoubtedly refinements that could be made to this system that would increase the efficiency, but it's not to that stage yet. This technology might turn out to be a true cure for cancer once it's refined.

      And don't criticize them for doing it in a dish just yet, this press release says "So far, tests have been done only on cells in a laboratory setting, but animal testing is planned for the next phase."

      They can hardly be blamed for not delivering the magic bullet cure to cancer in one fell swoop, that's just not how these things work.

  2. Re:Exploit by wizardforce · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why bother with using advanced technology like this when the school system already does that? :)

    --
    Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
  3. Re:Wish by Trepidity · · Score: 4, Funny

    It's starting to look more and more like it's going to be my generations plastic.

    I, too, look forward to the giant raft of entangled nanoparticles polluting the middle of the Pacific.

  4. Don't expect too much from this treatment by Michael+G.+Kaplan · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The article states that "cultured human GMB cells" were "killed up to 80 percent... after 5 minutes of exposure to focused white light".

    How exactly are you going to expose a malignant tumor that has diffusely infiltrated the parenchyma of the brain to focused white light? You can't surgically resect a GBM unless you are willing to remove an entire cerebral hemisphere. If you scooped out part of it and exposed the remaining cavity to white light you would barely effect any of the remaining tumor.

    Now if brain tumors only occurred in petri dishes then this treatment would result in a brief remission.

    1. Re:Don't expect too much from this treatment by hofmny · · Score: 4, Funny

      I don't see the problem really. All you need to do is collide some anti-matter with normal matter, use the energy to warp space time, and use the curvature to bend light particles to the specific areas of the brain.

      You such a pessimist :P

    2. Re:Don't expect too much from this treatment by elashish14 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Any number of possible solutions. Nanolasers; fiber optics; or they could use x-ray absorbing particles under the surface of the skull which can penetrate soft tissue.

      The research as stated in the article isn't exactly meant to be implemented as is for surgical procedures. It has to be engineered in some way that can be used in actual surgical/therapeutic environments. The REAL STORY is that it's possible using a very simple and effective technique. No one said that it was going to be implemented exactly this way.

      So I actually believe al contrare that there is much to be expected from this treatment.

      --
      I have left slashdot and am now on Soylent News. FUCK YOU DICE.
    3. Re:Don't expect too much from this treatment by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 4, Informative

      You can't surgically resect a GBM unless you are willing to remove an entire cerebral hemisphere.

      You don't need to resect. You can access as with a Stereotactic biopsy, using a computer and (previously done) MRI scans to generate a 3-D image of the brain mapped to the patient's head during surgery to guide instrumentation. This allows the surgeon to maneuver around blood vessels (bleeding being the most immediate threat) and such. Radioactive disks can be inserted and removed like this as well.

      I believe the system used for my wife's biopsy was accurate to 0.4 mm. They only drilled a "small" (surgeon's words) 5/8 inch hole in her head, behind the right ear, for access. When done, it was patched up and you couldn't tell anything had been done after the incision healed.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    4. Re:Don't expect too much from this treatment by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 4, Informative
      You gest, but see, Proton Therapy:

      The major advantage of proton treatment over conventional radiation, however, is that the energy distribution of protons can be directed and deposited in tissue volumes designated by the physicians-in a three-dimensional pattern from each beam used.

      and Antimatter Therapy:

      While an x-ray beam deposits energy along its entire path through the body, a beam of charged particles does damage only after electrical interactions have slowed it sufficiently to create a high chance of collision with atomic nuclei. This means that proton beams deposit most of their energy over a focused area, such as a collection of tumour cells, in the last millimetre of their journey.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  5. Just great... by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... that seek out and destroy GMB brain cancer cells ...

    Wish they had things like this when my wife was diagnosed with a glioblastoma multiforme four years ago. One afternoon, six weeks after diagnosis, she said she was sleepy. We said "I love you" and shared a kiss before she fell asleep. Later that afternoon, swelling around the tumor herniated her brain stem. She never woke up and died in my arms one week later. Twenty years together. I miss her every day and I don't think I'll ever recover.

    Love the people in your life like there's no tomorrow. (We were lucky.)

    P.S. For you Googlers, the more common abbreviation is GBM.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  6. Re:Exploit by gzipped_tar · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is so true it's not funny.

    --
    Colorless green Cthulhu waits dreaming furiously.
  7. you can't know ahead of time by ChipMonk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If there's one thing I've learned in my life, it's that no one can predict one's reaction to mortality, whether one's own or someone else's. Some can pick up and go on, others can't, and there's no way to tell who is wired which way, until the reality hits.

    Hopefully, you can come to understand this before you need others to understand this of you.

  8. Re:Awesome! by theMoleofProduction · · Score: 3, Funny

    Preliminary trials performed on cartoon characters were mostly non-invasive, though results were mixed:

    In late 2008, subject W. E. Coyote was admitted suffering from chronic headaches. MRIs of the patient's brain revealed several cancerous growths on surface of the cortex, likely caused by the subject's attempts to induce "X-ray vision" by applying ACME® 3-in-1 Shampoo & Conditioner & Radium to his scalp.

    Researchers injected Mr. Coyote with the nano solution, then showed him a series of videos featuring a common ground-foraging bird simply running in circles at the top of a tall mesa.

    After the videos, Mr. Coyote was presented with "gifts" from various charities: a hang glider, a butterfly net, and a gross of ACME® Brand Long-Distance Bottle Rockets. A moment after opening the last of the gifts, the subject raised one eyebrow, smirked, then clutched his temples and shrieked in pain before falling unconscious. MRI indicated that the glow of the patient's "idea light bulb" had been bright enough to activate the nano-solution. 70% of the tumor mass had been destroyed.

    Unfortunately, soon after regaining consciousness the subject disappeared with his gifts, an electric wheelchair, and a half dozen bottles of Oxycontin.

    --
    Chemists do it with moles.
  9. Re:A video game idea ? by Nethead · · Score: 3, Interesting

    As someone that lost a brother and a sister to brain cancer, I hope it will become as simple as a video game. Even though we lost my sibs back in the early 60's, the ways to fight the disease haven't really advanced as much as I would expect. I hope this tech will be the one that brings humanity beyond this horrible disease.

    --
    -- I have a private email server in my basement.
  10. Re:Awesome! by shadwwulf · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Actually, another approach to this is to activate the particles is by way of low-level and non-invasive radio frequency energy.

    This man was the one that started a lot of the research into this kind of stuff: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Kanzius

    As a cancer survivor myself, and somebody that has undergone Chemo, I am very intrigued and hopeful about this type of research. Lets hope it all pans out as we all hope.

  11. Re:Exploit by Kratisto · · Score: 4, Funny

    I've been taught to find this offensive, treasonous, and politically incorrect.

    --
    Conscience is the inner voice which warns us that someone may be looking.