Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

RNA-Loaded Nanoparticles Fight Cancer

Posted by Soulskill on from the hope-you-all-like-sousa dept.

DirkDaring writes "It's been promised for years: that nanoparticles offer a treatment to many forms of cancer. Today, an important first step has been announced. In a new human trial, nanoparticles carrying RNA have successfully reached cancer cells and silenced the target gene. 'The researchers developed a nanoparticle carrying a molecular marker that binds to the surface of cancer cells, triggering the cells to absorb it. The siRNA carried within the particle was designed to silence a gene called ribonucleotide reductase M2 (RRM2), which regulates DNA synthesis and repair and is known to be an anticancer target. Because it was the first trial using targeted RNAi delivery for cancer, says Mark Davis, a professor of chemical engineering at Caltech and the study's lead author, "we wanted to choose a gene that was suspected to be hugely upregulated in a broad spectrum of cancers" in order to increase the likelihood of being able to observe the novel therapy's effect. The researchers analyzed biopsy samples from three melanoma patients in the trial who had received different doses of the therapy. They tracked the particles in the different samples, finding that the amounts they could see in the tumor cells correlated with the doses the patients received.'"

9 of 69 comments (clear)

  1. Re:what if it wins... by gomiam · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Since the marker attaches to cancerous cells only, healthy ones should suffer no damage. Then again, I read the story above, so it's not like I'm specially insightful.

  2. Re:what if it wins... by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The most interesting part here is not about directing damage, it is that this was a successful non-topical application of siRNAs. In most tests up to now, siRNAs have been injected directly into the target tissue. This study shows a delivery system that carries the siRNA specifically into targeted cells via the bloodstream. In the long run, this might be the key to target metastases however small they are and wherever they are.

    --
    Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
  3. What if cancer cells are a symptom? by Yaddoshi · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Maybe I'm going out on a limb here, since I practically no medical schooling, but there have been suggestions by certain medical professionals (names elude me at the moment) that cancer cells could be the body's final (and potentially fatal) attempt to correct other, seemingly unrelated health issues. This would also explain why cancer can return after it has gone into remission.

    If so, while this technique would stop the cancer cells from spreading, it may not address the cause of the cancer. I suppose we'll find out if/once the treatment becomes mainstream.

    1. Re:What if cancer cells are a symptom? by Orga · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Cancer is simply a mistake in the copying process of cells. Typically this is brought on by aging, most old people have some cancer in them even if it doesn't end up being the thing that kills them. Since human reproduction occurs under 40 years or so cancer resistance is not something we've improved with evolution. If humans reproduced at the age of 10 we'd probably see cancers develop in our 20 and 30's. If humans reproduced in the 80-90's we wouldn't see cancers until we're in our 100's. It's simply a fact of our reproduction system and evolution that we've developed little reason to exist after our reproductive cycle has ended and therefore our bodies fail us.

    2. Re:What if cancer cells are a symptom? by Orga · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually I'll add to that and say that cancer could be seen as a benefit to our species. Having a faster reproductive rate increases the spread of our genes and therefore quickening our evolutionary rate as a species, in a world of limited resources it's best to kill off the resource consumers who can no longer produce offspring. Nature and evolution aren't here to benefit your grandparents... sorry.

    3. Re:What if cancer cells are a symptom? by thms · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But if you, as a grandparent, can ensure the survival of your children and grandchildren, then mutations which elongate life make sense again, especially for species that rely on learned behaviour more than instincts.

      As for cancer, I still assume that the cancer rate is coupled with the general mutation rate. If your species becomes too perfect in copying it's genes then it might be cancer-proof. But that also means that no changes occur in the germ line - you just became a static species! That mean you will probably die out because everyone else around you still evolves (the Red Queen's race). To summarize: Cancer and evolution have the same molecular basis! I wonder how this stabilized in living fossils....

  4. Re:What if cancer cells are a symptom? pseudosci.! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    have been suggestions [..] certain medical professionals [..] could be

    That are too many weasel words, and I raise a pseudo science alert! While I don't claim to know better, taking a potshot at conventional medicine with a very vague concept is not helpful.

    Also, cancer cells are no longer within the normal parameters of human cells and mutate wildly, please suggest how they could be in any way helpful.

  5. Original publication by DarkPixel · · Score: 2, Insightful

    See paper here http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature08956.html and article here http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100321/full/news.2010.138.html

    Why do I keep seeing summaries that link to articles that are summaries of summaries of the original publication? Just link to the damn Nature article if that's the source.

  6. Re:Interesting article by AlexBirch · · Score: 2, Insightful

    HIV mutates very frequently, so it's difficult to design an siRNA reagent to target it effectively. Another hurdle is delivering the siRNA to the infected T cells.