Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

First Anti-Cancer Nanoparticle Trial On Humans a Success

Posted by samzenpus on from the smallest-medicine dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Nanoparticles have been able to disable cancerous cells in living human bodies for the first time. The results are perfect so far, killing tumors with no side effects whatsoever. Mark Davis, project leader at CalTech, says that 'it sneaks in, evades the immune system, delivers the siRNA, and the disassembled components exit out.' Truly amazing."

10 of 260 comments (clear)

  1. Targetting by oldhack · · Score: 2, Interesting

    How do they direct them into tumor cells?

    --
    Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
    1. Re:Targetting by wisty · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'd guess that normal cells don't have as many, because they don't replicate as fast. But some fast-replicating cells (hair, some blood cells, etc) might have a few. Note, chemo also targets fast-replicating cells, which is why it kills cancer and makes your hair fall out.

      So this would be a suped-up chemo treatment, and hopefully a bit more specific.

    2. Re:Targetting by MichaelSmith · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Incorrect. There are significant physiological and genetic differences between cancerous cells and normal cells. It would be entirely possible to target the RNA sequence to only bind to malignant cells and ignore normal ones.

      Yeah but chemotherapy and radiotherapy work the same way. The problem is that the characteristic of cancerous cells they bind to is the fact that they grow fast. The problem is that these treatments also damage normally fast growing tissues. My father in law lost all his bone marrow that way.

      I hope that these nanoparticles don't bind to any other crucial tissues.

      --
      http://michaelsmith.id.au
  2. SWEET SUCCESS by OrwellianLurker · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Can we now laugh at all that silliness that smoking cigarettes leads to death? I can't wait till Camel gets in on the cancer killin' business.

    --
    'Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.' - Mao Tse-tung
  3. Re:Not just cancer! by wizardforce · · Score: 4, Interesting

    RNAi is an ancient anti-viral defense mechanism found in everything from plants to humans. That said, I agree. Any disease that is caused by the production of a given protein could in principle be treated using a derivative of this RNAi nanoparticle technology.
     

    Now we just need to figure out how to change people's DNA on the fly

    Viruses come close to this, it is just a matter of expanding what they can do (eg. enlarging their payload) and reducing the incidence of side effects like severe immune reactions.

    --
    Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
  4. Hopefully this works on Metastatic cancer by NotSoHeavyD3 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Since currently if you have metastasis most of the time it's incurable.(If you're lucky you'll just be a chronic cancer victim.)

    --
    Did you know 80 to 90% of the moderators on slashdot wouldn't recognize a troll even if one dragged them under a bridge.
  5. Re:Too small a sample size by BenVis · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Thanks for the overview of the clinical trials procedure. You clearly know a lot about it. One thing I wanted to point out is that while placebo-controlled designs are probably the most reliable, in many contexts (including a cancer treatment) it would be unethical to give patients a placebo (i.e. a treatment expected to do nothing) rather than a treatment that might actually help them.

    Basically, if there is a treatment that is known to be at least somewhat effective, that's your control rather than a placebo. It might be that the definition of placebo has shifted to include any standard non-experimental treatment, but that would be news to me.

    --
    "Preceded by itself yields falsehood" preceded by itself yields falsehood.
  6. Immortality anyone? by Raystonn · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Wonderful. Now that we can destroy cancer cells, where can I sign up to have my telemeres refreshed? I'm not getting any younger here... yet.

  7. Re:Too small a sample size by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    It's kind of morbid to think that a cancer patient would receive a placebo and be told it was a cure.

  8. Is nanotech the new asbestos? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    http://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2008/05/nanotechnolog-1.html