Slashdot Mirror
Injecting Liquid Metal Into Blood Vessels Could Help Kill Tumors
KentuckyFC (1144503) writes One of the most interesting emerging treatments for certain types of cancer aims to starve the tumor to death. The strategy involves destroying or blocking the blood vessels that supply a tumor with oxygen and nutrients. Without its lifeblood, the unwanted growth shrivels up and dies. This can be done by physically blocking the vessels with blood clots, gels, balloons, glue, nanoparticles and so on. However, these techniques have never been entirely successful because the blockages can be washed away by the blood flow and the materials do not always fill blood vessels entirely, allowing blood to flow round them. Now Chinese researchers say they've solved the problem by filling blood vessels with an indium-gallium alloy that is liquid at body temperature. They've tested the idea in the lab on mice and rabbits. Their experiments show that the alloy is relatively benign but really does fill the vessels, blocks the blood flow entirely and starves the surrounding tissue of oxygen and nutrients. The team has also identified some problems such as the possibility of blobs of metal being washed into the heart and lungs. Nevertheless, they say their approach is a promising injectable tumor treatment.
Those tumors could be terminated.
Thanks, I'll be here all week. Try the baklava!
Having blobs of liquid metal flowing to the heart seems like a show stopper to me. I'm intrigued by the old-school-mad-scientist aspect of this idea, but the potential risks seem a bit serious.
"Have you seen this boy?"
Lots of things are relatively benign compared to cancer -- but I'm not sure this is one of them.
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
I'm a radiology resident who is at least moderately familiar with embolic agents.
We already have a liquid embolic agent that solidifies slowly called Onyx. It is only approved for arteriovenous malformations in the central nervous system, but it is used off label for other indications, including tumor embolization: http://www.ajnr.org/content/34... [American Journal of Neuroradiology]. The English on the actual liquid metal article is pretty rough and I soon grew tired of trying to decipher it, but from what I did manage to read I cannot see this doing anything better than Onyx already does.
With regards to embolization to the heart and pulmonary arteries, this happens occasionally with any embolic agent. The cardiovascular system, like the internet, is a series of tubes and the pulmonary capillaries are a fine network of blood vessels that routinely catch tiny blood clots without you even noticing it. It's big emboli that you need to worry about.
Qian and co first tested the cytotoxicity of gallium and indium by allowing cells to grow in its presence and measuring the number that survive after 48 hours. If more than 75 per cent, a substance is deemed safe by China’s national standards.
After 48 hours just over 75 percent of cells in both samples were still alive
The experiments also reveal a number of potential problems, however. X-rays of the rabbit they injected clearly show that blobs of liquid metal found their way to the animal’s heart and lungs.
What’s more, their experiments also show blood vessel growth around the blocked arteries, revealing how quickly the body adapts to blockages.
At least it's easy to conduct research in China. Maybe they'll find something.
What I want to know is, why didn't they try wax or oil first?
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
You're trying too hard.
"Injecting Liquid Metal Into Blood Vessels Could Help Kill Tumors"
A large enough dose of cyanide is guaranteed to kill all tumors someone may have. The health of the patient is, of course, not guaranteed.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
Probably better than having Mercury up your ass, and then getting AIDS
Liquid Metal --- Cyanide.
One of these things is not like the other.
I doubt the death would be painful, if it happened. At least, I can't see it being any more painful than chemo already is.
With chemo there's always the debate over which is worse: the disease, or the cure? Most of the time chemo doesn't work, in which case I could see this being used instead.
Unless the cancer is in your liver or renal system.
Then switching to a ketonic diet will poison you in a matter of days.
Always consult a health professional before doing ANYTHING radical with your body. :D
Most of the time chemo doesn't work, in which case I could see this being used instead.
That myth hasn't held true for 30+ years.
When used against appropriate cancers and caught early enough (which doesn't mean "before you have any reason to suspect you have a problem" anymore), chemo has a very high success rate, on the order of 90% and up. Bladder and testicular cancer, most skin cancers - considered almost perfectly curable. Most leukemias, either curable or sustainable.
The question you pose applies more out of desperation than practicality. Very few people, when told they have an untreatable cancer, will decide to just sit down and die. No, they ask the doctor to try anything, however nasty, on the off chance it will work.
We don't complain about antibiotics as a complete failure, despite the fact that they don't treat viruses. The same applies to cancer treatments: use the right drug at the right time.