Slashdot Mirror
Detritus From Cancer Cells May Infect Healthy Cells
bmahersciwriter writes Tiny bubbles of cell membrane — called exosomes — are shed by most cells. Long thought to be mere trash, researchers had recently noticed that they often contain short, regulatory RNA molecules, suggesting that exosomes may be one way that cells communicate with one another. Now, it appears that RNA in the exosomes shed by tumor cells can get into healthy cells and 'transform' them, putting them on the path to becoming cancerous themselves.
Isn't it great when decades old assumptions are challenged and new research and understanding avenues open up? Can't beat science...
Mi domando chi à il mandante di tutte le cazzate che faccio - Altan
And you published your own research into the subject when exactly AC? It is easier to criticize the bus driver from the back of the bus.
These "pretentious arrogant twats" have known that exosomes can carry mRNA and miRNA and what exactly as early as 2007. Further, we knew that tumor cells used them to manipulate its environment and how as early as 2010.
And we've known about them since a study published in 1987. It seemed to just carry obsolete proteins from cells called reticulocytes. But we've known for well over a decade that they're used as a form of intercellular transport, especially within the immune system. No legitimate scientist was going, "Hey this does this one thing for this specific type of cell under certain conditions, I bet it does that exact same thing for all other cells in the body."
In fact scientists noticed that platelets were also using exosomes and it was a mystery as to why.
It's funny because you're the one who doesn't seem to be understanding basic microbiology, like the difference between a protein and mRNA.
At risk of feeding the troll, biologists would most likely be the first to tell you that they do not know everything in their field, nor that the field answers any of the fundamental questions, since that's what just about every story related to biology seems to be about lately - new understandings of something previously not considered or even dismissed, much as this case. Biology's understanding at the current time is much like giving you windows 10 today and asking you about it. You understand some of the externally visible pieces, but you don't have a clue how the library dependency structure works exactly, nor what will happen if you replace or remove this one particular file. In any case, understanding yet one more piece of the puzzle should be exciting, not a time to demean those working hard to solve the puzzle.
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
" Five of the 11 exosome samples from the patients induced tumour growth when mixed with normal cells and injected into mice"
Seems unlikely, there would be some statistical evidence in caregivers by now.
Which says that probably have a ways to go before really understanding what they have seen here.
"But trying to slow cancer by blocking exosomes is a difficult proposition, says Al-Nedawii. It is unclear how that would affect normal cells, he notes, and some exosomes from healthy cells have been shown to contain proteins that prevent cancer"
Too bad. I wonder whether they differ enough from non-malicious exosomes that they could be targeted/inhibited specifically with a different kind of chemotherapy drug to silence 'malangelizing' tumor cells.
Either in the DNA or any other part of the body's systems. We just made a lot of simplifying assumptions to get a handle on some extremely complex systems (i.e. genes are the only place inheritable traits are carried). Now we have to start addressing the complexity behind those simplifying assumptions.
You don't have to go that far and outside of biology for an analogy. It is simply like a virus.
Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
A small encapsulatory structure containing a fragment of RNA. I'm not a microbiologist, so can someone tell me how these things are different from a virus?
Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
Which itself can be simply RNA.
I can still tell if the roast is burnt!
It's called the Maillard reaction, you twit! You can't cook and the chef knows how to get a delicious crust on your roast.
.. This finding is not entirely surprising, as the Jarisch-Herxheimer reaction has been understood for quite some time, particularly relevant to treatment of bacterial infection.
Nutshell, antibodies, natural or pharmaceutical, kill bacteria, causing them to dump endotoxins contained within the bacteria into the bloodstream, often causing the patient to feel significantly worse for a period of time.
Not unlike taking a large garbage bag out of the dumpster, throwing it into your swimming pool, then cutting it open with a box cutter.
Chronic inflammatory or bacterial illnesses like rheumatoid arthritis or Lyme disease are particularly notorious for the "Herxing" patients feel during treatment.
THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
Well, I think usually they require some kind of cell-breaching machinery as well. I think it's unusual for cells to swallow up random strands of pure RNA floating around outside their walls- but I could be entirely wrong.
OK- well, nothing that the exosomes don't have.
No, you'd have to be inbred with the cancer 'donor' to not reject their cancer as readily as you'd reject an organ transplant from them.
Not necessarily.
These things aren't carrying the full-blown genome. They're carrying little bits of it - like regulatory switches (or something that functions like that). They ought to be able, occasionally, to covert another person's cells JUST FINE without also marking them as any more foreign than an equivalent cancer naturally arising in that person.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Viruses by definition contain genetic code from outside the host organism.
On the other hand, just as some organelles (i.e. mitochondria, chloroplasts) are apparently the remnant of a microbial infection or ancient symbiosis that became integrated, there are several cellular mechanisms that are apparently remnants of an ancient retrovirus infection, where the bulk of the viral genome was lost but one of its mechanisms was retained and adapted to perform some useful new function.
I'd be willing to bet this is another example of such an
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
This should be REALLY USEFUL - for gene therapy and stem cell therapy.
One of the big problems with such therapies is how to deliver the modified genes or regulators to the target cells, without converting them to something that would be rejected or otherwise have unintended markers or modifications.
One approach is to deliver genes or regulatory chemicals via a modified virius or using viral capsid proteins to construct an "injector". (A family of methods for turning harvested somatic cells into toti/pluri/multi/unipotent stem cells consists of inserting four regulatory proteins - by inserting about four GENES THAT CODE FOR THEM via a modified virus.)
Now here we have a a method, already used by the body, to transport RNA signalling snippets and other factors from one cell into another, by a sending cell creating virus-like carrier particles that destination cells readily accept and absorb.
THAT looks like an IDEAL basis for building a carrier for regulatory factors to switch cell modes on and off, or to tote new genetic material into a target cell for incorporation, to correct genetic errors or supply lost genes:
1) Make fake exosomes carrying the message you want to deliver.
2) Inject them into the tissue you want to affect.
3) Rewrite the state or code of the target cells.
4) Cure disease (or otherwise augment the patient's health).
5) PROFIT!
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Does anybody knows if exosomes would be removed from the blood stream if the "biospleen" is used? http://www.nature.com/news/art...