SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the combine-with-IBM's-Watson-and-watch-out dept.
A new CRISPR-related tool cuts RNA in a way that can be used to diagnose the presence of viruses or diseases:
Far to the right side of the decimal point—beyond milli, micro, nano, pico, and femto—lives the atto, the metric prefix representing 10-18. Slap it in front of a unit of concentration, such as molar, and it means that something exists in an extraordinarily small amount—think one part per quintillion. That's the realm of SHERLOCK, a new diagnostic system that can detect attomolar levels of viruses in a sample and also distinguish Zika from its close relative, dengue. This exquisitely sensitive and specific tool promises to help detect diseases that other diagnostics miss, and it's simple and cheap to use. Sexier still, it exploits a variation of CRISPR, the genome-editing method that has become the rage in biology. "It's very nice work and very well done," says Erik Sontheimer, an RNA specialist who did early CRISPR work and is at the University of Massachusetts Medical School in Worcester. Harvard University's George Church, who co-founded a CRISPR therapeutics company with one of SHERLOCK's inventors but is not involved with this work, sums up his reaction in one word: "Wow."
Scientists recognized as early as 2010 that they might be able to transform CRISPR into a virus detection device [open, DOI: 10.1128/AEM.01109-10] [DX]. But earlier efforts at making a viral detector became overshadowed by CRISPR's wild success at editing genomes. [...] SHERLOCK differs from the CRISPR-Cas9 system in fundamental ways. It uses an RNA guide that gloms onto RNA, not DNA, and an enzyme called Cas13a cuts the genetic material. Once Cas13a snips the target, it starts indiscriminately cutting any RNA it encounters. A team lead by bioengineer James Collins and CRISPR genome-editing pioneer Feng Zhang, both from the Broad Institute in Cambridge, Massachusetts, has now shown that these "collateral" cuts can form the basis for the SHERLOCK diagnostic. "Nature has a lot of very amazing tools," Zhang says. The researchers demonstrate that SHERLOCK can detect viral and bacterial infections, cancer mutations found at low frequencies, and subtle DNA sequence variations known as single nucleotide polymorphisms that are linked to other diseases. (SHERLOCK, a somewhat strained acronym coined by the team, stands for specific high sensitivity enzymatic reporter unlocking.)
Nucleic acid detection with CRISPR-Cas13a/C2c2 (DOI: 10.1126/science.aam9321) (DX)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 16 2017, @08:41AM
homeopathic levels.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 16 2017, @11:11AM (2 children)
how does this mechanism actually work for detection?
(Score: 3, Informative) by takyon on Sunday April 16 2017, @05:39PM
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 16 2017, @06:10PM
Their idea is that they can set up an enzyme (cas13a) to only cut RNA when it binds to a specific RNA sequence (target). In the presence of the RNA target it will begin indiscriminately chopping up all the RNA molecules around, while it should do nothing if the target is not present. Then there are various schemes you can use to check for widespread, nonspecific RNA degradation (which purportedly indicates presence of the RNA target sequence).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 16 2017, @04:57PM (4 children)
We have been telling you people not to listen to what is published in these tabloids (nature, science, pnas) because all they care about is "sexiness" of the results for awhile now. Now apparently even Science admits it, but it looks like they don't comprehend why people who think they are publishing scientific material (as opposed to entertainment) consider this a problem.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Sunday April 16 2017, @05:34PM (3 children)
Ah, the typical "boo hoo" tier complaint.
If it wasn't there, you would have found some other minor shit to get triggered over.
It also looks like you don't comprehend that a journal and a news blog are two separate entities, even when they are hosted on the same domain.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 16 2017, @06:03PM (2 children)
Ok, taking a look at the paper. It is already setting off all the crank alarms
1) A bunch of N =1 experiments.
2) No mention of blinding.
3) Dynamite plots.
4) Those cute stars wherever they got "a result".
(Score: 1, Troll) by b on Wednesday April 19 2017, @04:21AM (1 child)
I only skimmed the figures, but
1) Looks like it's mostly n=4? And they get p values.
2) I'd never blind if measuring objective readouts. Only for subjective things like "this cell looks spikier".
3) Fair point.
(Score: 2) by b on Wednesday May 03 2017, @04:00AM
Why did someone moderate this as a troll? Because you don't agree with the analysis? Perhaps a more detailed reply would be more constructive.
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Sunday April 16 2017, @09:46PM
If every test cost circa 0.61 US$ one could setup a automated test unit that samples the air say every 10 minutes around the clock for 790 US$ per day. It could be used to pinpoint airports for the spread of airborne or other dangerous pathogens like SARS, Ebola, Bird flue etc.
Otherwise it's just a question of time before natures natural mutation and migration cycle wrecks a region with disease.