SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Today, the majority of cancers are detected on the macroscopic level, when the tumor is already composed of millions of cancer cells and the disease is starting to advance into a more mature phase. But what if we could diagnose cancer before it took hold- while it was still only affecting a few localized cells? It would be like putting a fire out while it was still just a few sparks versus after having already caught on and spread to many areas of the house. An international team of researchers, led by ICFO- Institute of Photonic Sciences in Castelldefels, announce the successful development of a "lab-on-a-chip" platform capable of detecting protein cancer markers in the blood using the very latest advances in plasmonics, nano-fabrication, microfluids and surface chemistry. The device is able to detect very low concentrations of protein cancer markers in blood, enabling diagnoses of the disease in its earliest stages. The detection of cancer in its very early stages is seen as key to the successful diagnosis and treatment of this disease.
(Score: 2) by opinionated_science on Sunday May 25 2014, @02:14AM
well that is one of the major research problems. What effects to the mutations make? Go look at the 1000 genome project, for example, plenty of non-synonymous mutations (e.g. NTSR1 the neutrotensin 1 receptor has 83 non-synonymous mutations from population of 1000). Some mutation will cause constitutive activy (the receptors gets turned "on" permanently), or will cause a receptor to become less receptive with different salt concentrations.
My point is with the exact molecule, we can produce both positive and negative control tests.
So let's leave it as "it's a nice idea but needs more work". The particular study was deeply flawed. And we always want to know the active molecule...
(Score: 1) by Immerman on Sunday May 25 2014, @04:12AM
I won't argue that with the exact molecule and a cheap mass spectrometer we can do far better than a dogs nose - that's obvious. My point is that we've known for almost a hundred years how to do so *without* knowing any specific molecules, just as we've used dogs for search and rescue without knowing exactly what (combination of) molecules allow them to track a specific individual.
And again I say - mutations don't matter. Obviously a dog carrying a particular "debilitating" mutation may be unable to identify cancer - but we don't care. Such a dog won't be able to pass the identification training course and thus won't be an issue - it doesn't matter if it's because they have a nose-compromising mutation or are just particularly dumb or stubborn - they get weeded out by the training regime. It's not like a mutation is going to suddenly disable an already-certified dog, and even if it somehow did regular re-certification would solve that easily enough (and would be a good idea for several other reasons).