Posted on 06/24/2004 4:40:27 PM PDT by Zon
| Contact: Jade Boyd jadeboyd@rice.edu 713-348-6778 Rice University Nanoshells cancer treatment proves effective in first animal testLaser treatments eradicate all tumors from mice in trialHOUSTON, June 21, 2004 -- A revolutionary new form of cancer therapy in development at Rice University and its licensee, Nanospectra Biosciences Inc., has proven effective at eradicating tumors in laboratory animals during the first phase of animal testing.The noninvasive cancer treatment uses a combination of harmless, near-infrared light and benign, gold nanoshells to destroy tumors with heat. The treatment does not affect healthy tissue. "We are extremely encouraged by the results of these first animal tests," said Jennifer West, professor of bioengineering and chemical engineering. "These results confirm that nanoshells are effective agents for the photothermal treatment of in vivo tumors." Results of the study are published in the June 25 issue of the journal Cancer Letters. Invented in the 1990s by Naomi Halas at Rice, nanoshells are about 20 times smaller than a red blood cell. The multilayered nanoshells consist of a silica core covered by a thin gold shell. The size, shape and composition of nanoshells give them unique optical properties. By varying the size of the core and the thickness of the gold shell, researchers can tailor a nanoshell to respond to a specific wavelength of light. The photothermal cancer treatment uses nanoshells that are tuned to respond to near-infrared light. Located just outside the visible spectrum, near-infrared light passes harmlessly through soft tissue. In the treatment, nanoshells convert this light into heat that destroys nearby tumor cells. The heating is very localized and does not affect healthy tissue adjacent to the tumor. The animal trial involved 25 mice with tumors ranging in size from 3-5.5 millimeters. The mice were divided into three groups. The first group was given no treatment. The second received saline injections, followed by three minutes exposure to near-infrared laser light. The final group received nanoshell injections and laser treatments. The blood vessels inside tumors develop poorly, allowing small particles like nanoshells to leak out and accumulate inside tumors. In the test, researchers injected nanoshells into the mice, waited six hours to give the nanoshells time to accumulate in the tumors and then applied a 5 millimeter wide laser on the skin above each tumor. Surface temperature measurements taken on the skin above the tumors during the laser treatments showed a marked increase that averaged about 46 degrees Fahrenheit for the nanoshells group. There was no measurable temperature increase at the site of laser treatments in the saline group. Likewise, sections of laser-treated skin located apart from the tumor sites in the nanoshells group also showed no increase in temperature, indicating that the nanoshells had accumulated as expected within the tumors. All signs of tumors disappeared in the nanoshells group within 10 days. These mice remained cancer-free after treatment. Tumors in the other two test groups continued to grow rapidly. All mice in these groups were euthanized when the tumors reached 10 millimeters in size. The mean survival time of the mice receiving no treatment was 10.1 days; the mean survival time for the group receiving saline injections and laser treatments was 12.5 days. "The results of these first animal studies are very promising, and while we don't yet have a target date for our first human trial, our entire team is working hard to make this treatment available to cancer patients as soon as possible," said Halas, the Stanley C. Moore Professor in Electrical and Computer Engineering and professor of chemistry. "We have licensed the technology to the Houston-based firm Nanospectra Biosciences Inc., which will obtain the necessary approvals and funding for human trials."
###
This research was funded by the National Science Foundation under both an STTR grant to Nanospectra Biosciences and a National Nanotechnology Initiative grant to Rice's Center for Biological and Environmental Nanotechnology. |
What about unnatural causes of death, such as cancer and other diseases? The above article addresses some unnatural causes of death and potentially very promising cures.
Come to think about it, is not conscious man's nature to solve and control nature in this way. The only living species able to know/understand nature in order to control nature. Why? To benefit himself, his family, loved ones and humanity.
Click here to read the article that explains progress being made on achieving escape velocity. The culture of technology Death be not proud
You actually want people such as hippies to live forever? :-)
Wait, if the nanoshell mice were cured, why only 2.4 days better than the cancer mice? Something don't add up.
There were three groups. The way I read the article, the third group, the ones treated with nanoshells, appear to be cured.
There were three groups of mice in the research/study. The mice that
had 2.4 days extended longevity didn't have the nanoshell treatment. They
had saline solution injection and laser treatment; but no nanoshell
treatment. The third group of mice -- those that did receive nanoshells
and laser treatments lived on.
oh sorry my confuze.
very nice, wonder where the nanoshells go after the cure - a second treatment if cancer re-arises might be a problem because some of the nanoshells would be in healthy tissue now. maybe a biodegradable nanoshell could be done.
Amazing stuff
maybe a biodegradable nanoshell could be done.
That's quite possible as awhile back I read an article that described nano-medicine is being developed to do precisely that -- after annihilating the intended target it would breakdown and be excreted as waste.
yeah thats really cool what about detached molecules floating around the body collecting in nodes ...
guess we're going to nuke those...
pretty neat for solid tumors though...
The rest of your point not withstanding, cancer and other diseases are natural causes of death.
Cancer and disease are natural processes unless caused by man. The vast majority of disease is naturally occurring. Even man caused disease would be a natural reaction to a man related stimulus.
For 2,300 years survival of the fittest has been ill-defined as persons wielding the power of external authority over people. The notion that external authorities hold valid power above and beyond the power of the lone conscious individual acting according to his and her nature is absurd when viewed form an individual-survival perspective and not a collective-group survival perspective.
From a group-survival perspective individual rights to life property and contract can be "legitimately" violated. That in itself contradicts the nature of the conscious being. For 2,300 years history has documented that the two biggest violators and contradictions to those rights have been political and religious authorities.
No one lives forever. Even if average lifespan keeps accelerating to where the average person lives a thousand years, at some point an unconsidered accident will happen, and the private space yacht falls into the sun.
People may learn to live for a very, very long time, and I would love to do so. But,... No one lives forever.
There's the advancing knowledge curve; advancing technology curve; advancing control of nature curve. In a hundred years or less those inter-linked accelerating curves mean business will be able to re-create an indistinguishable copy of any person -- complete with memories and sense of self--"I-ness". Forever.
Forever is a very long time. I can believe that one of my backup duplicates will be able to take over where I left off when the private space yacht fell into the sun, or was obliterated by a stray mini-black hole or an unexpected supernova, or whatever.
But don't you consider the death of the operational self a death? Or the certainty of change accumulating to make a very old individual so different from a younger self that the whole question of "self" becomes problematic? Or the strong possibility of the heat death of the universe, an imploding big bang, or the eventual decay of all subatomic particles?
I've been seeing this coming for over a decade, and I look forward to a very, very long life, but I still think that all alive to day will die eventually. It may take thousands, or millions, or billions of years. But it will happen.
Then again, maybe my understanding of life and death will be so changed after a million years of existence, that I will laugh at the foolish notions of my youth of the first thousand years!
Then again, maybe my understanding of life and death will be so changed after a million years of existence, that I will laugh at the foolish notions of my youth of the first thousand years!
"Then again" is right! Perhaps with such a long time span -- millions or billions of years, let alone just a thousand years -- considering the trilogy of advancing curves, knowing that the universe exists via the laws of nature it is prone to being harnessed under the control of conscious beings. Perhaps it already is, just not by us Earthlings yet.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.