California high school student solves cancer?

[Phanuthier]

nanoparticles that would then attach to cancer cells and show up on an MRI. so doctors could see exactly where the tumors are. Then she thought shat if you aimed an infrared light at the tumors to melt the polymer

Um wasn't this presented by from U of Buffalo by Dr Paras Prasad in 2007? Among many others.

I don't think this is new... drug delivery has been a big field for a few years now. I don't know why they are publishing this as something new?

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by missdpuck

Hmmm thought i had heard of this technology already.

Probably... from a PM I sent you about 2 years ago?

this was supposed to be my masters project before I went to do something else

[Bagor]

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the difference that she has developed a polymer and is utilising the technology as a means of localised drug administration to kill the cells as opposed to the given examples in this thread that are killing the cells thermally.

Similar but different. Both go to the tumerous cells, both get a blast of energy, one kills the cells by heat, the other by releasing the drug.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by Bagor

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the difference that she has developed a polymer and is utilising the technology as a means of localised drug administration to kill the cells as opposed to the given examples in this thread that are killing the cells thermally.

Similar but different. Both go to the tumerous cells, both get a blast of energy, one kills the cells by heat, the other by releasing the drug.

you're saying IR instead of whatever chemo uses right now is the difference? Because drug delivery is localizing a drug to a cancer cell via the cancer cells markers.

So... is she suggesting a new polymer (aka. nanoparticle, aka semiconductor) then?

[photon]

Yeah as far as I understand it her unique contribution is designing the molecule that can do two duties at once, imaging and delivery.

[MarchHare]

I have no idea what kind of word "she've" is, but this is funny otherwise:

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

you're saying IR instead of whatever chemo uses right now is the difference? Because drug delivery is localizing a drug to a cancer cell via the cancer cells markers.

It appears to me that the difference is that she has proposed an innovative way of localised drug delivery, i.e mixing it with a polymer. Unless, there is evidence out there that this way of administration has been suggested before. Sure there are some drugs out there that are localised to specific types of tumours but that takes nothing away from her work given the complete difference in delivery method and the multifunctionality (treatment/imaging) of it.

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

So... is she suggesting a new polymer (aka. nanoparticle, aka semiconductor) then?

“She showed great creativity and initiative in designing a nanoparticle system that can be triggered to release drugs at the site of the tumor while also allowing for non-invasive imaging. Her work is an important step in developing new approaches to the therapeutic targeting of tumors via nanotechnology.”

http://www.gwu.edu/explore/mediaroom...encetechnology

At the end of the day her work is in the very embryonic stages but you definitely can't fault her innovation.

[TorqueDog]

I was not doing anything like this when I was 17. Pretty impressive stuff.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by Bagor

It appears to me that the difference is that she has proposed an innovative way of localised drug delivery, i.e mixing it with a polymer. Unless, there is evidence out there that this way of administration has been suggested before. Sure there are some drugs out there that are localised to specific types of tumours but that takes nothing away from her work given the complete difference in delivery method and the multifunctionality (treatment/imaging) of it. .

(read the link)

Maybe I'm missing something... so what I know they had, as of 2009, was that you take a "nanoparticle" (aka. polymer, semiconductor, insert name here)... you wrap up a medicine... the nanoparticle will stick to the cancer cells due to a "marker" ... a EM wave of some sort (IR or otherwise?) will open up the "nanoparticle" and target the cancer cells. I think, though I could be wrong and missed something here, thats exactly what is suggested here...

Or (as photon implied?) is what she did special that it also does imaging? In which case, its not a new approach but merely integrating both drug delivery + imaging?

[Bagor]

Which link Phanuthier and can you direct me to the 2009 work that was already done?

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by Bagor

Which link Phanuthier and can you direct me to the 2009 work that was already done?

No link, I just know about it cause I was there in person at a conference when it was presented.

The guy's name was Dr Paras Prasad... U of Buffalo ... he's supposed to be the founder of the field, or the biggest name in the field, or one of the first in the field... or something like that. That conference he presented in was Jan 2008 Photonics West I think.... in 2009 I had saw something else come out, but I forget what.

[Bagor]

Well if they presented it as something they'd achieved then no doubt there must be publications?

Or ... was he presenting it as "potential applications"?

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by Bagor

Well if they presented it as something they'd achieved then no doubt there must be publications?

Or ... was he presenting it as "potential applications"?

2006 : www.photonics.buffalo.edu/docs/remote_control.doc

2009 : http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0324101747.htm

though he might have presented only application.... i don't' remember... i just remember the idea and i was impressed by the concept.