Posted on 01/28/2006 4:49:56 PM PST by Founding Father
Nanolaser Device Detects Cancer in Single Cells
Using an ultrafast, nanoscale semiconductor laser, investigators at Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico, have discovered a way of rapidly distinguishing between malignant and normal cells. Moreover, this new technique has the potential of detecting cancer at a very early stage, a development that could change profoundly the way cancer is diagnosed and treated.
Reporting its work in the journal Biomedical Microdevices, a team of researchers led by Paul Gourley, Ph.D., described the methods it used to construct a device that can flow cells one at a time past an ultrafast laser, and how this device revealed that malignant cells have a characteristic optical response that differs from that of a normal cell. This response, the researchers found, arises from the fact that mitochondria, the internal organelles that produce a cell’s energy, are scattered in a chaotic, unorganized manner in malignant cells, while they form organized networks in healthy cells. This difference produces a marked change in the way that malignant cells scatter laser light.
The researchers were then able to show that they could measure this change when flowing individual cells through a “biocavity laser” that Gourley’s group had previously developed. The change shows up as a difference in the fluorescent signal they observed at two different frequencies of light. The investigators note that they are now studying other cellular components to determine if these intracellular structures also have laser-detectable differences between malignant and normal cells.
This work is detailed in a paper titled, “Ultrafast nanolaser flow device for detecting cancer in single cells.” An investigator from the University of California, San Diego, also participated in this study. An abstract is available through PubMed.
View abstract.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=16404511&query_hl=69&itool=pubmed_docsum
Way cool! Hope it is not the usual cancer cure hype, which I have seen before.
Well nobody will read about it since the Saturday night moderator has it in for science and medical articles.
Nanolasermegabump!
Very interesting.
The most likely beneficiaries are people with cancers that show up in the blood. The tool is perfect for scanning a blood sample.
Anything nano also has the potential to be somewhat more than a diagnostic tool.
This could also be developed into an in situ treatment program, by injecting nano-components into the bloodstream which would have the capability of recognising cancer cells "on sight."
It could form the basis of a new type of "T-cell", a techno-cell, which would augment the body's natural immune system.
An ability to recognise the cancer cell is the big news here. That has always been the hurdle.
I posted an article in the last week or two about advances in recognizing cancer cells "on sight," but alas, it too wasn't considered newsworthy enough by the saturday night moderator who banned it to the blogs.
That doesn't have the condemnatory imprimatur for me that it might for others.
I mostly hang out in such lower-key atmospheres.
It could be that your skills as a molecular biologist are what are needed to build the biological versions of nano-robots, or the biological machines that will build the robots.
My skills as a molecular biologist are that I recognize some of the words.
Bioinformatics is the interdisciplinary mix of my skill sets. Determining protein geometry was done by purification, crystallization and X ray crystallography in the 70's. Today, you sequence the protein and put it into a modeling program. Tweak the temperature, pH and ionic strength of the environment and you can predict how the protein will fold. That is the rudiments of designer proteins that perform custom tasks by design instead of evolving by genetic mishap.
I'm already somewhat involved in MEMS devices to leverage nanotechnology to create tiny accelerometers. My aim is to plant a MEMS accelerometer with a small digital signal processor and Bluetooth/Zigbee transceiver on a railcar bearing to transmit the current bearing defect profile. I'm doing that with large devices today. MEMS will cut costs, size and make the technology economically viable.
Would the devices you envision be able to add the extra channels of sensory analysis? It may be possible to develop a multi-use MEMS device which could function to analyze an entire internal combustion engine, for example, by monitoring selected parts through their cycle of motion. It would make a great oil additive.
Are they not also monitoring such things on over-the-road truck wheels? Last I heard, they were trying to use color-changing paint which was sensitive to temperature, and were scanning it with optical sensors.
The earliest method of detecting a bearing burnoff was to install stink bombs on the bearings. An overheat would make the bombs stink. The crew on the caboose could detect a hot bearing from the smell.
My colleagues have already applied this techniques on the jet engines of the B1 bomber and S3 anti-sub aircraft. The principal new technology horizon is being able to do this autonomously on a freight railcar. Pulling the car turns an bearing generator. That provides about 15 watts starting at 10 MPH to recharge the lead acid storage battery.
I have to head off to the rack now. It's 11:35 PM. I have to get up at 4:15 AM to catch a flight to car for my cars in Alabama next weeks. Cheers.
In regard to microscaling the bearing generator, the technique of using an oscillating magnetic weight in a coil suspension should provide sufficient energy any time the car is in motion. The trick would be having sensitive digital receivers positioned where they can pick up and discriminate the multitude of signals being put out by the bearing sensors.
The next developments in restoring rail travel to pre-eminence for American manufacturing and passenger travel may deal with embedded sensors in the tracks. One could scan ahead for overheated tracks, or for signs of other anomalies, as the train is approaching them.
While train operations, such as they are, are still going on, I think it is time that we make the investment in upgrading the system for our current and future needs. Many say the technology is antiquated, but I think our discussion proves that to be a false argument.
A big boost to rail travel would be afforded by an equally aggressive policy of building or rebuilding new, satellite, or reconstructed cities with internal transportation systems and package delivery systems as integral components of the city's layout.
Think of the efficiency made possible by being able to assemble your work force, your raw materials, and the delivery of the finished product, just as one provides energy and water to such buildings. Then such cities, in cooperation and friendly competition with each other, could ship their products back and forth to each other through automated delivery stations which would load them onto freight cars for long range delivery.
It's ironic that one can move more freely, and free of charge, vertically in a city, than one can horizontally. I think that should change, and any city that wants to be truly competitive should be looking to modernize its transportation and delivery systems.
It is very expensive to instrument tracks. The current hot bearing detectors are $50,000 each and are located on 20 mile intervals. A burnoff can happen in 2 minutes. Having instruments on the cars puts lots of observers in field to report on both the car AND the track on which it runs.
While train operations, such as they are, are still going on, I think it is time that we make the investment in upgrading the system for our current and future needs. Many say the technology is antiquated, but I think our discussion proves that to be a false argument.
The honest truth is that railcar owners are cheap screws. It takes a lot of loads to pay back the investment. They do everything as cheaply as possible. That's the point of being able to tell them when it it best to schedule the car for maintenance to minimize repair cost AND impact on the opportunity to derive revenue from the investment.
A big boost to rail travel would be afforded by an equally aggressive policy of building or rebuilding new, satellite, or reconstructed cities with internal transportation systems and package delivery systems as integral components of the city's layout.
That's a vision right out of a socialist central planner's dream book. Frankly, I'm tired of big government dictating how and where people can live. I'm tired of having my gas tax dollars stolen to pay for light right while potholes go unpatched. Government steals gas tax money with the premise/promise that it fixes the roads on a "pay as you go" basis. The liars then steal it for pet programs. If a rail project isn't viable as a privately funded project that can stand on its own, it has no business being built. Most light rail is grossly subsidized and grossly under utilized.
I'm just going to have to disagree on this vision of cities involved in competition/cooperation. It is an appeal to big government/central planning as an economic panacea. Such schemes have failed through history. Why resurrect a failure?
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.