Posted on 08/31/2015 7:39:46 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
We’ve told you before about IceCure’s amazing tumor-freezing technology that destroys breast tumors by freezing them into ice balls. Now the company has set its sights on another killer – lung cancer. The Israeli biomedical company that pioneered the application of cryoablation (a process which uses extreme cold to freeze and destroy diseased tissue) as a treatment for benign breast tumors (fibroadenomas), intends to expand its technology to the treatment of lung cancer, with a new clinical trial to begin in Japan.
Related articles
“This study, which is fully funded by the Kameda Medical Center in Japan, may pave the road for IceCure to use its cryoablation technology in lung cancer tumors, in addition to the current commercial applications for the treatment of benign breast tumors and investigational use for small breast cancers,” said IceCure President and CEO Hezi Himelfarb.
A proven means to destroy breast tumors
IceCure has received FDA approval for its cryoablation system, IceSense3, to treat fibroadenomas and small malignant breast tumors. The procedure is minimally invasive, takes approximately 15 minutes and requires only local anaesthetic.
The technology, called IceSense3, uses ultrasound imaging to guide a hollow needle into the lump or tumor. The distal part of the needle is then cooled to -274F (-170C) through the use of liquid nitrogen, which engulfs the tumor in a ball of ice and destroys the targeted cells. No further procedure is necessary and the body automatically reabsorbs the dead cells over time.
According to IceCure, its procedure produces a more aesthetically pleasing result than surgery, which often leads to serious scarring.
Doctor Eisuke Fukuma, Chairman of the Breast Center at Kameda Medical Center, explains: “Cryoablation offers a much more comfortable and cosmetically appealing treatment option for small breast cancers. The IceSense3 system provides a more efficient, targeted treatment to completely destroy the tumor in a quick, office procedure.”
Now IceCure Medical wants to apply its technology beyond treating fibroadenomas and small malignant breast tumors.
Tackling the deadliest cancer
Himelfarb says: “Successful results in the Japanese trial may open the possibility to enter a huge market with hundreds of thousands of new cases every year.” According to the American Cancer Society, lung cancer is the leading cancer killer of both men and women in the United States, more than the next three cancers combined (colon, breast and prostate).
The clinical study will be managed by Dr. Akihiko Takeshi, the chairman of the Thoracic Surgery Department at Kameda Medical Center. IceCure Medical will determine its future involvement in the treatment of lung cancer through cryoablation in accordance with the results of the study.
Now people will live even longer. Not so sure this is a good thing looking at the big picture.
Depends on who the person is.
Who makes that choice? Will it be used sparingly?
I kinda like my grandchildren an they're ok with me. Don't give a rat's behind about the big picture. I'll save that for the eugenicists and navel gazers.
If that's a joke it's not very funny.
Meanwhile, in the real world: I observe that liquid nitrogen is dirt cheap, and minimally invasive outpatient procedures are (relatively) inexpensive as well. I'm quite sure that this is a good thing.
Another area for those Pali lovers that want to boycott Israel will have to wring their hands over. Do they boycott this technology that would potentially save their own lives, or do they just die. I know how I would vote if I were them; boycott the “Jew” company and DIE.
Of course you do as most of us do, however, as more people live longer they use resources which in the long run deprive new generations. There indeed is a negative affect when considering the big picture. Don’t get me wrong, the cure is a wonderful thing, but it also has long term negative consequences associated with it.
Of course it is not a joke. While the cure is a marvelous thing, it also comes with negative impacts. People require resources, and living longer means those resources have to be stretched even further. My point is will the powers that be start deciding who gets treatment, and who is condemned to die even though a cure is available.
BTW, I will check out when the good Lord tells me to.
I know what you're saying but I can't worry about the elderly using resources when this country creates loafers by the millions a year. I'll take very personally someone attempting to deprive me of existing and proven life saving medical treatment that I can pay for. I won't align myself in any way with the eugenicists and gerontology bean counters. Nazis all.
Thank you. The Malthusian bean-counters forget that people are 'resources'. Old people don't cease to be 'resources' simply by way of being old. The bean-counters fail catastrophically to observe the real world in its entirety.
So I guess in your eyes I am a Nazi for pointing out that fact. Whatever.
No one implied anything to the contrary. I can't help it if you read something into what I haven't said.
Good people are scarce resources.
The numbers of non resourceful people are expanding.
So what is your point? That I am a bean counter? You're wrong, I am concerned about my grandchildren, more than I am concerned about extending my life. No where did I advocate the destruction of human lives. In fact I am against abortion. No where did I suggest people reject this treatment. I was merely pointing out that extending lives of more people will have negative consequences. If you want to bury your head in the sand, and reject that premise, that is your right.
I believe the positive impacts outweigh the negative impacts. Sorry to hear you believe so little of the human race. Not all who contract lung cancer are old.
Interesting article.
Again you read thing that haven't even been stated. I applaud the human endeavor to prolong life and improve its quality, even with the challenges it brings.
I believe the positive impacts outweigh the negative impacts.
What you or I believe are irrelevant. What is relevant is the reality. Only time will reveal what that reality is.
Not all who contract lung cancer are old.
Again, this is not about age, it is about the overall impact on life quality as more people vie for resources for longer periods. We have to start now to imagine what those negative impacts will be, to begin envisioning real workable solutions as they start to expose themselves.
For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. It is those reactions we need to examine.
The latter has been promoted enough by the 'generation gap' people, compounding the ignorance of those younger, especially when it comes to long term megatrends and the loss of Liberty.
Cultural continuity requires that those who remember be able to pass those memories on, so the expectations of the young are not easily manipulated by those who would do so to their advantage, especially the accumulation and usurpation of power.
The elimination of those who remember would suit the Totalitarians just fine.
Thanks for the ping!
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.