Researchers at A*STAR in Singapore and the United States used a method called "gene transfection" to develop brain-tumor cells that expressed a firefly gene, so they would emit light. They looked for the cells that were the most mobile within a three-dimensional matrix, and it turned out "the most invasive cells express a gene that makes them mobile." That same gene has been associated with reduced survival in cancer patients.

Then the researchers injected these tumor cells into zebrafish embryos, which have a fast development cycle. A few days later, they were able to watch the bioluminescent tumor cells moving around the zebrafish bodies, invading other organs.

Adds A*STAR:

This new bioluminescence screening platform represents a unique real-time method for observing small numbers of cancer cells in a live animal. It is cheaper, easier and far more sensitive than existing imaging methods such as positron emission or computed tomography scanning, or magnetic resonance or fluorescent imaging. Furthermore, the discovery of a genetic subset of highly invasive GBM cells could help greatly in the development of drugs that target tumor-initiating cells.

Bioluminescence image from Scientific American. A*STAR via NanoWerk.

Phillip Marzella from the Bernard O'Brien Institute of Microsurgery is part of the team that developed Neopec, the new stem cell technique for regrowing breast tissue. The researchers implant a chamber containing some of the individual's own fat tissue under the skin. The chamber is connected to the individual's blood vessels, and fat then grows to fill the chamber, creating a new breast. The chamber itself degrades naturally over time.

Marzella's team has had success with Neopec in pig trials, with the pigs growing new breasts in just six weeks. In the next three to six months, they plan to start a human trial on women who have had partial or total mastectomies. Marzella says that he hopes the technique will someday alleviate at least one aspect of the breast cancer diagnosis, and says that while Neopec might have some cosmetic applications down the road, he doesn't see it being used for cosmetic purposes in the next 10 years.

Australian scientists to start 'breast regrowth' trial [Telegraph via PopSci]

Carbon nanotubes have been proposed for use in everything from space elevators to synthetic muscles to sports equipment. But a new study shows that they can severely damage lungs if inhaled. There have long been fears that the nanotubes might cause mesothelioma, cancer of the lining of the lungs, because of their structural similarity to asbestos fibers. Now research has shown significant health risks from the tubes, which confirms previous studies about the dangers of this comparatively simple nanotech.

The research comes out of North Carolina State University, and is published in this month's Nature Nanotechnology. It showed that within a day of exposure, mice's lungs were reacting to the particles, with clusters of immune cells gathering on the outer walls (pleura) of their lungs. Within two weeks, fibrosis, or localized scarification, had occurred. This same scarring occurs after exposure to asbestos. Three months after this single exposure, the scarification and immune response had dissipated. However, chronic exposure might lead to a different result, with cancer as one possible outcome. And chronic exposure is exactly what humans have to worry about, when carbon nanotubes are rolled out for use in a variety of technologies. Workers may be exposed to the tiny tubes every day.

Previous studies out of the UK and Japan show similar results: that the nanotubes have a nasty habit of reaching the outer tissue of your lungs, the same location where asbestos causes cancer. The Japanese study from 2007 is particularly damning, as researchers were able to induce mesothelioma in mice using the carbon nanotubes.

Given the already-existing issues with asbestos remaining in the environment, and the unknown ecological impact of carbon nanofibers, this raises very troubling issues for the tube's long term effects. As useful as they may be, what will happen if they have a tendency to hang around in the local ecosystem for a very long time? Will its potentially damaging side effects overrule the mammoth benefits it may have in modern production? What about the safe disposal of objects containing nanotubes? If they do become ubiquitous, getting rid of the things may be a major problem. For all the fears of grey goo, it might just be one of the simplest forms of nanotech that does us in.

via Nature Nanotechnology

Despite the critters' 30-year lifespans, naked mole rats have never been found with tumors, and are the only known mammals that don't get cancer. Researchers at the University of Rochester in New York added cancerous cells to naked mole rat cells in order to observe the mechanism that inhibits cancerous growth. The growth of cancer cells in humans is inhibited by a gene known as p27, a gene that the naked mole rat also employs to inhibit cancer growth. But the gene primarily responsible for inhibiting cancer cell growth in naked mole rats is p16-ink4a, a gene humans also possess, but which plays no role in inhibiting cell growth in humans.

And the benefits for naked mole rats go beyond avoiding cancer. Unlike humans, naked mole rats have an active mechanism for cell division, called telomerase. Developing human cells divide using the same mechanism, but the mechanism is switched off in mature cells, likely to avoid cancer. Vera Gorbunova, who led the study, believes that because naked mole rats can inhibit cancerous cell division, the mechanism doesn't need to be switched off in mole rat cells as it does in human cells. This may grant a longer lifespan to naked mole rat stem cells, aiding in the repair and upkeep of their tissues.

We're still a long ways away from harnessing the naked mole rat's powers for human health, but Gorbunova believes that further study of unusual mammals, like the naked mole rat, will open up more doors than confining our medical studies to rats and mice.

The Life Span of a Rodent May Aid Human Health [NY Times]

The remake of 1950s camp-horror classic The Blob is still flash-frozen in development somewhere, but New Zealand is leading the rest of the world in Blob-mania.

It's Breast Cancer Awareness Month, so the New Zealand cancer foundation has unleashed "bulbous, veiny street art tumors" (as Animal NYC puts it) on the unsuspecting people of Auckland, to make people more aware of breast cancer by blocking sidewalks and wobbling bizarrely unpleasant-looking flesh in their faces. And there's an ad, which shows a tumor growing so large, it bursts out of a house:

Steve McQueen never had to deal with anything like this. [Animal NYC, thanks Mark Copyranter!]

Researchers at the Technion-Israel Institute of Technology in Haifa created a silicon-gold circuit by embedding gold nanoparticles in a silicon wafer. They then had 40 cancer patients and 56 people with healthy lungs fill mylar bags with healthy air, and had the air blown over the silicon-gold circuits.

Tumorous growths tear certain chemicals out of tissue, so that air in cancer-affected lungs contains molecules that healthy lungs do not. The research team chose to track four such chemicals: decane, trimethylbenzene, ethylbenzene, and heptanol. When the chemicals bind to the organic coat on the nanowires, they change the circuit's electrical resistance in a predictable way.

With some tweaking, the team hopes that the device will prove a reliable test for lung cancer, and, since the the circuits can be reused, it would be a relatively inexpensive, not to mention portable, method of detection. But aside from its convenience, breath testing could have another thing up on existing methods of lung cancer diagnosis: it could detect cancer too small to show up on an X-ray or CT scan, meaning it might detect lung cancer at a much earlier stage.

A Breathalyzer for Cancer [ScienceNOW]

Scientists at Wake Forest University injected multi-walled carbon nanotubes into tumors and then heated them up using a laser, a technique researchers have been talking about for a few years now. But what's exciting is the results of the latest study, published in the Procedings Of The National Academy Of Sciences. The mice that received the highest level of treatment saw their tumors disappear completely in 80 percent of cases.

Says Nanowerk:

Using a mouse model, the researchers injected kidney tumors with different quantities of MWCNTs and exposed the area to a 3-watt laser for 30 seconds. They found that the mice that received no treatment for their tumors died about 30 days into the study. Mice that received the nanotubes alone or laser treatment alone survived for a similar length of time. However, in the mice that received the MWCNTs followed by a 30-second laser treatment, the higher the quantity of nanotubes injected, the longer the mice lived and the less tumor regrowth was seen. In fact, in the group that received the highest dose of MWCNTs, tumors completely disappeared in 80% of the mice. Many of those mice continued to live tumor free through the completion of the study, about 9 months later.

You could actually watch the tumors shrinking, say researchers. And the mice maintained their weight and appeared healthy and normal.

A separate bit of research is also encouraging. A new method of delivering diptheria toxin-encoding DNA into ovarian tumors is at least as effective as chemotherapy — with no harmful side effects. And it could be tested in humans as soon as 18 to 24 months from now. In a nutshell, researchers injected nanoparticles into the peritoneal cavity, where ovarian cancer first starts to spread. And the nanoparticles delivered diptheria toxin that was genetically engineered to attack only ovarian cells. The toxin destroyed cells' ability to manufacture proteins.

In the past, scientists have worked on using viruses to deliver toxin-encoding DNA to a tumor, but using biodegradable nanoparticles instead is safer. And the treatment could also work in brain, lung and liver cancers.
Image from Nanotechweb.

[Nanowerk and Nanowerk]

The test, as reported in the August issue of the journal Genome Research, relies on observing DNA methylation. The process involves two substances: methyl (an organic chemical group) and cytosine (the C in GATTACA). During DNA methylation, the loose methyl groups attach to the cytosine in DNA, which can lead to the suppression of important tumor-fighting proteins, and maybe eventually to cancer.

To detect this nefarious change in DNA, the newly-developed testing process essentially removes any non-methylated DNA, and dyes and measures whatever is left. This gives the tester an idea of how much methylation is happening in a patient's DNA, which also demonstrates the patient's risk for cancer.

Worth noting is the strange quantum dye that the process uses. The modified methylated DNA strands are mixed with "quantum dots," or tiny semiconductor crystals that can easily transfer energy. When light is shined on the quantum dots, now adorned with DNA strands as in the picture above, the energy is quickly put into the nearby molecules, lighting them up like a Christmas tree and making it easy for doctors to measure them.

From a practical angle, this test, as compared with current cancer screenings, is more sensitive and quicker. It would involve only a simple blood test, as opposed to an invasive biopsy. Plus, this test can specify which cancers a patient is at risk for. It's great to see chemistry nerds making life easier and safer for all of us!

New DNA test uses nanotechnology to find early signs of cancer [via EurekaAlert]

Further Reading: What's the Future of Cancer Diagnosis?

(Image: glowing methylated DNA arrayed around a quantum dot, from Yi Zhang/JHU)

Dr. Cathy Shachaf's team at the Stanford University School of Medicine has developed a nanoparticle application that she expects will allow doctors to examine up to 100 distinct features in individual cancer cells — similar to how radioactive dyes are now used to highlight organs for more traditional scanning technologies. Shachaf and her term successfully integrated Raman signal emitting molecules with composite organic-inorganic nanoparticles (COINs) from Intel to boost the strength of the signals and allow the team to track changes in the functioning of certain proteins in leukemia cells that play a role in cancer development.

Two other teams are using nanoparticles to combat drug-resistant bacteria. The first team, based at the Institute of Bioengineering and Nanotechnology in Singapore, are specifically interested in using peptide nanoparticles to penetrate the blood-brain barrier in order to combat brain infections. In their studies, they've not only demonstrated that the peptide nanoparticles can — unlike most antibiotics - penetrate that barrier and successfully target bacterial, yeast or viral infections. Because of their small size, the nanoparticles enter the attacking cells, causing them to die — but without affecting normal human cells.

Brown University researchers Thomas Webster and Erik Taylor are using iron-ozide nanoparticles to kill the bacteria Staphylococcus epidermidis that has a tendency to accumulate on medical devices in therapeutic settings. The staph bacteria is particularly difficult to eliminate from medical implants — like knee and hip replacements — and often result in a full removal of the device. But Webster and Taylor found that the iron oxide nanoparticles can be forced through the bacterial cell walls with the use of magnets, virtually eliminating the staff infection from the device and — reportedly — encouraging normal bone growth around the implant.

Of course, all of this works right up until the nanoparticles give you the cancer other scientists have predicted they will.

Harnessing nanoparticles to track cancer cell changes [Nanowerk]
Singapore nanotechnology combats fatal brain infections [EurekAlert]
Implant Bacteria, Beware: Researchers Create Nano-sized Assassins [Science Daily]

[Image via the National Science Foundation]

In the June 23rd issue of Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, scientists described their cancer-detecting electric nose. It can process sample cells and sniff out harmful ones, the same way a human nose uses selective receptors to detect certain smells.

The chemical nose includes three such receptors now, but the researchers have hundreds more that they can add to the array, making the chemical nose more and more useful.

What makes this technology so powerful is its ability to adapt. When the human nose detects a new smell, the brain records the new smell and can remember previously experienced smells. The same is true of the chemical nose: it can cross-reference everything it detects with an extensive memory of cancer markers, creating new patterns when it needs to.

The result is an adaptable, precise method for cataloging and detecting new markers for various types of cancer. And just as a human nose can tell when something is "off," the chemical nose can also signal any abnormality, even if it can't pinpoint precisely what the problem is.

Now that this chemical nose can sniff cancer, maybe we can give the cancer sniffing cat a break.

'Chemical Nose' May Sniff Out Cancer Earlier [via Science Daily]

For further reading: What's the Future of Cancer Diagnosis?

(Image: an illustration of the chemical nose receptors at work, from University of Massachusetts Amherst)

In Calgary, Alberta, one kitty warned owner Lionel Adams that he had a cancerous tumor in his lung. How,because clearly cats can not speak or dance yet that we know of? Well, the cat by the name of Tiger, would point to it every night with his paw. UPDATE: The Cancer was in Adam's LUNG, not leg as reported earlier, sorry for the mix up.

"He would climb into bed and take his paw and drag it down my left side - he was adamant there was something there," Adams told the Sun. "And it was right where the cancer was."

When Adams went to the hospital, surgeons later removed a tumor the size of a soda can. Take that, dog owners. And let the LOLs flow, commenters.

[UPI via Snopes]

It's unlikely, because we don't need prostates to survive (even if a lot of men enjoy having them), and growing new ones might actually increase the risk of cancer. Plus, growing a new prostate doesn't help if you aren't able to attach it to other organs and nerves in the body — a process that is currently impossible. Instead, this research in manipulating mouse prostates might shed light on how prostate cancer works, and even lead to a cure.

Medical researcher Robin Lovell-Badge told BBC News:

Of course the main clinical problem with the prostate gland is not a need for additional ones, but their overgrowth, which often turns to prostate cancer. However, knowing the identity of these stem cells may eventually allow the development of therapies that specifically target these cells in a way that keeps them under control.

Added biologist Malcolm Alison:

It is a widely held view that cancers originate from normal stem cells, so this discovery will be a significant boost to prostate cancer research aimed at understanding how this deadly disease develops.

So you're saying I'm not going to be growing a prostate gland just for fun any time soon? Oh well — I guess curing prostate cancer is cool too.

New Prostate Grown Inside Mouse [via BBC News]

The BioBeer project will be entered into the International Genetically Engineered Machine (iGEM) competition to be held next month. Each team uses BioBricks, which are basically DNA toolkits, to create new lifeforms that do interesting things. Although the definition of "interesting" seems rather loose - past entrants included bacteria that smell different depending on whether they're growing or not.

The Rice team, several members of which are not old enough to drink, has genetically engineered a yeast so it will produce resveratrol in a two-step process (one gene produces some stuff, another gene makes the stuff into resveratrol). They haven't actually brewed any yet, and there are a whole lot of steps in between now and the day you can toss back a frosty mug of Cancer Destroyer Porter, but at least the team isn't creating something that could wipe out humanity. According the Rice press release:

Their entry last year, a bacterial virus that fought antibiotic resistance, was well-received but finished out of the prize running.

Now we just need some asthma-fighting pizza, or some anti-diabetes pretzels. Image by: a4gpa.

Better beer: college team creating anticancer brew. [Rice University via EurekAlerts!]

Genetic screening: find out which people are likely to develop certain cancers in the future.

Certain genetic mutations predispose a person to developing various cancers. While no mutation is a guarantee that cancer is in a patient's future, in a few cases the tendency is so strong that pre-emptive treatment is indicated, though earlier and more frequent screening is more common. It's estimated that 5-10 percent of cancers are strongly hereditary, along with another 20-30 percent that are weakly hereditary. Certain mutations of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes , for example, increase the lifetime chance of a woman developing breast cancer from around 13 percent to somewhere between 36 and 85 percent.

Research for other risky versions of genes continues, and will eventually branch out into risky combinations of genes that appear in single nucleotide polymorphism genotyping (for a few hundred dollars) and complete genome sequences (soon to be a few thousand dollars).

When personal genomics and medical histories (finally) come together, with a little luck we'll be able to find new correlations between genes and cancers. Family history is a good but imprecise indicator of risk; a better understanding of the specific genetic factors behind it will improve a physician's ability to assess an individual and design a regimen of treatment or prevention appropriate to the patient.

Tumor markers: search for indirect signs of an existing or developing tumor.

Usually this refers to a blood or urine test, though saliva or even smell are also options. If you can find a substance that increases or decreases in abundance when a certain kind of tumor is present, assays that look for these tumor markers can be used for routine evaluation. One of the most common markers is the prostate specific antigen (PSA)
- elevated levels of PSA in the blood are often (but not always) associated with prostate cancer. Because the test is prone to false positives, a worrisome blood test result is usually followed by ultrasound imaging. Looking for multiple tumor markers at the same time can potentially be more accurate, while new technologies decrease the time and expense of the necessary assays.

For tumors caused by infections, the presence of the infection itself can be used to determine at least risk - while a high-risk human papillomavirus infection certainly doesn't guarantee a cervical cancer, it does suggest that more frequent screening may be in order.

Similar profiling of the tumors themselves could indicate what sorts of drugs would be effective against an individual's particular tumor.

Imaging: look for the damn things.

This is a tricky business, because the difference between a benign and a cancerous (or pre-cancerous) mass can be difficult to tell without going in, taking out a sample, and subjecting it to various tests. In a colonoscopy, many suspicious lesions turn out to be harmless, but they still require a biopsy, which is even less fun than a colonoscopy without a biopsy. If you want to avoid bringing the cells to the microscope, bring the microscope to the cells - the pCLE system is effectively a fiberoptic microscope that can examine lesions in the colon without a biopsy.

If possible, avoid the colonoscopy entirely - take a series of radiographs of the colon and turn them over to the computer to reconstruct its 3D structure. Examination of a virtual colon is far more comfortable than the alternative.

If a computer can be used to verify a doctor's "eyeball spectroscopy" (as in computer-assisted mammography, currently in clinical trials), the visual analysis of an expert can be combined with digital image analysis to separate the healthy from the suspicious.

Displaying mammography results in 3D is also potentially useful in helping physicians to find suspicious masses, while improvements in MRI technology work to increase the resolution of images generated by the technique.

Imaging can also be combined with treatment to increase its effectiveness. Cancer-seeking nanoparticles can also be detected using various imaginge techniques - a build-up of the particles is desired at the cancer site, but not elsewhere, and being able to detect where the treatment is collecting is a partial measure of its efficacy.

Finally, technologies like the CyberKnife combine imaging and robotics to guide radiation delivery to the patient by zeroing in on its target and following it as the patient moves.

A good technique catches cancer early and is as unambiguous as possible. Unfortunately, early and unambiguous is a tall order.

Do you have questions you've always wanted to ask a biogeek? You can email me.

Apparently the chinchilla and other small rodents of its type have cells that are better than humans' at sensing when cancer is developing. As soon as cancerous growths are detected, the rodent's body slows down cell division, halting the expansion of the tumor and preventing metastasis. Gorbunova and colleagues suspect that the human body could be induced to do the same thing, essentially curing its own cancer by becoming very efficient at self-monitoring.

One of the interesting outcomes of this study had to do with the rodents' levels of telomerase, an enzyme that regulates cell aging and also causes cancer. According to the University of Rochester:

Gorbunova and colleagues showed that it was not life expectancy, but body mass that regulated the expression of telomerase. Simply having more cells increases the likelihood that one will become cancerous. We humans, as large animals, would likely develop cancer much more often and much earlier if we didn't suppress our telomerase.

So the bigger you are, the more likely you'll start mutating.

Said Gorbunova:

We haven't come across this anticancer mechanism before because it doesn't exist in the two species most often used for cancer research: mice and humans. Mice are short-lived and humans are large-bodied. But this mechanism appears to exist only in small, long-lived animals.

I'm ready to become the first human-chinchilla chimera if it will make me cancer-proof.

Image via FurryAnimalsOhMy.

Novel Anti-Cancer Mechanism Found in Small Rodents [via University of Rochester]

How about an article on the current cutting edge cancer research/treatments? Is there anything out there that is promising? Will there be a cure in our lifetimes?

Sadly, cancer is not a single disease, but a class of diseases - while we may effectively cure some forms of cancer, it's doubtful that we'll be able to cure them all, and unlikely that a single form of treatment will be effective against all or even a wide range of cancers. The cells in our bodies are tightly regulated, but over time entropy has its way, and some lose their original genetic programming. Often these breakdowns are harmless and strictly local, but in the case of cancer, they can be catastrophic.

If you look at the human body as an ecosystem, it's remarkably well-behaved. Various types of cells fulfill their proper roles in their proper places. The rapid cellular growth that is appropriate in the lining of our guts, for example, would be hazardous in the adult brain. Cells are regulated by their microenvironment (hormones, the surrounding tissue, etc.), with healthy cells reacting as you would expect. Cells with DNA damage resulting from viral infections, exposure to carcinogenic chemicals or radiation, or simple error during division are not so predictable.

The body is not entirely unprepared for damaged cells. Our immune system seeks them out, and there are mechanisms within the cell designed to sense damage and cause apoptosis - programmed self-termination. These systems catch many dangerous cells, but not all.


If a damaged cell escapes the immune system and its own self-destruct devices, it will often grow more damaged with time, accumulating mutations. A "successful" cancer will acquire additional mutations that allow it to grow uncontrollably into a tumor, feed itself via the formation of blood vessels, and metastasize - break away from the original tumor to form new colonies elsewhere in the body. Not every cell in the tumor needs to be the same for this to happen; if even a small population of cells hits a combination of errors that allows it to break away and take root elsewhere, the prognosis can be bleak.

I'm talking about cancer in a very general sense, but it's important to remember that not all cancers are the same. The types of cellular breakdown that lead to an aggressive breast cancer are not necessarily the same as the damage that would give you leukemia (though there may be a few gross similarities), and they originated with different kinds of cells in the first place, housed in different tissue niches. Nor are all cancers of the same general type the same - for example, some breast cancers overexpress a protein called HER2, but not all. So, a tumor is composed of a mixture of cells which share some (but not all) of the same kinds of breakage with their immediate neighbors, cancers of the same type in other patients, and cancers of a different type entirely. It's hard to come up with a generalized cure when there are so many different ways for cells to flip out.

Early detection of a treatable cancer is critical. If you can catch the tumor before it metastasizes, you have only a single tumor to deal with. Imaging techniques like mammograms, X-rays, and MRIs can be used to detect tumors, though more exotic techniques for detection are on the way. Dogs have been shown to be capable of smelling cancer, and research into the compounds they detect could lead to an artificial diagnostic nose.

Cellular therapies are another option. If your immune system is full of fail, perhaps it's time to send in the cavalry? Immune cells from cancer-resistant mice can be used to kill advanced tumors in normal mice (well, "normal" for lab mice, anyway). Cells can also be used to target existing treatments to the site of the cancer, by using genetically modified cells that home in on a tumor and, once there, activate an anti-cancer drug, reducing the wear and tear of side-effects on your healthy tissue. Since viruses are already quite good at homing in on cells, they're another potential cancer-busting option.

Nanotechnology has a few tricks up its sleeve if cells and viruses don't do the trick. Nanotubes can be loaded with drugs and "capped", potentially capable of releasing an anti-cancer payload on demand (though the "demand" part is still under construction). Once localized to a cancer cell, light at an appropriate wavelength zaps the nanotube, which absorbs it and heats up, effectively cooking the tumor.

Nanotubes in green, cancer cell nuclei in red.

Similar results have been achieved using gold-plated nanoparticles, while bundles of nanorods form light-activated cancer-shredding cluster bombs.

"As if billions of cancer cells cried out...and were suddenly silenced."

It's likely that not all of these approaches will bear fruit - if every cancer cure that worked on rats also worked on humans, I probably wouldn't have to answer this question. With a disease as diverse as cancer, however, it makes sense to approach a wide variety of possible treatments.

Do you have questions you've always wanted to ask a biogeek? You can email Terry Johnson.

The Fletcher bra works by flooding "cooling panels" with liquid. Then it looks for variations in the breast's skin temperature that could indicate an early malignancy. Fletcher's team claimed it would be "comfortable," but the cumbersome design includes:

a pair of body compliant liquid-perfused cooling panels lying adjacent and held within the inner contour of each cup... a pump connected by flexible tubing to the liquid-perfused cooling panels, a solenoid valve for controlling the flow of cooling liquid between the pump and the refrigerator-heat exchanger and heaters, a refrigerator-heat exchanger for cooling the cooling fluid, a heater for heating the cooling fluid, a cooling fluid reservoir tank, a temperature sensor located in the reservoir tank for sensing the cooling fluid temperature and a temperature readout and controller circuit for controlling the solenoid valve and heater circuit.

Maybe not something you'd wear to a party. Here's a diagram from the patent. (Click to enlarge.)

Fletcher's dream isn't dead. In 2002, researchers at De Montfort University in Leicester, England came up with a bra that uses tiny electrical currents to find tumors, which are denser than regular tissue. But clinical trials in China were supposed to lead to that device becoming available by 2005, which obviously hasn't happened. [FreePatentsOnline

Previous work with antibodies-as-cancer-killing-smart-missiles has involved attaching strong, nasty chemotherapy drugs to the antibodies. That's a good option, but even better would be to not have harsh chemicals circulating in your blood stream in the first place. Using nanotubes and infrared light is a good, pretty safe alternative because IR radiation doesn't damage living tissue. The only drawback is the tumors will need to be less than 1.5 inches deep in the body, about the limit for the radiation's effectiveness.

Source: UT Southwestern Medical Center

The bot is remote-controlled by magnetic field, just like the ones in the bloodstream. To move it up and down through your insides, your doctor will have a hand-held magnetic device about the size of a chocolate bar. Where ever s/he waves the device, the bot follows. The new gadget will be used for studying the insides of the stomach and esophagus mainly, which are usually hard because a device that's swallowed only spends few seconds in those parts of the body. Once in the stomach, it tends to sink to the bottom of the stomach, making imaging tough.

With magnetic control, doctors will be able to keep the camera-bot floating in the esophagus, stomach, or whatever part of the GI tract they want to study. It'll probably feel really strange having a robot wiggling through your esophagus, but it could go a long way towards treating cancers in the stomach and esophagus, not to mention that pesky, heartburn-inducing acid reflux disease.

Source: Eurekalert!