A group of researchers claim to have performed a "breakthrough" test that can detect cancer. While such a test may sound promising, it is not necessarily foolproof, experts warned.
Scientists at the University of Queensland, Australia, found cancer DNA fragments in very different ways in analyzing healthy cells and cancer cells on solid surfaces such as metals adhered. Based on this information, they developed a "simple" test in which blood was mixed with a solution containing gold nanoparticles. This was noted in an article published in Nature Communications, a peer-reviewed open access scientific science journal. When cancerous DNA of any kind is present in the blood, the gold nanoparticles discolor.
"The discovery that cancerous DNA molecules form completely different 3D nanostructures than normal circulating DNA was a breakthrough that allowed a whole new approach to cancer-neutralization-invasive in every tissue type, including blood," said Matt Trau. Professor at the University of Queensland and co-author of the study, in a statement.
See also: The Kentucky Congressman questions food stamps: "If health care is right, is food too?" [1
Observers, however, were the most reluctant to celebrate the news. In fact, this is just the latest example of a "simple" cancer blood test. In June, a separate group of researchers from the US announced that they had performed a blood test to identify up to 10 cancers. And in January, scientists at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine announced the formulation of a $ 500 blood test called CancerSEEK, which identified eight cancers before symptoms developed.
Cancer test: "Run for the hills because there is no such thing," wrote Gary Schwitzer, founder and publisher of HealthNewsReview.org, in an article citing caution regarding the latest cancer blood test. "While this researcher refers to the technology, using that technology – the leap from the lab to the bedside – brings with it many levels of complexity."
In particular, the Australian researchers found that their test successfully identified 90%. of cancer cases, but, as Schwitzer noted, "the claim of an incredibly simple universal marker sounds somewhat hollow" for those whose cancer was not identified by the test.
In addition, the test may supposedly determine if anyone has done this Cancer can not yet determine the origin or severity of the disease. To do this, patients would have to undergo additional testing, which costs time and can cause anxiety.
Others expressed concern about whether the test could produce false positives, forcing people to undergo unnecessary testing and stress.
Get a daily summary of the top reads in your personal inbox. Subscribe to the free MarketWatch Personal Finance Daily newsletter. Sign up here.