WingNews logo WingNews GitHub [2]
top | item 35193367

Prostate cancer could be treated by destroying tumors with electric currents

577 points| rmason | 3 years ago |telegraph.co.uk | reply

107 comments

order
[+] aquaphile|3 years ago|reply
Electrical pulse ablation technology has been around a while, with multiple studies performed and a large body of patents. The promise and hope for the technology is that is causes cell apoptosis, and early rat studies showed electrical ablation shrinking tumors. The goal was/is to apply it to multiple cancer types. Source: I helped with one of the pioneering companies in the field.

A quick internet search for "electrical ablation cell apoptosis cancer" yields a few research articles. For example https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fonc.2020.01235...

[+] kristopolous|3 years ago|reply
I agree that this is old as the hills. I was reading a text recently that cited medical claims of electricity curing cancers in the 1870s.

I'd assume there's more nuance this time around. At least I'd hope so.

The article points to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreversible_electroporation

You can do quite a bit with electrical signals, perhaps there's some novel instruments and feedback loops being used

[+] Antipodes456|3 years ago|reply
Sample size n=1, but my dad was on the research or clinical trial of this exact treatment in Sydney, it worked for his prostate cancer, he's still clear from PSA tests (and possibly had biopsy also. No side effects.

Previously he'd had the radioactive beads treatment which failed, the only other option was removal. Both these options have potentially unpleasant side effects.

Happy to ask him questions if anyone wants to know more

[+] breck|3 years ago|reply
Would you be interested in chatting more about the whole experience? [email protected] or 1-808-727-1111

I've been in Cancer Research for 5 years and am now starting my own idea to help (utilizing my background in software engineering and data science): CancerDB.com a public domain ad-free knowledge graph. The idea is to get a core group of researchers collating all the data into one place that's accessible by both patients, families, caregivers, and researchers.

[+] givemeethekeys|3 years ago|reply
How does it go? Was he put to sleep? What was the prep like leading up to it? What was the recovery like? Did he have to take any drugs?
[+] glenstein|3 years ago|reply
May I ask how this was discovered in your dad's case? I feel like prostate cancer is the single most dangerous cancer for men in the late 30s, 40s, and 50s. So it's a subject I'm trying to pay attention to.
[+] markdown|3 years ago|reply
Could you share the hospital or research facility where this was done?
[+] teruakohatu|3 years ago|reply
This seems like a game changer. According to the company website they have treated 6,000 patients.

https://nanoknife.com

Further Googling showed it has been around since 2008 and machine in 2010 the machines cost $300k. Maybe the novel application is prostate cancer?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704029304575525...

[+] rkagerer|3 years ago|reply
Non-paywalled version of that WSJ article: https://archive.is/bDRgi.

And a dumbed-down video primer on how it works: https://nanoknife.com/technology/

Basically they insert somewhere between two and a handful 1mm diameter needles, then pulse with high voltage to kill the cells in between.

The article mentioned concerns from doctors that it hadn't been through large clinical trials yet. 13 years later, does anyone know of those trials have taken place?

[+] laminarflow|3 years ago|reply
In a past life, I worked in prostate cancer ("PCa") clinical research. To drive home the point about how large of an unmet need this is:

A) In addition to 1/6 men being diagnosed with PCa, an ~equally large percentage of men have undiagnosed cancer at the time of death, it just wasn't severe enough yet to be the thing that killed them. (1)

B) Because treatment carries a 50% risk of sexual and/or urinary dysfunction side effects, the standard of care in the US for PCa is literally to leave the cancer untreated and monitor it closely, until it develops into an aggressive cancer. At that point, we treat the entire prostate (the opposite of "focal" therapy referenced in this article) and all bets are off re: side effects. Also, often by that time, the cancer has spread outside of the prostate and is much more difficult to treat.

(1) https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S246829422...

[+] Panzer04|3 years ago|reply
Most current cancer treatment methods we have are basically sledgehammers with loads of collateral damage - it’s not surprising the preference is to leave it if it’s benign.
[+] fortran77|3 years ago|reply
My father died from metastasized prostate cancer. If/when I get it I won’t do “watchful waiting”. I’m going to get the most aggressive treatment possible.
[+] univr|3 years ago|reply
The department I work with created PROST, a robot that can help with biopsy for that type of cancer.

It's still a Proof of Concept, but I think it's an interesting project to invest on. https://metropolis.scienze.univr.it/project/prost/

[+] haldujai|3 years ago|reply
I actually perform image guided prostate biopsies, what is this solving / what’s the point?

We have great diagnostic accuracy with TRUS+MR fusion with standard equipment.

This just looks much slower and more expensive.

[+] ars|3 years ago|reply
Is there anything about this that is specific to the prostate? Wouldn't this exact same treatment work on other accessible tumors, for example breast or skin?
[+] dcminter|3 years ago|reply
My father had Nanoknife for pancreatic cancer; it wasn't a cure, but it reduced the tumour enough to buy him another couple of years.
[+] haldujai|3 years ago|reply
Irreversible electroporation isn’t that new, it’s being actively used (i.e. not trials) for liver, lung, pancreas and kidney cancers for a few years now.

We use it quite a bit in radiology. Usually faster / easier to use thermal ablation (microwave or cryo these days, used to be radiofrequency more often) but there are cases where it’s not feasible due to heat sinking or other reasons and IRE is an alternative.

[+] CommanderData|3 years ago|reply
I read its effective at treating lung and liver cancers too.

Early diagnosis is key to survival.

[+] iSnow|3 years ago|reply
I'll take an uneducated guess here: this works best for small and clearly defined tumors. You would have a hard time causing electroporation of cell membranes farther away from the electrodes without damaging too much healthy tissue.
[+] the_third_wave|3 years ago|reply
Oddly enough I've just been looking into a veterinary treatment method for superficial tumours based around cytostatica in combination with electric pulses - delivered by a pulse generator controlled by a Raspberry Pi - which are supposed to increase the efficacy of the cytostatica by 'electroporation' [1]. I'm mostly looking into this because the glossy site and the presentation given at my wife's vet clinic have a relatively high snake oil coefficient although there is some science [2] behind the process. It seems to come down to a combination of a TENS machine [3] (which can be had for around £40-60, ₤80 if you want it remotely controlled through your phone) with needle probes except for the fact that a 10-pack of 4-needle probes costs €2.500 while the machine itself - a Raspberry Pi with a keyboard, a pulse generator and an LCD screen in a compact box - costs around €25.000...

[1] http://vetiqure.se/our-products/

[2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5092241/

[3] https://www.boots.com/health-pharmacy/electrical-health-diag...

[+] cududa|3 years ago|reply
Please for the love of god tell me you're not testing this on animals and if you are, you have actual medical training?
[+] jerbearito|3 years ago|reply
My uncle recently had this procedure here in the US. His hospital tried to push him quickly toward a surgical option, but he did his own research and eventually found this. It cost him $15k out of pocket, he now has a clean bill of health, and as a bonus he avoided potential/likely erectile dysfunction.
[+] thr717272|3 years ago|reply
First time it really hits home how large the risk is.

1/6 is a rather large risk.

[+] foepys|3 years ago|reply
It's more likely that you die with prostate cancer than because of prostate cancer.

Yes, cancer is never good but for most men prostate cancer develops late and is usually growing very slowly and doesn't spread.

[+] zwieback|3 years ago|reply
I had PC in my early 40s, over 15 years ago now. If that treatment had been available then I might still opt for surgical removal. The peace of mind of getting the thing out is huge and the side effects for me were negligible, as I had a great surgeon and recovery for younger patients is pretty good.

In my 60s I would definitely go for something like this although I'm always a little leery of treatments that have cool sounding brand names.

[+] hawk_|3 years ago|reply
Early 40s sounds kind of young to have it. How did you/they find out that you had it? Anyway good that it worked out well for you.
[+] CommanderData|3 years ago|reply
Seems to good to be true, retreatment only needed in 10% of cases with much less side effects too.

Is this still in clinical trials?

[+] chiefalchemist|3 years ago|reply
I heard an interview on one of NPR shows last week and the guest talked about using electricity for healing. For example, if I remember correctly, a wound treated in someway with electricity healed faster. It had something to do with stimulating the cells in a particular way.

Side note: Does this give any credibility to the idea that magnets can heal?

[+] mrWiz|3 years ago|reply
The mechanism used here is that high voltage causes cells to open channels through the cell wall, letting good cell stuff out and bad stuff in. Do it enough and the cell will die. I'm no biologist but I don't know of a similar magnetic mechanism.
[+] LegitShady|3 years ago|reply
the answer to your question is no, because the way you affect cells with electricity is not through magnets.

Also, the mechanisms of this and that are not the same - they're literally killing cells with electricity here, not healing.

[+] bulbosaur123|3 years ago|reply
Only initial cancer or mets as well? When can this be realistically tested on real humans? How long? I have a close relative with potential biochemical recurrence. Could this save him?
[+] dangwhy|3 years ago|reply
This is only if cancer isn't metastatic. correct?
[+] zwieback|3 years ago|reply
Yes, from the sound of it. "Localized" usually means that the cancer is inside the tough membrane surrounding the prostate.
[+] dnndev|3 years ago|reply
Is this similar to rife machines that you can use at home? Essentially frequency generators.
[+] starkd|3 years ago|reply
I would not try doing this at home.
[+] swader999|3 years ago|reply
Does this mean you need access to a MRI machine? "Guided by MRI scanning, the short pulses can be targeted to the right area, and surrounding healthy cells are left untouched and preserved, experts said."
[+] steponlego|3 years ago|reply
This has been debunked for generations, much like orgone. People have gone to JAIL for suggesting that you can use electricity to cure diseases such as cancer.