Cancer cells die in microgravity conditions – study(dw.com)
dw.com
Cancer cells die in microgravity conditions – study
https://www.dw.com/en/zero-gravity-kills-cancer-cells/a-50230741
54 comments
I thought any of these experiments are carried out on two sets of cells. One normal and the other cancerous. Both exposed to the same test environment and treatment -- shear in this case. And when they claim "70% of cancerous cells died" they mean 70% more of the cancerous cells died than that of the normal cells, where "more" is defined in some acceptable standard.
Yes, but it is not what they say or show. And as long as they don't publish anything more you should be far more sceptical than those journalists were.
> From what I have learned during my studies is that it is easy to kill cell cultures
The linked article mentions:
> only at zero-gravity do cells die via "programmed cell death"
Isn't triggering apoptosis a little different than not being able to keep cells alive?
Of course, this changes nothing about your other points - there are a lot of fishy things going on here
The linked article mentions:
> only at zero-gravity do cells die via "programmed cell death"
Isn't triggering apoptosis a little different than not being able to keep cells alive?
Of course, this changes nothing about your other points - there are a lot of fishy things going on here
It is, but you'd need to verify the difference somehow, with fluorescent markers for example. But they appear to have only counted the surviving cells.
... ok so they have an unverified claim of apoptosis too? Yikes, that just makes it worse!
> it is easy to kill cell cultures
https://xkcd.com/1217/
https://xkcd.com/1217/
So human cells first survive 3 gs during launch then zero gs before they come back to good old g again. They live and multiply through all this, as long as they stay inside the human.
Now somebody created a carousel and says extracted human cells die when put on that carousel. Some pertinent questions were not addressed in the article: Would the extracted cells live if not put on the carousel? Do other types of extracted cells not die when put on it?
Instead of answering these simple question, they speculate about sending cell cultures to space. Where it's even harder to control conditions. I expect exactly nothing to come of it.
Edit: They have not tested in "microgravity". There is no single place on earth where you can sustain microgravity. You'd have to move very very fast. At which point you have other problems. What they do to cell cultures is move them up and down while rotating them. This simulates microgravity in the sense that "on average" the cell cultures experience zero-g in any one direction. Actually the cultures are routinely accelerated above one g with added torque!
Now somebody created a carousel and says extracted human cells die when put on that carousel. Some pertinent questions were not addressed in the article: Would the extracted cells live if not put on the carousel? Do other types of extracted cells not die when put on it?
Instead of answering these simple question, they speculate about sending cell cultures to space. Where it's even harder to control conditions. I expect exactly nothing to come of it.
Edit: They have not tested in "microgravity". There is no single place on earth where you can sustain microgravity. You'd have to move very very fast. At which point you have other problems. What they do to cell cultures is move them up and down while rotating them. This simulates microgravity in the sense that "on average" the cell cultures experience zero-g in any one direction. Actually the cultures are routinely accelerated above one g with added torque!
I'm skeptical that this could really work, but imagine the breakthroughs that would be ushered in for both medicine and space travel if it turned out that zero gravity diminished cancer? It would be the best incentive by far humans have ever had to develop space travel. And curing cancer at the same time! Billions of dollars of research funds could be redirected for developing rockets and we'd saving more lives than before! A wonderful narrative to a science fiction eutopia at least :)
Also considering how expensive a normal chemotherapy is, this might be within reason ;)
Yep, 1-way tickets to explosive global warming.
Methane rockets can be zero net carbon.
Vastly improved rocketry could also make things like a huge mirror to shade the planet feasible.
There's no way that doesn't have a trillion higher-order effects.
. . . and replaces it with much worse!
So, just like Contact (the movie), where Hadden lives his last days in space to slow down his cancer.
Exactly my thought, one of my favorite movies combining my love for spirituality, wonder, science and technology.
R: Comrade Arroway... ...we have been expecting your call. One moment, please.
E: Mr. Hadden?
S: Doctor!
S: How kind of you to call.
E: Mr. Hadden, where are you?
S: The Russian government was kind enough to give me accommodations on Mir.
E: You're living on a space station?
S: It's quite simple, really. The low oxygen, zero gravity environment... ...is the only thing keeping the cancer from eating me alive. Actually, I quite like it up here. My little room has one hell of a view. I want to show you something.
R: Comrade Arroway... ...we have been expecting your call. One moment, please.
E: Mr. Hadden?
S: Doctor!
S: How kind of you to call.
E: Mr. Hadden, where are you?
S: The Russian government was kind enough to give me accommodations on Mir.
E: You're living on a space station?
S: It's quite simple, really. The low oxygen, zero gravity environment... ...is the only thing keeping the cancer from eating me alive. Actually, I quite like it up here. My little room has one hell of a view. I want to show you something.
2 of my favorite lines:
S: Wanna take a ride? and S: The first rule of government spending is build two at twice the price.
S: Wanna take a ride? and S: The first rule of government spending is build two at twice the price.
If S.R. had not lived for years in an airplane up in the flight levels, he probably would not have got cancer in the first place. "He hardly ever lands for anyone."
Oh boy
"Chou Collective Join our journey to help us find a cure to cancer and other aging diseases by utilising the unique environment of space."
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/choucollective/curing-d...
"Chou Collective Join our journey to help us find a cure to cancer and other aging diseases by utilising the unique environment of space."
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/choucollective/curing-d...
It's a shame that it is practically impossible to culture healthy cells the way they probably cultured these cancer cells so there is not really a control experiment.
But we know people (bags of healthy cell in their normal environment) don't die in space and cancer cells (presumably they did the same experiment on earth) keep growing in normal gravity. So what we can say is that the combination of loosing their normal environment and gravity kills these cancer cells (if they used cell lines those cells are hardly comparable to normal cancer cells anymore by the way). It's interesting to find out why, but it's a long way from saying that this finding will help cure cancer.
But we know people (bags of healthy cell in their normal environment) don't die in space and cancer cells (presumably they did the same experiment on earth) keep growing in normal gravity. So what we can say is that the combination of loosing their normal environment and gravity kills these cancer cells (if they used cell lines those cells are hardly comparable to normal cancer cells anymore by the way). It's interesting to find out why, but it's a long way from saying that this finding will help cure cancer.
Skylab did some experiments.
The Response of Single Human Cells to Zero Gravity https://lsda.jsc.nasa.gov/Experiment/exper/424
>RESULTS:
>Ten cultures were fixed during the first 12 days of flight. Growth curves, DNA microspectrophometery, phase microscopy, and ultrastructural studies of the fixed cells revealed no effects of a zero-gravity environment on the ten cultures. Two cultures were photographed by means of phase time-lapse cinematography during the first 27 days of the flight. Analysis of the films revealed no differences in mitotic index, cell cycle, and migration between the flight and control cells. No differences between the flight and control cell cultures were observed in the karotype and chromosome banding. Minor unexplained differences have been found in the biochemical constituents of the used flight and control media.
The Response of Single Human Cells to Zero Gravity https://lsda.jsc.nasa.gov/Experiment/exper/424
>RESULTS:
>Ten cultures were fixed during the first 12 days of flight. Growth curves, DNA microspectrophometery, phase microscopy, and ultrastructural studies of the fixed cells revealed no effects of a zero-gravity environment on the ten cultures. Two cultures were photographed by means of phase time-lapse cinematography during the first 27 days of the flight. Analysis of the films revealed no differences in mitotic index, cell cycle, and migration between the flight and control cells. No differences between the flight and control cell cultures were observed in the karotype and chromosome banding. Minor unexplained differences have been found in the biochemical constituents of the used flight and control media.
One could argue piles of individual cells (on petri-dishes) might not be representative for whole-tissue or even whole-organ behaviour, in situ, where cells do have a single spatial position, which is of course the very thing upon which gravity acts.
>It's a shame that it is practically impossible to culture healthy cells the way they probably cultured these cancer cells so there is not really a control experiment.
Why not? What is special about the way they culture those cells compared to a non-cancerous cell culture? (genuinely asking)
Why not? What is special about the way they culture those cells compared to a non-cancerous cell culture? (genuinely asking)
Normal human cells intentionally try to avoid growing too much, especially in weird environments (this is important for keeping things stable and functioning). Cancer cells on the other hand are cancerous for the very reason that those controls are broken. They will try to grow uncontrollably, everywhere.
Most (cancer) cell lines are sufficient in factors that normal cells are not (nutrients, growth factors, recalcitrance to death signals, all sorts of things). Thus, they are much more robust and some cell lines can grow in 3D structures, in suspension, and in monolayers in flasks.
While we do routinely culture primary cell explants, they are much more finicky. In part because their environment changes dramatically. Eventually they succumb to cell death (either apoptotic or not) or they senesce.
While we do routinely culture primary cell explants, they are much more finicky. In part because their environment changes dramatically. Eventually they succumb to cell death (either apoptotic or not) or they senesce.
Stem cells are also affected.
Stem Cell Health and Tissue Regeneration in Microgravity https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4235978/
It seems that after few days in days in microgravity, human immune cells were unable to differentiate into mature cells.
> Over the long-term, exposure to microgravity may cause severe deficits in mammalian stem cell-based tissue regenerative health, including, osteogenesis, hematopoiesis, and lymphopoeisis
>The lack of gravity in space is a major concern for stem cell and tissue regenerative health during long-term spaceflight.
Stem Cell Health and Tissue Regeneration in Microgravity https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4235978/
It seems that after few days in days in microgravity, human immune cells were unable to differentiate into mature cells.
> Over the long-term, exposure to microgravity may cause severe deficits in mammalian stem cell-based tissue regenerative health, including, osteogenesis, hematopoiesis, and lymphopoeisis
>The lack of gravity in space is a major concern for stem cell and tissue regenerative health during long-term spaceflight.
Would be curious to know more about this, maybe there is a sweet spot. One of the big issues with cancer is not in eradicating the regular tumor cells but detecting and killing the 'cancer stem cells'. These are a big cause of recurrence.
> "But what I really wanted to know was: is there something these cancers have in common? That's why I put them in the microgravity device."
What is this microgravity device? A quick web search was inconclusive.
Before anyone answers this, I would like to guess. Is it either real levitation by (dia)magnetic levitation (when levitating a live frog was possible years ago, levitating a tiny amount of cells in a desktop device should be possible by now?) or maybe something that makes the effect of gravity average out, e.g. floating clusters of cells in a fluid to reduce the net force and maybe even rotate them (or let them rotate freely), so that there is no longer a preferred direction in the cluster (which is what I guess is what is important here)?
What is this microgravity device? A quick web search was inconclusive.
Before anyone answers this, I would like to guess. Is it either real levitation by (dia)magnetic levitation (when levitating a live frog was possible years ago, levitating a tiny amount of cells in a desktop device should be possible by now?) or maybe something that makes the effect of gravity average out, e.g. floating clusters of cells in a fluid to reduce the net force and maybe even rotate them (or let them rotate freely), so that there is no longer a preferred direction in the cluster (which is what I guess is what is important here)?
>> "But what I really wanted to know was: is there something these cancers have in common? That's why I put them in the microgravity device."
What is this microgravity device? A quick web search was inconclusive.
They didn't specify what kind of microgravity device was used, but IMO none of the techniques we have are a "real" micro gravity.
According to this: http://www.grimm-space-research.com/RPM/RPM.html There are three types of micro gravity devices.I think their types 2 and 3 are very similar: - simulating micro gravity by counteracting gravitational forces (think frog magnetic levitation) - simulating micro gravity by averaging gravitational forces by rotation.
In both cases the culture experiences simulation of micro gravity, but to test this in practice the cells have to be sent to space with control.
They didn't specify what kind of microgravity device was used, but IMO none of the techniques we have are a "real" micro gravity.
According to this: http://www.grimm-space-research.com/RPM/RPM.html There are three types of micro gravity devices.I think their types 2 and 3 are very similar: - simulating micro gravity by counteracting gravitational forces (think frog magnetic levitation) - simulating micro gravity by averaging gravitational forces by rotation.
In both cases the culture experiences simulation of micro gravity, but to test this in practice the cells have to be sent to space with control.
The KS page from the sibling post has a gif of their device. It's merely a slowly rotating stand with a bottle duck-taped to it.
The description is as follows:
The description is as follows:
We are considered the world leaders in space
biology/medicine, owing it to our development
of advanced space technologies including a cell
biology dedicated microgravity device capable
of simulating the environment of space and the
gravity of different planets!!
Rotation, it is. Thanks to thegabriele who posted a link to a page that contains a short video of the device:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/choucollective/curing-d...
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/choucollective/curing-d...
I see the gif! Too bad rotation is not at all the same as microgravity... Why would they think going all the way to space would have any improvement over their tumbling device?
>We want to see if it is actually microgravity that’s having an affect on the cell, or could it be other things in space — like solar radiation?" he said. But such an endeavor is no easy task, Chou points out.
Wow. What a headline.
Wow. What a headline.
That's what I was thinking as well. It maybe solar radiation or some other stuff we haven't yet identified or hardly created an understanding of how they affect cancer cells. Overall it's exciting stuff :)
I would guess its nonsense clickbait hype personally.
> Cancer cells die in [whatever] conditions.
So what? There are plenty of [whatever]s that satisfy this statement.
The difficult part is how to create such conditions within the human body without affecting sane cells!
So what? There are plenty of [whatever]s that satisfy this statement.
The difficult part is how to create such conditions within the human body without affecting sane cells!
[deleted]
What is the control? Do cancer cells normally live if they are taken out of the body?
Yes, look ie at HeLa cell line, continuously cultured cancer cells from patient taken in 1951. Many labs around the world use them.
You still have to immortalize the cell line. NIH3T3 cells were immortalized by culture conditions. Others are immortalized with viral treatment. The end result is the cell line is similar, but not the sams as the source. Take a primary tumor out of a patient and culture it and it will slowly die over a few days or weeks.
Nose cancer!!!? There's nose cancer?
This just shows again how much we need a permanent lab in microgravity.
The ISS is continuously crewed since 19 years now. It could use a larger crew to conduct more experiments in my opinion since maintenance is taking up most of the time of the astronauts there.
I am hoping that in the future, there will always be a human in space.
I am hoping that in the future, there will always be a human in space.
> "We want to see if it is actually microgravity that’s having an affect on the cell, or could it be other things in space — like solar radiation?" he said. But such an endeavor is no easy task, Chou points out.
Why would he say that after the on-planet microgravity experiment? There was no solar radiation in his actual experiment where the cells died so why would he entertain that? Someone else should entertain that totally different experiment while he tries to gain support for expanding his experiment.
Why would he say that after the on-planet microgravity experiment? There was no solar radiation in his actual experiment where the cells died so why would he entertain that? Someone else should entertain that totally different experiment while he tries to gain support for expanding his experiment.
Cannabinoids would probably be easier for people.
Edit: I cannot find anything that's even looking like research. News articles all referring Chou, but nothing to show for it. No paper or data. Now it looks even worse.