d*y
2 楼
刚买的iphone 6和刚更新的itune，但itune就是找不到iphone，试了各种方法还是不行
，大家遇到过类似情况吗?计算机操作系统是windows 8。
另外，想更新铃声，还就得通过itune，大家有什么别的办法？
，大家遇到过类似情况吗?计算机操作系统是windows 8。
另外，想更新铃声，还就得通过itune，大家有什么别的办法？
t*d
3 楼
IMHO, to find novel drug delivering methods might be better ways to conquer
cancer comparing to studying the mechanisms of cancer initiation and
progression.
Nature 491, S58–S60 (22 November 2012)
Nanotechnology: Carrying drugs
When Joseph DeSimone makes nanomedicines, he compares himself to a baker. He
mixes drugs with different chemical 'batters', puts them in tiny moulds,
cures them and then turns them out. He can mould almost any shape: discs,
cubes, long sticks, roughened doughnuts, or particles shaped like pollen,
viruses or red blood cells. But unlike a baker's cakes, brags DeSimone, a
chemical engineer at the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill, every
particle in a batch will be identical, regardless of the recipe.
The materials scientists and chemists who work in nanotechnology are
creative designers, but they're also control freaks. The ability to make
particles to exact specifications, and to control their form at the
nanoscale with great precision, enables researchers to control their
function. DeSimone's various shapes can squeeze through blood vessels or
worm their way to the core of a tumour. And shape is just one of many
properties he and others can engineer at the nanoscale. Nanoparticles with
carefully controlled chemistry, size, surface charge and other properties
can carry drugs to new places and give them new functions. Nanoengineered
drug carriers can slip selectively into cancerous tissue, or protect the
drugs they carry from being destroyed before they reach their destination.
Nanomedicine has the potential to address one of the biggest problems in
cancer therapy: how to get enough of the right drug to the right place,
without causing side effects or inducing resistance. As researchers learn
more about the tumour microenvironment, and about how to engineer and
manufacture nanoparticles that carry drugs, they are gaining more control
over the course of cancer therapy — an advance that is expected to lead to
more effective treatments with fewer side effects. It is also resulting in
therapies that were previously thought impossible, such as drugs that change
their properties depending on where they are in the body, or that target
proteins once deemed undruggable. Some labs are even testing ideas inspired
by robotics and computing, such as nanoparticles that communicate with each
other to increase accumulation in a tumour.
Size matters
One of the greatest uses of nanomedicine in cancer treatments so far has
been keeping toxic drugs out of healthy tissues, says Rakesh Jain, a cancer
biologist at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston who is also affiliated
with several drug companies. Many traditional chemotherapies are too toxic
to be given in large doses or combined with other toxic drugs. They may have
precise chemical targets but they are poor at targeting specific tissues —
they make their way blindly through healthy tissues and cancerous ones
alike, causing harmful side effects.
Doxorubicin is used to treat a range of cancers, but it can also cause life-
threatening heart damage. One of the earliest successes of nanomedicine was
Doxil, a doxorubicin-carrying nanomedicine, approved in 1995, that keeps the
drug out of the heart.
By the mid-1980s, researchers knew that 100-nanometre particles are too big
to exit healthy blood vessels but can easily escape the leaky, hastily built
vasculature that feeds tumours. Doxil was engineered to take advantage of
this. To keep doxorubicin out of the heart, researchers loaded it into a
lipid bubble about 100 nanometres in diameter. Lipids don't allow for much
engineering control, but they readily self-assemble into bubbles. When
shaken together in a water-based solution, the lipid molecules coalesce
around doxorubicin particles to create drug-delivering nanoparticles. Then,
to help the nanoparticles evade the immune system, researchers coat them
with polyethylene glycol. Once these Doxil particles accumulate in the
tumour, the drug leaks out of its carrier and attacks nearby cells.
Patients receiving Doxil have one-third the congestive heart failure
incidence of those given conventional doxorubicin, resulting in “a quantum
jump in quality of life”, Jain says. But keeping drugs out of the wrong
places is much easier than getting them into the right ones. Drugs the size
of Doxil are passively excluded from healthy tissue but cannot actively make
their way deep into a tumour, instead clustering at its perimeter. As a
result, nanomedicines offer little or no survival benefits compared with
conventional formulations, Jain says. “Now we have to improve delivery in
tumours.”
The nanomedicines currently being developed are more sophisticated than
Doxil, but many maintain the basic design of a spherical carrier with a
coating. To improve delivery, companies such as BIND Biosciences of
Cambridge, Massachusetts, are also tuning other properties such as charge,
chemistry and shape. Chief executive Scott Minick describes BIND's approach
as “medicinal nanoengineering”. Minick was previously chief executive of
Sequus Pharmecauticals, the company that developed Doxil. But unlike Doxil,
which uses simple lipids as its drug carrier, BIND's nanomedicines use
polymers, which are easier to engineer. This approach means the company can
build drug bubbles and direct where they go, control how quickly they
release a drug, and target cancer cells according to their surface markers.
The leading candidate1, BIND-014, is a 100-nanometre polymer sphere loaded
with docetaxel, a drug that kills dividing cells. Like Doxil, BIND-014
relies on its size to leave the tumour vasculature. Unlike Doxil, however,
the polymer centre has been engineered to control drug release, among other
things. The outer layer is made up of two additional components:
polyethylene glycol to help it evade the immune system, and binding
molecules that seek out markers found only on the surface of tumour cells (
see 'Nano drug carrier').
The early results of BIND-014's phase I clinical trials look promising,
Minck says. “This patient population is late-stage, terminally ill, and we
don't expect to see signs of efficacy,” he says. Even so, there are hints
that the drug is working: although the trial is still recruiting, the
company has reported that, following a course of BIND-014, tumours shrank in
two of 17 patients.
To design its therapies, BIND Biosciences tweaks the size, charge and other
properties of each part of its drug carriers, giving it control over
circulation time and drug release rate, for example. This approach allows it
to make effective nanomedicines without knowing all the biological details
of why a particle works as well as it does. Researchers elsewhere, however,
are more deliberately taking advantage of advances in understanding the
biophysics of the tumour microenvironment.
Small and squishy
Designing nanomedicines to seep out of the bloodstream into tumour blood
vessels is only the first step in cancer drug delivery2. Although a size of
100 nanometres works well for some things, it's still quite large for a drug
. “Once a big nanoparticle leaks out, it's pretty much stuck,” says
Jeffrey Hubbell, a chemical engineer at the Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale
de Lausanne in Switzerland.
Once a large particle leaves the leaky blood vessels, it has difficulty
moving deep into a tumour. Making the particle smaller would improve its
mobility, and is also an advantage when fighting certain tumours —
particularly pancreatic and some breast cancers — that are threaded with a
tough tangle of collagen, which presents a physical barrier to drugs.
But reliably making polymer nanoparticles much smaller than 100 nanometres
is tricky. Kazunori Kataoka, a materials scientist at the University of
Tokyo, Japan, developed the first polymer drug carrier in the mid-1980s. His
company, NanoCarrier, based in Kashiwa, has now developed a 30-nanometre
polymer to transport the chemotherapy drug cisplatin; it is currently
undergoing phase II clinical trials in patients with pancreatic cancer.
Cisplatin usually has severe kidney toxicity, requiring patients to drink
painfully large amounts of water during treatment. Kataoka says that's not
the case in the NanoCarrier trials because the carrier's size allows it to
move into and accumulate in the pancreatic tumour, instead of accumulating
in the kidney. “We've already successfully extended survival,” he says,
which is heartening given how difficult pancreatic cancer is to treat. In a
small phase I trial, the drug more than doubled survival time from five
months to more than twelve.
Back in North Carolina, DeSimone's work moulding strangely shaped particles
has a similar motivation: controlling a drug's size and shape to help it
enter tumours. “We want to figure out how cancer cells get in places they'
re not supposed to be, and mimic that,” he says, so that he and others can
make drugs to follow them there.
DeSimone drew inspiration for his particle-moulding method from
semiconductor manufacturing plants, which make tiny transistors by the
trillion. He can precisely vary just a single property, such as stiffness,
and then test how the particles move through the body. Using this
manufacturing method, which has been licensed by Liquidia Technologies of
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, he can find out, for example whether
a squishier drug is better at squeezing into the centre of a tumour.
Silence will fall
One of the most promising applications for nanoengineered drug carriers is
gene silencing, in which small bits of RNA are deployed to shut down crucial
cancer genes through a process known as RNA interference. Researchers know
how to make RNA sequences that theoretically can turn off any given gene.
But without a good delivery vehicle to test the effects of these silenced
genes, finding promising therapeutic targets in animals — let alone making
an RNA therapy that will work in people — is slow going, says William Hahn,
an oncologist at Harvard Medical School in Boston, Massachusetts.
Nanocarriers may be just the technology to push this technique forward.
Designing a nanocarrier suited to transport gene-silencing RNA is tricky,
however. It must make it all the way inside a cancer cell, which requires an
escort smart enough to evade destruction. Typically, if it's not cleared
out by the liver, an RNA-carrying particle will bind to the cancer cell
membrane, which then folds inward and pinches itself off into an acidic,
destructive bubble called an endosome inside the cell.
Researchers are working on several tricks to get round this. Chemical
engineer Mark Davis at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena
has developed a polymer carrier that absorbs positive charges as they are
pumped into the endosome. This creates an osmotic pressure that eventually
bursts the cancer cell's bubble, freeing the silencing RNA before it is
destroyed.
Traditional therapies work by binding to proteins and disabling them.
Unfortunately, most cancer genes produce proteins that are considered
undruggable by traditional means. Some of these proteins hide inside the
cancer cell, out of the reach of antibody drugs that can only get to the
surface. Other proteins have a physical shape that provides no foothold for
a drug of any kind. Nanoengineering, Davis says, could break through these
defences. With the right carrier, there is no need to go after the
undruggable proteins — gene-silencing RNA can instead go directly to the
genes that make them.
It can also target several cancer genes at once. “The goal has got to be to
hit multiple targets simultaneously” so the tumour cannot develop
resistance, says Davis. If a tumour mutates in the course of treatment,
oncologists will be able to order therapies that target those new mutations.
The logical next step
Nanotechnology researchers such as Davis, and companies like BIND, are
focused on getting more effective therapies into the clinic as quickly as
possible. But most nanomedical research has been done in vitro and in
animals; little is known about how these drugs work in people, Davis says,
although a series of clinical trials is under way (see 'Nanomedicine in
clinical trials').
Other researchers are using the tools of physical science, from robotics to
computer science, to realize more fanciful ideas about future drugs. One
prototype, made by George Church's group at Harvard University in Cambridge,
Massachusetts, is a drug-stuffed 'lock box' that opens only after
performing a simple logic operation akin to those done by computer circuits.
The box is made of DNA, a material Church and his colleagues chose for its
design possibilities. Using a technique called DNA origami, the DNA self-
assembles into a barrel shape, with locks and hinges that cause it to spring
open when particular surface markers on cancer cells — the 'keys' —
unlock them.
Church calls his DNA drug carrier a nanobot because it performs a
computational logic function: when two input signals are present (two
molecular markers on the targeted cancer cell), the box generates an output
(opening to release its drug payload). In one recent experiment3, the team
designed a cylinder of DNA that contains a cancer drug, like gems in a
jewellery box. The nanobot had two locks designed to be opened by two
proteins on the surface of aggressive leukaemia cells. The researchers
showed that the leukaemia cells could unlock the nanobot, but other cells in
the bloodstream could not.
The logic-function idea was motivated by a clinical need. Most targeted
therapies seek out just one cell surface marker. Logic-gated systems like
Church's, however, might allow for specifically targeted drugs that go after
cancer cells, such as leukaemia, but avoid healthy cells that might have a
surface marker in common with the cancer cells. But the research is still in
the early stages, as it is difficult to produce enough DNA boxes to test
the method in animal models.
Sangeeta Bhatia, a biomedical engineer at the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, is also taking inspiration from information technology and other
fields. She is emulating natural systems and robotics to make smart
cocktails of cancer therapeutics that communicate with each other to 'swarm'
to tumours.
“Ninety percent of cancer deaths are caused by metastases,” says Bhatia.
Finding those secondary tumours is difficult, especially when they're new.
“We want to inject a therapy that will figure out where the metastasis is”
and then communicate that information to other drugs, she says, so more of
the drug reaches its target. Early demonstrations4 showed that drug-carrying
nanoparticles accumulate in a tumour in much larger numbers than they would
without such communication — in one experiment, there was a 40-fold
increase (see 'Communicating chemotherapies').
Bhatia is looking to expand this idea by incorporating design tricks from
robotics. Like ants, whose individual actions are simple but who en masse
can build a complex anthill, groups of individual robots can be programmed
to swarm and perform tasks collectively. Instituting simple rules such as “
maximize your distance from all neighbours” has allowed roboticists to make
groups of robots that fly like bees in a swarm. If Bhatia can apply this to
drugs, she might achieve even greater drug accumulation.
The work is unorthodox, but that doesn't bother Bhatia. “We want to evolve
nanomedicine away from formulations where everything is exactly the same,”
she says. Indeed, the whole field is still evolving. As researchers improve
their ability to control, manufacture and innovate at the nanoscale, they
are opening up new paths for cancer therapy. Some may prove fruitless, but
others could yield new ways to make cancer therapy less painful and more
effective.
cancer comparing to studying the mechanisms of cancer initiation and
progression.
Nature 491, S58–S60 (22 November 2012)
Nanotechnology: Carrying drugs
When Joseph DeSimone makes nanomedicines, he compares himself to a baker. He
mixes drugs with different chemical 'batters', puts them in tiny moulds,
cures them and then turns them out. He can mould almost any shape: discs,
cubes, long sticks, roughened doughnuts, or particles shaped like pollen,
viruses or red blood cells. But unlike a baker's cakes, brags DeSimone, a
chemical engineer at the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill, every
particle in a batch will be identical, regardless of the recipe.
The materials scientists and chemists who work in nanotechnology are
creative designers, but they're also control freaks. The ability to make
particles to exact specifications, and to control their form at the
nanoscale with great precision, enables researchers to control their
function. DeSimone's various shapes can squeeze through blood vessels or
worm their way to the core of a tumour. And shape is just one of many
properties he and others can engineer at the nanoscale. Nanoparticles with
carefully controlled chemistry, size, surface charge and other properties
can carry drugs to new places and give them new functions. Nanoengineered
drug carriers can slip selectively into cancerous tissue, or protect the
drugs they carry from being destroyed before they reach their destination.
Nanomedicine has the potential to address one of the biggest problems in
cancer therapy: how to get enough of the right drug to the right place,
without causing side effects or inducing resistance. As researchers learn
more about the tumour microenvironment, and about how to engineer and
manufacture nanoparticles that carry drugs, they are gaining more control
over the course of cancer therapy — an advance that is expected to lead to
more effective treatments with fewer side effects. It is also resulting in
therapies that were previously thought impossible, such as drugs that change
their properties depending on where they are in the body, or that target
proteins once deemed undruggable. Some labs are even testing ideas inspired
by robotics and computing, such as nanoparticles that communicate with each
other to increase accumulation in a tumour.
Size matters
One of the greatest uses of nanomedicine in cancer treatments so far has
been keeping toxic drugs out of healthy tissues, says Rakesh Jain, a cancer
biologist at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston who is also affiliated
with several drug companies. Many traditional chemotherapies are too toxic
to be given in large doses or combined with other toxic drugs. They may have
precise chemical targets but they are poor at targeting specific tissues —
they make their way blindly through healthy tissues and cancerous ones
alike, causing harmful side effects.
Doxorubicin is used to treat a range of cancers, but it can also cause life-
threatening heart damage. One of the earliest successes of nanomedicine was
Doxil, a doxorubicin-carrying nanomedicine, approved in 1995, that keeps the
drug out of the heart.
By the mid-1980s, researchers knew that 100-nanometre particles are too big
to exit healthy blood vessels but can easily escape the leaky, hastily built
vasculature that feeds tumours. Doxil was engineered to take advantage of
this. To keep doxorubicin out of the heart, researchers loaded it into a
lipid bubble about 100 nanometres in diameter. Lipids don't allow for much
engineering control, but they readily self-assemble into bubbles. When
shaken together in a water-based solution, the lipid molecules coalesce
around doxorubicin particles to create drug-delivering nanoparticles. Then,
to help the nanoparticles evade the immune system, researchers coat them
with polyethylene glycol. Once these Doxil particles accumulate in the
tumour, the drug leaks out of its carrier and attacks nearby cells.
Patients receiving Doxil have one-third the congestive heart failure
incidence of those given conventional doxorubicin, resulting in “a quantum
jump in quality of life”, Jain says. But keeping drugs out of the wrong
places is much easier than getting them into the right ones. Drugs the size
of Doxil are passively excluded from healthy tissue but cannot actively make
their way deep into a tumour, instead clustering at its perimeter. As a
result, nanomedicines offer little or no survival benefits compared with
conventional formulations, Jain says. “Now we have to improve delivery in
tumours.”
The nanomedicines currently being developed are more sophisticated than
Doxil, but many maintain the basic design of a spherical carrier with a
coating. To improve delivery, companies such as BIND Biosciences of
Cambridge, Massachusetts, are also tuning other properties such as charge,
chemistry and shape. Chief executive Scott Minick describes BIND's approach
as “medicinal nanoengineering”. Minick was previously chief executive of
Sequus Pharmecauticals, the company that developed Doxil. But unlike Doxil,
which uses simple lipids as its drug carrier, BIND's nanomedicines use
polymers, which are easier to engineer. This approach means the company can
build drug bubbles and direct where they go, control how quickly they
release a drug, and target cancer cells according to their surface markers.
The leading candidate1, BIND-014, is a 100-nanometre polymer sphere loaded
with docetaxel, a drug that kills dividing cells. Like Doxil, BIND-014
relies on its size to leave the tumour vasculature. Unlike Doxil, however,
the polymer centre has been engineered to control drug release, among other
things. The outer layer is made up of two additional components:
polyethylene glycol to help it evade the immune system, and binding
molecules that seek out markers found only on the surface of tumour cells (
see 'Nano drug carrier').
The early results of BIND-014's phase I clinical trials look promising,
Minck says. “This patient population is late-stage, terminally ill, and we
don't expect to see signs of efficacy,” he says. Even so, there are hints
that the drug is working: although the trial is still recruiting, the
company has reported that, following a course of BIND-014, tumours shrank in
two of 17 patients.
To design its therapies, BIND Biosciences tweaks the size, charge and other
properties of each part of its drug carriers, giving it control over
circulation time and drug release rate, for example. This approach allows it
to make effective nanomedicines without knowing all the biological details
of why a particle works as well as it does. Researchers elsewhere, however,
are more deliberately taking advantage of advances in understanding the
biophysics of the tumour microenvironment.
Small and squishy
Designing nanomedicines to seep out of the bloodstream into tumour blood
vessels is only the first step in cancer drug delivery2. Although a size of
100 nanometres works well for some things, it's still quite large for a drug
. “Once a big nanoparticle leaks out, it's pretty much stuck,” says
Jeffrey Hubbell, a chemical engineer at the Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale
de Lausanne in Switzerland.
Once a large particle leaves the leaky blood vessels, it has difficulty
moving deep into a tumour. Making the particle smaller would improve its
mobility, and is also an advantage when fighting certain tumours —
particularly pancreatic and some breast cancers — that are threaded with a
tough tangle of collagen, which presents a physical barrier to drugs.
But reliably making polymer nanoparticles much smaller than 100 nanometres
is tricky. Kazunori Kataoka, a materials scientist at the University of
Tokyo, Japan, developed the first polymer drug carrier in the mid-1980s. His
company, NanoCarrier, based in Kashiwa, has now developed a 30-nanometre
polymer to transport the chemotherapy drug cisplatin; it is currently
undergoing phase II clinical trials in patients with pancreatic cancer.
Cisplatin usually has severe kidney toxicity, requiring patients to drink
painfully large amounts of water during treatment. Kataoka says that's not
the case in the NanoCarrier trials because the carrier's size allows it to
move into and accumulate in the pancreatic tumour, instead of accumulating
in the kidney. “We've already successfully extended survival,” he says,
which is heartening given how difficult pancreatic cancer is to treat. In a
small phase I trial, the drug more than doubled survival time from five
months to more than twelve.
Back in North Carolina, DeSimone's work moulding strangely shaped particles
has a similar motivation: controlling a drug's size and shape to help it
enter tumours. “We want to figure out how cancer cells get in places they'
re not supposed to be, and mimic that,” he says, so that he and others can
make drugs to follow them there.
DeSimone drew inspiration for his particle-moulding method from
semiconductor manufacturing plants, which make tiny transistors by the
trillion. He can precisely vary just a single property, such as stiffness,
and then test how the particles move through the body. Using this
manufacturing method, which has been licensed by Liquidia Technologies of
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, he can find out, for example whether
a squishier drug is better at squeezing into the centre of a tumour.
Silence will fall
One of the most promising applications for nanoengineered drug carriers is
gene silencing, in which small bits of RNA are deployed to shut down crucial
cancer genes through a process known as RNA interference. Researchers know
how to make RNA sequences that theoretically can turn off any given gene.
But without a good delivery vehicle to test the effects of these silenced
genes, finding promising therapeutic targets in animals — let alone making
an RNA therapy that will work in people — is slow going, says William Hahn,
an oncologist at Harvard Medical School in Boston, Massachusetts.
Nanocarriers may be just the technology to push this technique forward.
Designing a nanocarrier suited to transport gene-silencing RNA is tricky,
however. It must make it all the way inside a cancer cell, which requires an
escort smart enough to evade destruction. Typically, if it's not cleared
out by the liver, an RNA-carrying particle will bind to the cancer cell
membrane, which then folds inward and pinches itself off into an acidic,
destructive bubble called an endosome inside the cell.
Researchers are working on several tricks to get round this. Chemical
engineer Mark Davis at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena
has developed a polymer carrier that absorbs positive charges as they are
pumped into the endosome. This creates an osmotic pressure that eventually
bursts the cancer cell's bubble, freeing the silencing RNA before it is
destroyed.
Traditional therapies work by binding to proteins and disabling them.
Unfortunately, most cancer genes produce proteins that are considered
undruggable by traditional means. Some of these proteins hide inside the
cancer cell, out of the reach of antibody drugs that can only get to the
surface. Other proteins have a physical shape that provides no foothold for
a drug of any kind. Nanoengineering, Davis says, could break through these
defences. With the right carrier, there is no need to go after the
undruggable proteins — gene-silencing RNA can instead go directly to the
genes that make them.
It can also target several cancer genes at once. “The goal has got to be to
hit multiple targets simultaneously” so the tumour cannot develop
resistance, says Davis. If a tumour mutates in the course of treatment,
oncologists will be able to order therapies that target those new mutations.
The logical next step
Nanotechnology researchers such as Davis, and companies like BIND, are
focused on getting more effective therapies into the clinic as quickly as
possible. But most nanomedical research has been done in vitro and in
animals; little is known about how these drugs work in people, Davis says,
although a series of clinical trials is under way (see 'Nanomedicine in
clinical trials').
Other researchers are using the tools of physical science, from robotics to
computer science, to realize more fanciful ideas about future drugs. One
prototype, made by George Church's group at Harvard University in Cambridge,
Massachusetts, is a drug-stuffed 'lock box' that opens only after
performing a simple logic operation akin to those done by computer circuits.
The box is made of DNA, a material Church and his colleagues chose for its
design possibilities. Using a technique called DNA origami, the DNA self-
assembles into a barrel shape, with locks and hinges that cause it to spring
open when particular surface markers on cancer cells — the 'keys' —
unlock them.
Church calls his DNA drug carrier a nanobot because it performs a
computational logic function: when two input signals are present (two
molecular markers on the targeted cancer cell), the box generates an output
(opening to release its drug payload). In one recent experiment3, the team
designed a cylinder of DNA that contains a cancer drug, like gems in a
jewellery box. The nanobot had two locks designed to be opened by two
proteins on the surface of aggressive leukaemia cells. The researchers
showed that the leukaemia cells could unlock the nanobot, but other cells in
the bloodstream could not.
The logic-function idea was motivated by a clinical need. Most targeted
therapies seek out just one cell surface marker. Logic-gated systems like
Church's, however, might allow for specifically targeted drugs that go after
cancer cells, such as leukaemia, but avoid healthy cells that might have a
surface marker in common with the cancer cells. But the research is still in
the early stages, as it is difficult to produce enough DNA boxes to test
the method in animal models.
Sangeeta Bhatia, a biomedical engineer at the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, is also taking inspiration from information technology and other
fields. She is emulating natural systems and robotics to make smart
cocktails of cancer therapeutics that communicate with each other to 'swarm'
to tumours.
“Ninety percent of cancer deaths are caused by metastases,” says Bhatia.
Finding those secondary tumours is difficult, especially when they're new.
“We want to inject a therapy that will figure out where the metastasis is”
and then communicate that information to other drugs, she says, so more of
the drug reaches its target. Early demonstrations4 showed that drug-carrying
nanoparticles accumulate in a tumour in much larger numbers than they would
without such communication — in one experiment, there was a 40-fold
increase (see 'Communicating chemotherapies').
Bhatia is looking to expand this idea by incorporating design tricks from
robotics. Like ants, whose individual actions are simple but who en masse
can build a complex anthill, groups of individual robots can be programmed
to swarm and perform tasks collectively. Instituting simple rules such as “
maximize your distance from all neighbours” has allowed roboticists to make
groups of robots that fly like bees in a swarm. If Bhatia can apply this to
drugs, she might achieve even greater drug accumulation.
The work is unorthodox, but that doesn't bother Bhatia. “We want to evolve
nanomedicine away from formulations where everything is exactly the same,”
she says. Indeed, the whole field is still evolving. As researchers improve
their ability to control, manufacture and innovate at the nanoscale, they
are opening up new paths for cancer therapy. Some may prove fruitless, but
others could yield new ways to make cancer therapy less painful and more
effective.
l*n
4 楼
西服不用换。领带衬衣可以。
我当时带了两条领带，但后来也没换，不太喜欢另外一条。
我当时带了两条领带，但后来也没换，不太喜欢另外一条。
T*O
5 楼
通过Lightning cable有线连接PC/Win，不可能找不到iPhone，此时的iPhone无非是一
个USB外接设备。检查你的PC/Win系统是否有问题，iPhone连接之后是否正确识别并安
装为外设。
另外，不论Mac或PC，iPhone在初次连接一台计算机的时候，会提示你是否信任该系统
。如果当时意外选择了不信任，那么iPhone就会拒绝与之对话，当然iTunes就找不到它
的。
个USB外接设备。检查你的PC/Win系统是否有问题，iPhone连接之后是否正确识别并安
装为外设。
另外，不论Mac或PC，iPhone在初次连接一台计算机的时候，会提示你是否信任该系统
。如果当时意外选择了不信任，那么iPhone就会拒绝与之对话，当然iTunes就找不到它
的。
A*y
6 楼
LOL, we have been trying especially in chemistry for last 30 years! Nature
is working on it for over millions of years, do you know what's the best way
to deliver DNA/RNA? Virus! If there are other way by nature, please let
me know.
is working on it for over millions of years, do you know what's the best way
to deliver DNA/RNA? Virus! If there are other way by nature, please let
me know.
j*o
7 楼
千万别换，否则别人想不起你是谁了
w*y
8 楼
重启计算机
t*d
9 楼
Why should it be by nature?
I think engineered virus is indeed an excellent way for targeted delivery.
I think engineered virus is indeed an excellent way for targeted delivery.
r*c
10 楼
谢谢！
【在 l**********n 的大作中提到】
: 西服不用换。领带衬衣可以。
: 我当时带了两条领带，但后来也没换，不太喜欢另外一条。
【在 l**********n 的大作中提到】
: 西服不用换。领带衬衣可以。
: 我当时带了两条领带，但后来也没换，不太喜欢另外一条。
q*n
11 楼
iTunes wifi sync目前是有问题，我在Mac上也找不到iPhone，只能有线连
r*c
12 楼
haha, good one! 不过估计大家会记得我，同一个时间就我一个candidate，要见一堆人
【在 j***o 的大作中提到】
: 千万别换，否则别人想不起你是谁了
【在 j***o 的大作中提到】
: 千万别换，否则别人想不起你是谁了
d*y
13 楼
谢谢大家。问题已经解决。root cause是前些天为了计算机启动快，disable了一些移
动设备的程序，在启动时enable这些程序就可以了。
动设备的程序，在启动时enable这些程序就可以了。
n*l
14 楼
你也是跳槽的，看来跳槽的确实挺多的。
【在 r**c 的大作中提到】
: 还是得每天换一套？衬衫领带当然带了多套。但西装带多了坐飞机麻烦。 有经验的说
: 说？
【在 r**c 的大作中提到】
: 还是得每天换一套？衬衫领带当然带了多套。但西装带多了坐飞机麻烦。 有经验的说
: 说？
N*3
15 楼
itunes随装的服务很多，也是被骂的一个原因，但是要用iphone只能迁就一下。。
【在 d*******y 的大作中提到】
: 谢谢大家。问题已经解决。root cause是前些天为了计算机启动快，disable了一些移
: 动设备的程序，在启动时enable这些程序就可以了。
z*t
16 楼
最好都换一下，包括西服， 衬衫和领带。 不然别人看你是多穷啊。
r*c
17 楼
是，骑驴找马。tenure 早了，年龄还不大。能折腾就折腾下，不行就再原地呆着。
【在 n*******l 的大作中提到】
: 你也是跳槽的，看来跳槽的确实挺多的。
【在 n*******l 的大作中提到】
: 你也是跳槽的，看来跳槽的确实挺多的。
b*h
18 楼
这BSO的直截了当，爽快！
祝你跳槽成功，到时候别忘了分享经验呀！
【在 r**c 的大作中提到】
: 是，骑驴找马。tenure 早了，年龄还不大。能折腾就折腾下，不行就再原地呆着。
祝你跳槽成功，到时候别忘了分享经验呀！
【在 r**c 的大作中提到】
: 是，骑驴找马。tenure 早了，年龄还不大。能折腾就折腾下，不行就再原地呆着。
r*c
19 楼
谢谢，也祝你成功！不过跳槽是要趁早，因为带着tenure 跳很难。我这次就算折腾过
了别人不给tenure肯定不敢去，就白费力气了。
【在 b******h 的大作中提到】
: 这BSO的直截了当，爽快！
: 祝你跳槽成功，到时候别忘了分享经验呀！
了别人不给tenure肯定不敢去，就白费力气了。
【在 b******h 的大作中提到】
: 这BSO的直截了当，爽快！
: 祝你跳槽成功，到时候别忘了分享经验呀！
相关阅读
生物发考题就是一群沾满了鲜血的奴隶主大片段DNA克隆我觉得BT蛋白的毒性吧为什么老板们宁可从国内招博后过来也不给我们一条活路？ (转载)help on a question求教材推荐浙江大学转化医学研究院招聘启事无菌的排枪加样槽英语叫啥？有人做过小鼠的condition knockout 吗？Any good free electronic book for R to share?国内亲戚（医生）进级需要发SCI文章，求推荐杂志绝对应该取消noble医学奖biochemistry 和 chemical biology 有啥区别？下午有个phone interview, 求祝福sunnyday，你再讲讲BT转基因粮食的看法吧清华的生物专业一两百万启动经费在小地方做老鼠模型是不是不可行？几个offer选一个有人订38刀一年的Nature吗？30＋女博后转行真心求建议