Blood Test Might Help Diagnose Parkinson's Disease Much Earlier

 Blood Test Might Help Diagnose Parkinson's Disease Much Earlier 

    Parkinson's cannot be diagnosed using any kind of blood test or brain scan as of right now. However, a new blood test shows promise and this can change if it continues to. DNA damage in the mitochondria of cells is more prevalent in those with Parkinson's, and this new blood test measures exactly that. This test also found high levels of damaged DNA in those who contain the genetic mutation LRRK2, which also leads to an increased risk of Parkinson's. Study author Laurie Sanders states, “We were able to see this marker in people who carry a genetic mutation but don’t have Parkinson’s disease yet... This is something that may be happening very early in the disease process, and we may be able to screen people who are at high risk and intervene earlier. A simple and cheap blood test could let people know if they should seek further care.”. Sanders and her team also tested therapy that targets the LRRK2 gene. The cells that received it had lower levels of mitochondrial DNA damage.

    I think that this discovery is amazing as there is no test out there that can pre-diagnose Parkinson's. The only way to be diagnosed is by checking off a series of physical symptoms. This is a great advancement because something so simple as a blood test can tell us whether a person will develop such a previously complicated disease. I think this will be a great help as people can then start preventative treatment earlier to maybe fight this disease before it starts to show. Their approach is also interesting because they might be able to determine if certain forms of therapy will help a person or not.

LINKS: 

https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2023-08-31/blood-test-might-help-diagnose-parkinsons-disease-much-earlier

https://neurology.duke.edu/news/new-blood-test-detects-key-indicator-parkinsons-disease#:~:text=%E2%80%9CA%20simple%20blood%20test%20would,treatments%20and%20potentially%20even%20cures.%E2%80%9D

New Way of Detecting Cancer

A new study by Umea University in Sweden has found a new RNA test of blood platelets that can be used to not only detect cancer but also to classify the type of cancer and pinpoint the approximate location of the cancer by using only one drop of blood. Researchers studied 283 blood samples from both cancer patients and non-cancer patients. Researchers compared the RNA profiles of the blood samples and found that they could identify the presence of cancer with a close accuracy of 96%. Out of the 283 blood samples, early detection of cancer was found in 39 of the samples. Researchers were able to identity as well as classify 100% of the 39 cases. The Umea University researchers proceeded with another follow up test using the same method and were able to detect the origin of tumors in cancer patients with breast, brain, lung, liver, and colon cancer with 71% accuracy. The study concluded that this new method of testing can easily replace the invasive cell tissue sampling in diagnosing cancers.

I found this article to be very interesting. I was surprised to learn that this new RNA test of blood platelets only requires one drop of blood. It’s fascinating that all it takes is one drop of blood to detect cancer, classify the type of cancer, and locate the location of the cancer. It was also interesting that the researchers were able to detect early stages of cancer in patients using this new blood test. I think that this blood test will help save many lives, especially since it has the “potential to improve early detection of cancer” as mentioned in the article, and therefore patients will be able to start treatment even sooner.

Original Article

A Blood Test Could Replace Biopsy for Cancer Diagnosis

Last week, Eric Lim made a presentation at the World Conference on Lung Cancer that could revolutionize the process of cancer diagnosis. By far the most popular and reliable method of testing for cancer has been the use of biopsies. While reliable, biopsies are both invasive and expensive. As of 2014, the average biopsy ran upwards of $14,000. To alleviate some of the issues presented by relying strictly on biopsies for cancer screening, Eric Lim presented a study using blood tests to detect cancer in the body. When cancer cells die, DNA is released into the bloodstream. The current blood test can detect three cancer-specific gene mutations in the blood. Because there are varying gene mutations for each type of cancer, multiple tests will have to be created in order to screen for more types of cancer. As of right now, these blood tests are almost 70% accurate in predicting the presence of cancer cells. Until this percentage is higher, blood tests will not be seen as an alternative to the traditional biopsy.

Considering that patients often have to wait to see a specialist for their biopsy, I think that the use of a  quick blood test to test for cancer cells can be an extraordinary finding. Even though these tests are not able to stand on their own in the scientific community, I can't imagine it being very long before more and more doctors are using this method as a preliminary cancer screening before jumping to more traditional methods.

The original link to this article can be found here.
A related article can be found here.

New Blood Test Shows Promise in Cancer Battles

           Liquid Biopsy could be the next big innovation in cancer technology. It is a blood test that finds tiny pieces of cancer DNA in a patient's blood.The goal is that the blood test will allow oncologists to figure out if a treatment is working. If it is, the continual monitoring of the treatment will be performed using weekly blood tests in case the cancer develops resistance. The current method is a traditional biopsy or CT scan, and these cannot be performed every week. With the liquid biopsy, treatments that are not working could be done away with, sparing patients from the side effects and allotting more time to try alternative. Dr. Jose Baselga believes that this could help cancer cells build resistance to ineffective treatment. The test is still new, so researchers advise that more evaluation of the test are needed. The idea originated from the idea that fetuses shed little pieces of DNA into the bloodstream of their mothers. All growing cells, even tumors, shed tiny DNA fragments. Patients can get a scan to see if a tumor is shrinking; however, it can take a long time before the tumor shows up smaller on the scan. The scan also shows the scars and connective tissue with the cancer, so sometimes doctors interpret the scan as the cancer being present when it is actually gone.
          Although this is a still a new test, I can see it becoming a crucial role in discovering cancer early on. The current methods have too much room for error and take up a lot of time. People with cancer do not have a lot of time.

Original: Link1
Supplemental: Link2

Predicting Breast Cancer

Researchers at the University of Copenhagen have determined that by analyzing a blood sample, it can be predicted if a woman will get breast cancer in the next two to five years. The method used in this research was a metabolic blood profile, which is able to predict the likelihood of developing breast cancer with a sensitivity of 80%. This method was found to be even more effective than a mammography, which can detect newly developed breast cancer with a sensitivity of 75%.

The research was based on a population study, where blood test data from 400 women who were healthy initially, but were diagnosed with breast cancer in the next 2-7 years was compared to data from 400 women who did not develop breast cancer.

Breast cancer is one of the most common forms cancer in women in the United States. This study is important because if breast cancer in women can be predicted, preventative measures can be taken, hopefully allowing for better treatment options.

My Article
Related Article

'Major Advance' a New Test for Down Syndrome

     A DNA-based blood test has been shown to be more effective in detecting Down syndrome in unborn children, in comparison to other screening methods.  The test called 'Major Advance' was shown to have perfect accuracy in all 38 women whose children inherited the disorder.  Standard screening methods only detected Down syndrome in 30 out of 38 mothers.  The blood test looks for patterns of various substances in the mothers blood that are associated with the chromosomal problems linked to Down syndrome.  Ultrasound examinations should still be conducted to see any indications of birth defects.
     The new clinical trial followed more than 15,000 women with an average age of 31.  It has been found that older women are at a higher risk for birth defects.  The DNA test also had a much lower rate of false-positive results.  Even though there are many positives to this new method, there are some drawbacks. It does not work properly for pregnant women who do not have enough fetal DNA floating in their bloodstream.  Obese women specifically fall into this category of little free floating fetal DNA.  The test can also overlook any other birth defects which traditional screening techniques would normally pick up.
     I feel that this new method could really be the new favorable way of detecting birth defects.  Most mothers do not want a needle in their uterus.  The blood test might be easier and more practical for detecting problems.


Original Article

A More Accurate Way for Detecting Down Syndrome

     Dr. Mary Norton, professor of clinical obstetrics and gynecology at the University of California-San Francisco, led the study revealing how blood tests are a more accurate way to detect two rarer chromosomal abnormalities - Edwards syndrome and Patau syndrome - than conventional techniques. According to Dr. Norton and colleagues, the cfDNA test has proved highly accurate in detecting Down syndrome in high-risk pregnant women, but its effectiveness among pregnant women at lower risk is unclear.
     This study involved 18,955 pregnant women between the ages of 30-35. Between the tenth and fourteenth week the women received both the first trimester combined test (conventional method) and the cfDNA test. Among the women, 38 cases of Down Syndrome were found, and the cfDNA test correctly identified all of them. The first trimester combined test only identified 3o cases. Researches also found that the cfDNA tested showed significantly fewer false-positive results than the first trimester combined test. The team also found the cfDNA test was more accurate than the standard test for identifying Edwards syndrome (trisomy 18) and Patau syndrome (trisomy 13). It identified nine out of ten cases of Edwards syndrome with 1 false positive, while standard screening identified eight cases with 49 false-positives. For Patau syndrome, 1 false-positive was given and there were 28 for standard screening. 
     This type of new screening using the cfDNA test is incredible and should become the regular screening process for every pregnant woman since it is more accurate. With this advancement, hopefully we will have better control and probability outcomes related to Down syndrome. 

Testing for Down Syndrome: DNA Blood Test is More Accurate than Standard Tests

Down syndrome is a genetic disorder than results from trisomy 21, meaning that there is an extra copy of chromosome 21. Unfortunately, this condition is not rare as 1 in 700 children are diagnosed with Down syndrome making it the most common genetic disorder. The classic characteristics exhibited by individuals with Down syndrome include flattened facial features, reduced muscle tone, upward slanting eyes, small hands, and small feet. As of now the prenatal test that screens for this condition involves measuring levels of proteins and hormones in the mother’s blood as well as having an ultrasound done in order to measure the amount of fluid accumulating around the baby’s neck. These two tests together are called the first trimester combined test. However, for high risk mothers the cell-free fetal DNA (cfDNA) test is used to test for Down syndrome. This test takes the small amount of fetal DNA floating in the mother’s blood and looks to see if trisomy 21 is present. It has been proven to be highly effective at detecting Down syndrome in women who are at high risk of having a child with the condition, but its effectiveness at diagnosing Down syndrome for lower risk women is unknown. 

A study to determine how effective the cfDNA test is compared to the older test was completed by researchers at UCSF. The study originally had 18,955 participants, but after the two tests (cfDNA test and the first trimester combined test) were administered to the participants, who were between 10-14 weeks pregnant, results and observations of pregnancy outcomes were only collected for 15,841 women.  

Of the 38 cases of Down syndrome found in these fetuses the cfDNA test identified 100% of them correctly, whereas the first trimester combined test only identified 30 of the 38 cases. The cfDNA test was also much better at producing less false positive results than the first trimester combined test. Another triumph of the cfDNA test was that it determined the presence of two other genetic disorders, Edwards syndrome and Patau syndrome more accurately than the regular test.

While this test may lead to fewer false positives and as a result less invasive procedures, which could cause miscarriages it also has drawbacks. In the study, this test was not able to be used for pregnant women that had immeasurable amounts of fetal DNA in their blood. Also, it some cases women’s results could not be interpreted. Some of these women who could not be evaluated may have had babies with Down syndrome. As a result, the detection rates of the cfDNA test may have been lowered if these women were included in the study.

I think that this is an interesting concept and that it could be useful in some cases. If it could lead to fewer invasive procedures and ultimately less miscarriages that would be great. However, it seems that it only works for some women and could only be used in certain situations. For the women that can use the test I think it is great because it seems to work much better than the traditional testing. I think more research needs to be done on this test to see if the same results are obtained.

Link to Article: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/291895.php 

Additional Link: http://www.ucsf.edu/news/2015/03/124336/blood-test-trumps-accuracy-standard-screening-detecting-down-syndrome-early 

Genetic "Switches" Linked to Breast Cancer in the Brain

 

        A genetic switch is a chemical mark that turn genes on or off. Researchers from the University of Wolverhampton discovered several genes with defective switches that are linked to breast cancer's spread to the brain. The researchers conducted their study by examining twenty-four breast cancers that had spread to the brain and samples from the original breast tumor. By comparing DNA methylation of the original breast cancer and the later developed brain tumor, the researchers narrowed down the 120 potential chemical switch candidates and dub a "signature" for the cancers that had spread. 

        The researchers were also able to find an early warning signal for tumors that may spread to the brain. Two genetic switches were found to be defective in the early development of the original breast cancer and these chemical marks are allowing scientist to develop a blood test that may detect these warnings before the disease spreads. 

        Dr. Mark Morris, author of the study and reader in Molecular Oncology at University of Wolverhampton, says "Each year the number of women whose breast cancer spreads to the brain is increasing. While we know many of the genetic changes behind breast cancer, we know very little about why the disease can spread to the brain. By identifying the genes that are switched off or on in breast cancer before they spread to the brain, we hope to be able to develop a blood test to spot this change.There's also potential for our findings to be used a starting point to develop treatmnets that might prevent the spread."

        In the UK, 50,000 women are diagnosed with breast cancer a year, while 11,600 die from the disease. Up to 30% of breast cancer will spread to the brain, often after the first tumor was already treated. Most women only survive up to seven months after the brain metastases has been diagnosed.

        I think what these researchers are doing is interesting. This is a very unique way of attempting to solve the problem of breast cancer spreading to the brain. Before this article, I did not even though that brain cancer in the brain was common. I believe the genetic switches of many different types of cancer should be studied, especially the more common ones. Genes seem to be very important in the development and spread of cancer. Finding unique ways to analyze cancerous genes will one day lead us to answers of the mysteries of cancer.

Main Article: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/11/141104194623.htm

Related Article: http://www.itv.com/news/central/2014-11-05/bbb/

Blood Test to Diagnose Major Depression in Adults

        Scientists are now able to diagnose adults with major depression by conducting a blood test. This blood test can also determine whether individuals that are diagnosed with depression will be able to benefit from cognitive-behavioral therapy, or whether another approach to dealing with depression is necessary. The results of the therapy will also be detectable through a follow-up blood test, to show if the therapy is actually helping those diagnosed with depression.

    This study was conducted with patients from Northwestern medical clinics. There were thirty-two patients that had already been diagnosed with depression from a clinician and thirty-two participants where were never depressed. Before cognitive-behavioral therapy had begun with depressed patients, all of the patients were given a blood test and when the results were examined, nine RNA markers in the blood of depressed participants were found to be substantially different than those in the blood of non-depressed participants. When new blood work was done for patients with depression, after being in therapy for eighteen weeks, it was discovered that subjects who were in remission from depression had changed RNA markers and those who were still depressed had markers that remained the same. 

    The pattern of the markers were also distinctly different between those who were benefited by the therapy and those were still considered depressed after the therapy. However, there were three markers that did not change at all in those that were depressed and were no longer considered depressed at the end of the study. Eva Redei, a professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Northwestern University, who also developed the blood test, argues that, "These three markers move us towards the ultimate goal of identifying predisposition to depression, even in the absence of a current depressive episode"[1]. Redei wants to further her research to determine if it is possible to tell the difference between major depression and bipolar depression using RNA blood markers. 

[1] Article: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/09/140917121229.htm

The Science Daily article can be found at: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/09/140917121229.htm 

The Full Journal Article: "Blood transcriptomic biomarkers in adult primary care patients with major depressive disorder undergoing cognitive behavioral therapy"