This 15 y/o Kid Cured [Pancreatic] Cancer. What have you done lately?

[music2doc]

This 15 y/o figured out how to detect pancreatic cancer with an incredible degree of accuracy after being inspired by the death of a friend's father.

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9yuAhusVts[/YOUTUBE]

(If the YouTube video isn't working, click here.)

What have you done lately?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[MedPR]

This 15 y/o figured out how to detect pancreatic cancer with an incredible degree of accuracy after being inspired by the death of a friend's father.

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9yuAhusVts[/YOUTUBE]

What have you done lately?

cure != detect

Still cool though. Only problem is it's so cheap. Pharma will never go for it.

 

[Neuronette]

Please check the title of this thread....
What the boy did was pretty amazing. After 199 rejections, he found a lab that accepted his proposal.
But he did not "cure" pancreatic cancer... lol

 

[deleted393595]

This 15 y/o figured out how to detect pancreatic cancer with an incredible degree of accuracy after being inspired by the death of a friend's father.

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9yuAhusVts[/YOUTUBE]

(If the YouTube video isn't working, click here.)

What have you done lately?

1) Use the search feature. We've brought this topic up before.

2) He found a way to ID it, not cure it.

 

[MedPR]

Typically SDN is "silly pre-med, you know nothing. Love, med student". I like when the tables are turned once in a while.

 

[deleted393595]

Typically music2doc is "silly pre-med, you know nothing. Love, music2doc". I like when the tables are turned once in a while.

Fixed

 

[MedPR]

Fixed

oright. ty

 

[487806]

This 15 y/o figured out how to detect pancreatic cancer with an incredible degree of accuracy after being inspired by the death of a friend's father.

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9yuAhusVts[/YOUTUBE]

(If the YouTube video isn't working, click here.)

What have you done lately?

Jack's a smart guy. Also, cure isn't the same as detect, but it definitely helps the prognosis.

 

[RogueUnicorn]

Fixed

Strong like

 

[Lamel]

That's REALLY impressive. Props to him.

 

[cinamin]

This 15 y/o figured out how to detect pancreatic cancer with an incredible degree of accuracy after being inspired by the death of a friend's father.

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9yuAhusVts[/YOUTUBE]

(If the YouTube video isn't working, click here.)

What have you done lately?

why do you still post in the pre-med thread? does vcu not give you enough to do?

this story has already been discussed. also... you should already know this, but there is no "cure" for cancer. many go into remission and are survivors but by no means have they been cured of cancer.

 

[def1]

Interesting. I used to work on diagnostic paper devices in my old lab. Kind of wish I had stayed on longer now lol.

 

[45408]

While this kid is incredibly bright, he picked a disease that we really probably shouldn't be screening for, at least not yet. Detecting pancreatic CA is good, probably, but this is not even remotely in the same ballpark as curing it. I also can't find any information on the specificity of the test.

 

[487806]

While this kid is incredibly bright, he picked a disease that we really probably shouldn't be screening for, at least not yet. Detecting pancreatic CA is good, probably, but this is not even remotely in the same ballpark as curing it.

I know my noobism is showing, but what's wrong with screening pancreatic cancer early? I thought it has a low prognosis, so it's best to start early.

 

[thlaxer]

I know my noobism is showing, but what's wrong with screening pancreatic cancer early? I thought it has a low prognosis, so it's best to start early.

My guess is that you may do more harm than good on a population scale. A test with low specificity will produce many false positives, which would lead to more costly and invasive tests (in addition to unnecessary worry for the patient). Also, with pancreatic cancer being rare, I wonder what its PPV (likelihood that a "positive" result really indicates pancreatic cancer) would be even if the test had high specificity and sensitivity.. Interested to hear what more experienced people have to say on this as well.

 

[487806]

My guess is that you may do more harm than good on a population scale. A test with low specificity will produce many false positives, which would lead to more costly and invasive tests (in addition to unnecessary worry for the patient). Also, with pancreatic cancer being rare, I wonder what its PPV (likelihood that a "positive" result really indicates pancreatic cancer) would be even if the test had high specificity and sensitivity.. Interested to hear what more experienced people have to say on this as well.

I read somewhere that the test has a 90% accuracy? Although the chance of false positives makes sense.

 

[45408]

I know my noobism is showing, but what's wrong with screening pancreatic cancer early? I thought it has a low prognosis, so it's best to start early.

Can you cure it if you find it earlier? That's the important question. There's a 95% mortality rate within 5 years of diagnosis.

If you can't cure it by finding it early, then there's no point in finding it early. The reason we screen for colon cancer is that you can improve survival a great deal by removing a pre-malignant polyp or by finding a low-grade tumor before it spreads. Details - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Screening_(medicine)#Principles_of_screening

Plus, the only real option for treating pancreatic cancer is resecting it. Doing a polypectomy (colon) or lumpectomy (breast) is a chip shot. Doing a Whipple? Yeah, no.

I read somewhere that the test has a 90% accuracy? Although the chance of false positives makes sense.

what is 90% accuracy? sensitivity? specificity? neither?

 

[airplanes]

And when would you test? Pancreatic cancer sx are very vague and non-specific. I've seen patients who early on only noticed things like early satiety, occasional diarrhea, loss of appetite. Are all these people going to be buying test strips from the grocery store and testing themselves every time they feel bloated?

Initial workup for pancreatic cancer requires things like CT scans ($$ and radiation) and fancy MRI's called MRCP, endoscopic procedures like endoscopic ultrasounds and ERCPs to actually take chunk of tissue for pathological diagnosis ($$$$$). So if you have a false positive you can see where it starts to get real costly for all involved.

Pancreatic cancer is relatively rare, and if the masses start to buy strips and test themselves every day, even a 99.9% specificity means 1/1,000 will get a false positive. If millions of people were to start using this you could see a lot of people booking appointments and expensive work ups for their non-existent pancreatic cancer.

But seriously, great job by this kid. Brilliant idea that probably has a ton of potential, just not too many real world applications at the present time.

Can you cure it if you find it earlier? That's the important question.

Yup. And we won't know that until we start detecting and taking out early pancreatic malignancies and watching those patients for years and years.

 

[Doctor Strange]

"Shouldn't I be watching movies or playing video games?"

Yes.

 

[487806]

Can you cure it if you find it earlier? That's the important question. There's a 95% mortality rate within 5 years of diagnosis.

If you can't cure it by finding it early, then there's no point in finding it early. The reason we screen for colon cancer is that you can improve survival a great deal by removing a pre-malignant polyp or by finding a low-grade tumor before it spreads. Details - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Screening_(medicine)#Principles_of_screening

Plus, the only real option for treating pancreatic cancer is resecting it. Doing a polypectomy (colon) or lumpectomy (breast) is a chip shot. Doing a Whipple? Yeah, no.


what is 90% accuracy? sensitivity? specificity? neither?

Ah, makes sense. What about Gemcitabine? Does that help?

The test is over 90 percent accurate in detecting the presence of mesothelin.[1] According to Andraka, it is also 168 times faster, 26,000 times less expensive (costing around three cents), over 400 times more sensitive than the current diagnostic tests and only takes five minutes to run. He says the test is also effective for detecting ovarian and lung cancer, due to the same mesothelin biomarker they have in common

Physicians at the Virginia G. Piper Cancer Center at Scottsdale Healthcare were first to design a clinical trial to determine the safety, tolerability and effectiveness of nab-paclitaxel (Abraxane) in combination with the standard drug gemcitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. Results of that multicenter study chaired by Dr. Daniel Von Hoff were encouraging enough that it led to one of the largest international studies ever done in pancreatic cancer, with 861 patients. Full results are expected to be presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) 2013 Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium in Jan. 24-26 in San Francisco.

Once again, I have zero knowledge of this matter.

 

[airplanes]

Ah, makes sense. What about Gemcitabine? Does that help?

Once again, I have zero knowledge of this matter.

Think about it like other cancers we screen for like breast cancer or colon cancer. Find it early with mammograms/colonoscopy, remove it early, (hopefully) stop the spread.

That trial you quoted is for *advanced* pancreatic cancer, not early stage pancreatic CA. We need to know if finding and taking out early pancreatic cancer is even possible, and if it's effective.

Pancreatic cancer is pretty much the worst because the surrounding real estate comprises the liver, gallbladder, intestines and arteries and veins crucial to survival. On top of that, it's discovered late because the majority of it's symptoms are non-specific until it's too late.

If we can detect it early, but can't stop it from killing the patient, then --like Prowler said-- what's the point in detecting it early.

 

[alpinism]

My guess is that you may do more harm than good on a population scale. A test with low specificity will produce many false positives, which would lead to more costly and invasive tests (in addition to unnecessary worry for the patient). Also, with pancreatic cancer being rare, I wonder what its PPV (likelihood that a "positive" result really indicates pancreatic cancer) would be even if the test had high specificity and sensitivity.. Interested to hear what more experienced people have to say on this as well.

Exactly.

Essentially, screening for a disease as rare as pancreatic CA would do more harm than good. Even with 90% accuracy, the number of false positives and subsequent wasted money/time/resources spent on them would not justify detecting the few true cancers out there.

In addition, pancreatic CA is one of the most aggressive and least treatable cancers. Even with earlier detection, there might not be much we could do for many patients given an earlier diagnosis. In order to have a successful screening program, you need to have an easily accessible and effective treatment available. Currently, even after treatment, the 5 year survival rate for pancreatic CA is only about 5%

 

[dbeast]

First of all, I love this kid just from his willingness to share the most embarrassing photo ever as part of his presentation.

Also, people could be pretty stoked on its usefulness for lung and ovarian cancer which actually do show a benefit from early detection, and ovarian cancer doesn't have any great biomarkers yet. Sure pancreatic cancer sounds more badass, but this seems actually useful elsewhere.

 

[Shinobiz11]

"I did all my research on Google and Wikipedia."

My damn teachers have been holding back my potential all this time...

 

[def1]

Exactly.

Essentially, screening for a disease as rare as pancreatic CA would do more harm than good. Even with 90% accuracy, the number of false positives and subsequent wasted money/time/resources spent on them would not justify detecting the few true cancers out there.

In addition, pancreatic CA is one of the most aggressive and least treatable cancers. Even with earlier detection, there might not be much we could do for many patients given an earlier diagnosis. In order to have a successful screening program, you need to have an easily accessible and effective treatment available. Currently, even after treatment, the 5 year survival rate for pancreatic CA is only about 5%

False positives are high with almost all type of diagnostic testing though, especially involving cancer. And yes pancreatic cancer is rare but very fatal and the 4th leading cause of cancer related death in the US.

I think if its 90% specificity then thats very good and worth the extra screening that needs to be involved with it. This can initially be used for people with a history of pancreatic cancer in their families. If its 90% sensitivity though, and a low specificity then I agree it might do more harm then good.

I mean downs syndrome tests often have false positives, which can lead to unnecessary abortions or worry for the mother. But they are still a valuable test.

Also treatment is good when caught early. It involves surgery to remove the tumor or the entire pancreas. It usually diagnosed after spreading to other organs though, so surgery is no longer an option.

By the way, a recent olympic turned pro boxer, Omar Henry, died of pancreated cancer about a week ago. He literally went from being in tip top shape at the age of 25 fighting undefeated to dwindling down to 110 lbs and dying 3 months after diagnosis. This stuff is nasty and I think this test is very valuable.

 

[flodhi1]

why do you still post in the pre-med thread? does vcu not give you enough to do?

this story has already been discussed. also... you should already know this, but there is no "cure" for cancer. many go into remission and are survivors but by no means have they been cured of cancer.

?

Typically SDN is "silly pre-med, you know nothing. Love, med student". I like when the tables are turned once in a while.

and WTF are you talking about?

 

[Pattycake25]

Is there no way to incorporate this into normal labwork, so that physicians are the first to know? I recognize this leaves several of your concerns unanswered, but it would at least be practical to implement.

And when would you test? Pancreatic cancer sx are very vague and non-specific. I've seen patients who early on only noticed things like early satiety, occasional diarrhea, loss of appetite. Are all these people going to be buying test strips from the grocery store and testing themselves every time they feel bloated?

Initial workup for pancreatic cancer requires things like CT scans ($$ and radiation) and fancy MRI's called MRCP, endoscopic procedures like endoscopic ultrasounds and ERCPs to actually take chunk of tissue for pathological diagnosis ($$$$$). So if you have a false positive you can see where it starts to get real costly for all involved.

Pancreatic cancer is relatively rare, and if the masses start to buy strips and test themselves every day, even a 99.9% specificity means 1/1,000 will get a false positive. If millions of people were to start using this you could see a lot of people booking appointments and expensive work ups for their non-existent pancreatic cancer.

But seriously, great job by this kid. Brilliant idea that probably has a ton of potential, just not too many real world applications at the present time.



Yup. And we won't know that until we start detecting and taking out early pancreatic malignancies and watching those patients for years and years.

 

[SpecterGT260]

False positives are high with almost all type of diagnostic testing though, especially involving cancer. And yes pancreatic cancer is rare but very fatal and the 4th leading cause of cancer related death in the US.

I think if its 90% specificity then thats very good and worth the extra screening that needs to be involved with it. This can initially be used for people with a history of pancreatic cancer in their families. If its 90% sensitivity though, and a low specificity then I agree it might do more harm then good.

I mean downs syndrome tests often have false positives, which can lead to unnecessary abortions or worry for the mother. But they are still a valuable test.

Also treatment is good when caught early. It involves surgery to remove the tumor or the entire pancreas. It usually diagnosed after spreading to other organs though, so surgery is no longer an option.

By the way, a recent olympic turned pro boxer, Omar Henry, died of pancreated cancer about a week ago. He literally went from being in tip top shape at the age of 25 fighting undefeated to dwindling down to 110 lbs and dying 3 months after diagnosis. This stuff is nasty and I think this test is very valuable.

You have an exaggerated and overly restricted view of these concepts.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using SDN Mobile

 

[deleted393595]

And when would you test? Pancreatic cancer sx are very vague and non-specific. I've seen patients who early on only noticed things like early satiety, occasional diarrhea, loss of appetite. Are all these people going to be buying test strips from the grocery store and testing themselves every time they feel bloated?

Initial workup for pancreatic cancer requires things like CT scans ($$ and radiation) and fancy MRI's called MRCP, endoscopic procedures like endoscopic ultrasounds and ERCPs to actually take chunk of tissue for pathological diagnosis ($$$$$). So if you have a false positive you can see where it starts to get real costly for all involved.

Pancreatic cancer is relatively rare, and if the masses start to buy strips and test themselves every day, even a 99.9% specificity means 1/1,000 will get a false positive. If millions of people were to start using this you could see a lot of people booking appointments and expensive work ups for their non-existent pancreatic cancer.

But seriously, great job by this kid. Brilliant idea that probably has a ton of potential, just not too many real world applications at the present time.



Yup. And we won't know that until we start detecting and taking out early pancreatic malignancies and watching those patients for years and years.

True. The test might not be of much utility, but that kid probably learned a lot about the whole product development process through this, and if he's been able to pull something like this off at so young an age, I can't wait to see where he ends up 20 years from now.

 

[def1]

You have an exaggerated and overly restricted view of these concepts.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using SDN Mobile

In what way?

Mammograms have roughly the same specificity (95%) and are recommended for biennial screening or sometimes annual screening, even though these have false-positives which can lead to additional unnecessary testing.

I'm not saying that these diagnostic tests are perfect but imo are better than nothing.

If you're comment was in reference to treatment, I think I just phrased it badly. Pancreatic cancer treatment is not "good" in the sense it usually cures the patient, but the earlier the diagnoses the higher the percentage of 5 year survival rates is. Granted even at the earliest stage the survival rate is only around 14% but most people who don't get diagnosed til stage IV cancer die within a few months. Thats why I still consider early treatment a good option.

Also 5 year survival rates for stage I neuroendocrine tumors are 61% which I think is also definitely worth the risk of false positives, even if neuroendocrine tumors are an even rarer form of pancreatic cancer.

 

[KnuxNole]

What have I done lately? Watched basketball and the Walking Dead.

 

[911 Turbo]

You have an exaggerated and overly restricted view of these concepts.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using SDN Mobile

lolololol on hold

 

[IslandStyle808]

I read somewhere that the test has a 90% accuracy? Although the chance of false positives makes sense.

what is 90% accuracy? sensitivity? specificity? neither?

If he is saying false positives, most likely he means sensitivity.

 

[circulus vitios]

Am I supposed to feel guilty or motivated that I haven't found a way to detect pancreatic cancer? I really don't care.

 

[Medstart108]

Typically SDN is "silly pre-med, you know nothing. Love, med student". I like when the tables are turned once in a while.

Sort of off topic but MedPR weren't u pre-med before? When did you change to pre-podiatry?

 

[occams_razor]

as someone who had a family member die from pancreatic cancer this year, what he did is wonderful but (as others have already said) there is a HUGE difference between detecting and curing

 

[487806]

lolololol on hold

Interesting. Let's sit back and watch.

 

[Arbor Vitae]

How come this story resurrected itself and went viral again? First of all this kid did not cure anything, and his parents are a physician and an engineer. I'm pretty sure his parents helped him with this.

 

[487806]

How come this story resurrected itself and went viral again? First of all this kid did not cure anything, and his parents are a physician and an engineer. I'm pretty sure his parents helped him with this.

Ok... He also got help from his mentor at Hopkins. So, your point is...?

 

[Arbor Vitae]

Ok... He also got help from his mentor at Hopkins. So, your point is...?

I'm just saying that he got help, it wasn't like this kid as a freshman in high school just thought of this on his own. I just don't find it that incredible. If one parent is a physician and one is an engineer, and you have resources like John Hopkins mentors to assist you, then you are going to have a lot of influence to help you form ideas. If it was a kid coming from a low educated family and background it would be more interesting to me.

 

[487806]

I'm just saying that he got help, it wasn't like this kid as a freshman in high school just thought of this on his own. I just don't find it that incredible. If one parent is a physician and one is an engineer, and you have resources like John Hopkins mentors to assist you, then you are going to have a lot of influence to help you form ideas. If it was a kid coming from a low educated family and background it would be more interesting to me.

i'm just happy to see new scientific innovations regardless of the scientist's socioeconomic background

 

[Arbor Vitae]

i'm just happy to see new scientific innovations regardless of the scientist's socioeconomic background

It's cool, I just don't think that kid deserves as much credit as he's getting. In fact, the thing he made is pretty similar to devices diabetics use. All I'm saying is people give this kid way too much credit.