Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

$5 device tests for breast cancer in under 5 seconds: study

studyfinds.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 137 posts

Re: $5 device tests for breast cancer in under 5 seconds: study

#11

Post by andrew_eu »

The publication is linked in the article [0]. Even if it's only for HER2 patients, even if it's only useful as a first-pass test, this is still great news.

The experimental design seems very small scale though. 17 cancer positive samples (of which only 1 was HER2 positive), 4 control. Since the strips are focused on HER2 detection I read this as "in 1 out of 1 samples, our test detected HER2 overexpression" but maybe I misread it.

[0] https://pubs.aip.org/avs/jvb/article/42/2/023202/3262988/Hig...

Re: $5 device tests for breast cancer in under 5 seconds: study

#12

Post by e63f67dd-065b »

Press release: https://publishing.aip.org/publications/latest-content/would...

Actual publication: https://pubs.aip.org/avs/jvb/article/42/2/023202/3262988/Hig...

Experiment size is literally N=21, with 4 healthy participants, 3 in-situ breast cancers, and 14 invasive breast cancers.

N=21 might as well be useless in my opinion. You can't draw any meaningful conclusions about statistical power of this test; if your priors were 10% for breast cancer, after taking this test, your posterior probably remains unchanged.

Re: $5 device tests for breast cancer in under 5 seconds: study

#14

Post by Aachen »

> employs paper test strips coated with specific antibodies. These antibodies interact with cancer biomarkers [from] a drop of saliva

> “[...] cost-effective, with the test strip costing just a few cents and the reusable circuit board priced at $5,” Wan says.

That is cool: the 5$ isn't even the cost of the test, it's the one-time cost of your lab equipment. Of course, per sibling comments, the efficacy has yet to be seen, but even a few percent more early detections due to frequent testing would be a win

Re: $5 device tests for breast cancer in under 5 seconds: study

#16

Post by rainbowzootsuit »

zacharyvoase wrote: post #10

> The study is published in the Journal of Vacuum Science & Technology B Dare I ask why?

Thin films grown in vacuums are how you get graphene layers and FETs that appear to be the basis of the technology here. Someone with a vacuum deposition system would be the prime candidate to develop a custom thin film to target adsorption of the molecules that they're trying to sense.

Re: $5 device tests for breast cancer in under 5 seconds: study

#17

Post by iandanforth »

Figures 3 and 5 from the paper (https://pubs.aip.org/avs/jvb/article/42/2/023202/3262988/Hig...) have overlap between all the groups. The same measured output could have come from any of the non-cancer, or known-cancer, participants. While the means of these groups look nicely separable, that overlap means there will be significant false positives or false negatives. So I'd label the studyfinds headline of this being 'accurate' to be false.

Re: $5 device tests for breast cancer in under 5 seconds: study

#19

Post by Ginger-Pickles »

shelkie wrote: post #13

Cool how they're using BNC connectors and ICs from the 1980's /s

First standout thing I noticed is the “patern generator” array of DIPs - admittedly without having dived into the paper, any answers from the hive mind what they’re doing?

Re: $5 device tests for breast cancer in under 5 seconds: study

#20

Post by adam_arthur »

deweller wrote: post #15

Would a US company have enough financial incentive to front the cost of FDA approval in the US? I'm guessing it is expensive to jump through all of the hoops. Without a patent, why would a company pay for this?

Usually with medical innovations, the idea is patented and the product is sold well above cost of production. e.g. this $5 device could be sold for $100 each... large profit margin.

If there is no patent, and no in-place infrastructure already producing the device, then yes, it's unlikely to see rapid scale up by manufacturers.

Though if it's really that cheap to produce, I'm sure it will come onto market in some form (whether through charitable foundations or otherwise). All assuming that the device is actually as efficacious as the study implies (with a small sample size).

Post reply on HN