Tardigrades may hold clues to cancer care, study finds
The Brief
A protein from tardigrades, called Dsup, may shield healthy cells from radiation damage
Scientists used nanoparticles to deliver mRNA instructions for producing Dsup in mice
Treated cells showed less DNA breakage and no signs of protecting nearby tumor tissue
LOS ANGELES - Radiation therapy is a vital treatment for many cancer patients, but it often comes with severe side effects, especially when healthy tissues are damaged in the process.
For patients with head and neck or prostate cancer, radiation can inflame oral tissue or harm the rectum, making recovery especially difficult.
Now, scientists are turning to a surprising source for help: tardigrades — tiny, resilient animals known for surviving extreme environments, including radiation levels that would be lethal to most organisms.
The backstory
The research, supported by the National Institutes of Health, centers around a tardigrade protein called Dsup, short for "damage suppressor." This protein binds to DNA and helps prevent it from breaking — a key cause of side effects in radiation therapy.
In a study published February 26 in Nature Biomedical Engineering, researchers from MIT and the University of Iowa explored whether Dsup could be used to protect healthy human tissues. They developed nanoparticles that delivered messenger RNA (mRNA) instructions to produce Dsup in targeted cells.
In experiments on mice, Dsup production peaked around six hours after injection and faded after a few days. When healthy tissue was exposed to radiation similar to cancer treatment levels, mice treated with the Dsup-encoded nanoparticles had far less DNA damage than untreated ones.
Dig deeper
One major concern was whether Dsup might unintentionally shield cancer cells. However, researchers found the effects were localized — limited to the area where the nanoparticles were injected — reducing the risk that nearby tumor tissue would also be protected.
Still, this is an early-stage study. The findings are promising, but more research is needed to refine the approach and explore whether it can be used safely and effectively in human patients.
What they're saying
"Radiation is an important tool for treating all kinds of cancer, but the side effects caused by radiation-induced damage to healthy tissue can be severe enough to stop patients from completing the therapy," Dr. James Byrne of the University of Iowa told the NIH.
"This is an entirely novel approach for protecting healthy tissue and may eventually offer a way to optimize radiation therapy for patients while minimizing these debilitating side effects," Byrne added.
The Source
This report is based on findings published February 26, 2025, in Nature Biomedical Engineering by researchers from MIT and the University of Iowa, with support from the National Institutes of Health. The study focused on the Dsup protein found in tardigrades and its use in protecting healthy tissue from radiation damage using mRNA-loaded nanoparticles in mice. All experimental outcomes, quotes, and background are sourced directly from NIH reporting and the original research publication.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
19 hours ago
- Yahoo
Federal cuts force families to make difficult, and potentially deadly, choices
A mother rushes into the emergency department cradling her 6-month-old baby. He is lethargic, seizing and in critical condition. The cause? Severely low sodium levels in his blood — a result of formula diluted with extra water to make it last longer. With grocery prices climbing and her SNAP benefits running out before the end of the month, she felt she had no other choice. This story is not an outlier. Pediatric clinicians across Wisconsin are seeing the real and devastating consequences of policies that fail to prioritize the health and well-being of children and families. And now, the situation could get worse. The Trump Administration's proposed 'skinny' budget for Fiscal Year 2026 includes deep and dangerous cuts to federal programs that form the backbone of public health in our communities. These proposed reductions include: $18 billion from the National Institutes of Health – stalling critical pediatric research and innovation $3.5 billion from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention – compromising disease surveillance, immunization programs, and emergency response efforts $1.73 billion from the Health Resources and Services Administration – cutting access to essential primary and preventive care services for children and families $674 million from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services – threatening the Medicaid and CHIP programs that provide health coverage to nearly half of Wisconsin's children. Opinion: We asked readers about wake boats on Wisconsin lakes. Here's what you said. And as if that weren't enough, further reductions to SNAP and other nutrition support programs are also on the table. These aren't just numbers on a spreadsheet. These are lifelines. Vital services that help children survive and thrive. When families can't afford formula, when clinics lose funding for immunization programs, when children lose health coverage, the consequences are immediate and, in many cases, irreversible. As front-line providers, we witness this every day. We can do better. Our federal budget is a reflection of our national values. It should not balance its books on the backs of our youngest and most vulnerable. I implore Wisconsin's elected officials to reject this harmful budget proposal. Think of that infant in the emergency room. Think of the thousands of other children across our state whose health and future depend on robust public health infrastructure, access to care, and support for families in need. We urge lawmakers to work toward a bipartisan budget that invests in children, strengthens public health, and protects the building blocks of a healthy society. Wisconsin's children deserve every opportunity to grow up healthy and strong. Our chapter of the National Association of Pediatric Nurse Practitioners stands ready to partner in this effort. Let's move forward — not backward — when it comes to the health of our children. Christine Schindler is a critical care pediatric nurse practitioner at Children's WI, a clinical professor at Marquette University, and the President of the Wisconsin Chapter of Pediatric Nurse Practitioners. She has been caring for critically ill and injured children for almost 30 years. All opinions expressed are her own. This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Trump budget jeopardizes health of American children | Opinion
Chicago Tribune
21 hours ago
- Chicago Tribune
Worried Northwestern lab directors describe ‘bleak' atmosphere in wake of Trump research funding freeze
The Trump administration's freezing in April of $790 million in federal research funding for Northwestern University has left concerned lab directors without key grants from the National Institutes of Health and forced the university to spend millions to keep vital research afloat and to continue to pay graduate workers and scientists. Carole LaBonne, a professor of molecular biosciences at Northwestern, said the situation at the prominent research institution can only be described as 'bleak' as the halt in federal funds continues to send shockwaves across the Evanston campus. 'You're at risk of losing an entire next generation of scientists, and these are the researchers who are going to be driving tomorrow's discoveries and cures,' LaBonne told the Tribune. 'It has short-term impacts, it has long-term impacts — it's terrifying; it's completely senseless.' Northwestern officials did not confirm how much the university is spending to keep research going there, but LaBonne said that is widely known among the science faculty, who were recently notified by the dean of the Weinberg College of Arts and Sciences in a meeting that it is costing Northwestern more than $10 million a week. 'The university is working very hard to advocate on behalf of research and our researchers,' a Northwestern spokesperson said in a statement. 'Our lifesaving research improves our society and has a multibillion-dollar impact on our economy.' In recent letters to the campus community, Northwestern President Michael Schill and other administrators said the university has received about 100 stop-work orders, mostly Department of Defense-funded research projects, and about 50 grant terminations. In addition, officials said Northwestern researchers have not received payments for National Institutes of Health grants since March, signaling that those funds have been frozen, despite no official word from the Trump administration. They also wrote that the university would continue to fund research affected by stop-work orders and the federal funding freeze. 'This support is intended to keep these projects going until we have a better understanding of the funding landscape,' the officials wrote. 'We expect and hope to recoup the costs of this research once federal funding is restored. However, this commitment places significant financial stress on the University and is not a permanent solution.' LaBonne said the scientific community at Northwestern is living in 'existential dread' as the question of how the university can continue to sustain big-budget research without grant reimbursements looms large. 'Financially, you're going to cripple universities. And when you cripple universities, you're going to cripple not only our health and scientific discoveries in this country, but also our economy,' she said. 'The federal government depends on universities to conduct the research that keeps our nation healthy, safe and economically competitive.' Part of LaBonne's lab work at Northwestern touches on pediatric cancers, and NIH funding has historically fueled breakthroughs in cancer treatments. 'Forty years ago, more than 60% of children that were diagnosed with cancer would have died within five years of the diagnosis. Today, there's a 90% survival rate,' she said. For years, work in LaBonne's lab has centered on understanding the normal development of the neural crest — a stem cell population central to the evolution of the vertebrates — and understanding how cancer can result from the aberrant development of this cell type. Such research never ends, LaBonne said, adding that she fears that some long-standing research programs won't be sustainable for much longer with federal funding in limbo. Sadie Wignall, a molecular biosciences professor at Northwestern, agrees. 'There is a lot of anxiety and apprehension because of the uncertainty of the situation, and that uncertainty is what is very difficult to navigate,' said Wignall. 'Many research labs here have NIH funding. I run my lab entirely off NIH funding. Am I going to be able to continue to pay the staff in my lab? Am I going to be able to continue to take graduate students into my lab?' Two NIH grants pay the salaries of four doctoral students and two research scientists in the Wignall Lab, which is investigating the dynamics and mechanics of how reproductive cells divide. Wignall also directs the Interdisciplinary Biological Sciences Graduate Program, which trains graduate students to get postdoctorates in biomedical science on the Evanston campus. The funding freeze affects those early-career scientists, she said, explaining that students go through three 10-week lab rotations culminating in a match system. But uncertain funding means labs can't take new doctoral students to train them, which means fewer students get the opportunity to study and work at Northwestern's myriad research facilities. 'We're right at that point of the year for our first-year class where they've been rotating through different research labs to try to decide where they want to do their Ph.D. research, but with the funding freeze and canceled grants, there are now a lot of labs that thought they wanted to recruit a student this year and now can't,' Wignall said. 'If current first-years can't find a lab to join, they'll likely have to exit the Ph.D. program.' How federal funding works At the beginning of every grant year, the NIH or the National Science Foundation sends a Notice of Award detailing approval for a certain amount of spending in the next grant year, but a check isn't sent to Northwestern. It's essentially an 'IOU,' explained Wignall. 'So as I make purchases on my grant and as I pay salaries, Northwestern sends an invoice to the NIH that says, 'Professor Wignall has charged these approved funds, please reimburse us,'' she said. 'That usually happens about every two weeks — an invoice is sent for every NIH grant to the NIH, then they send a check to cover that spending. And then at the end of the year, just like you do in a bank account, you have your balance. You try to spend down to zero on approved funds.' Northwestern recently has been submitting those requests to the NIH, hoping that the money will flow again, but nothing has been reimbursed since late March. 'All of the labs that are doing research are basically accumulating debt because we're spending money that we were promised, but it's not being sent, and the university is the one on the hook for that money right now,' Wignall said. The Trump administration's decision to freeze nearly all of Northwestern's annual federal research funding stems from federal investigations into allegations of antisemitism and civil rights violations at the university amid the school's handling of pro-Palestinian demonstrations on campus. The Trump administration also froze $1 billion in federal funds for Cornell University and stripped more than $2 billion in federal grants from Harvard University and blocked its international student enrollment. The administration also has ordered U.S. embassies and consular sections to stop scheduling new interviews for student visa applicants. LaBonne and other academics are highly skeptical of the Trump administration's reasoning, particularly the claims of widespread antisemitism on campus. 'Just about everything they're doing was clearly laid out in the Heritage Foundation's Project 2025 and that happened before Oct. 7 — before the encampments on campus,' LaBonne said. 'None of this has to do with any of that. It's about hurting universities, and why you would want to do that when they're so centrally important to our scientific research enterprise and the economics of the U.S. is mind-blowing.' Wignall, like LaBonne and other lab directors, said she's 'extremely grateful' to the board of trustees and the administration for helping to support their research. LaBonne said support is crucial, not just for the research itself but also because research labs train scientists, and science majors at top research universities expect hands-on training in faculty labs. 'But all of us researchers understand that the university can't support us forever and at some point they're going to have to shut down some labs. It's very uncertain if my lab will be fine a month from now or two months from now,' Wignall added. A tiny pacemaker fit for newborn babies At Northwestern's Efimov Lab in Chicago, research associate Eric Rytkin is working with a team of graduate students on several projects, including the world's smallest pacemaker. Their study, published in the journal Nature, demonstrates that the device, which is smaller than a grain of rice, can be non-invasively placed in the body. And although it is suitable for hearts of all sizes, researchers say the pacemaker is particularly beneficial to the tiny, fragile hearts of newborn babies with congenital heart defects. The project was made possible through an NIH grant, Rytkin said, and a new grant was issued recently, but the award has yet to be distributed. Still the pacemaker project remains secure, Rytkin said, thanks to Northwestern and interest from the national scientific community. But another project — a device aimed at delivering painless shocks to defibrillate the heart — is being tabled. 'I can say that everything here boils down to the quality of life of patients. Of course there are lifesaving therapies, but whether these lifesaving therapies will be well tolerated by this person, and whether it will affect their physical or moral well-being of that person is equally as important as the years of life,' Rytkin said. Rytkin said while it's common in the industry to prioritize certain research projects over others, it isn't ideal to have to put ideas on the back burner. 'As researchers we would like to have academic freedom to explore other ideas which are not aimed at immediate gain or immediate profit, but may have and may result in wonderful spinoffs and technological models at a later date,' Rytkin said. 'And if the devices are getting translated, it's the most likely path that they're going to be acquired by some big corporation like Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Abbott — they're all American companies.' Lichao (James) Tang, a joint Ph.D. student who earned a master's in biomedical engineering from Northwestern University, performed surgeries on lab animals during the pacemaker development. Tang said the hope is for the pacemaker to be clinically tested in humans in five years, but that might now hinge on federal funding. NIH spending also supports Tang's salary. 'The freeze affects our overall lab budget, because we have a lot of money to spend, either to purchase research animals, or to purchase materials, to fabricate devices,' Tang said. 'We can only buy the things that are super necessary right now.' Like many of his colleagues involved in research labs, Tang has concerns about the future of science and research. 'I've been in the U.S. for a very long time, but prospective students will definitely have (to think about their choices). Without all the issues with federal funding and student visas, I think America would definitely be their top choice,' said Tang, who is from China. 'It's getting harder to even get a student visa right now. And even if you come here, say for a Ph.D. program where you have at least a five-year commitment, the current uncertainty would make students think, 'If I come here, what if my funding is not guaranteed?'' Attracting top talent from other countries The halt in student visa interviews and the funding freeze will make it much more difficult for the U.S. to attract top minds from around the world, experts say. 'The reality is that there is a race for global talent around the world,' said Fanta Aw, executive director and CEO of NAFSA: Association of International Educators. 'The truth of the matter is, international students are going into fields like STEM that are in very high demand, but where there's a massive skill gap that exists in this country. These students are playing a very critical role in filling this gap that we're seeing.' A recent NAFSA breakdown looks at the national and state benefits from international students and how much money they've contributed to universities and colleges. According to the data, international students at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign have contributed $567.5 million to the local economy and supported 6,158 jobs; at the University of Chicago, $428.1 million and 4,965 jobs; at Northwestern, $323.7 million and 3,573 jobs; and the University of Illinois Chicago, $184.9 million and 1,886 jobs. LaBonne said the cuts are detrimental to many sectors of the U.S. 'The government doesn't fund university labs to help universities' bottom line — it funds the best ideas and people to meet national priorities,' she said. 'The resulting discoveries spill over to benefit all of society: new medicines, new companies, new military capabilities. This has been called one of the most productive partnerships in American history.' Academics have long argued that federally funded technologies like the revolutionary-gene editing tool CRISPR, CAR-T Therapy for cancer, vaccines and research unlocking treatments for diseases such as ALS and Alzheimer's are solid arguments for why Congress and the White House should ensure consistent and robust funding for science. LaBonne said the funding decreases touch virtually every area of science and goes far beyond the diversity, equity and inclusion programs the Trump administration wants to cut. An April executive order from the Trump administration mandated the elimination of DEI-related programs in federal agencies, resulting in the NSF canceling hundreds of project grants at universities. In February, U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz published a list identifying more than a third of the NSF grants that were being terminated, of which a handful were Northwestern grants. In a statement, the NSF said it has undertaken a review of its award portfolio. 'The agency has determined that termination of certain awards is necessary because they are not in alignment with current NSF priorities,' NSF officials said. On its website, the NSF said it is canceling awards that are not in line with its priorities, including those focused on DEI, environmental justice and 'misinformation/disinformation.' According to Grant Watch — a website that tracks the termination of scientific research grants under the Trump administration — more than 20 NIH grants related to research into HIV/AIDS, child development, substance use, vaccine hesitancy in Black communities, family planning and more were canceled at Northwestern. Lab directors at Northwestern noted there's a rigorous process for procuring federal grants each submission cycle. After a proposal is submitted, 20 to 30 scientists from across the country with subject matter expertise review the proposal and give them scores. Months later, another advisory council approves the recommendations and greenlights a federal grant. 'This is not easy money; this is highly competitive for the best ideas and the best processes,' LaBonne added. Wignall, who's said she's trying to stay positive despite the chaos, said the cost of stripping resources away from scientific research is insurmountable and will have an impact far beyond the current political situation. 'I think this is going to have a really chilling effect on future generations of students, because people will look at this career and say that science is not a safe career — It's too dependent on political whims,' Wignall said. 'Traditionally, science has been science. Support for science has been very bipartisan and we really hope that we can turn this around … otherwise we're really going to lose our excellence as a nation.'
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
We always joked dad looked nothing like his parents - then we found out why
Matthew's dad had brown eyes and black hair. His grandparents had piercing blue eyes. There was a running joke in his family that "dad looked nothing like his parents", the teacher from southern England says. It turned out there was a very good reason for this. Matthew's father had been swapped at birth in hospital nearly 80 years ago. He died late last year before learning the truth of his family history. Matthew - not his real name - contacted the BBC after we reported on the case of Susan, who received compensation from an NHS trust after a home DNA test revealed she had been accidentally switched for another baby in the 1950s. BBC News is now aware of five cases of babies swapped by mistake in maternity wards from the late 1940s to the 1960s. Lawyers say they expect more people to come forward driven by the increase in cheap genetic testing. During the pandemic, Matthew started looking for answers to niggling questions about his family history. He sent off a saliva sample in the post to be analysed. The genealogy company entered his record into its vast online database, allowing him to view other users whose DNA closely matched his own. "Half of the names I'd just never heard of," he says. "I thought, 'That's weird', and called my wife to tell her the old family joke might be true after all." Matthew then asked his dad to submit his own DNA sample, which confirmed he was even more closely related to the same group of mysterious family members. Matthew started exchanging messages with two women who the site suggested were his father's cousins. All were confused about how they could possibly be related. Working together, they eventually tracked down birth records from 1946, months after the end of World War Two. The documents showed that one day after his father was apparently born, another baby boy had been registered at the same hospital in east London. That boy had the same relatively unusual surname that appeared on the mystery branch of the family tree, a link later confirmed by birth certificates obtained by Matthew. It was a lightbulb moment. "I realised straight away what must have happened," he says. "The only explanation that made sense was that both babies got muddled up in hospital." Matthew and the two women managed to construct a brand new family tree based on all of his DNA matches. "I love a puzzle and I love understanding the past," he says. "I'm quite obsessive anyway, so I got into trying to reverse engineer what had happened." Before World War Two, most babies in the UK were born at home, or in nursing homes, attended by midwives and the family doctor. That started to change as the country prepared for the launch of the NHS in 1948, and very gradually, more babies were delivered in hospital, where newborns were typically removed for periods to be cared for in nurseries. "The baby would be taken away between feeds so that the mother could rest, and the baby could be watched by either a nursery nurse or midwife," says Terri Coates, a retired lecturer in midwifery, and former clinical adviser on BBC series Call The Midwife. "It may sound paternalistic, but midwives believed they were looking after mums and babies incredibly well." It was common for new mothers to be kept in hospital for between five and seven days, far longer than today. To identify newborns in the nursery, a card would be tied to the end of the cot with the baby's name, mother's name, the date and time of birth, and the baby's weight. "Where cots rather than babies were labelled, accidents could easily happen", says Ms Coates, who trained as a nurse herself in the 1970s and a midwife in 1981. "If there were two or more members of staff in the nursery feeding babies, for example, a baby could easily be put down in the wrong cot." By 1956, hospital births were becoming more common, and midwifery textbooks were recommending that a "wrist name-tape" or "string of lettered china beads" should be attached directly to the newborn. A decade later, by the mid-1960s, it was rare for babies to be removed from the delivery room without being individually labelled. Stories of babies being accidentally switched in hospital were very rare at the time, though more are now coming to light thanks to the boom in genetic testing and ancestry websites. The day after Jan Daly was born at a hospital in north London in 1951, her mother immediately complained that the baby she had been given was not hers. "She was really stressed and crying, but the nurses assured her she was wrong and the doctor was called in to try to calm her," Jan says. The staff only backed down when her mum told them she'd had a fast, unassisted delivery, and pointed out the clear forceps marks on the baby's head "I feel for the other mother who had been happily feeding me for two days and then had to give up one baby for another," she says. "There was never any apology, it was just 'one of those silly errors', but the trauma affected my mother for a long time." Matthew's father, an insurance agent from the Home Counties, was a keen amateur cyclist who spent his life following the local racing scene. He lived alone in retirement and over the last decade his health had been deteriorating. Matthew thought long and hard about telling him the truth about his family history but, in the end, decided against it. "I just felt my dad doesn't need this," he says. "He had lived 78 years in a type of ignorance, so it didn't feel right to share it with him." Matthew's father died last year without ever knowing he'd been celebrating his birthday a day early for the past eight decades. Since then, Matthew has driven to the West Country to meet his dad's genetic first cousin and her daughter for coffee. They all got on well, he says, sharing old photos and "filling in missing bits of family history". But Matthew has decided not to contact the man his father must have been swapped with as a baby, or his children – in part because they have not taken DNA tests themselves. "If you do a test by sending your saliva off, then there's an implicit understanding that you might find something that's a bit of a surprise," Matthew says. "Whereas with people who haven't, I'm still not sure if it's the right thing to reach out to them - I just don't think it's right to drop that bombshell." Woman contacted by stranger on DNA site - and the truth about her birth unravelled Swapped at birth: How two women discovered they weren't who they thought they were Canadians switched at birth get an apology 70 years on
