[HN Gopher] Ultrasound Cancer Treatment: Sound Waves Fight Tumors
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Ultrasound Cancer Treatment: Sound Waves Fight Tumors
        
       Author : rbanffy
       Score  : 114 points
       Date   : 2025-12-22 19:37 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (spectrum.ieee.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (spectrum.ieee.org)
        
       | darkerside wrote:
       | Dumb question, but isn't there a risk of spreading cancer causing
       | proteins throughout the body with this approach?
        
         | ramraj07 wrote:
         | Cancer isn't caused by proteins in the way you might think. Its
         | definitely not infectious at the protein level. You could ask
         | if this disruption spreads out cancer cells themselves and that
         | would be fair to ask. But then the cancer cells were already in
         | your body and were likely trying to migrate to other sites
         | anyway.
        
           | amelius wrote:
           | Ok, but this might stimulate migration further.
        
             | sowbug wrote:
             | The success of surgery to remove solid tumors usually
             | hinges on whether there are "clean margins," meaning they
             | were able to remove all the bad tissue and a little good
             | surrounding tissue just to be sure. It's likely that the
             | same principle applies using this new procedure: if you
             | blast the whole thing and trust the body to clean up the
             | mess, hopefully there won't be anything left to worry
             | about.
        
         | jjtheblunt wrote:
         | the article talks about this, the (too vaguely explained) tldr
         | is that pulverization allows neoantigens to be exposed to the
         | immune system rather than hidden within a tumor. i saw
         | elsewhere (weeks ago) an article that this worked excellently,
         | but this article seems to not reference it.
         | 
         | this is one such article:
         | 
         | https://viterbischool.usc.edu/news/2025/11/tricking-tumors-i...
        
         | ramoz wrote:
         | > Histotripsy generally seems to stimulate an immune response,
         | helping the body attack cancer cells that weren't targeted
         | directly by ultrasound. The mechanical destruction of tumors
         | likely leaves behind recognizable traces of cancer proteins
         | that help the immune system learn to identify and destroy
         | similar cells elsewhere in the body, explains Wood. Researchers
         | are now exploring ways to pair histotripsy with immunotherapy
         | to amplify that effect.
        
       | 0xWTF wrote:
       | Histotripsy means "cell pulverizing". We know disruption
       | (pulverization or otherwise) of a tumor bed tends to incite a
       | local inflammatory reaction, and a brisk inflammatory reaction
       | seems to correlate with survival. So the idea here seems to be an
       | extension of high energy ultrasound methods developed for
       | lithotripsy (breaking up kidney stones) to disrupt tumor beds.
       | Not something I'd want for a pre-cancerous lesion, but if it's
       | stage 4 liver mets ... sure. Have at it.
        
       | melling wrote:
       | The machine has been available for a couple years to treat liver
       | tumors. It's available in several US cities but not widely
       | available. It uses cavitation to destroy the tumor.
       | 
       | https://www.mdanderson.org/cancerwise/histotripsy-for-liver-...
        
       | jmward01 wrote:
       | The advancements in imaging, cheap intelligence and non-invasive
       | (mostly) tools like this are amazing. I can easily see a future
       | where we can scan, and analyze, every cell in a body and then
       | selectively manipulate them to achieve the desired effect. I
       | doubt we are actually that far away actually.
        
       | jtbaker wrote:
       | As someone who was recently diagnosed and treated for Uveal
       | Melanoma (get your annual eye exam and retinal scans!), and
       | occasionally struggling with some intrusive thoughts about the
       | potential for liver mets, reading about this treatment brought me
       | so much joy. Bless Zhen Xu!
        
         | moralestapia wrote:
         | Hey, I'm curious, did you have symptoms or did you just find it
         | by chance?
        
           | jtbaker wrote:
           | no symptoms. first identified the lesion a few years back and
           | it hadn't changed over a few subsequent appointments. exam
           | this year, it had grown a small amount 5mmx5mm to 6mmx8mm -
           | still considered small, but the change was enough for the Drs
           | to recommend treatment. I have been treated by Dr. Dan
           | Gombos[1] at MD Anderson and received excellent care.
           | 
           | [1] https://faculty.mdanderson.org/profiles/dan_gombos.html
        
             | moralestapia wrote:
             | Interesting, thanks.
             | 
             | Best wishes!
        
       | CGMthrowaway wrote:
       | What are the chances that breaking up a tumor this way seeds
       | cancer elsewhere in the body? 2024 meta analysis of seeding I
       | didn't see ultrasound in there:
       | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39605885/
       | 
       | Here is a study on AEs specifically from this type of ultrasound:
       | https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...
       | 
       | Quote: "Cavitation detaches cancer cells/emboli from the primary
       | site and thereby releases them into the circulation, leading to
       | metastasis"
        
         | agumonkey wrote:
         | It would not be the first therapy that may promote spread while
         | curing the primary site. Hopefully there are measures to assess
         | the cost / benefits.
        
           | CGMthrowaway wrote:
           | For sure. Goes without saying in any cancer treatment that
           | cost/benefit is a prime consideration. Still, that will not
           | stop me from asking the question. You can't do that analysis
           | without the answers after all.
        
             | agumonkey wrote:
             | Stopping you wasn't my intent. I'm just a visitor sharing
             | some stuff.
             | 
             | If any medical professional could give answers that would
             | be neat.
        
         | jjtheblunt wrote:
         | > What are the chances that breaking up a tumor this way seeds
         | cancer elsewhere in the body?
         | 
         | that's discussed in the article
        
         | candiddevmike wrote:
         | > The mechanical destruction of tumors likely leaves behind
         | recognizable traces of cancer proteins that help the immune
         | system learn to identify and destroy similar cells elsewhere in
         | the body, explains Wood
         | 
         | Seems a little too speculatively worded, IMO.
        
           | flir wrote:
           | If it was true, couldn't you get the same effect by taking a
           | biopsy, fragmenting the cells, and injecting them back in?
           | Like a vaccination, in fact. Somebody must have studied that
           | approach already.
        
         | pedalpete wrote:
         | It seems they are initially focused on pancreatic cancer, which
         | has a very low survival rate ~14% [1].
         | 
         | In theory, this may mean that metastisizing this tumour could
         | destroy it in the pancreas, but allow the cells to spread to
         | more treatable locations?
         | 
         | 1 - https://www.canceraustralia.gov.au/cancer-
         | types/pancreatic-c...
        
           | cowsandmilk wrote:
           | ?? HistoSonics first target was the liver, second was kidney.
           | Pancreas is the third organ they've targeted.
        
         | adamredwoods wrote:
         | Chemo post-histrophy would remove any lingering cancer cells
         | effectively. Cancer cells need lots of fuel or they stop
         | replicating, and this is what traditional chemo is great at
         | stopping.
        
         | TaupeRanger wrote:
         | We simply won't know until they do the inevitable phase2/3
         | RCTs. They will need to show that this method helps people
         | survive longer or with better quality of life than the current
         | standard of care.
        
           | cowsandmilk wrote:
           | HistoSonics has studies published with 50 patients. Their
           | upcoming study with 5000 liver patients obviously will give
           | more information, but we already have some.
           | 
           | And with that said, these studies are more relevant than the
           | top of thread linking to a review from 2011 looking at papers
           | from 2005-2006 for ultrasound cavitation causing metastases.
        
       | mcbain wrote:
       | Previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45514378
        
       | cogman10 wrote:
       | Due to some family stuff, this is something I've been
       | investigating. My oncologist has said "this will probably be
       | standard care in a few years". The results and studies around
       | this have been excellent.
       | 
       | What this does better than pretty much anything else is it
       | isolates the destruction of cells to just the target. The liver
       | is a VERY "bleedy" organ. It has a ton of blood that flows
       | through it which makes surgery extra hard. In fact, the not this
       | surgery that's next best for our circumstances laparoscopic
       | through the arteries to drop a radioactive pellet in the center
       | of the cancer.
       | 
       | The non-invasive nature of this is going to be very good for the
       | future of cancer treatment. Minimizing scaring and damage to
       | tissue is the number 1 factor to better results.
       | 
       | The only reason my local oncologist does not have this machine is
       | they are still pretty pricey.
       | 
       | When I first learned about this, I thought it was pseudo-science
       | BS. It's crazy what can be done with just sound.
        
       | YossarianFrPrez wrote:
       | Per the article, this seems even better than the headline would
       | suggest:
       | 
       | > Histotripsy generally seems to stimulate an immune response,
       | helping the body attack cancer cells that weren't targeted
       | directly by ultrasound. The mechanical destruction of tumors
       | likely leaves behind recognizable traces of cancer proteins that
       | help the immune system learn to identify and destroy similar
       | cells elsewhere in the body, explains Wood. Researchers are now
       | exploring ways to pair histotripsy with immunotherapy to amplify
       | that effect.
        
       | chaboud wrote:
       | I had the opportunity to meet with folks from Histosonics at a
       | Canopy Cancer Collective (pancreas cancer focused group -
       | https://canopycancer.org/) annual meeting a couple of years ago.
       | They had shown very promising results (and approval) with liver
       | cancer, and the applicability to any soft-tissue openly-
       | addressable masses (e.g., not brains in skulls, not lungs full of
       | air) seemed very likely, based on the physics. (Note: I'm a
       | consumer electronics and ML engineer, not a medical devices
       | engineer).
       | 
       | I'm excited to see this option become more broadly available. The
       | ability to precisely target and illicit an inflammatory response
       | is impressive, and Whipples are no joke.
        
       | lostsock wrote:
       | The awesome "What's your problem" postcast had an episode with
       | the CEO of this company recently which I really enjoyed:
       | https://www.pushkin.fm/podcasts/whats-your-problem/using-sou...
        
       | jbverschoor wrote:
       | Does this work with lung cancer?
        
       | PaulHoule wrote:
       | In general there is a lot of work on ultrasound stimulation now,
       | some of it is scary in other ways:
       | 
       | https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-65080-9
       | 
       | which could imaginably lead to wireheading or something like
       | Niven's "tasp".
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-12-22 23:00 UTC)