Here is the actual paper, with abstract:
<a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/nbt.4071" rel="nofollow">https://www.nature.com/articles/nbt.4071</a><p>Major things that are interesting just from the abstract:
1) their targeting dna aptamer binds to nucleolin (how this isn't binding to the nucleolin in normal cells is beyond my knowledge, but my guess is that the protein is expressed somewhere other than the nucleolus of the tumor cell).
2) Doesn't seem to affect mice without tumors, so a good thing?
Seems promising, though false positives for “looks like a tumor” might be problematic. I’m hopeful for something less barbaric than chemo and radiation. We’re truly in the Stone Ages around cancer treatments.
It's interesting that this nano-compound is made using self-assembly. What limits this process from producing other molecules? Could this be the beginning of the so-called "grey goo"? (<a href="http://amzn.to/2oG6mHR" rel="nofollow">http://amzn.to/2oG6mHR</a>)
Is this the same technique described in this old TED video?
<a href="https://www.ted.com/talks/paul_rothemund_details_dna_folding" rel="nofollow">https://www.ted.com/talks/paul_rothemund_details_dna_folding</a>
I wonder how much thrombin you need in order to overcome the negative feedback loop before you get the positive feedback loop of the blood clotting cascade?