Game-changing prostate cancer test, and magnetic turtles
In this edition of The Naked Scientists: A new screening test for prostate cancer that can, the inventors claim, accurately catch 96% of cases, and early. Also, why you might want to eschew artificial sweeteners: a new study suggests they can accelerate arterial disease. And, scientists show that turtles can sense magnetic fields to find their way around...
In this episode

01:06 - New multi-omic prostate cancer test 96% accurate
New multi-omic prostate cancer test 96% accurate
Chris Evans, EDX Medical
First this week, a potentially game changing prostate cancer screening test has been announced by a Cambridge-based company. Currently, there is no national screening programme for prostate cancer, despite it being the most commonly diagnosed cancer in England with more than 55,000 men diagnosed with it in 2023, Olympic cycling legend Chris Hoy among them. The new test uses a ‘multi-omics’ approach comprising the assessment of hundreds of biomarkers using an AI algorithm. I’ve been speaking to its creator, Professor Sir Chris Evans, from EDX Medical…
Chris E - It's a cancer that creeps up on men. 50,000 men get prostate cancer in the UK every year, 12,000 will die. 330,000 get it in Europe, 80,000 die. So it's a very serious problem for men between the ages of 45 and 85.
Chris S - But, diagnostically, what's the challenge? Because we do have ways to test for prostate cancer.
Chris E - The challenge we've got is that PSA is the main test. It's a single protein, a single biomarker, and it's about 43% accurate. And if its level is high, then you are referred on for an MRI, which of course is far more expensive and time-consuming, and you may be referred on for a biopsy. And that's based on the high PSA score. If it's a low PSA score, then you are not referred on because you are considered to be safe. And the problem there is that 14% of all low PSA score men can go on to get aggressive forms of prostate cancer. They don't know about it.
Chris S - But equally, we've got people who are getting a high level, and it isn't cancer at all, so we're then spending a lot of money screening and investigating and panicking the life out of people who haven't got prostate cancer.
Chris E - And that's about 70 odd percent of the men with high readings.
Chris S - What do you think you can do then to improve on our present situation?
Chris E - Our test has 100 biomarkers. It includes the PSA biomarker as one biomarker. So if the PSA, for example, is high, you have the rest of the 100-plus markers indicating whether or not cancer is highly likely to be present or it isn't. And it also indicates whether that cancer, if present, is likely to be slow-growing or very aggressive. And it also tells you whether you have hereditary genes increasing your risk of getting cancer in the prostate or not.
Chris S - In a nutshell then, you've got a large assemblage, 100-ish different markers, which are all associated with prostate cancer, and they give prognostic information about the likely outcome of a prostate cancer. When you bring all of those together, that paints a high-resolution picture of that person's situation, I presume.
Chris E - Exactly. It's a meta-analysis of all the biomarkers. They've been through tens and tens of thousands of prostate samples, and the algorithm that we've developed actually produces a very accurate reading and analysis of all of that data, which gives you the accuracy level above 96% that we've observed time and time again with samples in our own laboratories.
Chris S - PSA then, mid-40s in terms of accuracy, this is in the high 90s in terms of accuracy. So that is what you would describe an industry then as a potential game-changer, isn't it?
Chris E - Yes, that's why we think it is a game-changer. Obviously without going into prices, there's a difference between the cost of measuring one thing versus the cost of measuring 100 things. But the accuracy of 43% will compare to an ultimate accuracy of maybe between 96% and 99%.
Chris S - One of the most crucial things about any cancer is early detection, because that does literally make the difference between something potentially curative and something that you're going to live with rather than be able to get rid of. Do you think you can bring forward the pickup so a person would be detected earlier, and therefore their disease is almost certainly going to be more amenable to curative treatment with this?
Chris E - Yes, our test, for a number of reasons, has a very high sensitivity as well as specificity. We've already seen that we can pick up very early stage prostate cancers, and I think that is crucial because the treatment prognosis is excellent if you can catch these things early, and we can characterise the cancer from our test data as well. So we can help the MRI. The MRI scan that you will do shows you where it is, how big it is, its position in case you want to go in and do surgery later. But we produce a lot of genetic, genomic, proteomic data for that clinician before he even starts.
Chris S - And with that rich supply of data, can you feed it back in on itself so the machine is in a position to learn from its own activity? Because the surgeons now who are operating with robots are now training other surgeons using robotic data collected from other surgeons, for example, but equally we're training computer programs with the outcome of other computer programmes. Can you do the same thing and make your algorithm even better?
Chris E - Yes, we have already done that. This is a full AI-driven algorithm. Not only are we feeding the blood in and the urine in and looking at all of the markers and all of their ratios and all of their levels and their presence, we're feeding in what we call phenotypic variables; your age, the ethnicity of the individual, the size, obesity, family history, lifestyle, diet, alcohol, smoking, symptoms, all of that information is fed in and that's quite important because these things skew the accuracy of what's going to come out the other end as well. So we're combining very advanced biochemistry with all of what we call the phenotypic characteristics, into the algorithm, and it's learning all of the time it's improving. So we’re very optimistic actually about the ultimate outcome from this little test.
Chris S - Is it ready to go? As in, if I wanted to screen myself tomorrow, can I commission this test or is it somewhere yet down the track before we're in a position to use this commercially?
Chris E - No, you can't commission the test now because we will run for the next several months our final lap of validation studies where we will use different banks of prostate samples and we will look at a lot of different variables, just stress testing our own system. Then we will submit all of that information and data to the regulators, the MHRA, the FDA, etc. to get approval. So within, we expect about 12 months, we would hope to then launch the product into the marketplace.

08:13 - Aspartame sweetener linked to vascular disease in mice
Aspartame sweetener linked to vascular disease in mice
Yihai Cao, Karolinska Institute
Artificial sweeteners have promised to be a guilt-free way to indulge a sweet tooth without the caloric consequences of added sugar. But a research project inspired by a student drinking a can of low-calorie fizzy drink and published this week in Cell Metabolism suggests sweeteners might not be a free lunch after all. Giving mice small - human relevant amounts - of one of the most popular artificial sweeteners, aspartame, led to accelerated rates of arterial disease in the animals. The team think that a high levels of insulin, provoked by the sweet taste, are behind the damaging effect. Yihai Cao is Professor of Vascular Biology at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden…
Yihai - This study was initiated from a can of diet soda. It has been estimated that in the United States, 60% of young people may consume these kinds of beverages. As a scientist, I supervise students. One of the students asked me for projects. He was holding a diet soda can. I said, what are you drinking? He said, I'm drinking a sugar-free beverage. I said, why don't you do a project like that? We have a lot of experimental mouse models, I said, why don't you get these smaller animals to drink this to see what happens to their body? So this is how it started.
Chris - What health impacts specifically were you hoping to probe with your mice drinking fizzy pop?
Yihai - My expertise is in studying blood vessels, cardiovascular disease, stroke, diabetes. So at that time we had a disease model called atherosclerosis. Within the large blood vessel, they form plugs. So I asked the students to let these mice consume artificial sweetener.
Chris - So you have mice that are prone to developing arterial disease like a human does. You feed those animals the same stuff that sweetens a sugar-free beverage. And then you're asking, does this have any impact on the progression of the vascular disease that these animals naturally develop?
Yihai - Exactly. So this is the first experiment we did.
Chris - And what sort of doses of the sweeteners were you administering? Because one criticism of experiments like this is we end up feeding kilogram quantities of things to tiny animals and it's not representative at all. So what was the dosing pattern that you exposed the animals to?
Yihai - So the dosing we used is calculated not based on the weight, how many grams, it's based on the sweetness. For example, aspartame is 200 times more sweet than sucrose. So we converted that formula to make it equivalent to what we consume in the sugar soda, for example.
Chris - And do the rodents like eating this? Will they actually consume this? And will they regularly consume it as though they were consuming with a similar pattern to a human using these sorts of foodstuffs?
Yihai - Mice, they like sweet things very much, even more than people. So if we allow them to drink themselves, they could drink all day long. That's maybe consuming too much. In order to give them a defined dose, we basically drop it on their face, and then they use their front paws to lick.
Chris - Okay, so they don't overdose on the sweetener. What happens though, when you look in the blood vessels, do you see a difference in the animals consuming the artificial sweetener compared to animals eating normal rodent chow?
Yihai - Yes, we saw, very surprisingly, arterial vessel damage is increased when they consume more aspartame.
Chris - When you say increased, is it increased by much, or is it very subtle? Is it a dramatic difference?
Yihai - It is statistically significant. Both the plug numbers and the plug size are increased.
Chris - And what do you think the mechanism is behind this? What's driving that?
Yihai - We think it's related to the sweet taste. So there is in the mouth, in the intestine, sweet taste receptors. So when we eat something sweet, our body can release insulin. Insulin, after consumption of aspartame, is increased in the blood. The first organ in our body that could sense this is the blood vessel. On the vessel wall, the inside cells are called endothelial cells. So what is the insulin impact on these endothelial cells? Very surprisingly, one of the most upregulated genes is the inflammatory protein. This inflammatory protein can cause inflammation in the blood vessels.
Chris - Putting all that together then, if you ingest these chemicals, although there is no sugar there, they fool the body into thinking it's had a massive dose of sugar, which then drives a massive release of insulin, to which blood vessels are highly sensitised. And when the insulin activates them, it produces an inflammatory signal, and you're contending that that inflammation is upstream of forming these deposits in the wall of the arteries that will eventually turn into arterial disease.
Yihai - Correct. What you said is absolutely correct.
Chris - Do we think this is physiologically relevant in humans? Are we as humans, in striving for a healthier lifestyle and drinking these diet beverages then, and eating diet foods and snacks that are full of this stuff, are we actually doing ourselves more harm than if we just ate a sweet cake?
Yihai - In our study, we did not do human studies, but there's no reason we can see that it would not happen in humans in this way. So I would expect that a similar mechanism may exist in humans as well. I would not recommend myself to consume this.
Chris - I was just going to say, has everyone in your group given up drinking artificially sweetened beverages? Do you not have lab meetings where there's no fizzy pop with aspartame in it anymore?
Yihai - One of the students usually consumes many kinds each day, but he stopped completely after doing this project.

16:08 - Fossils contain original dinosaur tissue
Fossils contain original dinosaur tissue
Steve Taylor, University of Liverpool
For many years, it was widely believed that fossils no longer contain their original organic molecules, because the fossilisation process destroys them, replacing the preserved tissue with a mineral replica. But in recent years, scientists have begun to question this dogma, with a steady trickle of papers purporting to see blood cells and other tissues in dinosaur bones, and even the signature of a blood meal in a mosquito that buzzed about millions of years ago. Now, scientists at the University of Liverpool have used a range of techniques to produce the best evidence yet that ancient fossils genuinely do still preserve these original organic materials. Steve Taylor…
Steve - We noticed that there was a controversy in the literature about soft tissue, what's soft tissue? Soft tissue is the squishy bits that should be gone, but they're not, so organic materials. And in particular, the one that intrigued us looking at bones was collagen, because a very high proportion of all animal and human bone is collagen. So the question we were asking is, is the collagen that's being reported in old bones, archaeological and paleoanthropological, is that genuine? Is it produced by microbes or is it contamination? One of the researchers in the lab or some other way.
Chris - Of course, you had some kind of headstart that this might be the case, because I remember going to a meeting in America about 20 years ago, and I met this woman, Mary Schweitzer, and she said she'd had an accident in her lab one day. It was sort of her Alexander Fleming moment where he went away, left his Petri dishes and discovered penicillin because everything grew where it shouldn't. She left some samples in cleaning solution for longer than she should have done, came back and thought, oh dear, they'll be destroyed and found there might be things that are cells in there when she looked. And people rolled their eyes and laughed at the time, but it looks like then she might've been right.
Steve - Absolutely. Mary Schweitzer, she's a great scientist. And a very determined lady, of course, because it was all the, a lot of the male colleagues who said she'd made a mistake. Well, she hadn't. And she was able to do test after test to vindicate her original conclusion that these were in fact genuine organic molecules and so on. I think it was blood cells that she first claimed to have found. But yet Mary was right, did a great job. And we referenced a number of her papers in our work.
Chris - What have you done here then to build on this and strengthen the argument and perhaps lay some of those other uncertainties to rest?
Steve - We brought together a novel combination of four analytical techniques, all of which are consistent with the idea that this is original organic material. The first one, we use laser light to look at the fossil and we find that there's organics there. That doesn't tell us that it's collagen, which is a protein that belongs to the bone. We use then what's called cross-polarised light. And what that does, it gives us a 2D scan or a 2D image of the fossil and shows actually the locations of faint traces of collagen. That does image collagen, not just organic, but it images collagen very well. Then we do what's called, it's an advanced mass spectrometry technique called bottom-up proteomics to actually get a fingerprint for the collagen and that matches collagen in modern bones. And our colleagues in the US at the University of California, Los Angeles, they have a technique of quantifying an amino acid called hydroxyproline, which is a unique collagen indicator The final part of work was done in Liverpool at the Center for Proteomics Research and they were able to sequence the collagen. Now this, it really is a smoking gun for collagen. And we were able to find that the collagen sequence that we find matched previously reported dinosaur collagen.
Chris - How far back in time have you gone? How old are the fossils you've looked at?
Steve - We started with medieval. We've gone back to Roman times, Ice Age and dinosaur and all of that work has been published. Our focus as mass spectrometrists has been upon the chemicals. What is actually there and how do we know? And so that's been our particular focus rather than anything else.
Chris - But the mere fact it's dinosaur means it's got to be at least 60 something million years old because the dinosaurs stopped being on Earth then, didn't they? So this shows that for very prolonged periods of time, the molecules that were once living, breathing dinosaurs, some of them are still there in what we used to think was just a lump of stone.
Steve - Well, that's the amazing conclusion that we get too, Chris. Yeah, these molecules have persisted throughout geological time.
Chris - It's not quite Michael Crichton's Jurassic Park yet, but it does take us a stage closer to experiencing and touching the real deal, I suppose, doesn't it? What are the implications of this? I mean, it's nice to know it's there, but can we learn things from the chemistry that we couldn't learn just from a stony replica?
Steve - Well, first of all, it does show the fantastic resolving power of modern mass spectrometric instruments, really. I mean, these are low levels of materials, low levels of collagen here. So it shows the fantastic resolving power of modern analytical techniques. And of course, they're always improving. And as they do improve, of course, we'll be able to look for other materials as well. And so there are other fragile chemicals within our bodies, within our bones, and we should be able to look for them. So it's possible. If the sequencing of dinosaur collagen is possible, then it raises the intriguing prospect. It's still a long way off of being able to sequence DNA. So that becomes a possibility and a subject of future work.

22:13 - Loggerhead turtles detect and remember magnetic fields
Loggerhead turtles detect and remember magnetic fields
Kayla Goforth, Texas A&M University
A new study has found that the loggerhead turtle can recognise and remember the magnetic signature of the Earth. They probably rely on this ability to navigate and recall the best places to find food. The discovery has just been published in the journal Nature, and the paper’s author is Texas A&M University’s Kayla Goforth…
Kayla - So I was investigating whether turtles are able to learn magnetic fields. We know that turtles have a magnetic map sense or a positional sense that they can use like a GPS to identify where they are and a compass sense, like a directional sense that tells them which direction to go. But what we didn't know is how they were getting back to these really specific places and whether or not they could learn specific magnetic fields with their magnetic map.
Chris - It's the distinction then, the difference between having a sort of magnetic chart in your head and knowing where you are in relation to the magnetic field versus knowing what direction you're heading in and then using separate memories to remember the chart and the layout of the bit of the sea that you're in. Is that the distinction here?
Kayla - Yeah, exactly. It's kind of like if we were walking down the street trying to get home, we might have a compass in our hand that's telling us we're going north. But if we don't know which direction our home is relative to that, then we would have no way to actually get home.
Chris - Could the turtles be doing both?
Kayla - Yeah. So we expect they are doing both. They're determining where they are and then using their compass to get back there.
Chris - And how did you test this out?
Kayla - We conditioned sea turtles, which is sort of like training sea turtles or when you train your dog, we conditioned them to tell the difference between one magnetic field in which they received food and one magnetic field in which they did not receive food. So every other day they would go into the field in which they received food and they would eat their food, which consisted of some squid and shrimp, which is a really high reward for them. And then on opposite days, they would experience a magnetic field in which they were not fed. And eventually we begin to see that they would do what we call the turtle dance in the magnetic field that they were fed in.
Chris - And that's the giveaway that they must be sensitive to the magnetic field because they were dancing when it was pointing one way, anticipating getting fed, than when the magnetic field was the other way.
Kayla - Yeah, exactly. So the turtle dance is a behaviour that they exhibit in captivity when they're expecting food. They stick their heads out of the water, they open their mouths, they start to move their flippers really rapidly and spin around. So it demonstrated to us that they could recognise that field as being associated with the food, whereas in the other food, they didn't do that behaviour quite as much.
Chris - And how do you think they're actually doing this? Do we have an insight as to how the turtles might be registering the magnetic field?
Kayla - We don't know how their magnetic map sense works, but I did some experiments that demonstrated that the map and compass sense are probably relying on two different mechanisms. So what we did to test this is we exposed the turtles in both their training assay to what's called radiofrequency fields. And these radiofrequency fields are expected to disrupt a type of magnetoreception that's called chemical magnetoreception. So chemical magnetoreception just says that complex chemical reactions might underlie magnetic sensing and give animals the ability to detect magnetic fields. So these radiofrequency fields had no effect on the turtle's ability to recognise the magnetic field that they received food in. But then we did a second experiment where we asked the turtles to orient in a specific direction in a magnetic field. And in this experiment, when the turtles were exposed to radiofrequency, they could no longer orient properly, meaning their compass was affected. So their compass probably relies on chemical magnetoreception, but the map, we don't know what that mechanism is yet.
Chris - Interesting. So they're using some kind of chemical way to detect what way they are oriented with respect to the Earth's magnetic field. And they're using some other mechanism to log the magnetic sense of where they are in relation to the world. So they've got two independent mechanisms going on potentially.
Kayla - Yes, that is what we suspect, kind of like how our eyes are for seeing and our nose is for smelling. Those are two distinct senses.
Chris - But we don't yet know where in the nervous system, presumably, that this kind of transduction to detect the field is happening.
Kayla - Correct. We have no idea. Magnetic fields can pass through all tissue, and so magnetic receptors that detect the magnetic fields could be anywhere in the body.
Chris - And does that have implications for conservation as well? Because do we use any of these same electromagnetic frequencies that are known via your experiments to disrupt the ability of the turtles to see, in inverted commas, magnetic fields?
Kayla - Yeah, it does have conservation implications. These radio frequency fields that disrupted the compass are actually produced by pretty much every electronic device that we use. So when turtles are coming to shore to lay their eggs or when the hatchlings are leaving the shore, they could be affected by radio frequency fields that are produced from the nearby houses or radio towers or cell phone towers. So that's something that we should be aware of.

27:33 - What are the chances I'd be here today without vaccines?
What are the chances I'd be here today without vaccines?
Dan writes in. James Tytko asked Helen Bedford, Professor of Children's Health at UCL, to help with the answer...
James - Thanks Dan. If neither you, your parents, nor your grandparents had received vaccinations, it’s safe to say you being here would be less likely, but it is difficult to quantify exactly by how much. Age-specific death rates in the UK fell considerably in the period before the widespread use of vaccines due to interventions such as clean drinking water, sanitation and improved diets. But vaccination has also played an important role in reducing deaths and serious illnesses in the UK from infectious diseases. Here to tell us more is Helen Bedford Professor of Children’s Health at UCL…
Helen - Thanks James. Vaccination is often described as a global health success story, and the figures show that clearly. Quite simply, they save millions of lives every year. As a result of vaccination, smallpox, which is estimated to have killed more than 300 million people in the 20th century alone, was eradicated in 1980. Between 2000-2023, the measles vaccine prevented 60 million deaths, mainly in young children.
It’s also important to remember that death, while obviously the most severe outcome of vaccine preventable infections, is not the only consequence of these diseases. Individuals can be left with serious long-term effects too. These include, intellectual impairment, seizure disorders, physical disabilities such as cerebral palsy, limb amputations, and sensory impairments such as vision and hearing.
James - And it’s not just those that get vaccinated that see the benefit, is it…
Helen - That’s right. If enough people in the population are vaccinated, immunity in the community (herd immunity), can provide protection for people who cannot be vaccinated due to their age or health status.
Despite these incredible advances, many children still do not have the benefit of vaccination due to difficulties with access, conflict, lack of funding, or strained health services. Every day, over 300 children die from measles – easily preventable with a cheap, effective and safe vaccine. This inequity disproportionately affects children in resource poor countries and not only places children at risk but has wider impacts on a country’s economy and growth.
James - Sobering stuff. So, Dan, without vaccinations, the probability of your existence would be reduced due to the cumulative risk of infectious diseases across previous generations. Diseases like smallpox, polio, measles, mumps, rubella, diphtheria, pertussis and tetanus were major causes of serious illness and sometimes death before the introduction of vaccines, and are now largely controlled or eradicated.
Comments
Add a comment