Category Archives: Genetic medicine

From 7% to nearly 9% of patients with advanced cancer were found to harbor a germline variant with targeted therapeutic actionability in the first study of its kind.

The study involved 11,974patients with various tumor types. All the patients underwent germline genetic testing from 2015 to 2019 at the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) in New York City, using the next-generation sequencing panel MSK-IMPACT.

This testing identified 2043 patients (17.1%) with variants in cancer predisposition genes, including 849 patients (7.1%) who had targetable genes by strict criteria and 1003 patients (8.6%) by less strict criteria.

"Of course, these numbers are not static," commented lead author Zsofia K. Stadler, MD, a medical oncologist at MSKCC. "And with the emergence of novel targeted treatments with new FDA indications, the therapeutic actionability of germline variants is likely to increase over time.

"Our study demonstrates the first comprehensive assessment of the clinical utility of germline alterations for therapeutic actionability in a population of patients with advanced cancer," she added.

Stadler presented the study results during a virtual scientific program of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) 2020.

Testing for somatic mutations is evolving as the standard of care in many cancer types, and somatic genomic testing is rapidly becoming an integral part of the regimen for patients with advanced disease. Some studies suggest that 9% to 11% of patients harbor actionable genetic alterations, as determined on the basis of tumor profiling.

"The take-home message from this is that now, more than ever before, germline testing is indicated for the selection of cancer treatment," said Erin Wysong Hofstatter, MD, from the Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, in a Highlights of the Day session.

Now, more than ever before, germline testing is indicated for the selection of cancer treatment. Dr Erin Wysong Hofstatter

An emerging indication for germline testing is the selection of treatment in the advanced setting, she noted. "And it is important to know your test. Remember that tumor sequencing is not a substitute for comprehensive germline testing."

For their study, Stadler and colleagues reviewed the medical records of patients with likely pathogenic/pathogenic germline (LP/P) alterations in genes that had known therapeutic targets so as to identify germline-targeted treatment either in a clinical or research setting.

"Since 2015, patients undergoing MSK-IMPACT may also choose to provide additional consent for secondary germline genetic analysis, wherein up to 88 genes known to be associated with cancer predisposition are analyzed," she said. "Likely pathogenic and pathogenic germline alterations identified are disclosed to the patient and treating physician via the Clinical Genetic Service."

A total of 2043 (17.1%) patients who harbored LP/P variants in a cancer predisposition gene were identified. Of these, 11% of patients harbored pathogenic alterations in high or moderate penetrance cancer predisposition genes. When the analysis was limited to genes with targeted therapeutic actionability, or what the authors defined as tier 1 and tier 2 genes, 7.1% of patients harbored a targetable pathogenic germline alteration.

BRCA alterations accounted for half (52%) of the findings, and 20% were associated with Lynch syndrome.

The tier 2 genes, which included PALB2, ATM, RAD51C, and RAD51D, accounted for about a quarter of the findings. Hofstatter noted that, using strict criteria, 7.1% of patients were found to harbor a pathogenic alteration and a targetable gene. Using less stringent criteria, additional tier 3 genes and additional genes associated with DNA homologous recombination repair brought the number up to 8.6%.

For determining therapeutic actionability, the strict criteria were used; 593 patients (4.95%) with recurrent or metastatic disease were identified. For these patients, consideration of a targeted therapy, either as part of standard care or as part of an investigation or research protocol, was important.

Of this group, 44% received therapy targeting the germline alteration. Regarding specific genes, 50% of BRCA1/2 carriers and 58% of Lynch syndrome patients received targeted treatment. With respect to tier 2 genes, 40% of patients with PALB2, 19% with ATM, and 37% with RAD51C or 51D received a PARP inhibitor.

Among patients with a BRCA1/2 mutation who received a PARP inhibitor, 55.1% had breast or ovarian cancer, and 44.8% had other tumor types, including pancreas, prostate, bile duct, gastric cancers. These patients received the drug in a research setting.

For patients with PALB2 alterations who received PARP inhibitors, 53.3% had breast or pancreas cancer, and 46.7% had cancer of the prostate, ovary, or an unknown primary.

The discussant for the paper, Funda Meric-Bernstam, MD, chair of the Department of Investigational Cancer Therapeutics at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, pointed out that most of the BRCA-positive patients had cancers traditionally associated with the mutation. "There were no patients with PTEN mutations treated, and interestingly, no patients with NF1 were treated," she said. "But actionability is evolving, as the MEK inhibitor selumitinib was recently approved for NF1."

Some questions remain unanswered, she noted, such as, "What percentage of patients undergoing tumor-normal testing signed a germline protocol?" and, "Does the population introduce a bias such as younger patients, family history, and so on?"

It is also unknown what percentage of germline alterations were known in comparison with those identified through tumor/normal testing. Also of importance is the fact that in this study, the results of germline testing were delivered in an academic setting, she emphasized. "What if they were delivered elsewhere? What would be the impact of identifying these alterations in an environment with less access to trials?

"But to be fair, it is not easy to seek the germline mutations," Meric-Bernstam continued. "These studies were done under institutional review board protocols, and it is important to note that most profiling is done as standard of care without consenting and soliciting patient preference on the return of germline results."

An infrastructure is needed to return/counsel/offer cascade testing, and "analyses need to be facilitated to ensure that findings can be acted upon in a timely fashion," she added.

The study was supported by MSKCC internal funding. Stadler reports relationships (institutional) with Adverum, Alimera Sciences, Allergan, Biomarin, Fortress Biotech, Genentech/Roche, Novartis, Optos, Regeneron, Regenxbio, and Spark Therapeutics. Meric-Bernstram reports relationships with numerous pharmaceutical companies.

American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) 2020: Abstract 1500, presented May 30, 2020.

Follow Medscape Oncology on Twitter for more cancer news: @MedscapeOnc.

See the rest here:
Germline Testing In Advanced Cancer Can Lead to Targeted Tx - Medscape

The Forest Service is proposing to remove the prohibition against logging trees larger than 21 inches that grow in national forests on the eastside of the Cascades in Oregon. The probation was put into place when ecological studies demonstrated the critical importance of large-diameter old-growth trees to overall forest ecosystem function.

The Forest Service argues that it needs the flexibility to cut larger fir and other tree species competing with ponderosa pine to restore forest health. The agency suggests thinning the forests will enhance the resilience of the forest against the ravages of wildfire, bark beetles, and other sources of tree mortality.

The so-called need for restoration to what ails the forest by chainsaws medicine reflects the agencys Industrial Forestry Paradigm. By happy coincidence, such restoration happens to provide wood fiber to the timber industry, and typically at a loss to taxpayers.

One might assume that green and fast-growing trees are more desirable than dead or slow-growing trees. What the agency doesnt acknowledge due to its inherent Industrial Forestry bias is that healthy forest ecosystems require significant sources of tree mortality. The healthy forest that the Forest Service promotes is a degraded forest ecosystem.

Dead trees provide food and shelter to many plants and animals. By some estimates, more species depend on dead trees than live trees. These species live in mortal fear of green forests, which is the ultimate expression of the Industrial Forestry Paradigm.

Indeed, the second-highest biodiversity in forest ecosystems occurs after high severity wildfires kill most of all living trees.

However, due to the Industrial Forestry worldview bias of foresters and the Forest Service, that views any source of tree mortality as antithetical to forest health. Forest health is not the same as forest ecosystem health.

Logging does not restore forest ecosystems. It removes the snags and down wood that is critical wildlife habitat for many species of animals and plants. It removes carbon that is stored in those trees. It compacts soils and spread weeds. Logging roads fragment forest habitat and provide access for ORVs, hunters, and just more human disturbance for wildlife.

Worse for our forest ecosystems, thinning/logging can reduce the genetic diversity of our forest, eliminating, rather than enhancing, forest resilience. We know that some individual trees possess genetic traits that allow them to endure drought or resist bark beetles, and even some ability to survive some wildfires.

If foresters were concerned about forest ecosystem health, not just whether trees remained green until they were cut for lumber, they would welcome the wildfires, bark beetles, drought, and all the other sources of mortality that maintain healthy functioning forest ecosystems.

Yet the Forest Service continuously justifies timber cutting to restore forest health and resilience to the forest by trying to limit or exclude the very ecological processes like high severity wildfire, bark beetles, mistletoe, and other agents that sustain healthy forest ecosystems.

Allowing natural processes to thin the forest or select which trees have the best attributes to survive is how you preserve healthy forest ecosystems. Chainsaw medicine, the favored response of the timber industry for restoration, is not the solution; it is the problem.

See the original post:
The Problem With Chainsaw Medicine: the Forest Service's Move to Cut Oregon's Big Trees - CounterPunch

Based on market cap,CRISPR Therapeutics (NASDAQ:CRSP)ranks as the top biotech focused on developing CRISPR gene-editing therapies. It's more than 2 1/2 times the size ofEditas Medicine (NASDAQ:EDIT) and nearly four times larger thanIntellia Therapeutics (NASDAQ:NTLA).

But based on stock performance so far in 2020, Intellia wins the prize as the hottest CRISPR biotech stock. Its shares have soared more than 40%, thanks in large part to the expansion of its partnership with Regeneron.

While CRISPR Therapeutics and Intellia have captured investors' attention lately, Editas Medicine could now be the CRISPR stock to really watch. There are both near-term and long-term reasons why investors should keep their eyes on this company.

Image source: Getty Images.

In March, Editas and its partner Allerganannounced the dosing of the first patient in a phase 1/2 clinical study evaluating EDIT-101 in treating Leber congenital amaurosis type 10 (LCA10), an inherited form of blindness. Editas CEO Cynthia Collins called it "a truly historic event," as it wasthe world's first human study of anin vivo (inside the body) CRISPR gene-editing therapy.

Editas' Chief Scientific Officer Charlie Albright stated in the company's Q1 conference calllast month that the study "has been cleared to continue based on a review of safety data on the first patient." That's great news, especially considering the pioneering nature of the LCA10 therapy.

I don't necessarily look for this clinical trial to provide a big catalyst for Editas over the next few months, at least not directly. But it could give the biotech an indirect catalyst.

Editas Medicine's experience with EDIT-101 in targeting LCA10 has enabled it to move forward with EDIT-102, a CRISPR therapy targeting another genetic eye disease, Usher syndrome 2A. Allergan is currently reviewing a preclinical data package for the potential licensing of EDIT-102. Editas expects a decision from Allergan on exercising its option for EDIT-102 by the third quarter of 2020.

My hunch is that Allergan will decide to license EDIT-102 unless some safety issue emerges in the phase 1/2 study for EDIT-101. A positive decision would likely cause Editas' shares to jump.

CRISPR Therapeutics is the leader in developing a CRISPR therapy for treating rare blood diseases sickle cell disease and beta-thalassemia. The company and its partner, Vertex Pharmaceuticals, expect to report additional data from two phase 1/2 studies in progress evaluating CRISPR/Cas9 gene-editing therapy CTX001 later this year.

Editas is behind CRISPR Therapeutics right now. But I won't be surprised if Editas emerges as a winner in sickle cell disease and beta-thalassemia over the long term.

The company plans to file for FDA approval by the end of 2020 to begin clinical testing of EDIT-301 in treating sickle cell disease. EDIT-301 uses its proprietary enzyme Cas12a (also known as Cpf1) instead of Cas9, the enzyme most commonly used in CRISPR gene-editing therapies.

Editas thinks that EDIT-301 could be the best-in-class CRISPR therapy for treating both sickle cell disease and beta-thalassemia. One reason behind the biotech's confidence is that the therapy edits the HBG1 and HBG2 genes rather than theBCL11Ae gene targeted by CRISPR Therapeutics' CTX001. Editas believes that this difference will give EDIT-301 a better safety profile than CTX001 will have. The company also thinks that using Cas12a will lead to sustained higher fetal hemoglobin levels than using the Cas9 enzyme will.

There's another intriguing possibility for Editas Medicine. Its partner on EDIT-101, Allergan, was recently acquired by AbbVie (NYSE:ABBV). The primary reason for this deal was for AbbVie to reduce its dependence on Humira, which faces biosimilar competition in the U.S. beginning in 2023.

AbbVie has other arrows in its quiver for offsetting the inevitable loss of revenue from Humira -- notably including its new immunology drugs Rinvoq and Skyrizi. However, the closer the date approaches for Humira's U.S. sales decline, the more I suspect that AbbVie will be interested in making additional smaller deals to boost its top line.

If EDIT-101 is successful in phase 1 testing and advances to phase 2, Editas Medicine could very well be on AbbVie's acquisition radar. The biotech wouldn't be so expensive that it would require AbbVie to take on a lot of additional debt. Buying Editas could also boost AbbVie's oncology program since Editas has several preclinical programs that use CRISPR gene editing in cancer cell therapies.

To be sure, Editas Medicine is a speculative play. For that matter, so are CRISPR Therapeutics and Intellia Therapeutics. All of these biotech stocks face significant risks that their gene-editing therapies won't work or won't be safe. But the possibility of near-term catalysts and the tremendous long-term potential for Editas make this CRISPR biotech one for investors to closely watch.

Read more here:
Why Editas Medicine Is Now the CRISPR Stock to Really Watch - Motley Fool

Scientists at the Hotchkiss Brain Institute (HBI), Alberta Childrens Hospital Research Institute (ACHRI), and Owerko Centre at UCalgarys Cumming School of Medicine (CSM) have made a breakthrough discovery that could lead to treatment of Fragile X syndrome (FXS), the leading genetic cause of Autism Spectrum Disorder. The study, involving mouse models, shows promise of translating to treatment for people diagnosed with FXS.

FXS causes intellectual disabilities and hyperactive behaviour, usually more commonly seen in males than females. Children and adults with FXS are missing a protein vital to brain development called FMRP. Among other functions, FMRP helps develop synapses between neurons in the brain.

Dr. Raymond W. Turner, PhD, and members of his study team including Drs. Xiaoqin Zhan, PhD, Hadhimulya Asmara, PhD, and Ning Cheng, PhD, made the discovery while studying ion channels in the brain special proteins that conduct currents through cells, enabling communication within the brain.

If I had to make an analogy, it might be akin to insulin and diabetes. With FXS, individuals are missing this protein lets try putting it back in, says Turner, study lead, and professor in the departments of Cell Biology and Anatomy, and Physiology and Pharmacology at the CSM. In 30 minutes, the protein distributed throughout the brainand accomplished what its supposed to do at the single-cell level.

Unlike injected insulin, which helps someone with diabetes control their blood sugar for a few hours, the FMRP injection helps restore protein levels in the cerebellum and brain for up to one day after the injection. Hyperactivity was reduced for almost 24 hours, says Zhan, a postdoctoral scholar in the Turner lab.

We did one injection and we tested for it one day later, and three key proteins that are known to be in Fragile X were still at restored normal levels.

In other, unsuccessful attempts to inject mouse models with FMRP to mitigate FXS, scientists used the entire molecule. But Turner and his colleagues used a fragment of FMRP which was able to cross the blood-brain barrier.

Its not a full FMRP molecule at all but rather a fragment with important structural features and functional components that are active in doing things like controlling ion channels or the levels of other proteins, says Cheng, a research associate in the Turner lab.

Extensive FMRP expression in normal brain (A) is missing in FMRP knockout mice (B) but restored one hour after tat-FMRP injection (C).

Turner lab

In the next phase, the researchers will investigate using other parts of the FMRP molecule to mitigate cognitive disorders associated with FXS. Unlike a lot of drug therapies where you hope you can get your drug to one specific group of cells, FMRP is expressed in just about every cell in the brain, so an all-encompassing wide-based application is what you want, says Turner.

Beyond potential treatments for FXS, the research could help develop treatments to offset behavioural symptoms characteristic of other Autism Spectrum Disorders.

The findings are published in Nature Communications.

Funding for the study was provided by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), Alberta Children's Hospital Foundation through ACHRI, Simons Foundation Autism Research Initiative (SFARI) Explorer grant, and fellowship support from FRAXA and Fragile X Research Foundation of Canada, the HBI and CSM Postdoctoral Fellowship programs.

This technology has a patent through Innovate Calgary, the universitys knowledge transfer and business incubator centre, which continues to develop its commercial path through partnership/investment to advance this discovery as a viable treatment for patients.

The Turner lab works on the role of an ion channel complex they discovered that controls multiple functions in the cerebellum that led them to look at the effects of losing FMRP in the knockout mouse model. The reason replacing FMRP was so effective is that it turns out to be part of the very ion channel complex the lab has been studying for 10 years.

Led by theHotchkiss Brain Institute,Brain and Mental Healthis one of six research strategies guiding the University of Calgary toward itsEyes Highgoals. The strategy provides a unifying direction for brain and mental health research at the university.

See the rest here:
Scientists discover breakthrough toward treatment of Fragile X syndrome the leading genetic cause of autism - UCalgary News

REHOVOT, Israel, June 3, 2020 /PRNewswire/ -- Evogene Ltd. (NASDAQ: EVGN) (TASE: EVGN.TA), a leading computational biology company targeting to revolutionize life-science product development across several market segments, announced today its participation in the CRISPR-IL consortium. The goal is to develop "Go-Genome", an artificial intelligence (AI) based, end-to-end system for genome-editing to be used in multi-species for pharma, agriculture, and aquaculture. Evogene's CSO, Dr. Eyal Emmanuel will serve as the Chairman of the consortium.

The CRISPR-IL consortium has been approved for 1.5 years by the Israeli Innovation Authority and may be extended to an additional 1.5 years. The consortium's total budget (for the first period) is approximately ILS 36 million (roughly $10 million), partially funded by a grant from the Israeli Innovation Authority. CRISPR-IL participants include leading companies, medical institutions, and academic institutions. Apart from Evogene, key participants include BTG Bio-technology General Israel, Colors Farm, Hazera Seeds, NRGene, Pluristem, Rahan Meristem Ltd., TargetGene; medical institutions: Sheba Medical Center, Schneider Children's Medical Center; and academia: Bar-Ilan University, Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, IDC Herzliya, Tel-Aviv University and the Weizmann Institute.

CRISPR is a genome-editing technology for detecting and modifying DNA sequences. It is used as a tool to enable precise genetic alterations without the introduction of foreign DNA. The technology enables the development of unique bio-based products and novel therapeutics while reducing the time and cost of development. Current CRISPR-based workflows target precise areas within the DNA, however, these workflows still face several challenges, which prevent more extensive use of this tool, including: (i) accidental off-target modification, (ii) inefficient modifications and (iii) inaccurate measuring tools to ascertain that the modification was effective as intended.

The CRISPR-IL consortium intends to develop an artificial intelligence-based system, "Go-Genome", providing users improved genome-editing workflows. The system aims to provide end-to-end solutions, from user interface to an accurate measurement tool. The system is expected to include the computational design of on-target DNA modification, with minimal accidental, off-target modifications, improve modification efficiency and provide an accurate measuring tool to ensure the desired modification was made. This system intends be designed to be effective in multi-species, including human, plant, and certain animal DNA applicable to market segments in pharma, agriculture and aquaculture.

Evogene's work in the consortium is expected to include the broadening of its artificial intelligence capabilities that are expected to extend the range of itsGENErator AIsolution (part of Evogene's CPB platform). Evogene'sGENErator AIsolution already includes computational capabilities directing "which"edit should be made to achieve a specific trait; and the capabilities developed within the framework of the consortium aim to improve"how"these edits are made.

Dr. Eyal Emmanuel, Chairman of the CRISPR-IL consortium and CSO of Evogene commented: "Our mission is to position Israel as a top technological hub for the use of AI in genome editing. The all-encompassing system the consortium aims to develop, is expected to expand the scope of Evogene's discovery and development offerings for genetic elements, including for its subsidiaries. We believe this is a unique opportunity for applying computational biology and artificial intelligence to genome editing. We are excited to be leading this effort through decoding biology."

Prof. Avraham A. Levy, Chairman of Evogene's Scientific Advisory Board and Dean of the Biochemistry faculty at the Weizmann Institute of Science commented:"The workplan proposed by Evogene within the CRISPIL consortium addresses important gaps in our scientific understanding of the CRISPR technology. Evogene's unique computational analytical tools, together with the data produced by the consortium, have the potential to enable a more effective utilization of genome editing in medicine and agriculture, paving the road for novel products and treatments."

About Evogene Ltd.:

Evogene (NASDAQ: EVGN, TASE: EVGN.TA) is a leading computational biology company targeting to revolutionize product development for life-science based industries, including human health, agriculture, and industrial applications. Incorporating a deep understanding of biology and leveraging Big Data and Artificial Intelligence, Evogene established its unique technology, the Computational Predictive Biology(CPB)platform. The CPB platform is designed to computationally discover and develop life-science products based on microbes, small molecules and genetic elements as the core components for such products. Evogene holds a number of subsidiaries utilizing theCPBplatform, for the development ofhuman microbiome-based therapeutics, medical cannabis, ag-biologicals, ag-chemicals, seed traits and ag-solutions for castor oil production.

For more information, please visitwww.evogene.com

Forward Looking Statements:

This press release contains "forward-looking statements" relating to future events. These statements may be identified by words such as "may", "could", "expects", "intends", "anticipates", "plans", "believes", "scheduled", "estimates" or words of similar meaning.For example, Evogene is using forward-looking statements in this press release when it discusses the end-to-end solutions provided by the system to be developed and the expansion of the Company's artificial intelligence capabilities and solutions.Such statements are based on current expectations, estimates, projections and assumptions, describe opinions about future events, involve certain risks and uncertainties which are difficult to predict and are not guarantees of future performance. Therefore, actual future results, performance or achievements of Evogene and its subsidiaries may differ materially from what is expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements due to a variety of factors, many of which are beyond the control of Evogene and its subsidiaries, including, without limitation, the global spread of COVID-19, or the Coronavirus, the various restrictions deriving therefrom and those risk factors contained in Evogene's reports filed with the applicable securities authorities. In addition, Evogene and its subsidiaries rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties to conduct certain activities, such as their field-trials and pre-clinical studies, and if these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, comply with regulatory requirements or meet expected deadlines (including as a result of the effect of the Coronavirus), Evogene and its subsidiaries may experience significant delays in the conduct of their activities. Evogene and its subsidiaries disclaim any obligation or commitment to update these forward-looking statements to reflect future events or developments or changes in expectations, estimates, projections and assumptions.

Evogene Investor Contact:

US Investor Relations:

Rivka Neufeld

Joseph Green

Investor Relations and Public Relations Manager

Edison Group

E: [emailprotected]

E: [emailprotected]

T: +972-8-931-1940

T: +1 646-653-7030

Laine Yonker

Edison Group

E: [emailprotected]

T: +1 646-653-7035

SOURCE Evogene

http://www.evogene.com/

See the original post:
Evogene to Participate in CRISPR-IL Consortium to Provide End-to-End Artificial Intelligence System for Genome-Editing - PRNewswire

The National Human Genome Research Institute definesgenomic medicine asan emerging medical discipline that involves using genomic information about an individual as part of their clinical care (e.g., fordiagnostic or therapeutic decision-making) and the health outcomes and policy implications of that clinical use. Genomic medicine is a type of precision medicine in which genomics, epigenomics and other related data is used to accurately aid in individual disease diagnosis. Genomic medicine has novel applications in the fields of oncology, pharmacology, rare and undiagnosed diseases, and infectious disease.Genomic medicine paves way for personalized medicine into clinics and has immense potential to reach the physicians and patients. Genomic medicine has been used for advanced sequencing in cancer pharmacogenomics, rare disorder diagnosis and for tracking of outbreaks of infectious diseases.

Get Free Sample Copy With Impact Analysis Of COVID-19 Of Market Report @https://www.persistencemarketresearch.com/samples/11323

Genomic Medicine Market: Drivers & Restraints

Backed by government investments in precision medicine initiatives such as a multimillion dollar investment by President Obama in January 2015 which aims to improve how to treat and prevent a disease by laying emphasis on its genetic makeup is expected to boost the market growth. Clinical validity and utility of genomic medicine tests is a major issue witnessed in the global market. Also, lack of awareness among healthcare professionals, sluggish adoption of genome medicine, fluctuating regulatory landscape are the factors which could hamper growth of the global genomic medicine market.

Genomic Medicine Market: Segmentation

The global genomic medicine market is classified on the basis of application type, end use and region.

Based on application, the global genomic medicine market is segmented into the following:

Based on end use, the global genomic medicine market is segmented into the following:

Genomic Medicine Market: Overview

Genomic medicine is gaining momentum with expanding applications ranging from risk assessment and diagnosis in healthy individuals to genome-based treatment for patients with complicated disorders. Oncology is a major application of genomics medicine during cancer screening process as diagnostics for genetic and genomic markers. Oncology segment is expected to account for a major share in the global genomic medicine market. Genomic medicine is increasingly being used not only for research purpose but also in clinical applications. In clinical applications, genomic medicine will potentially enhance patient care.

Genomic Medicine Market: Region wise Overview

Geographically, global Genomic Medicine market is classified into regions viz. North America, Latin America, Western Europe, Eastern Europe, Asia Pacific Excluding Japan (APEJ), Japan, Middle East and Africa (MEA). Owing to the presence of large number of academic as well as research institutions in the U.S. which are working on genomic medicine to discover next-generation genomic medicines, North America region is projected to lead the global genomic market in terms of value during the forecast period. Also, the presence of several universities offering educational programs coupled with opportunities in scientific research of genomic medicine in the North America and Europe is expected to have positive impact on the regional markets. The genomic medicine concept still in its nascent stage is yet to receive an impetus from the emerging market which are anticipated to hold smaller shares in the global market.

You Can Buy This PMR Healthcare Report From Here @https://www.persistencemarketresearch.com/checkout/11323

Genomic Medicine Market: Key Players

The key research institutes in global genomic medicine market are BioMed Central Ltd., Cleveland Clinic, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, The Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Center for Genomic Medicine to name a few. The focus of the top players will be on the identification of effective drug candidates particularly in cancer treatment based on the molecular structure of tumors.

The research report presents a comprehensive assessment of the market and contains thoughtful insights, facts, historical data, and statistically supported and industry-validated market data. It also contains projections using a suitable set of assumptions and methodologies. The research report provides analysis and information according to categories such as market segments, geographies, accessories and applications.

Read the original here:
Growth in Sales of Genomic Medicine Market to be Largely Driven by Rising Consumer Adoption - Cole of Duty

New York, June 04, 2020 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Reportlinker.com announces the release of the report "Global Tumor Genomics Market: Focus on Products, Techniques, Applications, End User, Cancer Type, 14 Countries Data, Industry Insights and Competitive Landscape - Analysis and Forecast, 2019-2028" - https://www.reportlinker.com/p05903975/?utm_source=GNW By Technique: Next Generation Sequencing Technique (NGS), Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR), Microarray, In-Situ Hybridization (ISH), Immunohistochemistry (ICH), Others (Mass Spectrometry and Flow Cytometry) By Application: Diagnostics and Monitoring, Drug Discovery and Development, and Biomarker Discovery By End User: Academics and Research Organizations, Hospitals and Ambulatory Clinics, Clinical and Diagnostic Laboratories, and Biotechnology and Pharmaceutical Company By Cancer Type: Leukemia, Breast Cancer, Melanoma, Colon Cancer, Lung Cancer, Prostate Cancer, Head and Neck Cancer, and Others (Ovarian, Pancreatic, and Testicular)

Regional Segmentation

North America U.S., Canada Europe Germany, U.K., France, Italy, Spain, Netherlands, Rest-of-Europe Asia-Pacific Japan, China, Australia, India, Rest-of-Asia-Pacific Rest-of-the-World Latin America and Middle East & Africa

Growth Drivers

Rising Government Initiatives and Projects Increasing Incidence of Cancer Increasing Number of Product Approvals and Launches Ever Expanding Application Areas for Genomics Increasing Use of Biomarkers in Cancer Profiling

Market Challenges

High Cost of Genomic Equipment Lack of Unified Framework for Data Integration

Market Opportunities

Growing Prominence for Precision Medicine Increasing Demand for Point-of-Care Diagnostics

Key Companies Profiled

Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc., Illumina, Inc., QIAGEN, Agilent Technologies, Inc., Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc., F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Merck KGaA, Pacific Biosciences of California, Inc., Myriad Genetics, Inc., and PerkinElmer.

Key Questions Answered: What is tumor genomics? How the different tumor genomic techniques have evolved over the years? What are the major market drivers, challenges, and opportunities in the global tumor genomics market? What was the global tumor genomics market size in terms of revenue in 2019? How is the market expected to evolve in the upcoming years? What is the market size expected to be in 2028? How is each segment of the global tumor genomics market expected to grow during the forecast period between 2020 to 2028 and what is the revenue expected to be generated by each of the segments by the end of 2028? What are the developmental strategies implemented by the key players to sustain in the competitive market? What is the growth potential of the tumor genomics market in each region, namely, North America, Europe, Asia-Pacific, and the Rest-of-the-World? Which product among the two (assays and kits & instrument) are offered by key players such as Thermo Fisher Scientific, Illumina Inc., Qiagen N.V., and F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.? Which technique is leading the market in 2018 and expected to dominate the market in 2028 and why? Which application and end user type are leading the market in 2019 and are expected to dominate the market in 2028 and why? Which region dominated the global tumor genomics market in 2019 and what are the expected trends from each of the regions in the forecast period 2020-2028?

Market Overview

In order to meet the growing product demand and need, companies are investing in the assays, kits, and instruments used in tumor genomics.Nowadays, large number of kits and reagents are used to test the profiling of mutated genes.

For instance, companies such as Thermo Fisher Scientific, Illumina, Inc., and QIAGEN N.V. have focused on the development of variety of kits for the detection of rare genetic diseases due to cost-effectiveness of the kit as compared to instrument and software, which in turn is causing widespread utilization of kits globally.

The market is also witnessing the launches of various products by receiving FDA approvals such as assay for the study of genes and molecular characterization of DNA. For instance, on, January 16, 2019, QIAGEN received approval from Japanese Pharmaceuticals and Medical Device Agency (PMDA) on therascreen EGFR RGQ PCR Kit which is used as a companion diagnostic for lung cancer patients on treatment with Dacomitinib.

Similarly, several manufacturers are also launching innovative products to expand their offerings in the market. For instance, on November 6, 2019, Thermo Fisher Scientific launched Ion Torrent Genexus System, which is a fully integrated next generation sequencing platform used for profiling of genomes.

The market is favored by multiple factors, which include rising government initiatives, increasing incidence of cancer, therefore increasing the utilization of sequencing to identify the mutant DNA segments, increasing number of product approvals and launches pertaining to genomics market. Moreover, increasing use of biomarkers in cancer profiling is also one of the key driving factors for tumor genomics market.

Government funding is also one of the major growth factors for tumor genomics market, because increasing funding by the government help the research institutes to develop sequencing systems useful for the diagnosis of genetic diseases.Increasing funding shall lead to liquidity of the genomics market and thus companies shall develop various sequencing systems to identify the mutation in the segments of DNA.

All these factors are thus expected to contribute to the market growth during the forecast period.

Within the research report, the market is segmented on the basis of product type, techniques, application, end user, cancer type, and region, which highlight value propositions and business models useful for industry leaders and stakeholders. The research also comprises country-level analysis, go-to-market strategies of leading players, future opportunities, among others, to detail the scope and provide a 360-coverage of the domain.

Competitive Landscape

Major players including QIAGEN N.V., Illumina, Inc., Abbott Laboratories, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. Thermo Fisher Scientific, and BGI, among others, led the number of synergistic developments (partnerships and alliances) witnessed by the market. On the basis of region, North America is expected to retain a leading position throughout the forecast period 2019-2029, followed by Europe. This is a result of the presence of leading industry players in these regions, and a higher adoption rate of sequencing system to detect the mutation in genes and DNA segments. Moreover, growing research in the field of sequencing technologies including next-generation sequencing technologies (NGS) is one of the drivers that promote the growth of the tumor genomics market.

Countries Covered North America U.S. Canada Europe Germany U.K. France Italy Spain Netherlands Rest-of-Europe Asia-Pacific (APAC) China Japan Australia India Rest-of-Asia-Pacific Rest-of-the-World Latin America Middle East & AfricaRead the full report: https://www.reportlinker.com/p05903975/?utm_source=GNW

About ReportlinkerReportLinker is an award-winning market research solution. Reportlinker finds and organizes the latest industry data so you get all the market research you need - instantly, in one place.

__________________________

Go here to see the original:
Global Tumor Genomics Market: Focus on Products, Techniques, Applications, End User, Cancer Type, 14 Countries Data, Industry Insights and Competitive...

BIRMINGHAM, Ala. - Is personalized medicine cost-effective? University of Alabama at Birmingham researcher Nita Limdi, Pharm.D., Ph.D., and colleagues across the United States have answered that question for one medical treatment.

Patients experiencing a heart attack -- known as a myocardial infarction or an acute coronary syndrome -- have sharply diminished blood flow in coronary arteries, with a high risk of heart failure or death. Coronary angioplasty, a procedure to open narrowed or blocked arteries in the heart, and percutaneous coronary intervention, known as PCI or stenting, can restore blood flow to minimize damage to the heart. These procedures reduce the risk of subsequent major adverse cardiovascular events, or MACE, which include heart attacks, strokes or death.

But then, a treatment decision has to be made.

After stenting, all patients are treated with two antiplatelet agents for up to one year. Which combination of antiplatelets is best? The answer comes through pharmacogenomics, says Limdi, a professor in the UAB Department of Neurology and associate director of UAB's Hugh Kaul Precision Medicine Institute.

Pharmacogenomics combines pharmacology, the study of drug action, with genetics, the study of gene function, to choose the best medication according to each patient's personal genetic makeup. This is also called precision medicine -- tailored medical treatment for each individual patient.

The most commonly used antiplatelet combination after PCI is aspirin and clopidogrel, which is trademarked as Plavix. Clopidogrel is converted to its active form by an enzyme called CYP2C19. However, patients respond to clopidogrel differently based on their genetic makeup.

More than 30 percent of people have loss-of-function variants in the CYP2C19 gene that decrease the effectiveness of clopidogrel. The FDA warns that these patients may not get the full benefit of clopidogrel, which would increase the risk of MACE. So the FDA advises doctors to consider a different treatment such as prasugrel or ticagrelor, trademarked as Effient and Brillinta, to replace clopidogrel.

While most patients undergoing PCI receive clopidogrel without receiving any CYP2C19 loss-of-function testing, academic institutions like UAB that offer precision medicine use pharmacogenomics to guide the selection of medication dosing.

In 2018, Limdi and other investigators across nine United States universities -- all members of the Implementing Genomics in Practice consortium, or IGNITE -- showed that patients with loss-of-function variants who were treated with clopidogrel had elevated risks. There was a twofold increase in MACE risk for PCI patients, and a threefold increase in MACE risk among patients with acute coronary syndrome who received PCI, as compared to patients prescribed with prasugrel or ticagrelor instead of clopidogrel. Prasugrel and ticagrelor are not influenced by the loss-of-function variant and can substitute for clopidogrel, but they are much more costly and bring a higher risk of bleeding.

The IGNITE group then leveraged this real-world data to conduct an economic analysis to determine the best drug treatment for these heart disease patients.

A study led by Limdi and colleagues, published in the Pharmacogenomics Journal, examines the cost-effectiveness of genotype-guided antiplatelet therapy for acute coronary syndrome patients with PCI. This cost-effectiveness study is the first to use real-world clinical data; many cost-effectiveness studies use clinical trial data, which tends to exclude the sicker patients normally seen in clinical practice.

The study compared three main strategies: 1) treating all patients with clopidogrel, 2) treating all patients with ticagrelor, or 3) genotyping all patients and using ticagrelor in those with loss-of-function variants.

"We showed that tailoring antiplatelet selection based on genotype is a cost-effective strategy," Limdi said. "Support is now growing to change the clinical guidelines, which currently do not recommend genotyping in all cases. Evidence like this is needed to advance the field of precision medicine."

Costs, QALYs and ICERs

In the analysis, Limdi and colleagues considered differences in event rates for heart attacks and stent thrombosis in patients receiving clopidogrel versus ticagrelor versus genotype-guided therapy, during the one-year period following stenting. They also included medical costs from those events that are borne by the payer, such as admissions, procedures, medications, clinical visits and genetic testing. The analysis considered variations in event rates and medication costs over time to ensure that the results held under different scenarios.

The study uses an economic measure -- the QALY, which stands for the quality-adjusted life year.

"First, we looked at which strategy provided the highest QALY," Limdi said. "The QALY is the gold standard for measuring benefit of an intervention -- in our case, genotype-guided treatment compared to treatment without genotyping. Universal ticagrelor and genotype-guided antiplatelet therapy had higher QALYs than universal clopidogrel -- so those are the best for the patient."

But health care resources are not infinite. So, Limdi and colleagues then evaluated whether those interventions that have higher QALYs were also reasonable from a cost perspective. This analysis considered the willingness to pay. What would a payor or a patient pay for the highest QALY?

"In our case, the payor would recognize that ticagrelor is more expensive than clopidogrel -- $360 per month vs. $10 per month -- and there is a $100 cost for each genetic test," Limdi said. "So, from the payor perspective, the more effective strategy (one with a higher QALY) -- if more expensive (higher cost) -- would have to lower the risks of bad outcomes like heart attacks and strokes for the gains in QALY that are at, or below, the willingness-to-pay threshold."

A calculation called incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, or ICERs, assesses the incremental cost of the benefit (improvement in QALY). In the United States, a treatment is considered cost-effective if its associated ICER is at or below the willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per QALY.

"In our assessment, the two strategies with the highest QALY had very different ICERs," Limdi said. "The genotype-guided strategy was cost-effective at $42,365 per QALY. Universal ticagrelor was not; it had an ICER of $227,044 per QALY."

The researchers also looked at some secondary strategies for a real-world reason. A number of clinicians now prescribe ticagrelor or prasugrel for the first 30 days after PCI, which is considered a period of greater risk, and then switch their patients to the less expensive drug clopidogrel.

The secondary analysis allowed Limdi and colleagues to explore the cost-effectiveness of giving all patients ticagrelor for 30 days, and then switching them to clopidogrel, without genetic testing, versus switching the patients based on genotype. Both strategies were better -- in terms of QALYs -- than a universal switch to clopidogrel at 30 days. However, neither of the two appeared to be cost-effective. Because these secondary strategies used estimated parameters, "the findings should only be considered as hypothesis-generating," Limdi said.

Go here to read the rest:
Precision medicine guides choice of better drug therapy in severe heart disease - Science Codex

BOSTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Akouos, a precision genetic medicine company developing gene therapies to potentially restore, improve and preserve hearing, announced today that data from its inner ear gene therapy platform will be presented during the 23rd American Society of Gene and Cell Therapy (ASGCT) Annual Meeting, which will be held virtually May 12-15, 2020.

Two poster presentations will highlight Akouoss use of AAVAnc80 vector technology and its potential to address many forms of hearing loss. Presentation details are as follows:

Title:

Use of the Adeno-Associated Viral Anc80 (AAVAnc80) Vector for the Development of Precision Genetic Medicines to Address Hearing Loss

Date and Time:

Tuesday, May 12, 2020 5:30 PM - 6:30 PM (EST)

Title:

Enabling Temporal Control of Gene Expression in the Inner Ear after AAVAnc80 Vector Mediated Delivery

Date and Time:

Wednesday, May 13, 2020 5:30 PM - 6:30 PM (EST)

About Akouos

Akouos is a precision genetic medicine company dedicated to developing gene therapies with the potential to restore, improve, and preserve high-acuity physiologic hearing for people worldwide who live with disabling hearing loss. Leveraging its precision genetic medicine platform that incorporates a proprietary adeno-associated viral (AAV) vector library and a novel delivery approach, Akouos is focused on developing precision therapies for forms of sensorineural hearing loss. Headquartered in Boston, the Company was founded in 2016 by world leaders in the fields of neurotology, genetics, inner ear drug delivery and AAV gene therapy. Akouos has strategic partnerships with Massachusetts Eye and Ear and Lonza, Inc. For more information, please visit http://www.akouos.com.

About AAVAnc Technology

The Ancestral AAV (AAVAnc) platform was developed in the laboratory of Luk Vandenberghe, Ph.D., director of the Grousbeck Gene Therapy Center at Harvard Medical School. AAVAnc technology uses computational and evolutionary methods to predict novel conformations of the adeno-associated viral particle. AAVAnc80, one of approximately 38,000 AAVAnc vectors, has demonstrated preliminary safety and effective gene delivery in both mice and non-human primates in preclinical studies.

Continue reading here:
Akouos to Present Data from Inner Ear Gene Therapy Platform at 23rd ASGCT Annual Meeting - Business Wire

A researcher of the Openlab genetic and cell technologies laboratory of the Kazan Federal University working with biomaterial.

Yegor Aleyev | TASS via Getty Images

Health officials and scientists across the world are racing to develop vaccines and discover effective treatments against the coronavirus, which has infected more than 4.2 million people worldwide in as little as four months, according to data compiled by Johns Hopkins University.

There are no proven, knockout treatments and U.S. health officials say a vaccine could take at least a year to 18 months.

On May 1, theFood and Drug Administration granted emergency use authorizationfor Gilead Sciences' antiviral drug remdesivir. This after a government-run clinical trial found Covid-19 patients who took remdesivir usually recovered after 11 days. That is four days faster than those who didn't take the drug. The EUA means doctors in the U.S. will be allowed to use remdesivir on patients hospitalized with Covid-19 even though it has not been formally approved by the agency.

Even if the drug wins final approval, infectious disease specialists and scientists say researchers will need an arsenal of medications to fight this respiratory virus, which can also attack the cardiovascular, nervous, digestive and other major systems of the body.

Below is a list of the leading vaccines and drugs in development to battle Covid-19.

Nicolas Asfouri | AFP | Getty Images

Moderna

The National Institutes of Health, an agency within the Department of Health and Human Services, has been fast-tracking work with biotech company Moderna to develop a vaccine to prevent Covid-19.The company began the first phase 1 human trialon45 volunteers testing a vaccine to prevent the disease in March and has been approved to soon start its phase 2, which would expand the testing to 600 people, by late May or June. If all goes well, its vaccine could be in production as early as July.

Scientist Xinhua Yan works in the lab at Moderna in Cambridge, Massachusetts, on Feb. 28, 2020. Moderna has developed the first experimental coronavirus medicine, but an approved treatment is more than a year away.

David L. Ryan | Boston Globe | Getty Images

Moderna's potential vaccine contains genetic material called messenger RNA, or mRNA, that was produced in a lab. The mRNA is a genetic code that tells cells how to make a protein and was found in the outer coat of the new coronavirus, according to researchers at the Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute. The mRNA instructs the body's own cellular mechanisms for making proteins to create those that mimic the virus proteins, thereby producing an immune response.

Johnson & Johnson

Johnson & Johnson began Covid-19 vaccine development in January. J&J's lead vaccine candidate will enter a phase 1 human clinical study by September, the company announced in March, and clinical data on the trial is expected before the end of the year. If the vaccine works well, the company said it could produce600 million to 900 million doses by April 2021.

The company said it is using the same technologies it used to make its experimental Ebola vaccine, which was provided to people in the Democratic Republic of Congo in late 2019. It involves combing genetic material from the coronavirus with a modified adenovirus that is known to cause common colds in humans.

Inovio Pharmaceutical

Inovio began its early stage clinical trials for a potential vaccine on April 6,making it the second potential Covid-19 vaccine to undergo human testing after Moderna. It says it will enroll up to 40 healthy adult volunteers in Pennsylvaniaand Missouri and expects initial immune responses and safety data by late summer. Inovio made its potential vaccine by adding genetic material of the virus inside synthetic DNA, which researchers hope will cause the immune system to make antibodies against it.

Oxford University

A coronavirus vaccine developed by researchers at Oxford University began phase 1 human trials on April 23. British Health Minister Matt Hancock saidthat he wouldprovide 20 million, ($24.5 million), to help fund the Oxford project. The team said it aims to produce 1 million doses by September.

General view of the sign for University of Oxford, Old Road Campus and Trials clinic on May 02, 2020 in Oxford, England.

Catherine Ivill | Getty Images

Oxford researchers are calling their experimental vaccineChAdOx1 nCoV-19, and it's a kind ofrecombinant viral vector vaccine. Like J&J's team, the researchers will place genetic material from the coronavirus into another virus that's been modified. They will then inject the virus into a human, hoping to produce an immune response.

Pfizer

Pharmaceutical giant Pfizer,which is working alongside German drugmaker BioNTech, began testing an experimental vaccine to combat the coronavirus in the U.S. on May 5.The U.S.-based drugmaker hopes to produce "millions" of vaccines by the end of this year and expects to increase to "hundreds of millions" of doses next year. The experimental vaccine uses mRNA technology, similar to Moderna. The mRNA is a genetic code that tells cells what to build in this case, an antigen that may induce an immune response for the virus.

In this photo illustration the American multinational pharmaceutical corporation Pfizer logo seen displayed on a smartphone with a computer model of the COVID-19 coronavirus on the background.

Budrul Chukrut | SOPA Images | Getty Images

Sanofi and GSK

Sanofi and GSKannouncedApril14 that they had entered an agreement to jointly create a Covid-19 vaccineby the end of next year.The companies plan to start clinical trials in the second half of 2020 and, if successful, produce up to 600 million doses next year. To make it, Sanofi said it will repurpose its SARS vaccine candidate that never made it to market while GSK will provide pandemic adjuvant technology, which is meant to enhance the immune response in vaccines.

Novavax

Novavax announced on April 8 it found a coronavirus vaccine candidate and would start human trials in May with preliminary results expected in July. The potential vaccine, which is being calledNVX-CoV2373, is usingadjuvant technology and will attempt to neutralize the so-called spike protein, found on the surface of the coronavirus, which is used to enter the host cell.

Vials of investigational coronavirus disease (COVID-19) treatment drug remdesivir are capped at a Gilead Sciences facility in La Verne, California, U.S. March 18, 2020. Picture taken March 18, 2020.

Gilead Sciences Inc | Reuters

Gilead Sciences

The FDA granted emergency use authorization for Gilead's remdesivir drug to treat Covid-19 on May 1. The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases released results from its study showing patients who took remdesivir usually recovered faster than those who didn't take the drug. Even though remdesivir was granted for emergency use, there are still several ongoing clinical trials testing whether it's effective in stopping the coronavirus from replicating.

Remdesivir has shown some promise in treating SARS and MERS, which are also caused by coronaviruses. Some health authorities in the U.S., China and other parts of the world have been using remdesivir, which was tested as a possible treatment for the Ebola outbreak, in hopes that the drug can improve the outcomes for Covid-19 patients. The company said it expects to produce more than 140,000 rounds of its 10-day treatment regimen by the end of May and anticipates it can make 1 million rounds by the end of this year.

New York state and others

Hydroxychloroquine is a decades-old malaria drug touted by PresidentDonald Trumpas a potential "game-changer."

The drug is proven to work in treating Lupus and rheumatoid arthritis, but not Covid-19. A handful of small studies on its use in coronavirus patients published in France and China had raised hope that the drug might help fight the virus. However, hydroxychloroquine, which is available as a generic drug and is also produced under the brand name Plaquenil by French drugmaker Sanofi, can have serious side effects, including muscle weakness and heart arrhythmia.

A bottle of Prasco Laboratories Hydroxychloroquine Sulphate is arranged for a photograph in the Queens borough of New York, U.S., on Tuesday, April 7, 2020.

Christopher Occhicone | Bloomberg | Getty Images

The FDA issueda warning against takingthe drug outside a hospital or formal clinical trial setting after it became aware of reports of "serious heart rhythm problems" in patients.

On March 24, researchers at NYU Langone in New York launchedone of the nation's largest hydroxychloroquine clinical studiesafter federal health regulators fast-tracked approvals for coronavirus research, allowing scientists across the nation to skip through months of red tape. It's one of more than a dozen formal studies in the U.S. looking at treatments for the coronavirus,according to ClinicalTrials.gov.

But the early results aren't so promising. An observational study published in thejournal JAMA Network Open on Monday and run by the New York State Department of Health, in partnership with the University of Albany, found that it didn't help coronavirus patients. Worse yet, when taken with azithromycin which French researchers credited with speeding recovery times it put patients at significantly higher risk of cardiac arrest.

Zhejiang Hisun Pharmaceutical

Favipiravir is an anti-flu drug sold byFujifilm Holding under the name Avigan. Researchers in China are testing the drug to see if it's effective in fighting the coronavirus. Most of favipiravir's preclinical data is derived from its influenza and Ebolaactivity; however, the agent also demonstrated broad activity against other RNA viruses, according to researchers in Japan.

Regeneron and Sanofi

Regeneron and Sanofi started clinical trials of rheumatoid arthritis drug Kevzara in Covid-19 patients in March.The drug inhibits a pathway thought to contribute to the lung inflammation in patients with the most severe forms of Covid-19.

The companies announced last month that Kevzara showed promise for treating the sickest coronavirus patients in a clinical trial but it wasn't beneficial for patients with less-advanced disease, prompting the companies to stop testing the medicine in that group.

Eli Lilly

Eli Lilly, in partnership with National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, is seeing if its rheumatoid arthritis drugbaricitinib is effective against the coronavirus.The company theorizes that baricitinib's anti-inflammatory effects could curb the body's reaction to the virus.

Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca and Regeneron

While some drugmakers are looking for vaccines to stop the virus, Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca and Regeneron, among other companies, are working on so-called antibody treatments, which are made to act like immune cells and may provide protection after exposure to the virus. Earlier this month,Regeneron said its treatment could be available for use by the end of this summer or fall.

Originally posted here:
Scientists race to find a cure or vaccine for the coronavirus. Here are the top drugs in development - CNBC