Page 1,015«..1020..1,0141,0151,0161,017..1,0201,030..»

Prevail Therapeutics Reports First Quarter 2020 Financial Results and Business Highlights – GlobeNewswire

Posted: May 16, 2020 at 11:48 am

Phase 1/2 Trial of PR001 for Parkinsons Disease with GBA1 Mutations Ongoing; Study Startup ActivitiesProgressing for Phase 1/2 Trials of PR001 for Type 2 NeuronopathicGaucher Disease and PR006 forFrontotemporal Dementia with GRN Mutations

Data Presentations Highlight Potential of AAV Gene Therapy Approach toSlow or Stop Neurodegenerative Disease Progression in Preclinical Models

NEW YORK, May 14, 2020 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Prevail Therapeutics Inc. (Nasdaq: PRVL), a biotechnology company developing potentially disease-modifying AAV-based gene therapies for patients with neurodegenerative diseases, today reviewed recent business highlights and reported financial results for the first quarter ended March 31, 2020.

We are excited to continue the clinical development of PR001 and are on track to report interim data for a subset of patients from our Phase 1/2 clinical trial of PR001 for Parkinsons disease with GBA1 mutations (PD-GBA) later this year. In addition, we are advancing our AAV gene therapy-based pipeline, with the planned mid-year initiation of Phase 1/2 clinical trials of PR001 for Type 2 neuronopathic Gaucher disease (nGD) and PR006 for frontotemporal dementia with GRN mutations (FTD-GRN), said Asa Abeliovich, M.D., Ph.D., Founder and Chief Executive Officer of Prevail. In addition, at ASGCT and AAT-AD/PD, we presented or will present data that validate the potential of these products for neurodegenerative disease patients with urgent unmet needs, and detailed our ongoing and planned clinical trials.

Recent Business Highlights and Updates:

In addition, study startup activities are continuing for the PROVIDE Phase 1/2 clinical trial of PR001 for Type 2 nGD, and the Company intends to initiate dosing in mid-2020. Prevail also continues to expect to initiate the PROGRESS Phase 1/2 clinical trial of PR001 for Type 3 nGD in the second half of 2020. The timelines for PR001 are subject to any delays related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Clinical Development of PR006: Study startup activities are also underway for the PROCLAIM Phase 1/2 clinical trial of PR006 for FTD-GRN patients, which is planned to initiate in mid-2020, subject to any delays related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

First Quarter 2020 Financial Results

About Prevail TherapeuticsPrevail is a gene therapy company leveraging breakthroughs in human genetics with the goal of developing and commercializing disease-modifying AAV-based gene therapies for patients with neurodegenerative diseases. The company is developing PR001 for patients with Parkinsons disease with GBA1 mutations (PD-GBA) and neuronopathic Gaucher disease; PR006 for patients with frontotemporal dementia with GRN mutations (FTD-GRN); and PR004 for patients with certain synucleinopathies.

Prevail was founded by Dr. Asa Abeliovich in 2017, through a collaborative effort with The Silverstein Foundation for Parkinsons with GBA and OrbiMed, and is headquartered in New York, NY.

Forward-Looking Statements Related to PrevailStatements contained in this press release regarding matters that are not historical facts are forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, as amended. Examples of these forward-looking statements include statements concerning: the potential impact of COVID-19 on Prevails ongoing and planned clinical trials, business and operations; the potential of Prevails gene therapies to modify the course of neurodegenerative diseases; the anticipated timing of Prevails clinical trials of PR001 in PD-GBA and in nGD and Prevails clinical trial of PR006, including resuming of delayed trials and initiation of new trials; the expected timing of reporting of interim data for a subset of patients from Prevails Phase 1/2 clinical trial of PR001; and expectations regarding Prevails cash runway. Because such statements are subject to risks and uncertainties, actual results may differ materially from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties include, among others: Prevails novel approach to gene therapy makes it difficult to predict the time, cost and potential success of product candidate development or regulatory approval; Prevails gene therapy programs may not meet safety and efficacy levels needed to support ongoing clinical development or regulatory approval; the regulatory landscape for gene therapy is rigorous, complex, uncertain and subject to change; the fact that gene therapies are novel, complex and difficult to manufacture; and risks relating to the impact on our business of the COVID-19 pandemic or similar public health crises.

These and other risks are described more fully in Prevails filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), including the Risk Factors section of the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2020, filed with the SEC on or about May 14, 2020, the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2019, filed with the SEC on March 26, 2020, and its other documents subsequently filed with or furnished to the SEC. All forward-looking statements contained in this press release speak only as of the date on which they were made. Except to the extent required by law, Prevail undertakes no obligation to update such statements to reflect events that occur or circumstances that exist after the date on which they were made.

Prevail Therapeutics Inc.Statements of Operations(Unaudited)(in thousands, except share and per share data)

Balance Sheets(in thousands, except share and per share data)

Media Contact:Mary CarmichaelTen Bridge Communicationsmary@tenbridgecommunications.com617-413-3543

Investor Contact:investors@prevailtherapeutics.com

View post:
Prevail Therapeutics Reports First Quarter 2020 Financial Results and Business Highlights - GlobeNewswire

Posted in Human Genetics | Comments Off on Prevail Therapeutics Reports First Quarter 2020 Financial Results and Business Highlights – GlobeNewswire

Deficient Expression of DGCR8 in Human Testis is Related to Spermatoge | IJGM – Dove Medical Press

Posted: May 16, 2020 at 11:48 am

Emad Babakhanzadeh,1,2,* Ali Khodadadian,1,* Majid Nazari,1 Masoud Dehghan Tezerjani,1 Seyed Mohsen Aghaei,1 Sina Ghasemifar,1 Mehdi Hosseinnia,3 Mahta Mazaheri1,4

1Department of Medical Genetics, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran; 2Medical Genetics Research Center, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran; 3Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran; 4Mother and Newborn Health Research Center, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran

*These authors contributed equally to this work

Correspondence: Mahta Mazaheri Email mahta.mazaheri2019@gmail.com

Introduction: DiGeorge syndrome critical region gene 8 (DGCR8) contributes to miRNA biogenesis, and defects in its expression could lead to defects in spermatogenesis.Methods: Here, we assess gene and protein expression levels of DGCR8 in the testicular biopsy specimens obtained from men with obstructive azoospermia (OA, n = 19) and various types of non-obstructive azoospermia (NOA) including maturation arrest (MA, n = 17), Sertoli cell-only syndrome (SCOS, n = 20) and hypospermatogenesis (HYPO, 18). Also, samples of men with NOA were divided into two groups based on successful and unsuccessful sperm recovery, NOA+ in 21 patients and NOA in 34 patients.Results: Examinations disclosed a severe decrease in DGCR8 in samples with MA and SCOS in comparison to OA samples (P < 0.001). Also, the results showed DGCR8 has significantly lower expression in testis tissues of NOA group in comparison to NOA+ group (p< 0.05). Western blot analysis confirmed that the DGCR8 protein was not expressed in SCOS samples and had a very low expression in MA and HYPO samples.Discussion: The results of this survey showed that DGCR8 is an important gene for the entire spermatogenesis pathway. Moreover, DGCR8 gene plays an important role in the diagnosis of NOA subgroups, and also the expression changes in it might contribute to SCOS or MA phenotypes. This gene with considering other related genes can also be a predictor of sperm retrieval.

Keywords: DGCR8, obstructive azoospermia, non-obstructive azoospermia, spermatogenesis

This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License.By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Go here to see the original:
Deficient Expression of DGCR8 in Human Testis is Related to Spermatoge | IJGM - Dove Medical Press

Posted in Human Genetics | Comments Off on Deficient Expression of DGCR8 in Human Testis is Related to Spermatoge | IJGM – Dove Medical Press

California Stem Cell Research Institute Bond Initiative (2020)

Posted: May 16, 2020 at 11:47 am

The California Stem Cell Research Institute Bond Initiative (#19-0022) may appear on the ballot in California as an initiated state statute on November 3, 2020.

The ballot initiative would issue $5.5 billion in general obligation bonds for the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM), which was created to fund stem cell research. The ballot initiative would require CIRM to spend no more than 7.5 percent of the bond funds on operation costs. The remaining bond funds would be spent on grants to entities that conduct research, trials, and programs related to stem cells, as well as start-up costs for facilities.[1]

The official ballot title is as follows:[2]

Authorizes Bonds to Continue Funding Stem Cell and Other Medical Research. Initiative Statute.[3]

The summary provided for inclusion on signature petition sheets is as follows:[2]

Authorizes $5.5 billion in state general obligation bonds to fund grants from the California Institute of Regenerative Medicine to educational, non-profit, and private entities for: (1) stem cell and other medical research, therapy development, and therapy delivery; (2) medical training; and (3) construction of research facilities. Dedicates $1.5 billion to fund research and therapy for Alzheimers, Parkinsons, stroke, epilepsy, and other brain and central nervous system diseases and conditions. Limits bond issuance to $540 million annually. Appropriates money from General Fund to repay bond debt, but postpones repayment for first five years.[3]

The fiscal impact statement is as follows:[2]

State costs of $7.8 billion to pay off principal ($5.5 billion) and interest ($2.3 billion) on the bonds. Associated average annual debt payments of about $310 million for 25 years. The costs could be higher or lower than these estimates depending on factors such as the interest rate and the period of time over which the bonds are repaid. The state General Fund would pay most of the costs, with a relatively small amount of interest repaid by bond proceeds.[3]

The full text of the ballot measure is available here.

Californians for Stem Cell Research, Treatments & Cures is leading the campaign in support of the ballot initiative.[4]

Ballotpedia has not identified individuals and entities opposing the ballot initiative. If you are aware of published opposition to the ballot initiative, you may send a reference link to editor@ballotpedia.org.

The Californians for Stem Cell Research, Treatments & Cures PAC was registered to support the ballot initiative. The committee had raised $6.06 million. Robert N. Klein II and Klein Financial Corporation provided $4.63 million to the PAC. The committee had expended $8.72 million (expenditures exceeded contributions due to accrued expenses).[6]

There were no PACs registered to oppose the ballot initiative.[6]

The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committee in support of the ballot initiative.[6]

The following was the top donors to the support committee.[6]

In 2004, voters approved Proposition 71, which was a ballot initiative designed to establish a state constitutional right to conduct stem cell research, create the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM), and issue $3.00 billion in general obligation bonds to fund CIRM.[7]

As of October 2019, CIRM had spent $2.91 billion of the $3.00 billion bond issue.[8]

In California, the number of signatures required for an initiated state statute is equal to 5 percent of the votes cast in the preceding gubernatorial election. Petitions are allowed to circulate for 180 days from the date the attorney general prepares the petition language. Signatures need to be certified at least 131 days before the general election. As the verification process can take multiple months, the secretary of state provides suggested deadlines for ballot initiatives.

The requirements to get initiated state statutes certified for the 2020 ballot:

Signatures are first filed with local election officials, who determine the total number of signatures submitted. If the total number is equal to at least 100 percent of the required signatures, then local election officials perform a random check of signatures submitted in their counties. If the random sample estimates that more than 110 percent of the required number of signatures are valid, the initiative is eligible for the ballot. If the random sample estimates that between 95 and 110 percent of the required number of signatures are valid, a full check of signatures is done to determine the total number of valid signatures. If less than 95 percent are estimated to be valid, the initiative does not make the ballot.

On October 10, 2019, Robert N. Klein filed the ballot initiative.[1] Attorney General Xavier Becerra (D) released ballot language for the initiative on December 17, 2019, which allowed proponents to begin collecting signatures. The deadline to file signatures is June 15, 2020.

Political responses overviewState reopening plansDocumenting America's Path to RecoveryDaily updatesElection changesChanges to vote-by-mail and absentee voting proceduresFederal responsesState responsesState executive ordersStay-at-home ordersMultistate agreementsNon-governmental reopening plansEvictions and foreclosures policiesTravel restrictionsEnacted state legislationState legislative session changesSchool closuresState court closuresInmate releasesLocal government responsesDiagnosed or quarantined politiciansBallot measure changesArguments about government responsesThe 1918 influenza pandemicPandemic Response Accountability CommitteeUnemployment filingsLawsuitsSubmit

On February 13, 2020, proponents announced that the number of collected signatures surpassed the 25-percent threshold (155,803 signatures) to require legislative hearings on the ballot initiative.[9] In 2014, Senate Bill 1253 was enacted into law, which required the legislature to assign ballot initiatives that meet the 25-percent threshold to committees to hold joint public hearings on the initiatives not later than 131 days before the election.

On March 21, 2020, Sarah Melbostad, a spokeswoman for Californians for Stem Cell Research, Treatments, and Cures, reported that the campaign's signature drive was suspended due to the coronavirus pandemic. Melbostad said, "In keeping with the governors statewide order for non-essential businesses to close and residents to remain at home, weve suspended all signature gathering for the time being. ... Were confident that we still have time to qualify and plan to proceed accordingly."[10]

On May 5, 2020, the campaign reported submitting about 925,000 signatures for the ballot initiative.[11] At least 623,212 of the signatures need to be valid. The recommended deadline to file signatures for the election on November 3, 2020, was April 21, 2020. Counties need to validate the signatures before June 25, 2020, for the ballot initiative to appear on the ballot in 2020. Otherwise, the ballot initiative would appear on the ballot on November 8, 2022.

Here is the original post:
California Stem Cell Research Institute Bond Initiative (2020)

Posted in California Stem Cells | Comments Off on California Stem Cell Research Institute Bond Initiative (2020)

BUSINESS: Can lab-grown meat save the planet and dinner? – E&E News

Posted: May 16, 2020 at 11:47 am

The idea is hard to stomach at first: animal meat grown in a lab.

But proponents of "cell-based meat" say the emerging technology has the potential to tackle two global problems at once. Lab-grown beef patties, chicken cutlets and even exotic proteins could help satisfy the world's growing appetite for meat, they argue. And it could be done in a way that cuts down on the tremendous environmental impact of animal agriculture.

Standing in the way is a long list of challenges including regulatory obstacles, sky-high production costs and the ever-present ick factor.

Still, advocates say lab-grown meat could hit store shelves as soon as 2025 if not earlier.

One proponent is Krijn de Nood, the chief executive of Meatable, a Netherlands-based company that is producing animal tissue by mimicking the cellular growth that typically happens inside rather than outside of living organisms. In an interview, de Nood said Meatable is "mission driven" and that it aims to address issues from climate change to animal welfare.

Advertisement

The company is among dozens of startups worldwide that are racing to scale technology they claim produces "real meat" not plant-based alternatives from companies such as Impossible Foods and Beyond Meat (Climatewire, Oct. 21, 2019).

That's possible, they say, because most cultured protein products originate as stem cells from real animals. Some companies make a point to say that no animals are harmed in the process.

Here's how it typically works. Engineers obtain an animal stem cell sample and isolate "cell lines" with the strongest genetic material. The cells are then placed in an environment like a petri dish or bioreactor that encourages rapid growth, and later differentiation. The resulting fat and muscle tissue is then harvested, structured and processed to create a final product.

De Nood said Meatable already has produced small quantities of meat using this process. And the whole thing took just three weeks a far faster timeline, Meatable notes, than it takes to raise an animal for slaughter. The company plans to host its first public taste testing of a pork prototype in September.

Several other companies already have allowed outsiders to sample their products. Those include Memphis Meats, Peace of Meat and Mosa Meat, which are based in the U.S., Belgium and the Netherlands, respectively.

In fact, one of the first cultured meat tastings dates back to 2013, when Maastricht University physiologist Mark Post presented the world with a beef patty that was produced in a petri dish.

At the time, that single slab of meat cost a whopping 250,000 to produce; Google co-founder Sergey Brin picked up the tab. Several years later, Post co-founded Mosa Meat.

More recently, in March, Peace of Meat hosted an event where attendees sampled a chicken nugget.

Tasting aside, co-founder David Brandes underscored that the startup has a different ambition than many other companies. Rather than producing consumer-facing products, Peace of Meat aims to eventually grow more than 100,000 tons of pure, cultured fat per year. The startup plans to sell the fat to other companies as a key ingredient to enhance the taste and texture of alternative meat products, including those that are plant-based.

"We don't want to make the most fancy-looking piece of food, we don't want to work on exotic species," said Brandes. "You need to produce massive amounts of meat if you really want to have an impact."

Animal agriculture is responsible for a whopping 14.5% of planet-warming emissions, according to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. That figure includes greenhouse gases attributable to meat processing, meat-related transportation and manure storage. Then there's the issue of belching cattle which itself is responsible for 65% of the livestock sector's emissions.

Paul Mozdziak, who serves as Peace of Meat's chief scientific officer, was among those who said a central goal of cellular agriculture is to satisfy the world's staggering, and still rising, demand for animal protein but without relying on supply chains that scientists say are environmentally fraught and highly vulnerable to marketplace disruptions.

As an example, Mozdziak pointed to the novel coronavirus crisis, which in recent weeks has temporarily shuttered meat packing plants, forced farmers to cull tens of thousands of animals and spurred fears of a nationwide protein shortage (Greenwire, May 4).

"I absolutely think the pandemic supports the need for this," said Mozdziak, who also directs North Carolina State University's graduate physiology program.

"It's another way to produce food. It's another way to produce protein. It's another way to increase food security," he added. "What if something [else] happens? ... [W]here's the protein going to come from? How are we going to eat?"

But even Mozdziak, who has pondered cultured meat since the early 1990s, acknowledged the obstacles ahead. Despite entrepreneurs' ambitions, he said, the field remains deep in research and development and far from supermarket shelves.

De Nood, of Meatable, highlighted that same issue. "It's all about the scalability of the process," he said, noting that his company is working to drive down costs and move its operations from "small environments" to large bioreactors that would require major processing factories.

Peace of Meat's Brandes agreed. But he said that even if production costs fall, there's the possibility that cultured meat would not meaningfully impact the carbon footprint of the global food system.

"When it comes to greenhouse gas emissions, I think there is a big potential," said Brandes. But producing large quantities of cultured meat would inevitably require substantial amounts of energy, too, "so it really depends where you draw the energy from," Brandes said.

Despite those obstacles and more, some projections have named cultured meat as a key driver of a revolutionary shift away from animal agriculture. Independent think tank RethinkX, for instance, predicts that cell-based meat and plant-based alternatives could render industrial cow farming "obsolete" in the U.S. entirely.

Ermias Kebreab, who is a climate and animal agriculture expert at the University of California, Davis, disagreed with that assessment.

Even as the world becomes more invested in exploring alternatives to conventional protein, Kebreab said, researchers and traditional farmers are actively developing strategies like feeding seaweed to cows to cut the sector's environmental footprint.

In his eyes, sustainable agriculture, rather than cellular agriculture, is what will ultimately enhance food security in developing countries where most future population growth is predicted to occur.

"I'd rather have beef" from cows, said Kebreab, adding that cell-based meat also raises other issues for him, like the products' overall nutritional value. He said he's wary of "highly, highly processed food."

Mozdziak, of Peace of Meat, agreed in part. He doesn't see cellular agriculture putting meat companies out of business.

But "at the same time," he said, "let me vehemently state that I think cultured meat is really important. ... [I]f we're going to have a billion more people on the planet in 30 years, we're going to have to find a way to feed them."

Go here to see the original:
BUSINESS: Can lab-grown meat save the planet and dinner? - E&E News

Posted in California Stem Cells | Comments Off on BUSINESS: Can lab-grown meat save the planet and dinner? – E&E News

Sharpless: COVID-19 threatens to reverse long-running trend of decreasing cancer mortality – The Cancer Letter

Posted: May 16, 2020 at 11:47 am

Today I would really like to keep most of the focus on regular NCI business. Im really eager, in fact, to be talking about cancer research and concepts the NCI would like to release. And these will spur interest in cancer research and priority areas. But there is a pandemic going on and we do have some coronavirus items to address as well.

We just had a board meeting on this topic almost entirely devoted to COVID-19. We dont have to do a whole lot on that topic today. But I will just use a few slides to summarize that presentation from the joint board meeting, and remind you of how the NCI has been taking a critical role in an unprecedented response to this pandemic. Also, since things are moving so fast around here right now, there actually have been a few significant developments in the coronavirus spacesince even the joint board meeting just a few weeks ago. Ill briefly summarize that news as well.

In particular, related to those developments, including a new and correct congressional appropriation. There are some COVID items that we do need, and Dinah Singer will direct that discussion at the end of todays meeting.

But let me start out our short COVID discussion by repeating a statement I made last month at the joint board meeting, which is that the primary focus of the National Cancer Institute is, and always will be cancer research and cancer care. Thats a message Ive been delivering in just about every presentation Ive given, in every email and blog post and other materials Ive written during this pandemic response.

And its one that Dinah Singer spoke to at her virtual presentation at AACR two weeks ago on April 28. If you havent seen this, I encourage you to check it out. Dinah also wrote a great post for our Bottom Line blog on the topic, which includes a link to the presentation.

So, this slide summarizes why the NCI is important to the pandemic response. It shows the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on cancer patients, and patients with cancer whove survived cancer. Additionally, as I illustrated at the joint board meeting, the NCI has unique research expertise and capacity related to Frederick National Lab and our great extramural networks.

Therefore, we have to be involved in the pandemic response. And then, lastly, I think given the nature of this crisis, it has had a tremendous effect on public health. The NCI has a moral obligation to work in this area.

I want to call your attention though to the decrease in care delivery to cancer patients related to the coronavirus pandemic. And this is something, frankly, Ive been worrying about a lot lately, and Ive been hearing from a lot of you and other extramural leaders.

Ive been looking at the statistics about decreases in screening and deferred care, and I am getting very worried about this issue. The data regarding delayed diagnosis and delayed therapy are very clear from cancer research over the decades.

Delayed diagnosis and deferred care leads to worse outcomes for patients with cancer. The things we do to prevent cancer and to diagnose cancer and to treat cancer well, they work, and they cant be put off indefinitely.

And if we do, we will lose ground, and we will give up hard-won progress. And heres a very specific fear I have, in this regard. Every spring, the National Cancer Institute, with the CDC and the ACS and NAACCR, puts out our Annual Report to the Nation on our progress against cancer.

Thanks to advances in screening and prevention and treatment and survivorship, that document has become an annual feel-good story for the NCI. Every year Ive been here, the report has been good news.

Its been a couple of percent drops in cancer mortality each year, and thats been going on, in fact, for decades. But with all this deferred and delayed care and postponed surgeries and later, reduced chemotherapy, and canceled appointments for mammography or a Pap smear or colonoscopy, this is going to have an impact on cancer outcomesan impact that I think well see play out over years to come.

So, Im becoming worried that, because of the pandemic, that in 2021 or 2022 or 2023, we will have the first Annual Report to the Nation since 1993 that shows an increase in cancer mortality. And I know exactly what the statistics will mean for patients. I know that that represents more cancer suffering and more bad outcomes, and more deaths. And lets all agree, we dont want that to happen, and we wont let that happen. I know COVID has caused many changes to how we care for patients.

And we have a legitimate need to be careful during the pandemic in order to protect the public health. But we need to get back to work of caring for our patients. We need our hospitals and our clinics and our infusion centers to start doing what they do best, which is care for our patients who need this. Of course, we have to do this in a manner that is smart, that is careful, that protects patients and staff alike from the coronavirus.

But we need to get back to work. The cost of deferred cancer care will be significant. Neglecting cancer will produce a negative impact on the public health, and one that may trouble our patients for years to come. I plan on talking a lot more about this in the coming weeks. And I havent even spoken about the debilitating impact on cancer science, by having these labs closed and postponedtremendous impact as well.

Just to remind you something that Dinah spoke about, and that is on the blog post as well, is the number of NCI COVID-19 funding opportunities that are somewhat new and recently posted, and still open. This is summarized here. I wont spend a lot of time on them, other than to say were taking both administrative supplements and competitive revisions.

We also had a good discussion at the joint board meeting about allowing a change of scope of certain grants, and we have received a small number of requests to do that, and are working through that. But I think that we are still considering administrative supplements and competitive revisions, and we will be making funding decisions related to these very soon.

Now with the COVID part of the discussion behind us, at least for the next few hours, lets return to regular NCI business. Frankly, I am really excited, as I said, to be able to spend most of our time today on advancing cancer research and cancer science. Getting these concepts that the BSA will see today is really a lot of work getting these things together.

I think you will be impressed or youll be really shocked by how much the NCI has been able to get done during a period of complete telework. I think this is a testament to the really extreme efforts of the trained professionals in the NCI to get this work done, no matter what the situation.

As always, its good to mention where we are in the appropriations outlook. Theres really not a lot to report. At this stage right now, much of Congresss focus has been on supplemental funding related to the coronavirus pandemic, and the work on the 2021 budget has been a little a bit behind that.

But Congress has been busy and has already passed these supplemental fundings, and as is widely reported, is working on a fifth emergency appropriations bill. At the same time, appropriators are starting to take up their work on the regular FY21 appropriations bill, and I suspect well be hearing more about that soon. So, stay tuned.

Some really wonderful news during the joint board meeting last month, I was able to share some news about Dan Gallahan assuming the permanent role as director of NCIs Division of Cancer Biology. And today Im very pleased to share that Phil Castle will soon take the helm at NCIs Division of Cancer Prevention.

Those of you who know, Phil is replacing Barry Kramer in this role, but DCP has been led for over a year now by Debbie Winn, serving in an acting capacity. Debbie has done a spectacular job in this rolevery hard to be an acting in this roleand I want to thank her for taking this on for the benefit of the NCI. I would like a virtual round of applause for Debbie. Yay Debbie!

Phil is joining us from Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York, where he served as professor in the Department of Epidemiology and Population Health. He was also the executive director and co-founder of the Global Coalition Against Cervical Cancer.

Phil is no stranger to the NCI. He was a senior tenured investigator and tenure-track investigator in the Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics from 2003 to 2011. While at NCI, he was the lead investigator on several epidemiologic studies, including the Mississippi Delta project, the HPV Persistence and Progression Cohort, and the guidelines cohort and cancer at Kaiser Permanente, Northern California, and the Anal Cancer Screening Study.

Im thrilled Phil is joining the NCI in this key role, and Im really excited to have him join and provide vision for the DCP mission regarding cancer prevention, screening and early detection. So, welcome, Phil.

Id like to give a brief update on the Childhood Cancer Data Initiative. We are anxiously anticipating an upcoming working group report for the joint board meeting in June. As some of you know, Jaime Guidry Auvil kicked off the BSA working group on March 27 and provided an overview of its activities, as well as its relationship with ongoing NCI pediatric initiatives.

While we await the report, its important to note that we are using the FY20 CCDI funding to support foundational aspects of childhood cancer research and data related to those efforts, from which to build CCDI in years FY21 to FY30. So, we are working on this at a good speed with the already appropriated funds and are eagerly awaiting more advice from the working group on the shape of this initiative.

Ill just mention that the cell-based therapy and vector production efforts at Frederick National Lab are proceeding apace. As I mentioned though at the joint board meeting, we have actually had our first trial, using a CAR T-cells prepared at Frederick, open. The virus production facility will soon come online. And well evaluate potential viral production projects proposed by the extramural community.

So, we envision Frederick will have capacity to make viral vectors as needed for extramural searchers. This will include both developmental and clinical trial proposals.

Needless to say, Im thrilled with the progress and ramping up of this facility. In fact, this summer we will begin accepting applications. Weve dedicated space to produce viral projects, so those of you who will need help producing virus for, say, a CAR T trial or some other related efforts, stay tuned for the announcement about the acceptance of applications.

I think many on this board are aware of the interesting pattern of prostate cancer statistics over the last few years, regarding incidence and mortality, with changing recommendations related to PSA screening. The NCI has been following this area carefully. We had a very large internal NCI meeting, spanning the gamut from basic researchers to clinical trialists, to population health science researchers, to discuss where our prostate cancer research portfolio ought to be, in light of these changing statistics, and we decided a good way to go forward would be to have a lot of advice from the extramural community.

And for that reason, were working towards a workshop next spring to bring in extramural perspective to convene the best folks to try and understand where the NCI should be focusing its research mission related to prostate cancer now. Bill Dahut and others are leading this effort at the NCI.

I thought Id mentioned a few quick research updates that we found exciting. I always like to try and at least note some of the great science that NCI has done, either intramurally, or funded extramurally, and always try and bring up a few recent items.

This is work from the DeNardo lab at Washington University, published recently in Cancer Cell, related to dendritic cells in tumor immunotherapy. It proposes that the number of dendritic cells in a tumor may explain why immunotherapy works for some cancers, but not others, and work in miceboosting dendritic cell number triggered an immune response in pancreatic cancer, which has been traditionally difficult in terms of immunotherapy. So exciting research proposals to follow.

Work from the Richard Kitsis lab at Albert Einstein tries to better understand the relationship between daunorubicin and doxorubicin and cardiomyopathy, and developed an experimental drug to prevent this chemotherapy-induced heart toxicity. It does so without interfering with the chemotherapys therapeutic ability to kill cancer cells in mice. So, interesting work for a long-standing problem related to the use of these agents at extended doses for patients.

In some microbiome research from Marcel van den Brink at Memorial Sloan Kettering in people with blood, hematologic malignancies, the health of their gut microbiome appears to affect the risk of dying after receiving allogeneic stem cell transplant, according to this NCI-funded study, published in the New England Journal of Medicine that got tremendous attention in the press. An exciting development to help improve outcomes for patients who need allogeneic transplantation.

Finally, in addition to our grantee blog, Bottom Line, which is now widely read, and our research enterprise blog, which is Cancer Currents, I also also want to remind everyone about an important resource on our cancer.gov site. This site is specifically designed for researchers with questions. And it is updated frequently with new information as it becomes available.

To date, weve tracked over 20,000 visits to these blogs and other researcher-focused web content. I wanted to stress that we know all too well that the extramural community, as is the case in nearly every sector of the nation, things are really hurting out there.

And regardless of how the back-to-business plan does roll out at various institutions, it will really take some time to bounce back. We know, for instance, that universities and institutions have begun furloughing staff and laying off researchers. We know clinical trials accrual is down, especially for non-treatment trials.

All of this will slow the pace of research, but beyond that and equally important, the public health crisis represents a real hardship for our families, our communities, and patients with cancer. NCI has not lost sight of this. Well do all we can help to recover from these significant setbacks.

See the article here:
Sharpless: COVID-19 threatens to reverse long-running trend of decreasing cancer mortality - The Cancer Letter

Posted in California Stem Cells | Comments Off on Sharpless: COVID-19 threatens to reverse long-running trend of decreasing cancer mortality – The Cancer Letter

Precision medicine guides choice of better drug therapy in severe heart disease – Science Codex

Posted: May 16, 2020 at 11:45 am

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

Posted in Genetic medicine | Comments Off on Precision medicine guides choice of better drug therapy in severe heart disease – Science Codex

Akouos to Present Data from Inner Ear Gene Therapy Platform at 23rd ASGCT Annual Meeting – Business Wire

Posted: May 16, 2020 at 11:45 am

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

Posted in Genetic medicine | Comments Off on Akouos to Present Data from Inner Ear Gene Therapy Platform at 23rd ASGCT Annual Meeting – Business Wire

Scientists race to find a cure or vaccine for the coronavirus. Here are the top drugs in development – CNBC

Posted: May 16, 2020 at 11:45 am

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

Posted in Genetic medicine | Comments Off on Scientists race to find a cure or vaccine for the coronavirus. Here are the top drugs in development – CNBC

Tech optimization: Unlocking the promise of precision medicine – Healthcare IT News

Posted: May 16, 2020 at 11:45 am

The healthcare provider organization is a crucial participant in a fast-evolving ecosystem around precision medicine, which includes pharma and biotech companies, medical device manufacturers, national research organizations, academic medical centers, patient advocacy groups, and others.

According to the Precision Medicine Initiative, precision medicine is an approach for disease treatment and prevention that takes into account individual variability in genes, environment and lifestyles.

Precision medicine and personalized medicine often are used interchangeably, but have slightly different connotations with the former focused more on the clinical realm of genomics and the latter taking a more expansive view of social and behavioral health.

Both hold huge potential for better health outcomes but also require complex and challenging technology deployments, changes to clinical workflow, and education for physicians and patients alike.

It is important that the provider CIO help to lead their organization into this new world by considering how existing technologies can be optimized and how new, disruptive technologies can be anticipated over multiple years of capital budget investments, said Dan Kinsella, managing director, healthcare and life science, at consulting giant Deloitte.

Of paramount importance to the typical provider CIO is how to operationalize precision medicine at the point of care. There is not a one-size-fits-all solution for healthcare providers, but there are leading practices to consider whether you are an academic medical center, an integrated delivery network or a community hospital.

In this special report, seven precision medicine technology experts from Accenture, CereCore, Chilmark Research, Deloitte and Orion Health offer healthcare provider organization CIOs and other health IT leaders best practices for optimizing this technology.

Some optimization techniques for precision medicine technologies can take place during system implementation. Implementing precision medicine technology is no different from any other IT implementation project, said Ian McCrae, CEO of Orion Health, a healthcare technology company delivering interoperability, population health and precision medicine systems.

Healthcare CIOs and other health IT leaders must get the basics of change management right by following seven steps, McCrae advised.

Ian McCrae, Orion Health

First, know what problem you are trying to solve, he said. Have this clearly defined from the outset. Dont make the mistake of trying to implement the tech if you havent identified what you will be using it for. Second, ensure the solution makes life easier and delivers a better outcome. If the project fails in either of these areas, then it will fail overall. If the precision medicine tech doesnt make life easier for clinicians, or deliver a better outcome for patients, then why are you implementing it?

Third, have clear roles and responsibilities, including data stewardship, governance and ethics, he suggested. The principles of data governance and stewardship are critical, and must not be overlooked if a project is to be successful, he said.

What are your guidelines for governing the data you will extract? he asked. These guidelines should be clearly aligned with your organizations strategic vision and values. Ethics of data use is another critical area: informed patient consent, the right to withdraw, confidentiality, objectivity the list is long.

Fourth, CIOs need to connect the dots with precision medicine technologies, McCrae advised.

Providing a better prediction without a means to act on it will be a recipe for frustration, he said. Once you have the technology to enable improved predictions, will you also have the resources to apply the learnings? If you cant deliver a better outcome for patients, then its likely your project will fail. Fifth, remember accuracy isnt necessarily the most important thing.

We often compare solutions by how often they get the answer right, without understanding what people want to do with the answer, he added. Knowing that someone is 61.3% likely to get cancer versus 59.8% isnt as important as how quickly you can know it, and what you can do when you find out.

Sixth, stick to the plan and do not get distracted by failures along the way, he said.

We find it hard to continue the development of something when the first stage isnt as successful as we had hoped, he noted. If we are aiming to make precision medicine the gold standard across different fields but the first application isnt successful, that doesnt mean you should throw out the goal.

And seventh, start with specialties where the application is clear, said McCrae. Rather than aiming to implement the tech into a multitude of areas, select one or two specialties where the value of precision medicine is clear. Learn from those before expanding into new areas.

Dr. Charles Bell, chief medical officer at CereCore, a health IT consulting firm, advised that getting the foundational infrastructure established before precision medicine can be applied via the EHR is one best practice for optimizing the use of the technology.

Precision medicine relies on genomics genomics, including pharmacogenomics, has created a vast amount of data, whereas the advent of the EHR has established an enormous data repository, he said. The success of advancing the technology is dependent on the genomic data residing in a repository that the EHR can readily provide access to. Therefore, there is a foundational infrastructure that must be established before precision medicine can be applied leveraging the EHR platforms.

Dr. Charles Bell, CereCore

Genomic medicine is currently informing clinical care. Notable examples are in the treatment of some cancer types, cystic fibrosis and heart disease.

The integration of the EHR, the data repository and the genomics medicine platform becomes essential to translate relevant and crucial data to drive precision medicine care, Bell said. A streamlined workflow must be established that allows clinicians to provide appropriate care from within the EHR using genomics and precision medicine.

Precision medicine requires capturing and analyzing complex data so that it is actionable at the point of care. Evolution of clinician workflow to support precision medicine use cases even those that are relatively simple, such as pharmacogenomics requires multidisciplinary change-management efforts and thoughtful systems integration, said Kinsella of Deloitte.

Furthermore, the challenges of leveraging next-gen sequencing data in clinical decision support exceeds the capability of current EHR systems, except in certain use-cases such as pharmacogenomics, said Kinsellas colleague Connor OBrien, manager at Deloitte Consulting.

Dan Kinsella, Deloitte

This requires external decision support analysis, which often is a manual process, such as the outputs of diagnostic review boards, although we are seeing many attempts at automation being applied, such as the decision-support platforms being deployed by GenomOncology, 2bPrecise, Syapse and others.

When it comes to oncology and other service line roadmaps, health IT leaders should work with their service-line leaders to understand any gaps they have in the technology required to enable excellence in care delivery, Kinsella suggested.

With oncology specifically, ensure that genomic requirements are understood as the capital investments may require multiple fiscal years, he said. Refine your technology roadmap for tumor boards as the future state is likely to include a variety of external contributors such as leading academic medical centers and drug and biotech companies.

Then there are social determinants of health (SDoH). Precision requires understanding of variability in environment and lifestyle in addition to genetics. While most provider organizations are oriented to patients, expansion to the notion of member as an individual who may or may not have a medical record is required, Kinsella insisted.

Value-based contracts with payers define specific cohorts (members) for whom the provider has assumed a level of accountability, he explained. Background and lifestyle questions not typically the focus of most EHR-centric workflows are crucial to the personalization of the care we deliver.

With precision medicine comeinstitutional alliance relationships, said Kinsellas colleague Kate Liebelt, a manager with the Precision Medicine Community of Practice at Deloitte Consulting.

In addition to having the logo on your website, what is the essence of your relationships with your external partners? she asked. Are you sending your data out to a registry without distilling the value of that information for care of your own patients? Increasingly, providers are licensing proprietary data to industry partners. For example, Cancer Commons is a not-for-profit network focused on connecting patients, physicians and providers to access cutting-edge personalized treatments beyond the traditional standard of care, through data sharing.

Entities like the Texas Medical Center Accelerator harness innovation and talent from area healthcare organizations and generate start-up companies with regional, local and international reach, she added.

Real-world evidence is driving innovation in value-based contracting and reimbursement strategies as demonstrated by the CMS Oncology Care Model a new payment and delivery model designed to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of specialty care, she explained. Enablement of precision medicine helps AMCs continue to meet their tripartite mission of education, care delivery and research.

And on a related note, interoperability. Sending and receiving data from across the evolving ecosystem requires that one be at the top of one's game regarding interoperability and, importantly, cybersecurity and compliance from FTTP, to HL7, to FHIR APIand beyond, OBrien said.

Dont leave out your CISO or legal and compliance teams, he said. Current architectures integrate insights from external clinical-decision-support systems, with the EHR serving as the transactional system of record:insights derived from external decision support FHIR API-based integrations that trigger EHR transactions such as pre-populated order sets, modifications to problem lists, and incorporation of CLIA test reports into clinical documentation modules in EHRs.

Jody Ranck, senior analyst at Chilmark Research, a healthcare IT research and consulting firm, advised that integration of genomic data across different EHR systems and across different laboratory and precision medicine platforms is key and challenging for most organizations.

Genetic test results tend to be large files that are difficult to integrate into an EHR, he said. Therefore, having a road map for your precision medicine approach is essential to think ahead several years and analyze which clinical areas will be impacted by the precision medicine program first. Oncology tends to be the most well-developed area, but in our COVID-19 moment, we may see the need for adjustments as significant caseloads of patients are those recovering from treatment with long-term challenges and new knowledge of the virus expands.

Jody Ranck, Chilmark Research

The impact of the pandemic on precision medicine may have some long-term consequences for best practices.

There will be a distributional shift of baseline health characteristics at the population level for the datasets that machine learning algorithms were trained on and new features to these populations that may interact with specific precision medicine initiatives, Ranck said.

The pandemic also has highlighted how poorly prepared the health IT infrastructure was for a public health crisis. Future federal funding, if funded wisely, will have significant funding to enhance precision public health initiatives, particularly those that bring social determinants into the picture. CIOs will face growing pressure to find effective ways to leverage and enhance SDoH efforts through more precise allocation knowledge and financial resources to address the sequelae of the pandemic.

One best practice for optimizing precision medicine technology is to create integration standards that support treatment across ambulatory and inpatient settings, said Bell of CereCore.

The large amount of data that has been generated in both the ambulatory and inpatient settings creates a challenge for integration of the information, he said.

Standards need to be established and refined to aid in the adoption of the technology that will support precision medicine. Clinical-decision-support capabilities must be integrated within the EHR. The evolution of the use of genomics to support precision medicine is dependent on collaborative development by multiple stakeholders.

The list of requirements includes, but is not limited to, genomics specifications, clinical decision support, systems capable of handling genomic information, and resources to bridge the gaps between the data and its use clinically, he added.

An example of the use of pharmacogenetics is that of Warfarin dosing, he said. For a decade now, recommendations for Warfarin dose requirements have been influenced by gene studies. Though there continue to be questions of the effect on specific genotypes in some patient populations, there still has been an improvement in treatment of identified patients with warfarin therapy. The result is that information is gained for a more effective treatment plan and a decreased risk of potentially harmful side effects.

The more specific needs of varied patient populations can be addressed with further use of genetic data that is standardized across the patients settings, he added.

Most EHRs offer a genomics solution to address providers workflow, Bell noted. An order is entered into the system and a pathway provides information to enhance clinical decision-making. It takes into account clinical decision support as well as alternatives if genomic results do not exist or are not accessed within the system. For all vendors, including Meditech, Cerner and Epic, storage and access to genomic repositories needs to be resolved.

eMerge and ClinGen are examples of organizations, along with other resources and efforts, that are developing approaches to integrate genomic information into precise clinical care, he added.

To enable precision medicine, leading provider organizations are refreshing their existing analytics strategies, and hardening core data-management capabilities, said Kinsella of Deloitte. Note that analytics includes descriptive (reports on what happened yesterday), predictive (what might happen in the future) and prescriptive (for example, precision medicine leading practices), he explained.

Regarding reference architecture, use what you have, buy what you need and build what you must, Kinsella said. Explore the capabilities of your core enterprise applications including EHR, ERP and cost accounting, and adjust known levers for example, clinical-decision-support capabilities, lab-management systems, and billing and coding management to operationalize a precision medicine program. Focus on the tools you may require to ensure collection, curation, calculation and consumption of data to generate analytic insights.

On a related front, there are edge technologies and big data. By leveraging open source and edge solutions, providers can augment legacy analytics and data management capacity, Deloittes OBrien said.

For example, providers increasingly are commissioning data lakes to collect and curate data from a variety of internal and external sources, he noted. The velocity of data, including streaming, enables monitoring (for example, sepsis data),disease management and population health surveillance (for example, SDoH), and remote patient-monitoring, tapping into the tsunami of data generated from wearables and IoT.

The need for analysis provenance and traceability of results becomes amplified when dealing with molecular-level data, due to the dynamic nature of scientific discovery, he added.

Genomic variants that are classified as variants of unknown significance today can become clinically significant as scientific knowledge progresses, he said. These requirements will become even more critical as more dynamic types of omics data become clinically significant, such as being realized in the case of metabolomic and proteomic data. Put simply, todays information exhaust may become tomorrows rocket fuel.

In the continuous pursuit of data excellence, CIOs should collaborate with CMIOs, CNIOs and clinical informatics to ensure that key data elements are understood, configured to be captured by the enterprise applications, and, most important, align the workflow so that data is collected predictably, Kinsella said.

Registries, often a standard feature of enterprise EHRs, represent untapped potential, he noted. Typical features include definition of inclusion rules and calculation instructions for specific cohorts of patients. When, for example, does a diabetic patient get tagged as a diabetic patient in the diabetes registry?

Threaded throughout the emerging theme of precision medicine enablement is education around analytics: training in data science, and the application of descriptive, predictive and prescriptive analytics, he added. Increasingly, provider organizations are hiring in-house analytics experts and partnering with entities on their data strategies and capabilities, he said.

Review your organization strategy and align your data sharing approach accordingly, added Deloittes Liebelt. Are you motivated by social good? Academic pursuit of new science? Are you open to earning revenue by sharing de-identified data by building bandwidth to drive robust real-world evidence programs and innovative industry partnerships?

Patient registries and patient-reported outcomes-measurement are a significant means of value creation for provider organizations, particularly in the areas of oncology, rare and orphan disease, and chronic disease management, she said.

Theoretically, providers can predict and validate a patients predisposition to diabetes and track and measure their progress on various treatment regiments through the systematic collection of patient data, for example, population-level data, lab results, patient-reported outcomes, etc., she explained.

As providers continue to make their real-world data available in open, closed or hybrid networks, there is an emergence of innovative partnership opportunities with other provider organizations, pharmaceutical/biotechnology/medical device companies, health insurance companies, and publicly and privately funded research institutions.

On another front, precision medicine is a significant mind-shift for both patients and providers, and the integration of genomic data, or more importantly, knowledge, is a significant challenge, said Ranck of Chilmark Research.

The process of obtaining genetic information is not always as straightforward,and interpreting these results for a patient can be difficult, he said. Most diseases are not a one gene equals X disease type of phenomenon.

Physicians will need more time to digest precision medicine data and render this into actionable information for the patient, he said.

In the context of standard clinical workflows, this is a challenge, he observed. However, there are platforms that can reduce the burden for physicians, but rigorous evaluation of these solutions and the underlying science needs to be done by physicians and scientists with sufficient knowledge of statistics, machine learning and genetics.

Genetic counselors will be essential and may not be in adequate supply as precision medicine matures, he added. Precision medicine is not solely a technological issue and needs to be understood as socio-technical in nature.

Dr. Kaveh Safavi, senior managing director at Accenture Health, offers two best practices when trying to optimize precision medicine technology.

Good clinical practice today needs therapy to be tailored to the genetics of the tumor and the patients immune system for many types of cancer, he explained.

Dr. Kaveh Safavi, Accenture Health

From a CIO perspective, precision medicine achievements mean building a new environment for data acquisition, analysis and decision support in near real time. Oncology decision-support platforms will require managing genetic information of the patient, the patients tumor and other phenotypic data that may not be part of the typical electronic health record.

Since much of oncology care is provided in an ambulatory setting, it also will require seamless data sharing across care settings that may cross boundaries of a clinical enterprise but be essential to treating a patients condition in the most appropriate way possible, Safavi said.

And on another note, there is a growing body of knowledge that combines pharmacology and genomics to develop effective and safe medications and doses tailored to a patients genetic makeup, he said. A delicate part of a CIOs responsibility is selecting and investing in an informatics strategy to support this highly dynamic aspect of clinical care.

An informed drug-prescribing platform requires the ability to gather biological information found in genomes, microbiomes, proteomes, metabolomes, phenotypes and endotypes, he concluded, and applying them to drug-prescribing decision-support platforms used by prescribers should take into account looking for technology architectures with the greatest flexibility to predictably handle large data volumes and data types.

Twitter:@SiwickiHealthITEmail the writer:bill.siwicki@himssmedia.comHealthcare IT News is a HIMSS Media publication.

Go here to see the original:
Tech optimization: Unlocking the promise of precision medicine - Healthcare IT News

Posted in Genetic medicine | Comments Off on Tech optimization: Unlocking the promise of precision medicine – Healthcare IT News

Sarepta Therapeutics and Dyno Therapeutics Announce Agreement to Develop Next-Generation Gene Therapy Vectors for Muscle Diseases – GlobeNewswire

Posted: May 16, 2020 at 11:45 am

-- Agreement leverages Sareptas leadership in gene therapy for neuromuscular and cardiovascular diseases and Dynos CapsidMap artificial intelligence platform to design AAV vectors --

CAMBRIDGE, Mass., May 11, 2020 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc.(NASDAQ:SRPT), the leader in precision genetic medicine for rare diseases, and Dyno Therapeutics, Inc., a biotech company applying artificial intelligence (AI) to gene therapy, today announced an agreement to develop next-generation Adeno-Associated Virus (AAV) vectors for muscle diseases, using Dynos CapsidMap platform.

AI and machine learning technologies have the potential to deliver enhanced vectors for gene therapies. Dynos proprietary CapsidMap platform opens up new ways to identify novel capsids the cell-targeting protein shell of viral vectors that could offer improved muscle targeting and immune-evading properties, in addition to advantages in packaging and manufacturing.

Sareptas world-leading gene therapy engine is founded on three pillars: developing a broad portfolio of programs to treat rare diseases; our first-in-class manufacturing expertise; and investment in advancing and further improving the science of gene therapy to help patients in need of more options. To that end, our agreement with Dyno provides us with another valuable tool to develop next-generation capsids for gene therapies to treat rare diseases, said Doug Ingram, Sareptas President and Chief Executive Officer. By leveraging Dynos AI platform and Sareptas deep expertise in gene therapy development, our goal is to advance next-generation treatments with improved muscle-targeting capabilities.

Under the terms of the agreement, Dyno will be responsible for the design and discovery of novel AAV capsids with improved functional properties for gene therapy and Sarepta will be responsible for conducting preclinical, clinical and commercialization activities for gene therapy product candidates using the novel capsids. If successful, Dyno could receive over $40 million in upfront, option and license payments during the research phase of the collaboration. Additionally, if Sarepta develops and commercializes multiple candidates for multiple muscle diseases, Dyno will be eligible for additional significant future milestone payments. Dyno will also receive royalties on worldwide net sales of any commercial products developed through the collaboration.

This agreement is a major step forward in our plan to realize the potential of Dynos AI platform for gene therapies to improve patient health. We are excited to work with Sarepta to create gene therapies with improved properties to address a range of muscle-related diseases, stated Dynos CEO and co-founder Eric D. Kelsic, Ph.D. The success of the gene therapies developed through this collaboration with Sarepta will rely on AI-powered vectors that allow gene therapies to be safely and precisely targeted to the muscle tissue.

About CapsidMap for Designing AAV Gene Therapies By designing capsids that confer improved functional properties to Adeno-Associated Virus (AAV)vectors, Dynos proprietary CapsidMap platform overcomes the limitations of todays gene therapies on the market and in development. Todays treatments are primarily confined to a small number of naturally occurring AAV vectors that are limited by delivery, immunity, packaging size, and manufacturing challenges. CapsidMap uses artificial intelligence (AI) technology for the design of novel capsids, the cell-targeting protein shell of viral vectors. The CapsidMap platform applies leading-edge DNA library synthesis and next-generation DNA sequencing to measure invivo gene delivery properties in high throughput. At the core of CapsidMap are advanced search algorithms leveraging machine learning and Dynos massive quantities of experimental data, that together build a comprehensive map of sequence space and thereby accelerate the discovery and optimization of synthetic AAV capsids.

Dynos technology platform builds on certain intellectual property developed in the lab of George Church, Ph.D., who is Robert Winthrop Professor of Genetics at Harvard Medical School (HMS), a Core Faculty member at Harvards Wyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering, and a co-founder of Dyno. Several of the technical breakthroughs that enabled Dynos approach to optimize synthetic AAV capsid engineering were described in a November 2019 publication in the journal Science, based on work conducted by Dyno founders and members of the Church Lab at HMS and the Wyss Institute. Dyno has an exclusive option to enter into a license agreement with Harvard University for this technology.

About Dyno TherapeuticsDyno Therapeutics is a pioneer in applying artificial intelligence (AI) and quantitative high-throughput in vivo experimentation to gene therapy. The companys proprietary CapsidMap platform is designed to rapidly discover and systematically optimize superior Adeno-Associated Virus (AAV) capsid vectors with delivery properties that significantly improve upon current approaches to gene therapy and expand the range of diseases treatable with gene therapies. Dyno was founded in 2018 by experienced biotech entrepreneurs and leading scientists in the fields of gene therapy and machine learning. The company is located in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Visit http://www.dynotx.com for additional information.

AboutSarepta TherapeuticsAt Sarepta, we are leading a revolution in precision genetic medicine and every day is an opportunity to change the lives of people living with rare disease. The Company has built an impressive position in Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) and in gene therapies for limb-girdle muscular dystrophies (LGMDs), mucopolysaccharidosis type IIIA, Charcot-Marie-Tooth (CMT), and other CNS-related disorders, with more than 40 programs in various stages of development. The Companys programs and research focus span several therapeutic modalities, including RNA, gene therapy and gene editing. For more information, please visitwww.sarepta.com or follow us on Twitter, LinkedIn, Instagram and Facebook.

Sarepta Therapeutics Forward-looking StatementsThis press release contains "forward-looking statements." Any statements contained in this press release that are not statements of historical fact may be deemed to be forward-looking statements. Words such as "believes," "anticipates," "plans," "expects," "will," "intends," "potential," "possible" and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements include statements regarding the potential of artificial intelligence and machine learning technologies to deliver enhanced vectors for gene therapies; the potential of the CapsidMap platform to offer improved muscle targeting and immune-evading properties, in addition to advantages in packaging and manufacturing; the agreement between Sarepta and Dyno Therapeutics providing a valuable tool to develop next-generation capsids for gene therapies to treat rare disease; the parties goal to advance next-generation treatments with improved muscle-targeting capabilities; the parties responsibilities under the agreement and potential payments to Dyno Therapeutics; and the potential of AI-powered vectors to allow gene therapies to be safely and precisely targeted to the muscle tissue.

These forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties, many of which are beyond Sareptas control. Known risk factors include, among others: the expected benefits and opportunities related to the collaboration between Sarepta and Dyno Therapeutics may not be realized or may take longer to realize than expected due to challenges and uncertainties inherent in product research and development. In particular, the collaboration may not result in any viable treatments suitable for commercialization due to a variety of reasons, including any inability of the parties to perform their commitments and obligations under the agreement; the results of research may not be consistent with past results or may not be positive or may otherwise fail to meet regulatory approval requirements for the safety and efficacy of product candidates; possible limitations of company financial and other resources; manufacturing limitations that may not be anticipated or resolved for in a timely manner; regulatory, court or agency decisions, such as decisions by the United States Patent and Trademark Office with respect to patents that cover Sareptas product candidates; and those risks identified under the heading Risk Factors in Sareptas most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2019 and most recent Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) as well as other SEC filings made by the Company which you are encouraged to review.

Any of the foregoing risks could materially and adversely affect the Companys business, results of operations and the trading price of Sareptas common stock. For a detailed description of risks and uncertainties Sarepta faces, you are encouraged to review Sarepta's 2019 Annual Report on Form 10-K and most recent Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the SEC as well as other SEC filings made by Sarepta. We caution investors not to place considerable reliance on the forward-looking statements contained in this press release. Sarepta does not undertake any obligation to publicly update its forward-looking statements based on events or circumstances after the date hereof.

ContactsFor Sarepta: Investors: Ian Estepan, 617-274-4052, iestepan@sarepta.comMedia: Tracy Sorrentino, 617-301-8566, tsorrentino@sarepta.com

For Dyno:Kathryn MorrisThe Yates Networkkathryn@theyatenetwork.com914-204-6412

See the rest here:
Sarepta Therapeutics and Dyno Therapeutics Announce Agreement to Develop Next-Generation Gene Therapy Vectors for Muscle Diseases - GlobeNewswire

Posted in Genetic medicine | Comments Off on Sarepta Therapeutics and Dyno Therapeutics Announce Agreement to Develop Next-Generation Gene Therapy Vectors for Muscle Diseases – GlobeNewswire

Page 1,015«..1020..1,0141,0151,0161,017..1,0201,030..»