The remains of thousands of Aboriginal Australians are scattered around the world in museums and universities. Many institutions accept these remains should be returned to descendant communities, but its not always easy to do.

A major problem is that we often lack detailed information about where in Australia the remains came from. It has been estimated that up to a quarter of the human remains in Australian museums have poor contextual information.

Recently, we completed an Australian Research Council-funded project that focused on human remains from the Cape York Peninsula of Queensland, in collaboration with several local Aboriginal communities.

What we found suggests no single method such as DNA testing or using geological clues will be enough to reliably determine the origin of remains an interdisciplinary approach using all available evidence will be required.

Read more: Mungo Man returns home: there is still much he can teach us about ancient Australia

Over the past few years there has been considerable interest in the possibility that genetic testing can solve the repatriation problem. One aim of our project was to see if this approach would work in the Australian context.

In a study reported last year, we extracted genetic information from ancient human remains of known provenance and compared them to genomes obtained from living Aboriginal Australians.

We looked at two different kinds of DNA: nuclear DNA (this is the DNA that contains the genetic code for building your body) and mitochondrial DNA (the DNA of the tiny cell units called mitochondria that help to power your bodys cells).

When we used nuclear DNA, we were able to link ancient remains and living individuals from the same area with a high degree of accuracy. But when we only employed mitochondrial DNA from the ancient remains, the accuracy dropped markedly. The nuclear DNA analyses had a success rate of 100%, whereas the mitochondrial DNA analyses failed to identify a region of origin for 31% of the individuals and suggested the wrong region for 7% of them.

This is an issue because, for very old remains, its much more likely that we will be able to recover mitochondrial DNA than nuclear DNA. The reason is simply numbers: each cell contains hundreds or thousands of copies of the mitochondrial DNA but only one or two of the nuclear DNA.

There are other problems with relying solely on DNA for repatriation. The complexities of human social life (such as inter-tribal marriage) and the impacts of colonisation on Aboriginal Australians (such as displacement) mean that even full genome comparisons may not correctly identify an individuals tribal affiliation.

Another way to get information about where human remains are from is to measure the strontium in their bones and teeth.

Strontium is a common element, and our bodies use it as a building block. There are different types of strontium, called isotopes, and the ratio of these isotopes in the ground varies from place to place. So, if you measure the strontium isotope ratios in some remains and have a map of the different ratios at different places, it can help you work out where the remains came from.

Strontium isotope ratios have been used to guide repatriation elsewhere in the world, but our research in Cape York suggests this approach also wont solve the problem of repatriating Australian Aboriginal remains by itself.

In the course of our Cape York project, we completed the first regional scale analysis of strontium isotope variability in Australia. This involved collecting a large number of water, soil, and plant samples and creating a strontium isotope map or isoscape.

We found that locations often did not have unique values. This suggests that strontium ratios can narrow down the range of possible areas to which a set of remains could be returned, but on their own they are unlikely to pinpoint the exact area.

Read more: Where did you grow up? How strontium in your teeth can help answer that question

Based on the results of our studies with genomes and isotopes, we think a reliable protocol for repatriating Aboriginal remains will take more than one scientific technique. Genomics alone wont solve the problem. Nor will isotope geochemistry.

Instead, we need to develop an integrated interdisciplinary approach using DNA, isotopes, and whatever other lines of evidence are available (such as detailed analysis of bones, and even linguistics).

In order for this approach to work, we need to avoid creating a hierarchy among the scientific disciplines involved and focus instead on how they complement each other. In addition, we need to devise mechanisms that encourage sustained interaction and knowledge transfer between scientists from different disciplines.

We drew another major conclusion from our Cape York project: those of us involved in repatriation projects should aim higher. We need to put more time and energy into developing new techniques and assessing the accuracy of existing ones.

Equally importantly, we need to seek new ways of fostering collaboration among scientists from different fields and between scientists and Aboriginal communities.

Lastly, the repatriation of Aboriginal remains deserves the same level of rigour as the repatriation of historical military remains and modern missing person cases. Crucially, this means that we should employ the standard of proof for coronial investigations, which is on the balance of probabilities.

See more here:
Returning to country: we should use genetics, geology and more to repatriate Aboriginal remains - The Conversation AU

In September, the world of entertainment news buzzed with word that Kim Kardashian West tested positive for lupus and rheumatoid arthritis. The star underwent further tests, however, resulting in a diagnosis of psoriatic arthritis instead. While all three autoimmune disorders share some signs and symptoms, psoriatic arthritis is generally considered to have a better prognosis than lupus. That said, the conditions can co-exist and lupus has gotten a reputation for being difficult to diagnose, especially in the absence of the butterfly-shaped rash on ones cheeks and nose.

Im so relieved. The pain is going to come and go sometimes, but I can manage it and this is not going to stop me, Kardashian said in an article in response to receiving her psoriatic arthritis diagnosis. Her relief at not having lupus is understandable, given that lupus can affect a greater number of organs and systems in the body and is considered to be life-threatening.

Lupus, rheumatoid arthritis and psoriatic arthritis are examples of some conditions that are often considered when an individual is undergoing diagnosis for certain autoimmune diseases, because they share several symptoms and can trigger positive results in the same diagnostic tests. Kim Kardashian received the initial news that she had lupus or rheumatoid arthritis likely due to positive antinuclear antibody (ANA) test results.

An ANA is a blood test ordered when a doctor, usually a rheumatologist, suspects that a patient has a particular kind of autoimmune disorder. This test checks for the existence of autoantibodies, which are produced when a persons body is, in effect, attacking itself and several areas of the body are affected. A positive ANA test usually indicates that the doctors suspicions are confirmed, and then other factors (like medical and family history) need to be considered and more tests done to arrive at a diagnosis.

Psoriatic arthritis is usually diagnosed between the ages of 20 and 50, and occurs in women and men equally. While there is no cure, appropriate and early treatment can help prevent major damage to affected parts of the body.

Psoriatic arthritis appears in a minority of individuals who have already been diagnosed with psoriasis, an autoimmune skin condition with which Kim Kardashian and her mother, Kris Jenner, had already been diagnosed. Psoriatic arthritis affects around 520,000 individuals in the United States alone.

The autoimmune condition is believed to be caused by a combination of genetic factors and environmental triggers. So while some people inherit psoriatic arthritis-related genes, only a subset of those individuals will go on to develop the condition. In these cases, the disease could be triggered by other illnesses or infections, various forms of extreme stress, poor diet, smoking, and so on.

Around 40 percent of psoriatic arthritis patients have one or more close family members with psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis diagnosis, which strongly indicates that the disease is hereditary. Interestingly, recent research has suggested that psoriasis patients who go on to develop psoriatic arthritis have a different genetic profile than those who do not. And the most well-studied of the psoriatic arthritis genes belong to a family of genes called the human leukocyte antigen (HLA) complex, which help the body tell the difference between its own proteins and viral or bacterial proteins.

According to Genetics Home Reference by the U.S. National Library of Medicine, Variations of several HLA genes seem to affect the risk of developing psoriatic arthritis, as well as the type, severity, and progression of the condition.

Ive been feeling so tired, so nauseous, and my hands are really getting swollen. I feel like I literally am falling apart. My hands are numb, Kardashian said on a recent episode of Keeping Up with the Kardashians.

These kinds of descriptions are common in all three conditions lupus, rheumatoid arthritis, and psoriatic arthritis though each patient presents with a different array of symptoms, and all with varying degrees of severity. The main symptoms of psoriatic arthritis are pain, stiffness, and swelling in affected joints, along with chronic fatigue. Joints near the end of the fingertips and tips of the toes are often affected, as are bones in the spine.

The symptoms of psoriatic arthritis tend to worsen over time, though some patients experience periods of remission when symptoms temporarily improve. Compared to rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis is more likely to cause swelling in the smallest joints of the fingers and toes, foot pain (in the heel and/or sole of the foot), and lower back pain caused by inflammation in vertebral joints. Patients with psoriatic arthritis are also more likely to experience symptoms on one side of the body or in different appendages on each side (in other words, it tends to be an asymmetric disease), whereas patients with rheumatoid arthritis are more likely to experience symptoms that affect both sides of the body equally (symmetric disease).

Most if not all patients with psoriatic arthritis also have psoriasis, an autoimmune condition that causes red, scaly patches of skin that can be itchy, painful and embarrassing. Psoriasis usually precedes the onset of psoriatic arthritis by several years. People with psoriatic arthritis commonly experience fingernail changes, too, such as the formation of a pitted or ridged nail surface, or the nails become separated from the nail beds.

There are several treatment options for psoriatic arthritis, which include nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) to reduce inflammation and pain, immunosuppressants to suppress the immune system, disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) to slow the progression of the disease, and newer medications that minimize the activity of certain enzymes involved in the inflammatory process. Treatment plans may also involve steroid injections administered directly into affected joints, or joint replacement surgery in cases where the disease has significantly progressed.

Kristen Hovet covers genetics, medical innovations and the intersection of sociology and culture. The North Dakota native is based in Vancouver, Canada, where she is working on a masters degree in health communication at Washington State University. Follow her on her website or Twitter @kristenhovet

Continued here:
Kim Kardashian West's battle with psoriatic arthritis: Will understanding the genetics of the autoimmune disorder point to a cure? - Genetic Literacy...

In the 1950s, Dmitri K. Belyaev began one of the most famous experiments in animal domestication. Dr. Belyaev, a geneticist at the Institute of Cytology and Genetics in Novosibirsk, Russia, selectively bred foxes that he had acquired from a fur farm, concentrating only on reducing their fear of humans.

Within 10 generations, he wrote in 1979, Like dogs, these foxes seek contact with familiar persons, tend to get close to them, and lick their hands and faces.

In a new paper in the journal Trends in Ecology and Evolution, several scientists have challenged a common interpretation of Dr. Belyaevs results, and have questioned whether scientists who study domestication have any common understanding of what the word means.

The authors dont dispute the essence of Dr. Belyaevs work: the selection for tameness, which is regarded as profoundly important in exploring the genetics and evolution of behavior.

But that wasnt all that Dr. Belyaev discovered. His foxes also showed physical changes, like piebald coats and floppy ears characteristics shared by dogs, cows and other domesticated animals.

Dr. Belyaev and the researchers who followed up his work suggested, as had Charles Darwin before them, that there might be a collection of physical traits that go along with tameness called domestication syndrome.

The authors of the new paper argue that this idea is undermined by an intriguing sub-chapter in the long history of the fur trade in Canada. The reaction to that criticism from other scientists has been mixed, reflecting contentious but cordial disagreements about what domestication is and how it happens.

The average pet lover may know the story of the foxes from a book by Lee Alan Dugatkin and Lyudmila Trut, who collaborated with Dr. Belyaev, called How to Tame a Fox (and Build a Dog).

Far fewer people probably know about the development of fox farming on Prince Edward Island, Canadas smallest province. This history is buried in plain sight, you might say, since you can learn about it easily if you visit International Fox Museum and Hall of Fame on the island.

The museum is not a common destination for evolutionary biologists who specialize in domestication. But one of them did visit back in 2015, and he was taken aback.

The late Raymond Coppinger, a biologist at Hampshire College in Massachusetts who was a major contributor to the study of dog evolution, toured the museum and returned full of questions.

He saw these pictures of spotted foxes, and they looked just like the Belyaev foxes, recalled Kathryn Lord, an animal behaviorist at the Broad Institute in Cambridge, Mass., and the first author of the new paper. Dr. Coppinger was her mentor at Hampshire College.

There have been academic reports as well, suggesting that the Russian foxes hailed from Prince Edward Island, Dr. Lord said: Different pieces of the story were all over, but nobody had put it together.

As it turned out, genetic tests showed that Dr. Belyaevs foxes did have roots in eastern Canada, which almost certainly meant Prince Edward Island. So the question bothering Dr. Coppinger and Dr. Lord was this: How much domestication had gone on before the famous fox experiment began?

She got the attention of Elinor Karlsson, a geneticist at the Broad Institute in whose lab Dr. Lord worked. And she drew in Greger Larson, a specialist in ancient canine DNA at the University of Oxford in England, who is deeply involved in questions of dog evolution and domestication. They began to refine the work Dr. Lord and Dr. Coppinger had already done.

Dr. Belyaev had plainly stated that his foxes were from farmed stock. So some domestication must have occurred before his experiment, said Anna Kukekova, a geneticist at the University of Illinois who researches the genetics of Russian foxes and has collaborated with Dr. Trut.

Dr. Belyaev recognized that fur farmers would have chosen animals that were at least somewhat tolerant of people, Dr. Kukekova said. But Dr. Belyaev also described his foxes as mostly uncomfortable with people, virtually wild animals. Now, Dr. Lord and her colleagues suggest otherwise.

Fox-farming pioneers on Prince Edward Island began by breeding wild-caught black foxes, also called silver foxes, a color variant of the red fox (Vulpes vulpes) common all over the world.

They were bred mainly for the look of the pelts. In 1910, one company sold 25 skins for $34,649.50, according to Silver Fox Odyssey: History of the Canadian Silver Fox Industry.

Then breeding stock became more profitable. Old proven breeders of good quality were valued during the last months of 1912 at from $18,000 to $25,000 a pair, according to a 1913 report by the Canadian government quoted in Silver Fox Odyssey. Eventually the industry declined, and there are only traces of it remaining.

The museum on Prince Edward Island has old photographs that show foxes looking very comfortable with human beings. And as Dr. Lord took a deep dive into fox-farming history, she found other sources suggesting the animals were already somewhat domesticated, including The Black Fox Magazine, a publication for people who hoped to make their fortune raising foxes for their pelts.

The magazine offers a glimpse into a bygone world. For example, an article by F. E. Muzzy in the January 1921 issue described the 1921 International Fox Show in Montreal. Mr. Muzzy wrote that one of the islands fox industry bigwigs, Leo Frank, brought a pair of tame foxes to town, and not only walked them on leashes but took them to a dance where the girls did the fox trot with these foxes around their necks.

Hearsay, of course, but a good story, given the other evidence.

Dr. Belyaevs claims in his landmark article were twofold. One, he had shown how quickly one could select for tameness and tolerance of human beings. The second was that breeding, or selecting for lack of fear in the presence of humans, also had brought about other changes, like floppy ears, spotted coats and differences in tail carriage.

He didnt use the term, but that suite of physical traits came to be known as domestication syndrome. And it was thought to cross species, showing up in cows and goats, for example, as well as foxes.

The idea of domestication syndrome, said Dr. Larson, has been appealing but not thoroughly examined. He, Dr. Lord and their colleagues looked at 10 papers that defined domestication syndrome and found that there wasnt one trait that was included in all the definitions. What the hell are we even talking about here? he asked.

The authors argue that the foxes already showed some of the physical traits that Dr. Belyaev described by the time he got them. His breeding may, however have affected how frequently the traits appeared.

The researchers also note that different species show different combinations of the traits that were proposed to be in the syndrome.

The paper provides the final nail in the coffin to the idea of a universal set of traits characterizing all domesticated animals, said Marcelo R. Snchez-Villagra, a professor of paleobiology at the University of Zurich who studies domestication and was not involved in the study.

But that was not surprising, he added, given other research showing varying processes of domestication. He appreciated the critical look at the fox experiment, because I also think its value has been overestimated.

Dr. Kukekova said she found that critique oversimplified, although she sympathized: I completely understand their frustration with domestication syndrome.

But many aspects of the fox domestication experiment were not presented correctly, she added.

Dr. Belyaev created a pattern of behavior totally different from that of the farmed foxes he began with, Dr. Kukekova said. The old photographs of the friendly foxes were not scientific evidence, she added, and there was no evidence that the foxes actively sought out human interaction, as Dr. Belyaevs did.

She cautioned, however, that there is an enormous difference between a domesticated animal and a pet. The foxes are domesticated, but they are not pets, she said.

Adam Wilkins, a biologist at Humboldt University in Berlin, found the new paper deeply flawed. In a personal letter to the authors, he argued that mammals do share a suite of physical characteristics that go along with tameness.

Dr. Wilkins has argued that mutations in cells in a part of the embryo called the neural crest are linked to behavioral and physical changes.

The fact that different kinds of domesticated animals have somewhat different sets of the affected traits is perfectly consistent with the idea of a syndrome, he wrote in an email.

Asked if there was a working definition of domestication, Dr. Sanchez-Villagra replied, There are as many as there are authors who have provided a definition.

Despite their differences, the spirit of collaboration and scientific discourse among researchers in the quite small field of canine evolution might best be captured by Dr. Wilkins at the end of his letter.

He tempered his criticisms with a friendly note, concluding, We clearly share a strong interest in the subject and I suspect a love of dogs. Here, I attach a picture of my personal favorite domesticated animal, my dog Wolfie.

Originally posted here:
Why Are These Foxes Tame? Maybe They Werent So Wild to Begin With - The New York Times

IRVING, Texas and ALISO VIEJO, Calif., Dec. 4, 2019 /PRNewswire/ --Caris Life Sciences, a leading innovator in molecular science focused on fulfilling the promise of precision medicine, and Ambry Genetics(Ambry), a leading clinical genetic testing company, today announced that Caris will begin offering Ambry's 67-gene CancerNext-Expanded panel to evaluate the hereditary risks for cancer. Combined with Caris' somatic (tumor) tests that analyze a cancer's detailed molecular makeup, Caris will provide patients and their healthcare providers unparalleled information to more accurately diagnose and treat cancer. This will be the most comprehensive, clinically relevant molecular and genetic offering on the market today to guide treatment and management of cancer.

"We are committed to providing clinicians with high-quality information they can use to inform treatment decisions," said David D. Halbert, Caris Life Sciences Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and Founder. "By partnering with Ambry Genetics to better inform patient care, we are able to provide clinicians a greater ability to learn about a cancer's molecular composition."

Caris currently offers clinicians Caris Molecular Intelligence, a proprietary, comprehensive tumor profiling approach that assesses DNA, RNA, and proteins unique to an individual's cancer to reveal a molecular blueprint in order to guide more precise and individualized treatment decisions.

Through the partnership, Caris will now offer Ambry's CancerNext-Expanded hereditary cancer panel. This panel analyzes 67 genes associated with an increased hereditary risk of cancer, including brain, breast, colon, ovarian, pancreatic, prostate, renal, uterine, and many other cancers. Its comprehensive testing identifies inherited risks for cancer in order for clinicians to accurately diagnose, treat, and manage cancer risks for each patient's needs.

"To best diagnose and treat cancer, clinicians must understand whether patients have mutations in genes associated with an increased risk for hereditary cancer," said Aaron Elliott, Chief Executive Officer of Ambry. "Caris' molecular tests combined with Ambry's germline genetic testing, give clinicians the most comprehensive, clinically relevant molecular profile on the market to guide treatment and management."

The combined Caris and Ambry testing is now available nationwide.

"Being able to simultaneously conduct comprehensive tumor genomic testing and multi-gene germline sequencing is invaluable, especially for sick patients at the beginning of their cancer journey," said Michael J. Hall, M.D., M.S., Chair, Department of Clinical Genetics at Fox Chase Cancer Center. "This is information I can immediately begin using for my patients to more accurately diagnose them and to better individualize their treatments."

About Caris Life Sciences Caris Life Sciences is a leading innovator in molecular science focused on fulfilling the promise of precision medicine through quality and innovation. The company's suite of market-leading molecular profiling offerings assesses DNA, RNA and proteins to reveal a molecular blueprint that helps physicians and cancer patients make more precise and personalized treatment decisions.

Caris is also advancing precision medicine with Next Generation Profiling that combines its innovative service offerings, Caris Molecular Intelligence and ADAPT Biotargeting System, with its proprietary artificial intelligence analytics engine, DEAN, to analyze the whole exome, whole transcriptome and complete cancer proteome. This information, coupled with mature clinical outcomes on thousands of patients, provides unmatched molecular solutions for patients, physicians, payers and biopharmaceutical organizations.

Whole transcriptome sequencing with MI Transcriptome provides the most comprehensive and unique RNA analysis available on the market and covers all 22,000 genes, with an average of 60 million reads per patient, to deliver extremely broad coverage and high resolution into the dynamic nature of the transcriptome. Assessing the whole transcriptome allows us to dig deeper into the RNA universe to uncover and detect fusions, splice variants, and expression changes that provide oncologists with more insight and actionable information when determining treatment plans for patients.

Caris Pharmatech, a pioneer of the original Just-In-Time research system with the largest research-ready oncology network, is changing the paradigm from the traditional physician outreach model to a real-time approach where patient identification is completed at the lab and the physician is informed so that the patient can be enrolled days earlier, and remain in the local physician's care, without having to travel to a large central trial site. This fundamentally redefines how pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies identify and rapidly enroll patients in precision oncology trials by combining Caris' highest quality industry leading large-scale molecular profiling services with Pharmatech's on-demand site activation and patient enrollment system.

Headquartered in Irving, Texas, Caris Life Sciences offers services throughout the U.S., Europe, Asia and other international markets. To learn more, please visitwww.CarisLifeSciences.comor follow us on Twitter (@CarisLS).

About Ambry GeneticsAmbry Genetics, as part of Konica Minolta Precision Medicine, excels at translating scientific research into clinically actionable test results based upon a deep understanding of the human genome and the biology behind genetic disease. Our unparalleled track record of discoveries over 20 years, and growing database that continues to expand in collaboration with academic, corporate and pharmaceutical partners, means we are first to market with innovative products and comprehensive analysis that enable clinicians to confidently inform patient health decisions. We care about what happens to real people, their families, and the people they love, and remain dedicated to providing them and their clinicians with deeper knowledge and fresh insights, so together they can make informed, potentially life-altering healthcare decisions. For more information, please visitambrygen.com.

Caris Company Contact & Media:Srikant RamaswamiVice President, Chief Communications Officersramaswami@carisls.com +1-214-769-5510

Ambry Genetics Media Contact:Liz Squirepress@ambrygen.com (202) 617-4662

SOURCE Caris Life Sciences

Home April 2021

Read the original post:
Caris Life Sciences and Ambry Genetics Partner to Advance Cancer Care - PRNewswire

SALT LAKE CITY, Dec. 03, 2019 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Myriad Genetics, Inc. (NASDAQ: MYGN), a leader in molecular diagnostics and precision medicine, today announced that multiple studies will be presented at the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium (SABCS) being held Dec. 10-14, 2019 in San Antonio, Tx.

"We are excited to present new data from several studies at SABCS this year, said Nicole Lambert, president of Myriad Oncology. "Our data represents Myriads commitment to advancing precision oncology for people with breast cancer and improving outcomes.

A list of the companys presentations at SABCS is below. Please visit Myriad at booth #113 to learn more about our portfolio of genetic tests for breast cancer. Follow Myriad on Twitter via @myriadgenetics and keep up to date with Symposium news by using the hashtag #SABCS19.

About Myriad myRisk Hereditary CancerThe Myriad myRisk Hereditary Cancer test uses an extensive number of sophisticated technologies and proprietary algorithms to evaluate 35 clinically significant genes associated with eight hereditary cancer sites including: breast, colon, ovarian, endometrial, pancreatic, prostate and gastric cancers and melanoma.

About riskScoreriskScore is a new clinically validated personalized medicine tool that enhances Myriads myRisk Hereditary Cancer test. riskScore helps to further predict a womens lifetime risk of developing breast cancer using clinical risk factors and genetic-markers throughout the genome. The test incorporates data from greater than 80 single nucleotide polymorphisms identified through 20 years of genome wide association studies in breast cancer and was validated in our laboratory to predict breast cancer risk in women of European descent. This data is then combined with a best-in-class family and personal history algorithm, the Tyrer-Cuzick model, to provide every patient with individualized breast cancer risk.

About EndoPredictEndoPredict is a second-generation, prognostic test that aids personalized treatment planning for patients with early-stage breast cancer. EndoPredict has been validated in over 3500 patients with node-negative and node-positive disease and is the leading breast prognostic in Europe. In contrast to first-generation multigene prognostic tests, EndoPredict incorporates a 12-gene molecular score with known prognostic factors tumor size and nodal status. In clinical studies, EndoPredict demonstrated its robust ability to predict recurrence risk across multiple time-periods: 0-5, 5-10, and 5-15 years. EndoPredict provides clinically actionable information to physicians and patients as they consider the use of adjuvant chemotherapy and extended endocrine therapy.

About Myriad GeneticsMyriad Genetics Inc. is a leading precision medicine company dedicated to being a trusted advisor transforming patient lives worldwide with pioneering molecular diagnostics. Myriad discovers and commercializes molecular diagnostic tests that: determine the risk of developing disease, accurately diagnose disease, assess the risk of disease progression, and guide treatment decisions across six major medical specialties where molecular diagnostics can significantly improve patient care and lower healthcare costs. Myriad is focused on five critical success factors: building upon a solid hereditary cancer foundation, growing new product volume, expanding reimbursement coverage for new products, increasing RNA kit revenue internationally and improving profitability with Elevate 2020. For more information on how Myriad is making a difference, please visit the Company's website: http://www.myriad.com.

Myriad, the Myriad logo, BART, BRACAnalysis, Colaris, Colaris AP, myPath, myRisk, Myriad myRisk, myRisk Hereditary Cancer, myChoice, myPlan, BRACAnalysis CDx, Tumor BRACAnalysis CDx, myChoice HRD, EndoPredict, Vectra, GeneSight, riskScore, Prolaris, Foresight and Prequel are trademarks or registered trademarks of Myriad Genetics, Inc. or its wholly owned subsidiaries in the United States and foreign countries. MYGN-F, MYGN-G.

Safe Harbor StatementThis press release contains "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, including statements related to the Companys data across multiple genetic tests being featured at the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium being held Dec. 10-14, 2019 in San Antonio, Tx.; and the Company's strategic directives under the caption "About Myriad Genetics." These "forward-looking statements" are based on management's current expectations of future events and are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially and adversely from those set forth in or implied by forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to: the risk that sales and profit margins of our molecular diagnostic tests and pharmaceutical and clinical services may decline; risks related to our ability to transition from our existing product portfolio to our new tests, including unexpected costs and delays; risks related to decisions or changes in governmental or private insurers reimbursement levels for our tests or our ability to obtain reimbursement for our new tests at comparable levels to our existing tests; risks related to increased competition and the development of new competing tests and services; the risk that we may be unable to develop or achieve commercial success for additional molecular diagnostic tests and pharmaceutical and clinical services in a timely manner, or at all; the risk that we may not successfully develop new markets for our molecular diagnostic tests and pharmaceutical and clinical services, including our ability to successfully generate revenue outside the United States; the risk that licenses to the technology underlying our molecular diagnostic tests and pharmaceutical and clinical services and any future tests and services are terminated or cannot be maintained on satisfactory terms; risks related to delays or other problems with operating our laboratory testing facilities and our healthcare clinic; risks related to public concern over genetic testing in general or our tests in particular; risks related to regulatory requirements or enforcement in the United States and foreign countries and changes in the structure of the healthcare system or healthcare payment systems; risks related to our ability to obtain new corporate collaborations or licenses and acquire new technologies or businesses on satisfactory terms, if at all; risks related to our ability to successfully integrate and derive benefits from any technologies or businesses that we license or acquire; risks related to our projections about our business, results of operations and financial condition; risks related to the potential market opportunity for our products and services; the risk that we or our licensors may be unable to protect or that third parties will infringe the proprietary technologies underlying our tests; the risk of patent-infringement claims or challenges to the validity of our patents or other intellectual property; risks related to changes in intellectual property laws covering our molecular diagnostic tests and pharmaceutical and clinical services and patents or enforcement in the United States and foreign countries, such as the Supreme Court decision in the lawsuit brought against us by the Association for Molecular Pathology et al; risks of new, changing and competitive technologies and regulations in the United States and internationally; the risk that we may be unable to comply with financial operating covenants under our credit or lending agreements; the risk that we will be unable to pay, when due, amounts due under our credit or lending agreements; and other factors discussed under the heading "Risk Factors" contained in Item 1A of our most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2019, which has been filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, as well as any updates to those risk factors filed from time to time in our Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q or Current Reports on Form 8-K. All information in this press release is as of the date of the release, and Myriad undertakes no duty to update this information unless required by law.

Read this article:
Myriad Genetics to Present Multiple Studies on Breast Cancer at the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium - BioSpace