Page 1,295«..1020..1,2941,2951,2961,297..1,3001,310..»

Curetis To Attend Key Conferences in the Fourth Quarter of 2019 – Yahoo Finance

Posted: October 30, 2019 at 1:42 pm

Amsterdam, the Netherlands, and Holzgerlingen, Germany, October 30, 2019, 10:00 am CET - Curetis N.V. (the "Company" and, together with its subsidiaries, "Curetis"), a developer of next-level molecular diagnostic solutions, today announced that the Curetis Group Companies will be attending several key conferences in the fourth quarter of 2019.

November 2019

EIT Health German-French Bilateral Meeting, November 4-5 2019 Mannheim, Germany (Ares Genetics GmbH) 54th Annual Northeast Branch American Society for Microbiology, November 7-8, 2019 Randolph, MA, USA (Curetis USA Inc.)DICON/DASON Fall 2019 Symposium (Duke Infection Control Outreach Network / Duke Antimicrobial Stewardship Outreach Network), November 8, 2019 Raleigh, NC, USA (Curetis USA Inc.)Southeastern Association of Clinical Microbiology (SEACM) Annual Fall Meeting, November 14-16, 2019 Myrtle Beach, SC, USA (Curetis USA Inc.)DxPx - Diagnostics and Research Tools Partnering Conference, November 18, 2019 Dsseldorf, Germany (Ares Genetics & Curetis GmbH)European Summit of Industrial Biotechnology, November 18-20, 2019 Graz, Austria (Ares Genetics GmbH)Emerging Antimicrobials and Diagnostics in AMR 2019, November 19-20, 2019 Amsterdam, The Netherlands (Ares Genetics GmbH & Curetis GmbH)EPAASM 49th Annual Symposium (Eastern Pennsylvania Branch of the American Society for Microbiology), November 22, 2019 Philadelphia, PA, USA (Curetis USA Inc.)

December 2019

3rd Congress Immunotherapies & Innovations for Infectious Diseases, December 3-4, 2019 Lyon, France (Ares Genetics GmbH)

ASPH Midyear Clinical Meeting (American Society of Health-System Pharmacists), December 8-12, 2019 Las Vegas, NV, USA (Curetis USA Inc., booth #773)

13. Nationaler Qualittskongress Gesundheit, December 12-13, 2019 Berlin, Germany (Ares Genetics GmbH)

###

About Curetis

Curetis N.V.s (CURE.NX) goal is to become a leading provider of innovative solutions for molecular microbiology diagnostics designed to address the global challenge of detecting severe infectious diseases and identifying antibiotic resistances in hospitalized patients.

Curetis Unyvero System is a versatile, fast and highly automated molecular diagnostic platform for easy-to-use, cartridge-based solutions for the comprehensive and rapid detection of pathogens and antimicrobial resistance markers in a range of severe infectious disease indications. Results are available within hours, a process that can take days or even weeks if performed with standard diagnostic procedures, thereby facilitating improved patient outcomes, stringent antibiotic stewardship and health-economic benefits. Unyvero in vitro diagnostic (IVD) products are marketed in Europe, the Middle East, Asia and the U.S.

Curetis wholly owned subsidiary Ares Genetics GmbH offers next-generation solutions for infectious disease diagnostics and therapeutics. The ARES Technology Platform combines what the Company believes to be the most comprehensive database worldwide on the genetics of antimicrobial resistances, ARESdb, with advanced bioinformatics and artificial intelligence.

For further information, please visit http://www.curetis.com and http://www.ares-genetics.com.

Legal Disclaimer

This document constitutes neither an offer to buy nor an offer to subscribe for securities and neither this document nor any part of it should form the basis of any investment decision in Curetis.

The information contained in this press release has been carefully prepared. However, Curetis bears and assumes no liability of whatever kind for the correctness and completeness of the information provided herein. Curetis does not assume an obligation of whatever kind to update or correct information contained in this press release whether as a result of new information, future events or for other reasons.

This press release includes statements that are, or may be deemed to be, forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology, including the terms believes, estimates, anticipates, expects, intends, targets, may, will, or should and include statements Curetis makes concerning the intended results of its strategy. By their nature, forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties and readers are cautioned that any such forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance. Curetis actual results may differ materially from those predicted by the forward-looking statements. Curetis undertakes no obligation to publicly update or revise forward-looking statements, except as may be required by law.

Story continues

Contact details

Curetis Contact DetailsCuretis N.V.Max-Eyth-Str. 4271088 Holzgerlingen, GermanyTel. +49 7031 49195-10pr@curetis.com or ir@curetis.comwww.curetis.com - http://www.unyvero.com

International Media & Investor InquiriesakampionDr. Ludger Wess / Ines-Regina Buth Managing Partnersinfo@akampion.comTel. +49 40 88 16 59 64Tel. +49 30 23 63 27 68

Attachment

Originally posted here:
Curetis To Attend Key Conferences in the Fourth Quarter of 2019 - Yahoo Finance

Posted in Molecular Genetics | Comments Off on Curetis To Attend Key Conferences in the Fourth Quarter of 2019 – Yahoo Finance

GM could be decisive: An open letter to the Green Party from young NZ scientists – The Spinoff

Posted: October 30, 2019 at 1:42 pm

More than 150 New Zealand scientists under 30 have signed a letter to the Green Party urging a rethink of its stance on the regulation of genetic modification. The full text of the letter follows.

To the members and supporters of the Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand and their representatives in government

Climate change is one of the greatest crises in human history, and our current law severely restricts the development of technologies that could make a vital difference. In 2003 the 1996 Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act was modified to tightly regulate research into genetic modification (GM). This legislation and the surrounding public debate was driven by uncertainty about the risks that these new technologies posed to biodiversity and human health, and resulted in creating one of the toughest regulatory environments in the world for this field of research.

We, an emerging generation of New Zealand scientists with expertise in and/or undertaking research in the biological sciences*, are writing to request that the Green Party reconsider its position on the regulation of these technologies. We are addressing this letter to the Greens because of a history of leading in science-based policy such as climate action, even when that path is difficult. We believe that GM based research could be decisive in our efforts to reduce New Zealand and global climate emissions as well as partially mitigating some of the impacts of climate change. At the same time, we emphasise that potential reduction of impact is not a substitute for emission reduction.

The period since the introduction of the 2003 legislation has seen important GM related research in the areas of agricultural efficiency, carbon sequestration, and alternative protein production. The existing regulation in New Zealand inhibits application of advances such as these, blocking not only the development of green technology, but the potential for a just transition away from extractive and polluting industries. New Zealand has the opportunity to be a world leader in such a transition: for example, the development and demonstration of effective technologies to reduce agricultural emissions could have an international impact and set an example for other countries.

While such a powerful technology as targeted genetic modification certainly requires controls, existing frameworks do not enable public and environmental benefits from these technologies to be realised. The gene editing expert advice panel supported by The Royal Society Te Aprangi, the Prime Ministers Chief Science Advisor, and the interim climate change committee have recently called for public discussion on potential reform of New Zealands laws around modern gene editing techniques.

As a confidence and supply member of the current government the Greens have the ability to drive this reform: the members can persuade the party to reconsider its policy position, and the Members of Parliament can influence the government it supports to revise the legislation. The Greens have been strong advocates of both climate action and evidence based policy informed by science. In this light we call upon its members, supporters, ministers, and MPs to add their voices to the cause of a science-based approach to climate, on behalf of the people and environment of both Aotearoa and the world.

Ng mihi

PhD

Kyle Webster, University of Auckland, Bio-nanotechnology

Luke Stevenson, Victoria University of Wellington, Biotechnology

Emilie Gios, University of Auckland, Microbial ecology

Morgane Merien, University of Auckland, Biological Sciences Entomology

Lucie Jiraska, University of Auckland, Environmental Microbiology

Victor Yim, University of Auckland, Peptide chemistry

Zach McLean, University of Auckland, Genetic engineering

Declan Lafferty, Plant and FoodResearch/University of Auckland, Genetics and Molecular Biology

Samarth Samarth, University of Canterbury, Plant Biology

Juliane Gaviraghi Mussoi, University of Auckland, Avian Behaviour

Alex Noble, University of Canterbury, Biology

Kelsey Burborough, University of Auckland, Genetics

Matthew Mayo-Smith, University of Auckland, Plant Molecular Biology

Moritz Miebach, University of Canterbury, Plant-microbe interactions

Olivia Ogilvie, University of Auckland, Food Biotech / Biochemistry

Rachel Bennie, University of Canterbury, Human Toxicology

Sean Mackay, University of Otago, Chemistry and Nanotechnology

Georgia Carson, Victoria University of Wellington, Cell and Molecular Biology

Ruby Roach, Massey University

Jeremy Stephens, Massey University, Biology

Zidong (Andy) Li, Massey University, Molecular Cancer Biology

Aqfan Jamaluddin, University of Auckland, Molecular Pharmacology

Michael Fairhurst, Victoria University of Wellington, Microbiology

Nikolai Kondratev, Massey University, Plant Biology

Mariana Tarallo, Massey University, Plant pathology

Ellie Bradley, Massey University, Plant pathology

Mercedes Rocafort Ferrer, Massey University, Plant pathology

Yi-Hsuan Tu, Massey University, Biochemistry & Microbiology

Sean Bisset, Massey University, Biochemistry

Patrick Main, Massey University, Biological sciences

Abigail Sharrock, Victoria University of Wellington, Biotechnology

Alvey Little, Victoria University of Wellington, Molecular Microbiology

William Odey, Victoria University of Wellington, Biotechnology

Gabrielle Greig, Victoria University of Wellington, Molecular Microbiology

Melanie Olds, Victoria University of Wellington, Biotechnology

Jennifer Soundy, Victoria University of Wellington, Biological Sciences

Matire Ward, Victoria University of Wellington, Cell and molecular bioscience

Tom Dawes, Victoria University of Wellington, Plant Ecology

Hamish Dunham, Victoria University of Wellington, Biomedical science

Amy Alder, Victoria University of Wellington, Neuroscience

Caitlin Harris, University of Otago, Plant genetics

Lucy Gorman, Victoria University of Wellington, Coral reef biology

Vincent Nowak, Victoria University of Wellington, Biotechnology

Brandon Wright, University of Otago, Biochemistry

Anna Tribe, Victoria University of Wellington, Cancer cell biology

Conor McGuinness, University of Otago, Breast Cancer

Genomics/Immunology Kelsi Hall, Victoria University of Wellington, Biotechnology

Andrew Howard, University of Waikato, Biochemistry

Mitch Ganley, Victoria University of Wellington, Biotechnology/vaccines

Matt Munro, Victoria University of Wellington, Biomedical Science

Prashath Karunaraj, University of Otago, Genetics

Pascale Lubbe, University of Otago, Evolutionary genetics

Mackenzie Lovegrove, University of Otago, Genetics, Insect evolution

Nicholas Foster, University of Otago, Ecology

Taylor Hamlin, University of Otago, Antarctic Marine Ecosystem & Movement Ecology

Fionnuala Murphy, Massey University, Proteomics

Amanda Board, University of Canterbury, Protein Biochemistry

Esther Onguta, Massey University, Food Technology

Nomie Petit, University of Auckland, Proteins

Liam Le Lievre, University of Otago, Plant Reproduction

James Hunter, University of Otago, Ecology

Samarth Kulshrestha, University of Canterbury,

Rebecca Clarke, University of Otago, Whole body regeneration

Sarah Killick, University of Auckland, Environmental Science

Stephanie Workman, University of Otago, Developmental Genetics

Erik Johnson, University of Otago, Oceanography

Declan Lafferty, University of Auckland, Molecular Biology

Laurine van Haastrecht, Victoria University of Wellington, Glaciology

Leo Mercer, Victoria University of Wellington, Environmental Studies

Aidan Joblin-Mills, Victoria University of Wellington, Chemical Genetics

Gabrielle Keeler-May, University of Otago, Marine Science

Aqfan Jamaluddin, University of Auckland, Pharmacology

Spencer McIntyre, University of Auckland, Biological Sciences

Sarah Inwood, University of Otago, Genetics

Isabelle Barrett, University of Canterbury, Freshwater ecology

Olivia Angelin-Bonnet, Massey University, Biostatistics

Hannah McCarthy, Massey University, Plant Pathology

Sofie Pearson, Massey University, Plant Science

Zac Beechey-Gradwell, Lincoln University, Plant physiology

Hannah Lee-Harwood, Victoria University of Wellington, Biotechnology

Euan Russell, University of Otago, Microbiology

Masters

Kelly Styles, University of Auckland, Biological Sciences

Merlyn Robson, University of Auckland, Virology

Andra Popa, University of Auckland

James Love, University of Auckland, Bioinformatics

Evie Mansfield, University of Auckland, Molecular Microbiology

Ash Sargent, University of Auckland, Immunology

Sabrina Cuellar, University of Auckland, Plant Genetics

Renji Jiang, University of Canterbury, Plant pathology

Morgan Tracy, University of Canterbury, Ecology

See the original post here:
GM could be decisive: An open letter to the Green Party from young NZ scientists - The Spinoff

Posted in Molecular Genetics | Comments Off on GM could be decisive: An open letter to the Green Party from young NZ scientists – The Spinoff

ERT to Treat Pompe May Work Better in Combo with Blood Pressure Medication, Study Says – Pompe Disease News

Posted: October 30, 2019 at 1:42 pm

Adding carvedilol, the active compound of a blood pressuremedicine, to enzyme replacement therapy (ERT) for Pompe disease can improve its effectiveness in reaching and strengthening skeletal muscles, a study in mice suggests.

This finding, Evaluation of antihypertensive drugs in combination with enzyme replacement therapy in mice with Pompe disease was published in Molecular Genetics and Metabolism.

At present, enzyme replacement therapy (ERT) is the only effective treatment for Pompe disease, a rare genetic disorder caused by the absence or deficiency of the acid alpha-glucosidase (GAA) enzyme.

When GAA activity is low, a sugar molecule called glycogen accumulates inside cells, damaging organs and tissues throughout the body, but primarily skeletal muscle, smooth muscle, and cardiac muscle. If left untreated, the accumulation of glycogen in cardiac and skeletal muscle leads to severe and progressive muscular weakness, risking heart and respiratory failure.

There is, however, a major limitation in ERT. Skeletal muscle is less accessible to it, meaning the therapy has trouble getting into this type of muscle cell. Skeletal muscles poor response to ERT has been attributed to a serious lack of a protein receptor called cation-independent mannose-6-phosphate receptor (CI-MPR) on its cells.

Animal studies suggest that an active compound common to blood pressure medications (with work to control hypertension) could increase the uptake of ERT by muscle cells, by increasing the amount of muscle (muscle hypertrophy), and therefore the amount of CI-MPR.

Investigators atDuke Universityevaluated the effects of ERT with and without three anti-hypertensive agents: carvedilol, losartan, and propranolol. All these compounds have different ways of working, or mechanisms of action, in the body. They experimented using a mouse model of Pompe disease called the GAA knockout (absent) mouse.

Animals were assigned to one of seven groups: no treatment, ERT alone, ERT with carvedilol, ERT with losartan, ERT with propranolol, or to only losartan or carvedilol. Drugs were given to the mice in drinking water, and one week after treatment initiation, recombinant human GAA was given by injection every week for a month. Five days following the last GAA injection, scientists examined the animals cardiac and muscle function.

The team reported that carvedilol uniquely increased muscle strength, while losartan uniquely decreased heart rate. GAA activity was also found to be significantly higher in the heart following either losartan or propranolol being added to enzyme replacement therapy, compared to mice left untreated as a control group.

Both carvedilol or propranolol significantly increased GAA activity in the animals quadriceps, the muscles in the front of the thigh, compared to control mice. However, only carvedilol administration significantly increased GAA activity in quadriceps, in comparison with ERT alone, the scientists wrote.

These findings indicate that the greatest rise in enzymatic activity occurred in response to carvedilol, the active substance in the blood pressure medication Coreg. Carvedilol is a beta-blocker that relaxes the smooth muscle that makes up blood vessels, leading to an overall reduction in blood pressure.

Because more than half (seven of 13) of the mice given losartan, either alone or in combination with ERT, died during the study, researchers thought this active molecule potentially toxic in Pompe, and suggested physicians should be mindful of it when prescribing high blood pressure medications to Pompe patients.

Currently we demonstrated unique toxicity from the administration of losartan in mice with Pompe disease, the researchers wrote.

Because of the benefits seen in diseased micegiven carvedilol during ERT, they recommended the compound be studied in a clinical trial in patients.

Carvedilol was well-tolerated, and the ability to use a -blocker [beta-blocker] in patients that will not interfere with ERT would be highly valuable for clinical use in patients with Pompe since they often require a -blocker to mitigate disease-associated hypertension, the investigators concluded.

A clinical trial of carvedilol in patients with Pompe disease should be considered to further evaluate its usefulness.

With over three years of experience in the medical communications business, Catarina holds a BSc. in Biomedical Sciences and a MSc. in Neurosciences. Apart from writing, she has been involved in patient-oriented translational and clinical research.

Total Posts: 3

Margarida graduated with a BS in Health Sciences from the University of Lisbon and a MSc in Biotechnology from Instituto Superior Tcnico (IST-UL). She worked as a molecular biologist research associate at a Cambridge UK-based biotech company that discovers and develops therapeutic, fully human monoclonal antibodies.

Read this article:
ERT to Treat Pompe May Work Better in Combo with Blood Pressure Medication, Study Says - Pompe Disease News

Posted in Molecular Genetics | Comments Off on ERT to Treat Pompe May Work Better in Combo with Blood Pressure Medication, Study Says – Pompe Disease News

Genetic Study: Shared Molecular Pathway Might Influence Susceptibility to Lack of Oxygen Caused by Sleep-disordered Breathing and Other Lung Illnesses…

Posted: October 30, 2019 at 1:42 pm

Researchers have identified 57 genetic variations of a gene strongly associated with declines in blood oxygen levels during sleep. Low oxygen levels during sleep are a clinical indicator of the severity of sleep apnea. The study, published today in the American Journal of Human Genetics, was funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI), part of the National Institutes of Health.

A persons average blood oxygen levels during sleep are hereditary, and relatively easy to measure, says study author Susan Redline, MD, senior physician in the Division of Sleep and Circadian Disorders at Brigham and Womens Hospital, and professor at Harvard Medical School, in a release. Studying the genetic basis of this trait can help explain why some people are more susceptible to sleep disordered breathing and its related morbidities.

When we sleep, the oxygen level in our blood drops, due to interruptions in breathing. Lung and sleep disorders tend to decrease those levels further, and dangerously so. But the range of those levels during sleep varies widely between individuals and, researchers suspect, is greatly influenced by genetics.

Despite the key role blood oxygen levels play in health outcomes, the influence of genetics on their variability remains understudied. The current findings contribute to a better understanding, particularly because researchers looked at overnight measurements of oxygen levels. Those provide more variability than daytime levels due to the stresses associated with disordered breathing occurring during sleep.

The researchers analyzed whole genome sequence data from the NHLBIs Trans-Omics for Precision Medicine (TOPMed) program. To strengthen the data, they incorporated results of family-based linkage analysis, a method for mapping genes that carry hereditary traits to their location in the genome. The method uses data from families with several members affected by a particular disorder.

This study highlights the advantage of using family data in searching for rare variants, which is often missed in genome-wide association studies, says James Kiley, PhD, director of the Division of Lung Diseases at NHLBI. It showed that, when guided by family linkage data, whole genome sequence analysis can identify rare variants that signal disease risks, even with a small sample. In this case, the initial discovery was done with fewer than 500 samples.

The newly identified 57 variants of the DLC1 gene were clearly associated with the fluctuation in oxygen levels during sleep. In fact, they explained almost 1% of the variability in the oxygen levels in European Americans, which is relatively high for complex genetic phenotypes, or traits, that are influenced by myriad variants.

Notably, 51 of the 57 genetic variants influence and regulate human lung fibroblast cells, a type of cell producing scar tissue in the lungs, says study author Xiaofeng Zhu, PhD, professor at the Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine. This is important, he said, because Mendelian Randomization analysis, a statistical approach for testing causal relationship between an exposure and an outcome, shows a potential causal relationship between how the DLC1 gene modifies fibroblasts cells and the changes in oxygen levels during sleep.

This relationship, Kiley added, suggests that a shared molecular pathway, or a common mechanism, may be influencing a persons susceptibility to the lack of oxygen caused by sleep disordered breathing and other lung illnesses such as emphysema.

Continued here:
Genetic Study: Shared Molecular Pathway Might Influence Susceptibility to Lack of Oxygen Caused by Sleep-disordered Breathing and Other Lung Illnesses...

Posted in Molecular Genetics | Comments Off on Genetic Study: Shared Molecular Pathway Might Influence Susceptibility to Lack of Oxygen Caused by Sleep-disordered Breathing and Other Lung Illnesses…

Pacific subspecies of fin whales has been revealed by new genetic study – Oceanographic – Oceanographic Magazine

Posted: October 30, 2019 at 1:42 pm

New research fromNOAA Fisheries, Ocean Associates Inc., Cascadia Research Collective, Tethys Research Institute, and Universidad Autnoma de Baja California Sur, has concluded that fin whales in the northern Pacific Ocean are a separate subspecies. The paper outlines key genetic differences between the fin whales of the Pacific and the Atlantic Oceans.

The increasing study of cetacean genetics is revealing new diversity among the worlds whales and dolphins that has not been previously recognised, said lead author Eric Archer, a geneticist at NOAA Fisheries Southwest Fisheries Science Center (SWFSC).Theres definitely more diversity out there than has been on the books. There has been a wave of progress in cetacean taxonomy.

Fin whales are the second largest whale on Earth and widely believed to be the fastest whales in the ocean. Not a huge amount is known about this elusive creatures, which tend reside in the open ocean, away from coastlines where they might be seen and studied more easily. Whalers killed approximately 46,000 fin whales in the North Pacific Ocean between 1947 and 1987.

Traditional taxonomy focuses on skeletons to assess biological variation into recognised species and subspecies, butpowerful genetic technologies now allow scientists to compare genes instead of skeletons. They extract DNA from tissue samples the size of a pencil eraser obtained from whales in the field.

Archer and his team made use of the SWFSCsMarine Mammal and Turtle Molecular Research Sample Collection, which is one of the largest collections of marine mammal genetic material in the world. They also used samples from museums and other collections.

By comparing the DNA of fin whales in both the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans, they found that the have been separated for hundreds of thousands of years. To provide further evidence of the two distinct subspecies, the scientistscould also assign individual fin whale samples to their ocean of origin using the genetic data.

There are other new species and subspecies that we are learning about thanks to the technology that has made this possible, Archer added. It is changing the field.

Approximately 14,000 to 18,000 fin whales in the northern Pacific Ocean will be affected by the new subspecies designation.

To read the full paper,Revision of fin whaleBalaenoptera physalus(Linnaeus, 1758) subspecies using genetics, click here.

Photograph courtesy ofPaula Olson/NOAA Fisheries.

For more from our Ocean Newsroom,click hereor on one of the images below:

Read more here:
Pacific subspecies of fin whales has been revealed by new genetic study - Oceanographic - Oceanographic Magazine

Posted in Molecular Genetics | Comments Off on Pacific subspecies of fin whales has been revealed by new genetic study – Oceanographic – Oceanographic Magazine

Lupus Study Illustrates the Importance of Diversity in Genetic Research – Nature World News

Posted: October 30, 2019 at 1:42 pm

Scientists at theHudsonAlpha Institute for Biotechnologyhave pinpointed epigenetic differences in the way lupus affects black women compared to other lupus patients, revealing important mechanics of the puzzling disease. Epidemiologists have identified that lupus impacts black women with greater frequency and severity than other populations. Scientists inDevin Absher's Labat HudsonAlpha published findings in August showing that increased risk and harm to lupus patients can be linked to epigenetic differences--essentially, the degree to which certain genes are functioning.

The finding, published inArthritis & Rheumatology, helps create a more complete understanding of an often misunderstood disease, revealing some of the mechanisms that contribute to it. It also reveals a gap in genetic research, highlighting the lack of information scientists have regarding racial differences on the genetic level.

Devastating Disease

Lupus is an autoimmune disorder, meaning that the immune system attacks healthy cells in the body. It causes symptoms that are often difficult to quantify, including fatigue and extreme joint pain.

Lupus is one of the most historically chronicled diseases, having first been documented by Socrates in 400 BC. The disease gets its name from a common rash that forms on the face which is said to resemble the markings of wolves, hence the latin name "lupus" meaning wolf.

There are more than 200,000 cases of lupus in the US every year, yet there is no universally accepted cause or cure. The disease is chronic, meaning it can last for years or even an entire lifetime.

Megan Breitbach, PhD, is the lead author on the paper. She notes, "The diagnostic process can also prove long and tedious, because the symptoms come and go and often can only be observed through patient description."

"On average," she adds, "it takes six years to diagnose someone with lupus."

While treatment can help manage lupus, the condition cannot be cured. Instead, patients and their physicians try to address symptoms and take the edge off flare-ups.

Molecular Differences

While the disease on the whole remains a mystery, scientists hope to find some answers in the ways that the condition affects different populations. In the United States, lupus has a much higher prevalence in non-white populations. In fact, lupus is the 5th leading cause of death for black women ages 15-24.

Ancestry can dramatically impact disease genetics, so understanding why the disease affects populations differently could go a long way toward telling us what genetic factors play a part in developing the condition.

In the case of lupus, the body's immune B cells function distinctive epigenetic signatures of the disease are found in B cells, which are part of the immune system. The analysis performed by the Absher Lab revealed lupus-specific differences in methylation throughout B cell development between black and white women.

Methylation changes can alter the degree to which a stretch of DNA functions without changing the genetic code itself. This research shows the most significant changes in methylation occur around genes related to Interferons, which are proteins that regulate immune response.

These differences in B cell development could help explain the more severe symptoms and earlier age of onset for lupus in black women.

"What we found," explains Devin Absher, PhD, "was that there are a number of methylation changes we can link to lupus. When you isolate them, you see that the changes are far greater in black women. The population differences could be key to a more complete understanding of the disease on the whole."

Gaps in Understanding

The genetic gap between these two groups of patients with lupus illustrates a broader gap in knowledge. One key limitation of genetics stems from a lack of diverse data, which hurts all populations.

Disease genetics frequently relies on genome-wide association studies (GWAS) to link genes with various health conditions. However the most recent aggregations of GWAS show nearly 88% of participants come from European ancestry. These eurocentric results can make it harder to identify genetic components of diseases that disproportionately affect underrepresented populations.

A lack of diversity in genetic research slows progress across the board. The unique genetic factories of all kinds of ancestry can help us better understand the human genome and even find potential ways to share the benefits of natural resistance. For example, Americans of African descent were found to have mutations on their PCSK9 genes which led to lower levels of cholesterol in their bloodstream. With that information, researchers developed PCSK9 inhibitors to lower cholesterol and heart disease risk across ancestries.

This lupus research from the Devin Absher Lab further illustrates the importance of understanding racial diversity when examining genetic components for diseases.

Absher is involved in a number of efforts to drive greater diversity in genetic research, including the Alabama Genomic Health Initiative, which aims to bring the value of genetic sequencing to diverse populations across the state.

The Way Forward

This lupus research helps open the door for future exploration of methylation around Interferon sites as it relates to the disease. However, the finding is only possible because of an active consideration of the value of diversity in genetic research. HudsonAlpha remains dedicated to bringing the value of genomics to all, as a diverse approach to research opens doors that would otherwise remain closed.

2018 NatureWorldNews.com All rights reserved. Do not reproduce without permission.

Originally posted here:
Lupus Study Illustrates the Importance of Diversity in Genetic Research - Nature World News

Posted in Molecular Genetics | Comments Off on Lupus Study Illustrates the Importance of Diversity in Genetic Research – Nature World News

Interpace to Present Data at the ATA Annual Meeting – GlobeNewswire

Posted: October 30, 2019 at 1:42 pm

PARSIPPANY, NJ, Oct. 29, 2019 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Interpace (IDXG) announced today that it will be presenting new data on the performance of its molecular thyroid products at the upcoming 89th Annual Meeting of the American Thyroid Association (ATA), being held October 30th to November 3rd, 2019 in Chicago, IL. The ATA meeting is one of the largest gatherings of endocrinologists, ENTs, surgeons and other providers who focus on the diagnosis and treatment of thyroid cancer.

Interpace will be presenting three separate posters focused on the performance of the companys molecular tests for indeterminate thyroid nodules, ThyGeNEXT and ThyraMIR, and are titled:

Together these posters underline the clinical utility of ThyGeNEXT and ThyraMIR in assessing the risk of thyroid nodules with indeterminate cytology results progressing to cancer. They also highlight progress made by the Company to provide quality diagnostic information for the detection of aggressive forms of thyroid cancer.

Jack Stover, CEO of Interpace, stated, We are pleased that our data has been accepted for presentation in this prestigious forum and look forward to sharing our work with such an established group of attendees. Mr. Stover continued, The acceptance of our data supports our belief that our molecular products continue to add value to physicians and patients at risk of thyroid cancer.

About Thyroid Nodules, ThyGeNEXT and ThyraMIR Testing

According to the American Thyroid Association, approximately 20% of the 525,000 thyroid fine needle aspirations (FNAs) performed on an annual basis in the U.S. are indeterminate for malignancy based on standard cytological evaluation, and thus are candidates for ThyGeNEXT and ThyraMIR.

ThyGeNEXT and ThyraMIR reflex testing yields high predictive value in determining the presence and absence of cancer in thyroid nodules. The combination of both tests can improve risk stratification and surgical decision-making when standard cytopathology does not provide a clear diagnosis.

ThyGeNEXT utilizes state-of-the-art next-generation sequencing (NGS) to identify more than 100 genetic alterations associated with papillary and follicular thyroid carcinomas, the two most common forms of thyroid cancer, as well as Meduallary Thyroid Carcinoma. ThyraMIR is the first microRNA gene expression classifier. MicroRNAs are small, non-coding RNAs that bind to messenger RNA and regulate expression of genes involved in human cancers, including every subtype of thyroid cancer. ThyraMIR measures the expression of 10 microRNAs. Both ThyGeNEXT and ThyraMIR are covered by both Medicare and Commercial insurers, with more than 280 million patients covered.

About Interpace

Interpace is a leader in enabling personalized medicine, offering specialized services along the therapeutic value chain from early diagnosis and prognostic planning to targeted therapeutic applications.

Interpaces Diagnostic Business is a fully integrated commercial and bioinformatics business unit that provides clinically useful molecular diagnostic tests, bioinformatics and pathology services for evaluating risk of cancer by leveraging the latest technology in personalized medicine for improved patient diagnosis and management. Interpace has four commercialized molecular tests and one test in a clinical evaluation process (CEP): PancraGEN for the diagnosis and prognosis of pancreatic cancer from pancreatic cysts; ThyGeNEXT for the diagnosis of thyroid cancer from thyroid nodules utilizing a next generation sequencing assay; ThyraMIR for the diagnosis of thyroid cancer from thyroid nodules utilizing a proprietary gene expression assay; and RespriDX that differentiates lung cancer of primary vs. metastatic origin. In addition, BarreGEN for Barretts Esophagus, is currently in a clinical evaluation program whereby we gather information from physicians using BarreGEN to assist us in positioning the product for full launch, partnering and potentially supporting reimbursement with payers.

Interpaces Biopharma Business provides pharmacogenomics testing, genotyping, biorepository and other customized services to the pharmaceutical and biotech industries. The Biopharma Business also advances personalized medicine by partnering with pharmaceutical, academic, and technology leaders to effectively integrate pharmacogenomics into their drug development and clinical trial programs with the goals of delivering safer, more effective drugs to market more quickly, and improving patient care.

For more information, please visit Interpaces website at http://www.interpacediagnostics.com.

Forward-looking Statements

This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, relating to the Company's future financial and operating performance. The Company has attempted to identify forward looking statements by terminology including "believes," "estimates," "anticipates," "expects," "plans," "projects," "intends," "potential," "may," "could," "might," "will," "should," "approximately" or other words that convey uncertainty of future events or outcomes to identify these forward-looking statements. These statements are based on current expectations, assumptions and uncertainties involving judgments about, among other things, future economic, competitive and market conditions and future business decisions, all of which are difficult or impossible to predict accurately and many of which are beyond the Company's control. These statements also involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause the Company's actual results to be materially different from those expressed or implied by any forward-looking statement. Known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors include, but are not limited to the fact that there is no assurance the acquisition of the BioPharma business of Cancer Genetics, Inc. will be successfully integrated with the Company, or that the potential benefits of the acquisition, including future revenues, will be successfully realized. Additionally, all forward-looking statements are subject to the Risk Factors detailed from time to time in the Company's most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K, Current Reports on Form 8-K and Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q. Because of these and other risks, uncertainties and assumptions, undue reliance should not be placed on these forward-looking statements. In addition, these statements speak only as of the date of this press release and, except as may be required by law, the Company undertakes no obligation to revise or update publicly any forward-looking statements for any reason.

CONTACTS:Investor Relations - Edison GroupJoseph Green(646) 653-7030jgreen@edisongroup.com

Continued here:
Interpace to Present Data at the ATA Annual Meeting - GlobeNewswire

Posted in Molecular Genetics | Comments Off on Interpace to Present Data at the ATA Annual Meeting – GlobeNewswire

Time to break the stigma on genetic modification, for the sake of the climate – Stuff.co.nz

Posted: October 28, 2019 at 12:46 pm

OPINION: Recently, there has been a shift in society's view of genetic modification and its potential applications in the fight against climate change. This has led to a call for changes in our current policies from farmers and MPs alike.However, due to the Green Party's current stance on this topic, New Zealand is unable to utilise genetic modification for anything that is not laboratory-based.

I am a member of the Emerging Scientists for Climate Action society, which involves students from universities all over New Zealand. We are writing an open letter to the Greens to encourage them to review their stance on genetic modification and the current laws and regulations around genetic engineering. Our overarching goal to tackle climate change aligns with the Greens, and they are in a position to make positive change. We have 155signatures from emerging scientists (aged under 30) in support.

Genetic modification is a controversial topic, and there is much misunderstandingabout its techniques and applications.Genetic modification (aka genetic engineering) uses gene editing technologies and knowledge of genetics to make changes in an organism for a specific outcome. For example, a plant could be genetically modified to grow bigger to produce a higher yield. There are many gene-editing techniques that can be utilised, which further adds to the misconceptions around its applications. There is warranted concern over the long-term impacts of manipulating organisms at the molecular level, however, does this mean that we should disregard genetic modification altogether?

READ MORE:* New Zealand's anti-science GMO laws need to change to tackle climate change* Gene-editing risks are still too great to warrant a change in the law* Time for a grown-up conversation about gene editing

Our laws and regulations around genetic modification were established in 2001 and fall under the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act. That lawregulates research and release of all living things that do not already exist in New Zealand, including those that are genetically modified. However, these regulations have not accounted for the rapid advances in gene editing technology over the last decade, leaving New Zealand behind in the biotechnological sector. The calls for law changes come from all over New Zealand, including government agents such as Professor Juliet Gerrard, the Prime Minister's Chief Science Advisor. Current legal and regulatory frameworks are struggling to keep up with current technologies.

The focus on genetic modification has largely been on food production, such as pesticide-resistant crops and increased growth for higher crop yields. But the scope of genetic engineering expands far beyond this. Genetic engineering techniques have many benefits,including to mitigate the effects of climate change. For example, there has been research into genetically modifying plants to sequester more carbon from the environment, which would assist with lowering rising temperatures.

SUPPLIED

Deborah PaullPostgraduate student - Masters of Science in Microbiology, at the University of Canterbury.

I have been working on projects involving genetic modification, specifically, around genetically modifying milk proteins to reduce the allergenicity. The goal is to produce these proteins through a cellular-agriculture based system that can produce milk products in a more sustainable fashion in comparison to current methods. When discussing this project with people within the dairy industry, the overall remark is that it's a great idea but it will never be produced in New Zealand. It is disheartening to see that the potential benefits of using technology such as this to address climate change hasn't been considered due to our laws.

But it is now 2019, and we have advanced our technology and understanding of genetics in ways we couldn't have imagined. A new generation of emerging scientists has new values and ethical drives, especially focused on preserving our planet for future generations. To mitigate the effects of climate change, we need new and optimised technologies, such as genetic engineering. This is a practical action that could be implemented through highly controlled policy.

It is time to reframe the conversation around genetic modificationIf we hope to reach the carbon neutral targets set in the UN by 2050 while meeting the demands of the increasing population in a sustainable fashion, this is a conversation that we need to have now. The Royal Society has started this discussion, identifying the cultural values involved with using genetic engineering technologies but emphasisinghow New Zealand needs to shift its current view of this technology.

The goal is not to be carelessly modifying organisms for the benefit of a few -it is to utilise knowledge and technology so that as a country we can take a step forward. New Zealand is a world leader in green agricultural technologies. As a forward-thinking country, let's break the stigma surrounding genetic modification and create a better future for ourselves and the generations to come.

DeborahPaullis studying for aMasters of Science in Microbiologyat the University of Canterbury.

Read the rest here:
Time to break the stigma on genetic modification, for the sake of the climate - Stuff.co.nz

Posted in Genetic Engineering | Comments Off on Time to break the stigma on genetic modification, for the sake of the climate – Stuff.co.nz

Record-Time FDA Approval of Human Insulin In 1982: When Genetic Engineering Came of Age – American Council on Science and Health

Posted: October 28, 2019 at 12:46 pm

October 31stwill mark the 37th anniversary of one of biotechnologys most significant milestones -- the approval by the FDA of human insulin synthesized in genetically engineered bacteria.It launched a revolutionary new era in pharmaceutical development, and as the FDA medical reviewer of the product and the head of the evaluation team, I had a front-row seat.

The saga is remarkable in several ways, not least of which is that although both the drugmakers and regulators were exploring unknown territory, the development of the drug and its regulatory review progressed smoothly and rapidly.

Insulin in crude form was first produced in 1922 by Canadian researchers Frederick Banting and Charles Best, which lifted the death sentence that had previously been imposed on diabetics. By the end of that year drug company, Eli Lilly and Company had devised a method for much higher purification. Over the next half-century or so, the purified insulins obtained from pig or cow pancreases, which differ slightly in chemical composition from human insulin, were constantly improved in purity and formulated in ways that refined their performance.

During the early 1970s, as the supply of animal pancreases declined and the prevalence of insulin-requiring diabetes grew, there were widespread fears of possible future shortages of insulin.Fortuitously, around the same time, a new and powerful tool recombinant DNA technology, also known as genetic modification, genetic engineering, or gene-splicing became available and offered the promise of unlimited amounts of insulin that was identical to the molecule produced by humans.

The seminal molecular genetic engineering experiment wasreported in a 1973 research articleby academic scientists Stanley Cohen, Herbert Boyer and their collaborators. They isolated a ringlet of DNA called a plasmid from a bacterium, used certain enzymes to splice a gene from another bacterium into that plasmid, and then introduced the resulting recombinant, or chimeric, DNA intoE. colibacteria.

When these now recombinant bacteria reproduced, the plasmids containing the foreign DNA were likewise propagated and produced amplified amounts of the functional recombinant DNA. And because DNA contains the genetic code that directs the synthesis of proteins, this new methodology promised the ability to induce genetically modified bacteria (or other cells) to synthesize desired proteins in large amounts.

The scientists at Lilly immediately saw the promise of this technology for the production of unlimited quantities of human insulin in bacteria. After obtaining from startup Genentech, Inc., the recombinantE. colibacteria that contained the genetic blueprint for and that synthesized human insulin, they developed processes for the large-scale cultivation of the organism (in huge fermenters similar to those that make wine or beer) and for the purification and formulation of the insulin.

Insulins had long been Lillys flagship products, and the companys expertise was evident in the purification, laboratory testing and clinical trials of human insulin. The companys scientists painstakingly verified that their product was extremely pure and identical to pancreatic human insulin (which differs slightly in chemical composition from beef and pork insulin).

Lilly began clinical trials of its human insulin in July 1980. The product performed superbly. There were no systematic problems with treating naive patients (who had never before received injections of insulin) or those switched from animal to human insulin. A small number of patients who had had adverse reactions of some kind to the animal insulins tolerated the human insulin well.

The dossier that provided evidence of safety and efficacy was submitted in May 1982 to the FDA, where I was the medical reviewer and head of the evaluation team. Over many years the FDA had had prodigious experience with insulins and also with drugs derived from various microorganisms, so it was decided that no fundamentally new regulatory paradigms were necessary to evaluate the recombinant human insulin.

In other words, recombinant DNA techniques were viewed as an extension, or refinement, of long-used and familiar methods for making drugs. That proved to be a historic, precedent-setting decision.

Based on my teams exhaustive review of Lillys data, which were obtained from pre-clinical testing in animals and clinical trials in thousands of diabetics, FDA granted marketing approval for human insulin in October 1982. The review and approval took only five months when the agencys average approval time for new drugs was 30.5 months.

In retrospect, that rapid approval was particularly remarkable for a drug that was produced with a revolutionary new technology, and that after approval would be available in pharmacies nationwide to millions of American diabetics.

The back story, however, is revealing. My team and I were ready to recommend approvalafterfour months review. But when I took the packet to my supervisor, he said, Four months? No way! If anything goes wrong with this product down the road, people will say we rushed it, and well be toast. Thats the bureaucratic mind-set. I dont know how long he would have delayed it, but when he went on vacation a month later, I took the packet to his boss, the division director, and he signed off.

That anecdote illustrates Milton Friedmans observation that to understand the motivation of an individual or organization, you need to follow the self-interest. A large part of regulators self-interest lies in staying out of trouble. One way to do that, my supervisor understood, is not to approve in record time products that might experience unanticipated problems, even if it is the right thing to do.

The Humulin approval had significant effects. A New York Timesarticlementioned my prediction that the speedy approval was a major step forward in the scientific and commercial viability of recombinant DNA technology. We have now come of age, I said, and potential investors and entrepreneurs agreed. Seeing that biopharmaceuticals would compete with other medicines on a level playing field, the biotechnology industry was on the fast track.

Scores of genetically engineered drugs have been approved over the years, but the rapidity of the human insulin approval proved to be an anomaly. Even with a toolbox of improved technologies available to both the FDA and industry, bringing a new drug to market on average now takes 10-12 years and costs, on average, over$2.5 billion.Regulators are highly risk-averse, few new drugs are approved without convening extramural advisory committees, and decisions are sometimes hijacked by political forces exerted on the FDA.

Other FDA-regulated biotech sectors have fared worse.Incomprehensibly, the FDAdeclined to grant Generally Recognized As Safe (GRAS) statusto two proteins that would be life-saving as additives to oral rehydration solution administered to children with diarrhea.

In addition, FDA officials have made a horrendousmessof the regulation of genetically engineered animals, which FDA chose to regulate as new animal drugs, including a grotesquely prolonged, 20-plus year review of a faster-growing Atlantic salmon, and genetically engineered mosquitoes to control mosquitoes that carry viral diseases.(It took FDA more than five years to realize that the latter were actually pesticides which are outside the Agencys purview -- and that jurisdiction should, therefore, be turfed to EPA.)As a result, the entire biotech sector of genetically engineered animals is moribund.

Its too bad that government regulation hasnt aged as gracefully as genetic engineering technology itself.

See more here:
Record-Time FDA Approval of Human Insulin In 1982: When Genetic Engineering Came of Age - American Council on Science and Health

Posted in Genetic Engineering | Comments Off on Record-Time FDA Approval of Human Insulin In 1982: When Genetic Engineering Came of Age – American Council on Science and Health

Stream It Or Skip It: ‘Unnatural Selection’ On Netflix, A Docuseries About The Ethics And Ease Of Editing DNA – Decider

Posted: October 28, 2019 at 12:46 pm

With everything youve been hearing about genetic engineering over the years, starting with the idea of genetically-modified fruits and vegetables all the way through gene editing in humans, youve heard a lot about why itshouldnt be done. But what are the positives? And what might happen if gene editing goes mainstream and available to (gulp) everyone? A new Netflix docuseries examines that issue.

Opening Shot: At night, we see a large cage full of barking dogs, likely pit bulls. The location is Mendenhall, Mississippi.

The Gist: The dogs are owned by Paul Ishee, an oil field tech who breeds dogs on the side. He collects sperm from the dogs (in just the way youd expect) because he wants to genetically engineer a better dog. How does he do that? Via CRISPR, a small protein that can be injected via a bacteria into an organism to edit its DNA. One of the big features with CRISPR, which was perfected only a few years ago, is that the protein is easily obtainable. So genetic modifications can be done in expensive labs by trained scientists or by biohackers in their garages.

Unnatural Selection, a docuseries produced and directed by Leeor Kaufman and Joe Egender, examines the new frontier of genetic engineering, and what ethical stumbling blocks there are to adapting gene editing on a wider basis.

The filmmakers interview a mixture of scientists and biohackers, some of whom are both. Dr. Jennifer Doudna, widely regarded as the inventor of the CRISPR method, seems to be in the middle of the debate; she knows how powerful using CRISPR can be when it comes to curing genetic-based diseases and other conditions, but is wary of people who want to use it to engineer superior organisms. Biohackers like Dr. Josiah Zayner, a biophysicist who used to work for NASA, is in favor of the democratization of genetic engineering, sending $140 CRISPR kits to people via Priority Mail. One of those people is Ishee, who wants to make a glowing dog as his first experiment, just to prove that the engineering worked.

Others, such as Dr. Kevin Esvelt, an evolutionary engineer at MIT, want to put genetic engineering into practice by modifying mice to be immune to the bite of Lyme-carrying ticks and then releasing them to breed on a small island in Marthas Vineyard. What will the consequences of that be? Even Esvelt really doesnt know for sure. And thats the problem, and where the ethical issues take hold. Sending genetically modified mice, dogs, or humans into the world may introduce unintended consequences, or might be deadly in the wrong hands. But are people who think its dangerous just being alarmist?

Our Take: Genetic engineering and all of its advantages and ethical quandaries is a complex topic to cover, and in the first part of their four-part docuseries, Kaufman and Egender try to lay out the issue in as balanced a way as possible. But what we got during the feature-length (70-minute) first episode was more of a sense of fear than one of wonder.

Why? Because, while the filmmakers are giving biohackers like Ishee and Dr. Zayner as much time as the more legit scientists, it doesnt help matters when you see Dr. Zayner concocting CRISPR samples in his kitchen or see Ishee looking at YouTube videos of glowing mice and luminescent monkeys for inspiration.

But then we see Jackson Kennedy, a boy from New Jersey who is autistic and was born with poor vision, and we become hopeful again. His parents got genetic testing for him that showed that hes missing a gene that would help him see. And hes going to go for treatment that fixes that gene, which should restore his sight if it works. This is where genetic engineering could make a huge positive impact on the world. But, whether the filmmakers intended it this way or not, there seems to be a whole lot scarier ways the use of CRISPR could go haywire, which makes us as cautious as the anti-engineering activists they interview for the first episode.

Sleeper Star: When Jasons mother talked about how he wanted to be an astronaut and how heartbroken he was when he heard that astronauts need 20-20 vision, it almost broke our hearts. While his story will be a through-line through the limited series, were disappointed that there isnt a documentary just about him.

Most Pilot-y Line: There are actually two scenes of Ishee collecting sperm from his dogs. Yuck.

Our Call: STREAM IT. Were wondering how much of what were going to see during the rest ofUnnatural Selection will be more crackpots and less of the positive stuff like Jasons treatment. If its the former, wed likely end up skipping it.

Your Call:

Joel Keller(@joelkeller) writes about food, entertainment, parenting and tech, but he doesnt kid himself: hes a TV junkie. His writing has appeared in the New York Times, Slate, Salon,VanityFair.com,Playboy.com, FastCompany.com,RollingStone.com, Billboard and elsewhere.

StreamUnnatural Selection On Netflix

The rest is here:
Stream It Or Skip It: 'Unnatural Selection' On Netflix, A Docuseries About The Ethics And Ease Of Editing DNA - Decider

Posted in Genetic Engineering | Comments Off on Stream It Or Skip It: ‘Unnatural Selection’ On Netflix, A Docuseries About The Ethics And Ease Of Editing DNA – Decider

Page 1,295«..1020..1,2941,2951,2961,297..1,3001,310..»