header logo image


Page 10«..9101112..2030..»

Archive for September, 2020

Common HIV drugs increase a type of immunity in the gut – UW Medicine Newsroom

Tuesday, September 22nd, 2020

Drugs currentlyused to keep the HIV virus in check also cause immune-system changesthat mightmake humans better able toresist viral infectionsbutmight also cause harmful inflammation, according to a study published today in Cell Reports Medicine.

The UW Medicine-led studyby Dr.Florian Hladik and Sean Hughes examined the effects ofa commonly prescribed drug cocktail of drugs on the body.

Sold under the brand name Truvada, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and emtricitabine (TDF/FTC)are prescribed in tandem formost HIV/AIDS patients to suppress viral loads to undetectable levels. First allowed for use in the United States 20 years ago, the drugs haveenabledpeopleto live for decades beyond their initial diagnosis.

However, Hladik said,"the virus itself never goes away."

In this research, the investigatorsstudied the effect of TDF/FTC in patients who were using the drugto prevent HIV, and in the absence of active HIV infection. The researchers observed patientsover the past five yearsand also includeddata from two earlier studies.

We wanted to know how the drugs themselves affect the immune system, Hughes said. We found that they stimulated type I / III interferon responses, a part of the immune system that is crucial for the bodys ability to fight off viruses. This only happened in the gut.

The clinical consequences of the findings are uncertain and merit further study.

Increased type I / III interferons could be a good thing and actually make the drugs more effective at suppressing viral infections, including HIV. However, they could also cause inflammation, which could contribute to conditions such as cardiovascular disease that are common in people living with HIV, Hladik said. These effects might even make it harder to find a cure for HIV if they make cells silently infected with HIV (called latent cells) more likely to survive or even cause them to proliferate.

Hladik and Hughesalso want to look for those same effects in people infected with HIV.

New drug regimens have just become available that highly suppress the HIV virus in patients and dont contain TDF/FTC or other drugs of thatclass. Bothhope to conduct a trial comparing immunity in HIV-infected individuals using TDF/FTC to others using these newer regimens to determine whether their findings are true in HIV-infected individuals. The researchers hypothesize that the newer regimens will avoid chronic immune activation and decrease the number of latent cells.

The most important next step is to repeat our studies in HIV-infected individuals, and to find out if replacing drugs such as TDF/FTC with newer regimens has clinically relevant effects on reducing chronic inflammation and persistence of latent HIV, Hladik said.

This work was funded by the National Institutes of Health(R01AI116292, R01AI111738,R01AI134293,AI027757,AI069481,R01DK112254);the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation;the Microbicide Trials Network (UM1AI068633); the Canadian Institutes for Health Research;the Emory University-CDC HIV/AIDS Clinical Trials Unit (UM1AI069418, from the NIAID). The ddPCR work was supported by a grant from the James B. Pendleton Charitable Trust. A National Cancer Institute grant supported the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center Experimental Histopathology core facility.

Read the original:
Common HIV drugs increase a type of immunity in the gut - UW Medicine Newsroom

Read More...

What we know about COVID-19 and kids – Yale News

Tuesday, September 22nd, 2020

Its unusual that a virus would be less severe in children than it is in adults. But when it comes to COVID-19, kids make up just a small percentage of severe cases. Yale researchers are working to understand why that is.

Their discoveries can help guide understanding of the virus and possible treatment options.

Ina paper published recently in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences(PNAS),Dr. Naftali Kaminski, theBoehringer-Ingelheim Endowed Professor of Internal Medicine and chief of Pulmonary, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, and colleagues shared findings related tochildrens surprising immunity to the virus. They detailed how factors including allergies, asthma, the common cold, and existing vaccines may be having a protective effect.

Meanwhile,Carrie Lucas, assistant professor of immunobiology at Yale, is looking at blood samples from the small percentage of children who develop the rare condition known as Multi-Inflammatory Syndrome in Children, or MIS-C, in response to COVID-19. Her lab is analyzing blood samples for molecular and genetic clues to figure out why a certain subset of kids are most at risk.

Findings just published in the journal Science Translational Medicine led byKevan Herold, the C.N.H. Long Professor of Immunology and Internal Medicine at Yale, revealed that children diagnosed with COVID-19 express higher levels of two specific immune system molecules, a factor that might be leading to better health outcomes.

Related story:Childrens immune response more effective against COVID-19

Understanding why children appear to be better protected from severe cases than adults could provide important clues on how the novel coronavirus spreads, who is at greatest risk, and how to treat it.

This is different from other viruses that affect kids more seriously, Kaminski said. Its an interesting conundrum and could provide implications for therapeutics.

In the PNAS paper, researchers point to the possibility that allergies and asthma in children has a protective effect. When the body responds to an allergy or asthma trigger, the immune system releases Th2 cells, which in turn increases a type of cell called the eosinophil in the blood and tissues. This allergic inflammation has been shown to dramatically reduce the levels of a key receptor to the COVID-19 molecule, known as ACE2. They added that astudy of 85 older adultswho died of COVID-19 in China showed that they had very low levels of blood eosinophils.

Initially, there was a concern about the impact of COVID-19 on children with asthma, said Kaminski. Some 7.5% of U.S. children under 18, or 5.5 million kids, have asthma, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. But, in fact, it seems that compared to other chronic lung diseases, people with asthma are infected less, and, when they are infected, asthma is not a risk factor.

Instead, risk factors known to drive worse COVID-19 outcomes include age, obesity, hypertension, and cardiac diseases.

The greater exposure children have to the common cold may also offer protection. Coronaviruses are a large family of viruses so named for their crown-like shape under a microscope, of which the common cold is one. SARS-CoV-2, which causes COVID-19, is another.

It is thought that exposure to colds may cause viral interference, when one virus interferes with the replication of a second virus. Exposure to common colds, and more severe illnesses like croup, more common in children, are associated with decreased expression of the ACE2 COVID-19 receptor. Studies have found that children symptomatic with COVID-19 may have high viral loads in their noses but, because they have lower levels of ACE2, their lungs are less likely to become infected. In other words, they can still easily spread the virus, but are less likely to develop serious symptoms.

Kaminski added that there is even evidence that vaccines can provide protection. Astudyof Department of Defense personnel found that the 2017-2018 seasonal flu vaccine produced a statistically significant number of individuals who tested positive for common cold-related coronaviruses. If future flu vaccines are designed to increase common coronaviruses, he said, this phenomenon may actually provide some protection to SARS-CoV-2 through cross-reactive immunity.

Of course, not all children are protected from the worst effects of COVID-19. Lucas and her team of pediatric immune disease researchers at Yale are looking at the rare cases of children who have been seriously affected by the virus. Specifically, they looked at children who were asymptomatic during SARS-CoV-2 infection, but weeks later developed a high fever, vomiting, abdominal pain, and sometimes shock, a condition known as MIS-C.As of Sept. 17, there were 935 confirmed cases of MIS-C in the U.S., and 19 deaths.

Lucas lab, which has enrolled 16 pediatric MIS-C patients, is analyzing immune cells in their blood at the single-cell level, as well as thousands of blood proteins, to understand what is happening.

Mostly, right now, our data are showing what the syndrome isnot, she said. For instance, we have found no sign of an active viral or bacterial infection during acute MIS-C.

They are also collecting saliva samples from parents to compare to childrens samples, which might reveal information about genetic variants. Were looking for the needle in the haystack that could be causing this rare manifestation, Lucas said. So far, theres no evidence that this is something that runs in families. I dont know of any cases where two children in a family developed MIS-C.

What they do know, she said, is that inflammatory markers are high, and most patients respond well to immunosuppressive therapies such as steroids. Additional findings will be published in the coming weeks on MedRxiv, a preprint server founded by Yale scientists which publishes studies before they have been peer-reviewed.

While children largely seem to be protected from the immediate effects of COVID-19, there are still long-term concerns, Kaminski and the authors caution. The pandemic and social distancing, they note, affect maturation of the immune system, psychological health, education, and childhood obesity.

We know that the health of children is strongly affected by socioeconomic downturns, Kaminski said, and this potential adverse outcome should not be overlooked.

View post:
What we know about COVID-19 and kids - Yale News

Read More...

Antibodies made in the lab show some promise for treating COVID-19 – Science News

Tuesday, September 22nd, 2020

Amid the rush to test and develop potential treatments for COVID-19, lab-made antibodies are showing hints of success. In news releases, two companies announced preliminary results, though shared only limited data, that suggest the experimental drugs may help patients both early and late in infection.

One clinical trial of monoclonal antibodies human-made versions of immune system defenders produced by the body suggests that the drugs can help keep people hospitalized with COVID-19 from needing a ventilator or from dying. And a second trial appears to show that the drugs can bring down levels of the coronavirus in recently infected people, and help reduce the chances that a person would need hospitalization.

Antibodies are part of the bodys natural defense against infectious pathogens. The proteins typically attach to parts of bacteria or viruses to fight off infection. In the lab, scientists can engineer versions of antibodies to recognize specific targets in order to hinder the virus replication or prevent the bodys immune system from overreacting to the virus (SN: 2/21/20).

A monoclonal antibody drug called tocilizumab is one of the latter types; it blocks a part of the immune response that can cause inflammation, a protein known as IL-6. By curbing inflammation, the drug could help people whose immune systems have become overactive through a process called a cytokine storm, which can cause severe COVID-19 symptoms (SN: 8/6/20).

In a Phase III clinical trial of 389 people hospitalized with COVID-19, those who received tocilizumab were 44 percent less likely to need a ventilator or die compared with people who got a placebo, San Franciscobased biotechnology company Genentech announced September 17 in a news release. Of those who received the drug, 12.2 percent of people needed a ventilator or died, compared with 19.3 percent of patients who received a placebo. Still, when the researchers looked at death alone, the drug did not result in a statistically significant difference in mortality between the groups.

Saying that it was still analyzing the data, the company did not provide such specifics as how many people died in each group.

A 44-percent decrease is definitely very intriguing, says Abhijit Duggal, a critical care specialist at the Cleveland Clinic who has treated people with COVID-19. But because the results have been publicized in a news release, without key patient information, I dont know what to really make of that, Duggal says. Only as more data come in will experts be able to conclusively say whether the drug might help people, he says. The announced results have not yet been vetted by outside experts or published in a peer-reviewed journal.

Unlike many other clinical trials of potential COVID-19 drugs and treatments, the Genentech trial focused on groups of people that have been disproportionately impacted by the virus (SN: 4/10/20). Around 85 percent of people in the study are Black, Hispanic and Native American. People in these groups are more likely than white people to be infected or die from COVID-19, studies have shown. In part thats due to high rates of underlying conditions like high blood pressure and jobs with a higher risk of exposure to the virus.

Its really important that [the researchers] are including a diverse population, says Rajesh Gandhi, an infectious disease physician at Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School in Boston. That is critical as we do these trials.

Headlines and summaries of the latest Science News articles, delivered to your inbox

In a previous Genentech-related trial that included 452 people with severe COVID-19, tocilizumab did not help improve symptoms or prevent death, researchers reported in a preliminary study posted September 12 at medRxiv.org. Other trials of the drug have reported improved outcomes in people with moderate or severe COVID-19 symptoms.

Importantly, the new trial focused on hospitalized people before they required a ventilator, says Jamie Freedman, Genentechs head of U.S. medical affairs. So differences among trials could be a timing issue. If you give it too early, before cytokines are elevated, would there be a benefit there? When patients are already in the ICU, is it too late? Or is there some sweet spot in the middle? Freedman says. Those are analyses that really need to continue.

Scientists working on another monoclonal antibody, which targets the coronavirus spike protein, also recently reported promising results (SN: 2/21/20). Called LY-CoV555, the drug can reduce the amount of virus in the bodies in newly infected people and help prevent COVID-19 hospitalizations, Indianapolis-based pharmaceutical company Eli Lilly announced September 16 in a news release.

People in this ongoing Phase II clinical trial to determine efficacy receive either a low, medium or high dose of the antibody or a placebo. So far, those who get a medium dose of LY-CoV555, which is based on an antibody from one of the first COVID-19 patients in the United States, appear to clear the virus faster than those on the placebo, according to the release. Fewer treated patients still had high viral loads later on in the study. Most people, including those on a placebo, cleared the virus from their bodies by day 11. Like Genentech, Eli Lilly released only limited data. The announced results have not yet been vetted by outside experts or published in a peer-reviewed journal.

Its really intriguing and tantalizing information, Gandhi says. But without the full details of the study, like patient age or whether any people had underlying conditions, its difficult to know how solid the findings are, he says.

Its surprising that people on the medium dose had a benefit from the drug but those on the higher dose didnt, but that could be because the results are preliminary and could change as people are added to the trial, says Nina Luning Prak, an immunologist at the University of Pennsylvania. But in principle, it looks hopeful, she says.

Whats more, of 302 people treated with any amount of LY-CoV555, five, or 1.7 percent, landed in the hospital, while nine people, or 6 percent, in a control group of 150 patients who received a placebo, were hospitalized. Its unclear based on the results included in the news release, however, whether the difference between the two groups is meaningful. But if its borne out, well see hopefully soon that this is important because it shows that an antibody is having an antiviral effect, Gandhi says.

There are many other monoclonal antibody trials ongoing around the world, many of which feature drugs that bind to a variety of both virus and host proteins. Experts are carefully watching for results, keen to know for sure whether such treatments can help patients. Still, compared with where treatments were in March and April, weve made progress, Gandhi says. I think that progress is going to just accelerate.

Continued here:
Antibodies made in the lab show some promise for treating COVID-19 - Science News

Read More...

How and when will we know that a COVID-19 vaccine is safe and effective? – Fairfield Citizen

Tuesday, September 22nd, 2020

(The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts.)

William Petri, University of Virginia

(THE CONVERSATION) With COVID-19 vaccines currently in the final phase of study, youve probably been wondering how the FDA will decide if a vaccine is safe and effective.

Based on the status of the Phase 3 trials currently underway, it is unlikely that the results of these trials will be available before November. But it is likely that not just one but several of the competing COVID-19 vaccines will be shown to be safe and effective by the end of 2020.

I am a scientist and infectious diseases specialist at the University of Virginia, where I care for patients with COVID-19 and conduct research on the pandemic. I am also a member of the World Health Organization Expert Group on COVID-19 Vaccine Prioritization.

What is the status of COVID-19 vaccines in human clinical trials?

Phase 3 studies are underway for the Moderna and BioNTech/Pfizer vaccines and the Oxford/AstraZeneca viral vector vaccine.

Each of these vaccines uses the SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein, which the virus uses to infect cells, to trigger the immune system to generate protective antibodies and a cellular immune response to the virus. Protective antibodies act by preventing the spike glycoprotein from attaching the virus to human cells, thereby neutralizing the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes COVID-19.

In the case of Modernas nucleic acid vaccine, the messenger RNA encoding the spike glycoprotein is encased in a fat droplet called a liposome to protect the mRNA from degradation and enable it to enter cells. Once these instructions are inside the cells, the mRNA is read by the human cell machinery and made into many spike proteins so that the immune system can respond and begin producing antibodies against this coronavirus.

The Oxford/AstraZeneca uses a different strategy to activate an immune response. Here an adenovirus found in chimpanzees shuttles the instructions for manufacturing the spike glycoprotein into cells.

Phase 1 and 2 studies by pharmaceutical companies Janssen and Merck also use viral vectors similar to the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine, while vaccines by Novavax and GSK-Sanofi use the actual spike protein itself.

Animal tests show the vaccines provide protection from coronavirus infection

Studies in animal models of COVID-19 provide convincing evidence that vaccination with the spike glycoprotein will protect from COVID-19. Experiments have show that when the immune system is shown the spike protein which alone cannot trigger disease the immune system will generate an antibody response that protects from infection with SARS-CoV-2.

In studies in hamsters an adenovirus viral vector the approach used by Oxford/AstraZeneca, for example was used to immunize with the Spike glycoprotein. When the hamsters were infected with SARS-CoV-2 they were protected from pneumonia, weight loss and death.

In nonhuman primates, DNA vaccines which deliver the gene for the spike glycoprotein reduced the amount of virus in the lungs. Animals that produced antibody that prevented virus attachment to human cells were most likely to be protected.

What have the early Phase 1 and 2 studies in humans shown?

Overall, vaccination has triggered a more potent neutralizing antibody response than even that seen in patients recovering from COVID-19.

This has also been the case for Modernas vaccine currently in Phase 3 trials and for vaccines from CanSino Biologics and Oxford/ AstraZeneca.

What side effects have been observed?

Physicians have recorded mild to moderate reactions when the subjects were observed up to 28 days after vaccination. These side effects included mild pain, warmth and tenderness at the site of injection, and fever, fatigue, joint and muscle pain.

But Phase 1 and 2 studies are by small by design, with just hundreds of participants. So these trials will not be large enough to detect uncommon or rare side effects.

The emphasis on safety as the primary goal was recently demonstrated in the Phase 3 Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine trial where one vaccinated individual developed inflammation of the spinal cord. It isnt clear whether the vaccine caused this reaction it might be a new case of multiple sclerosis unrelated to the vaccine but the Phase 3 trial was halted in the U.S. until more is known.

How is the FDA ensuring that a vaccine will be safe yet quickly produced?

The FDA has issued guidance for industry on the steps required for developing and ultimately licensing vaccines to prevent COVID-19 these are the same rigorous safety standards required for all vaccines.

There are, however, ways to speed the process of approval that are centered on platform technology. What this means is that if a vaccine is using an approach such as an adenovirus that has previously been shown to be safe, it may be possible for a company to use previously collected data on toxicity and pharmacokinetics to fast-track clinical trial approval.

While speed and safety may appear conflicting goals, it is also encouraging to note that the rival vaccine manufacturers have jointly pledged not to bow to any political pressures to rush vaccine approval, but to maintain the most rigorous safety standards.

How protective does a vaccine need be to receive FDA approval?

The FDA has set the bar for the primary endpoint of a Phase 3 trial of 50% protection for approval of a COVID-19 vaccine.

Protection is defined as protection from symptomatic COVID-19 infection, defined as laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection plus symptoms such as fever or chills, cough, shortness of breath, fatigue, muscle aches, loss of taste or smell, congestion or runny nose, diarrhea, nausea or vomiting.

This means that an effective vaccine is considered one that will reduce the number of infections in vaccine recipients by half. This is the minimal protection that is anticipated to be clinically useful. That is, in part, because lower levels of efficacy could paradoxically increase COVID-19 infections if it leads vaccinated people to decrease mask wearing or social distancing because they think they are completely protected.

Since a vaccine might be more effective at preventing severe COVID-19, the FDA instructs that protection from severe COVID-19 should be a secondary endpoint.

How many people have to be vaccinated to know if a vaccine works in Phase 3?

The current Phase 3 trials are enrolling 30,000-40,000 subjects. Most of these participants will receive the vaccine and some a placebo.

When, exactly, the results of Phase 3 studies will be released depends in large part on the rate of infection in the placebo recipients. The way that these vaccine studies work is that they test if naturally acquired new coronavirus infections are lower in the group that received the vaccine compared with the group receiving the placebo.

So while it is good news that COVID-19 infections have dropped recently in the U.S. from 70,000 to 40,000 cases per day, this drop in new infections may slow the vaccine studies.

Will Emergency Use Authorization fast-track vaccine?

In an emergency such as we are faced with the COVID-19 pandemic, with approximately 700 new deaths and 40,000 new cases per day right now, the FDA is authorized to allow the use of unapproved products for the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of disease. That includes a vaccine.

The standard approval process for vaccines can require more than one year of observation after vaccination. If the short-term safety is good and the vaccine works to prevent COVID-19, then the vaccine should be approved for use under an Emergency Use Authorization while it is still being studied.

Under Emergency Use Authorization, the FDA will continue to collect information from the companies producing the vaccines for benefit and harm, including surveillance for vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease or other potentially rare complications that might be observed in only one in a million.

What should we expect in terms of approvals?

I expect that the FDA will approve several vaccines by the end of 2020 under its Emergency Use Authorization authority so that vaccination can begin immediately, starting with high-risk groups including first responders, health care personnel, and the elderly and those with preexisting medical conditions.

This will be followed rapidly with roll-out of vaccination to the population at large, while all of the time the FDA and vaccine manufacturers will continue to monitor for side effects and work to improve upon these first vaccines. This process is expected to take months.

It may not be life back to normal next year, but all signs point to a healthier 2021.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article here: https://theconversation.com/how-and-when-will-we-know-that-a-covid-19-vaccine-is-safe-and-effective-146091.

Read the original here:
How and when will we know that a COVID-19 vaccine is safe and effective? - Fairfield Citizen

Read More...

Prenatal Opioid Exposure Associated with Development of Asthma in Children – MD Magazine

Tuesday, September 22nd, 2020

Findings from a new study demonstrated that infants exposed to opioids prior to birth had a two times higher odds of developing asthma.

The results underscore the necessity of maintaining close follow up care in this vulnerable patient population.

In the past 10 years, prenatal opioid exposure (POE) has seen a dramatic increase among the US newborn population. As many as 100 infants are born daily with Neonatal Opioid Withdrawal Syndrome (NOWS).Therefore, there lies a great need in investigating long-term outcomes in such patients.

Isabella Cervantes, BA, of the University of New Mexico School of Medicine, and colleagues designed a retrospective cohort study to determine the association between POE and the likelihood of an altered immune response by 8 years of age. Immune response was measured by the development of asthma.

To do this. Cervantes and team pulled data from a comprehensive CERNER HealthFacts U.S. national database, which captures de-identified, longitudinal health record data from 800 hospitals across the country.

The investigators used ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM diagnostic codes to identify infant patients born at term who had confirmed prenatal exposure to opioids or Neonatal Opioid Withdrawal Syndrome (NOWS).

Then they compared this population of patients with infants who had neither diagnoses at birth. Data was analyzed using IBM Statistical Package for Social Sciences, and Pearsons Chi-Square test analysis was conducted to determine any association between POE and asthma diagnosis.

Overall, the study included 3021 patient records between 2000-2016. A majority of the population was male (50.7%), with Caucasian (61%) being the most represented race/ethnicity.

The investigators also noted that a majority of patients had Medicaid insurance (41.9%) and were raised in urban communities (92.5%).

As many as 50.4% of patients presented with POEversus 49.6% who had no known exposure.

In their analysis, the investigators found that up to 66.3% of all asthma patients (n = 172) were prenatally exposed to opioids.

Thus, after controlling for race, gender demographics, and insurance type, they determined that the odds of developing asthma were two times higher for the prenatally exposed group (OR, 21; 95% CI, 1.4-3.0; P<.0001) than those who did not have POE.

They considered a major strength of the study to be the vastness of the national database. Therefore, the results could be consistent across different regions in the US.

A limitation, however, were the diagnostic codes used to identify their patient population of interest. For example, the codes used to identify infants with prenatal opioid exposure included other diagnoses such as Drug Withdrawal Syndrome in Newborn. Other confounding variables included smoking in the household, among others.

To address such limitations, they highlighted a need to undertake a longitudinal, prospective, multisite study for the future.

These emerging results suggest infants with POE may have altered immune reactivity that not only impacts the newborn period but persists into childhood, they wrote.

Future investigations should aim to characterize in greater detail the impact of POE on the immune system so that new follow-up strategies or effective interventions can be developed, they concluded.

The study, Increased Incidence of Asthma in Children with Prenatal Opioid Exposure, was published online in The Univeristy of New Mexico Digital Repository.

View post:
Prenatal Opioid Exposure Associated with Development of Asthma in Children - MD Magazine

Read More...

Need better immunity? Try these teas! – Hindustan Times

Tuesday, September 22nd, 2020

No matter what the season is tea is undeniably one of the best beverages. After water, tea is the worlds most consumed beverage. Drinking tea could actually ward off some very serious conditions, including cancer and obesity. It might sound inflated, but some surveys have stated that the world drinks about six billion cups of tea a day.

Tea contains antioxidants, improves heart health, facilitates weight loss etc. It keeps the body hydrated. There is a large variety of teas available in the market today and in the list below, we share the ones that can build and boost your immune system.

1. Masala Chai: India is a land of spices and has mastered the art of curing ailments and illnesses using unique combination of spices and herbs. There are several magical and abundantly available spices in India that strengthen the immune system. Masala Chai usually contains six condiments, namely cardamom, cinnamon, star anise, pepper, cloves and ginger. Their concoction will keep you pink of health.

2. Ginger Green Tea: A body is more susceptible to catch flue during changing seasons. This is that time of the year when one needs to take good care of their immune system and diet. Make ginger green tea your bae. Ginger, which is used extensively in Indian households, consists of anti-inflammatory components and antioxidants that can cure inflammation.

3. Cinnamon Green Tea: Cinnamon is a commonly used spice globally. It is derived from the inner bark of a small evergreen tree. Adding cinnamon stick or cinnamon powder to the tea enhances its potential. This magical ingredient is believed to reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease, improves digestion, and keeps a check on diabetes among other health benefits.

Inputs by Nutritionist Tripti Tandon

Read the original:
Need better immunity? Try these teas! - Hindustan Times

Read More...

Everything you need to know about what it would take for the FDA to approve a COVID-19 vaccine – MarketWatch

Tuesday, September 22nd, 2020

With COVID-19 vaccines currently in the final phase of study, youve probably been wondering how the Food and Drug Administration will decide if a vaccine is safe and effective.

Based on the status of thePhase 3 trialscurrently under way, it is unlikely that the results of these trials will be available before November. But it is likely that not just one but several of the competing COVID-19 vaccines will be shown to be safe and effective by the end of 2020.

I am a scientist and infectious diseases specialistat the University of Virginia, where I care for patients with COVID-19 and conduct research on the pandemic. I am also a member of the World Health Organization Expert Group on COVID-19 Vaccine Prioritization.

Phase 3 studies are under wayfor the Moderna MRNA, -0.78% and BioNTech BNTX, +1.40% /Pfizer PFE, +0.63% vaccines and the Oxford/AstraZeneca AZN, -0.37% AZN, -0.84% viral vector vaccine.

Follow the latest news on the coronavirus on MarketWatch

Each of these vaccines uses the SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein, which the virus uses to infect cells, to trigger the immune system to generate protective antibodies and a cellular immune response to the virus. Protective antibodies act by preventing the spike glycoprotein from attaching the virus to human cells, thereby neutralizing the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes COVID-19.

In the case ofModernas nucleic acid vaccine, the messenger RNA encoding the spike glycoprotein is encased in a fat dropletcalled a liposometo protect the mRNA from degradation and enable it to enter cells. Once these instructions are inside the cells, the mRNA is read by the human cell machinery and made into many spike proteins so that the immune system can respond and begin producing antibodies against this coronavirus.

The Oxford/AstraZeneca uses a different strategy to activate an immune response. Here an adenovirus found in chimpanzees shuttles the instructions for manufacturing the spike glycoprotein into cells.

Phase 1 and 2 studies by the pharmaceutical companies Janssen and Merck MRK, -0.22% also use viral vectors similar to the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine, while vaccines by Novavax NVAX, +1.34% and GSK GSK, -0.55% and Sanofi SNY, -1.94% use the actual spike protein itself.

Studies in animal models of COVID-19 provide convincing evidence that vaccination with the spike glycoprotein will protect from COVID-19. Experiments have show that when the immune system is shown the spike proteinwhich alone cannot trigger diseasethe immune system will generate an antibody response that protects from infection with SARS-CoV-2.

In studies in hamstersan adenovirus viral vectorthe approach used by Oxford/AstraZeneca, for examplewas used to immunize with the spike glycoprotein. When the hamsters were infected with SARS-CoV-2 they were protected from pneumonia, weight loss and death.

In nonhuman primates, DNA vaccineswhich deliver the gene for the spike glycoproteinreduced the amount of virus in the lungs. Animals that produced an antibody that prevented virus attachment to human cells were most likely to be protected.

Overall,vaccination has triggered a more potent neutralizing antibody responsethan even that seen in patients recovering from COVID-19.

This has also been the case forModernas vaccine currently in Phase 3 trialsand for vaccines fromCanSino Biologics 6185, -1.24% and Oxford/ AstraZeneca.

Physicians have recordedmild to moderate reactionswhen the subjects were observedup to 28 days after vaccination. These side effects included mild pain, warmth and tenderness at the site of injection, and fever, fatigue, joint and muscle pain.

But Phase 1 and 2 studies are by small by design, with just hundreds of participants. So these trials will not be large enough to detect uncommon or rare side effects.

The emphasis on safety as the primary goal was recently demonstrated in the Phase 3 Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine trialwhere one vaccinated individual developed inflammation of the spinal cord. It isnt clear whether the vaccine caused this reactionit might be a new case of multiple sclerosis unrelated to the vaccinebut the Phase 3 trial was halted in the U.S. until more is known.

TheFDA has issued guidance for industryon the steps required for developing and ultimately licensing vaccines to prevent COVID-19these are the same rigorous safety standards required for all vaccines.

There are, however, ways to speed the process of approval that are centered on platform technology.

What this means is that if a vaccine is using an approach such as an adenovirus that has previously been shown to be safe, it may be possible for a company to use previously collected data on toxicity and pharmacokinetics to fast-track clinical trial approval.

ile speed and safety may appear conflicting goals, it is also encouraging to note that therival vaccine manufacturers have jointly pledgednot to bow to any political pressures to rush vaccine approval, but to maintain the most rigorous safety standards.

The FDA has set the bar for the primary endpoint of a Phase 3 trial of 50% protection for approval of a COVID-19 vaccine.

Protection is defined as protection from symptomatic COVID-19 infection, defined as laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection plus symptoms such as fever or chills, cough, shortness of breath, fatigue, muscle aches, loss of taste or smell, congestion or runny nose, diarrhea, nausea or vomiting.

This means that an effective vaccine is considered one that will reduce the number of infections in vaccine recipients by half. This is theminimal protection that is anticipated to be clinically useful. That is, in part, because lower levels of efficacy could paradoxically increase COVID-19 infections if it leads vaccinated people to decrease mask wearing or social distancing because they think they are completely protected.

Since a vaccine might be more effective at preventing severe COVID-19, the FDA instructs thatprotection from severe COVID-19should be a secondary endpoint.

FDA to announce tough guidelines that could delay approval of vaccine, Washington Post reports

The current Phase 3 trials are enrolling 30,000-40,000 subjects. Most of these participants will receive the vaccine and some a placebo.

When, exactly, the results of Phase 3 studies will be released depends in large part on the rate of infection in the placebo recipients. The way that these vaccine studies work is that they test if naturally acquired new coronavirus infections are lower in the group that received the vaccine compared with the group receiving the placebo.

So while it is good news that COVID-19 infections have dropped recently in the U.S. from70,000 to 40,000 cases per day, this drop in new infections may slow the vaccine studies.

In an emergency such as we are faced with the COVID-19 pandemic, with approximately 700 new deaths and 40,000 new cases per day right now, the FDA is authorized to allow the use of unapproved products for the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of disease. That includes a vaccine.

The standard approval process for vaccinescan require more than one year of observation after vaccination. If the short-term safety is good and the vaccine works to prevent COVID-19, then the vaccine should be approved for use under an Emergency Use Authorization while it is still being studied.

Under Emergency Use Authorization, the FDA willcontinue to collect informationfrom the companies producing the vaccines for benefit and harm, including surveillance for vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease or other potentially rare complications that might be observed in only one in a million.

I expect that the FDA will approve several vaccines by the end of 2020 under its Emergency Use Authorization authority so that vaccination can begin immediately, starting with high-risk groups including first responders, health-care personnel, and the elderly and those with pre-existing medical conditions.

This will be followed rapidly withrollout of vaccinationto the population at large, while all of the time the FDA and vaccine manufacturers will continue to monitor for side effects and work to improve upon these first vaccines. This process isexpected to take months.

It may not be life back to normal next year, but all signs point to a healthier 2021.

William Petri is professor of medicine at the University of Virginia.

This commentary was originally published by The ConversationHow and when will we know that aCOVID-19vaccine is safe andeffective?

Heres the latest on what we know worksand doesnt workin treating coronavirus infections

How to stay safe from coronavirus in a public restroom

See original here:
Everything you need to know about what it would take for the FDA to approve a COVID-19 vaccine - MarketWatch

Read More...

Good nutrition can contribute to keeping COVID-19 and other diseases away – The Conversation US

Tuesday, September 22nd, 2020

The connection between the pandemic and our dietary habits is undeniable. The stress of isolation coupled with a struggling economy has caused many of us to seek comfort with our old friends: Big Mac, Tom Collins, Ben and Jerry. But overindulging in this kind of food and drink might not just be affecting your waistline, but could potentially put you at greater risk of illness by hindering your immune system.

Hear the word nutrition, and often what comes to mind are fad diets, juice cleanses and supplements. Americans certainly seem concerned with their weight; 45 million of us spend US$33 billion annually on weight loss products. But one in five Americans consumes nearly no vegetables less than one serving per day.

When the emphasis is on weight loss products, and not healthy day-to-day eating, the essential role that nutrition plays in keeping us well never gets communicated. Among the many things I teach students in my nutritional biochemistry course is the clear relationship between a balanced diet and a strong, well-regulated immune system.

Along with social distancing measures and effective vaccines, a healthy immune system is our best defense against coronavirus infection. To keep it that way, proper nutrition is an absolute must. Although not a replacement for medicine, good nutrition can work synergistically with medicine to improve vaccine effectiveness, reduce the prevalence of chronic disease and lower the burden on the health care system.

Scientists know that people with preexisting health conditions are at greater risk for severe COVID-19 infections. That includes those with diabetes, obesity, and kidney, lung or cardiovascular disease. Many of these conditions are linked to a dysfunctional immune system.

Patients with cardiovascular or metabolic disease have a delayed immune response, giving viral invaders a head start. When that happens, the body reacts with a more intense inflammatory response, and healthy tissues are damaged along with the virus. Its not yet clear how much this damage factors into the increased mortality rate, but it is a factor.

What does this have to do with nutrition? The Western diet typically has a high proportion of red meat, saturated fat and whats known as bliss point foods rich in sugar and salt. Adequate fruit and vegetable consumption is missing. Despite the abundance of calories that often accompanies the Western diet, many Americans dont consume nearly enough of the essential nutrients our bodies need to function properly, including vitamins A, C and D, and the minerals iron and potassium. And that, at least in part, causes a dysfunctional immune system: too few vitamins and minerals, and too many empty calories.

A healthy immune system responds quickly to limit or prevent infection, but it also promptly turns down the dial to avoid damaging the cells of the body. Sugar disrupts this balance. A high proportion of refined sugar in the diet can cause chronic, low-grade inflammation in addition to diabetes and obesity. Essentially, that dial is never turned all the way off.

While inflammation is a natural part of the immune response, it can be harmful when its constantly active. Indeed, obesity is itself characterized by chronic, low-grade inflammation and a dysregulated immune response.

And research showsthat vaccines may be less effective in obese people. The same applies to those who regularly drink too much alcohol.

Nutrients, essential substances that help us grow properly and remain healthy, help maintain the immune system. In contrast to the delayed responses associated with malnutrition, vitamin A fights against multiple infectious diseases, including measles. Along with vitamin D, it regulates the immune system and helps to prevent its overactivation. Vitamin C, an antioxidant, protects us from the injury caused by free radicals.

Polyphenols, a wide-ranging group of molecules found in all plants, also have anti-inflammatory properties. Theres plenty of evidence to show a diet rich in plant polyphenols can lower the risk of chronic conditions, like hypertension, insulin insensitivity and cardiovascular disease.

Why dont we Americans eat more of these plant-based foods and fewer of the bliss-based foods? Its complicated. People are swayed by advertising and influenced by hectic schedules. One starting place would be to teach people how to eat better from an early age. Nutrition education should be emphasized, from kindergarten through high school to medical schools.

Millions of Americans live in food deserts, having limited access to healthy foods. In these circumstances, education must be paired with increased access. These long-term goals could bring profound returns with a relatively small investment.

[Deep knowledge, daily. Sign up for The Conversations newsletter.]

Meantime, all of us can take small steps to incrementally improve our own dietary habits. Im not suggesting we stop eating cake, french fries and soda completely. But we as a society have yet to realize the food that actually makes us feel good and healthy is not comfort food.

The COVID-19 pandemic wont be the last we face, so its vital that we use every preventive tool we as a society have. Think of good nutrition as a seat belt for your health; it doesnt guarantee you wont get sick, but it helps to ensure the best outcomes.

More:
Good nutrition can contribute to keeping COVID-19 and other diseases away - The Conversation US

Read More...

Longitudinal immune profiling reveals key myeloid signatures associated with COVID-19 – Science

Tuesday, September 22nd, 2020

Abstract

COVID-19 pathogenesis is associated with an exaggerated immune response. However, the specific cellular mediators and inflammatory components driving diverse clinical disease outcomes remain poorly understood. We undertook longitudinal immune profiling on both whole blood and peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) of hospitalized patients during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK. Here, we report key immune signatures present shortly after hospital admission that were associated with the severity of COVID-19. Immune signatures were related to shifts in neutrophil to T cell ratio, elevated serum IL-6, MCP-1 and IP-10, and most strikingly, modulation of CD14+ monocyte phenotype and function. Modified features of CD14+ monocytes included poor induction of the prostaglandin-producing enzyme, COX-2, as well as enhanced expression of the cell cycle marker Ki-67. Longitudinal analysis revealed reversion of some immune features back to the healthy median level in patients with a good eventual outcome. These findings identify previously unappreciated alterations in the innate immune compartment of COVID-19 patients and lend support to the idea that therapeutic strategies targeting release of myeloid cells from bone marrow should be considered in this disease. Moreover, they demonstrate that features of an exaggerated immune response are present early after hospital admission suggesting immune-modulating therapies would be most beneficial at early timepoints.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection can result in the clinical syndrome COVID-19 (1) that, to date, has resulted in over 20 million confirmed cases and in excess of 733,000 attributable deaths world-wide. As such, a large number of clinical trials have been established to evaluate anti-viral and immune modulatory strategies aimed at improving clinical outcome for this globally-devastating virus.

SARS-CoV-2 is a single stranded, positive sense RNA virus that enters cells via human angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) (2). Ordinarily, diverse immune mechanisms exist to detect every stage of viral replication and protect the host from viral challenge. Pattern recognition receptors of the innate immune system recognize viral antigen and virus-induced damage, increasing bone marrow hematopoiesis, the release of myeloid cells including neutrophils and monocytes, and the production of a plethora of cytokines and chemokines (3). If inflammatory mediator release is not controlled in duration and amplitude then emergency haematopoiesis leads to bystander tissue damage and a cytokine storm that manifests as organ dysfunction. Initial studies suggest cytokine storm occurs in COVID-19 (4). Indeed, neutrophilia and lymphopenia (resulting in an increased neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio), increased systemic interleukin-6 (IL-6) and C-reactive protein (CRP), correlate with incidence of intensive care admission and mortality (5). However, detailed understanding of cellular and molecular inflammatory mediators across the COVID-19 disease trajectory would support the development of better clinical interventions.

We carried out the Coronavirus Immune Response and Clinical Outcomes (CIRCO) study at four hospitals in Greater Manchester, UK, which was designed to examine the kinetics of the immune response in COVID-19 patients, as well as to identify early indicators of disease severity. Understanding the specific elements and kinetics of the immune response is critical to gain insight into immune phenotypes associated with disease progression, identify potential biomarkers that predict clinical outcomes and determine at which stage of the disease immune modulation may be most effective (4).

Here, by analyzing fresh blood samples immediately without prior storage we outline unappreciated immune abnormalities present within COVID-19 patients. Assessment of inflammatory mediators within the blood demonstrated these immune properties were most dysregulated in patients with severe COVID-19 prior to admission to intensive care, indicating immune modulating therapies should be considered early after admission. Furthermore, our study demonstrated profound alterations in the myeloid cells of COVID-19 patients. Our data demonstrate that monocytes from COVID-19 patients displayed elevated levels of the cell cycle marker Ki-67 but reduced expression of the prostaglandin-generating enzyme COX-2, with both these features being predominant in severe COVID-19 patients. These findings not only identify possible immune biomarkers for patient stratification but potential mechanisms of immune dysfunction contributing to the immunopathology of COVID-19.

In total, 73 patients were recruited and 49 were stratified for maximum disease severity (Fig. 1A). Six patients were excluded due to: an alternative diagnosis (2 patients); indeterminate imaging findings with negative result in the SARS-CoV-2 nasopharyngeal test (2 patients); or diagnosis of a confounding acute illness (2 patients). Two patients could not be stratified for disease severity due to insufficient clinical observation data and a further 16 were not stratified because recruitment occurred more than 7 days after admission. The median time from patient-reported symptom onset to hospital admission was 7 days. The overall median age was 61 and 63% were male. The most frequent co-morbidities were diabetes, ischemic heart disease, hypertension, asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (Table 1). The majority (86%) of patients tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 via nasopharyngeal RT-PCR. In 14% of patients, symptoms and radiographic features were highly suggestive of COVID-19, but nasopharyngeal test was negative for the virus and thus a clinical diagnosis was made; these patients are clearly indicated in all graphs (white triangles). Patient disease severity was defined as mild (less than 28% FiO2), moderate (28-60% FiO2) or severe (above 60% FiO2, or admission to intensive care) (Fig. 1B). Death occurred in 50% of severe cases of COVID-19 and only one of the ten patients with severe disease was categorized as severe upon admission.

Patient recruitment and categorization. (A) Patients were recruited to the study as close to admission as possible and within 7 days. Peripheral blood samples were collected on recruitment and at intervals thereafter. Samples were analyzed immediately and results stratified based on their ultimate disease severity. (B) Criteria for patient stratification. NIV, non-invasive ventilation; CPAP, continuous positive airway pressure; ICU, intensive care unit.

Data are listed as median (IQR) m, where m is the number of missing data points, n (%), or n/N (%), where N is the total number with available data. PE, pulmonary embolism; AKI, Acute kidney injury. aAdmission observations. Representative participants from each severity cohort were used in cross-sectional or longitudinal analysis.

Based on blood cell counts by the hospital laboratory at admission, no significant differences in total white blood cells, neutrophils, monocytes or lymphocytes were observed between groups of COVID-19 patients that went on to progress to mild, moderate or severe disease (Fig. S1A). However, as reported previously (6, 7), a trend was evident toward a higher neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) at hospital admission in those patients whose outcome eventually was severe (Fig. S1B). This suggested that a more in-depth immune profiling could aid in patient stratification prior to escalation of the disease.

Thus, we further explored alterations in the innate and adaptive immune compartments using high dimensional flow cytometry on white blood cells from freshly lysed whole blood (see Fig. S1C for gating strategy). Initially, we examined the first blood sample taken at the time of patient recruitment to the study (this was typically 2-3 days after hospital admission and was not greater than 7 days). At this recruitment time point, alterations to the characteristics and relative abundance of diverse immune cell types was observed. Uniform manifold approximation and projection (UMAP) visualization outlined alterations between patients and healthy controls in the characteristics of neutrophils and monocytes, dramatic increases in the frequency of neutrophils and decreased T cells, B cells and basophils. Cellular changes were exaggerated with disease severity (Fig. 2A). In a subset of infected individuals CD16low granulocytes were present (Fig. 2A); these cells can be associated with altered immune cell output from the bone marrow (8). This global picture of alterations to innate and adaptive immune cells was confirmed by manual flow cytometric gating (Fig. 2B and Fig. S1, C and D). In addition to these alterations, examining cell frequencies within isolated peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) revealed a decrease in the frequency of plasmacytoid dendritic cells (pDCs) in COVID-19 patients, that was enhanced with elevated disease severity (Fig. S1E). There were no changes observed in frequencies of CD56+ NK cells (Fig. S1E).

Whole blood immune profile of COVID-19 patients. (A) Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection (UMAP) of flow cytometry panel broadly visualizing white cells in whole blood. Representative images for healthy individuals, mild, moderate and severe patients are shown. Key indicates cells identified on the image. (B) Graphs show neutrophil (CD16+CD11bhi), CD14+ monocyte, CD3+ T cell, and CD19+ B cell frequencies in whole blood samples of healthy individuals (n=28) and recruitment samples from COVID-19 patients with mild (n=12), moderate (n=13) and severe (n=6) disease. (C) Longitudinal time course of (top row) neutrophils (CD16+CD11bhi), (2nd row) CD14+ monocytes, (3rd row) CD3+ T cells and (bottom row) B cells segregated by disease severity. Individual patients are shown as different colors and shapes with lines connecting data from the same patient. Crossed squares for severe patients are time points in intensive care unit (ICU). X axis values represent the number of days since reported onset of symptoms. (D) Graphs showing frequencies of neutrophils (CD16+CD11bhi), monocytes, T cells and B cells at the first and last time points in (left) mild/moderate patients (green and blue circles) and (right) severe patients (black circles). Red triangles represent severe patients that had poor outcome (deceased or long-term ICU) and are not included in the statistical test. Graphs show individual patient data with the bar representing median values. In all graphs, open triangles represent SARS-CoV-2 PCR negative patients. Kruskal Wallis with Dunns post-hoc test; 2B Neutrophils, T cells and B cells. One-way ANOVA with Holm-Sidak post-hoc test: 2B Monocytes. Paired t-test; 2D all except monocyte graph detailing mild and moderate patients which was tested using Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test. (*P<0.05, **P<0.01, ***P<0.001, ****P<0.0001).

Given the dramatic alterations in neutrophil and T cell frequencies at the time of recruitment (Fig. 2B), we next examined their profile longitudinally over the course of hospitalization. To do this we used the first day of patient-reported symptom onset as a common reference point to align patient disease trajectories. This revealed that in the majority of patients, irrespective of final severity, neutrophil frequencies, although initially extremely high, decreased prior to hospital discharge while T cell frequencies reciprocally increased (Fig. 2C and 2D). In contrast, CD14+ monocytes and B cells showed no obvious trends during the hospital stay (Fig. 2C and D). These data highlight the importance of examining neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio in COVID-19 patients (6, 7), but, along with other studies (9), indicate that assessment of neutrophil to T cell ratio may provide a more stringent disease insight. Notably, in two severe patients with poor outcome, T cell frequencies were extremely low and neutrophil frequencies high even after entry into an intensive care unit (ICU) (Fig. 2C; white and pink crossed squares and Fig. 2D, red triangles); indicating that rebalancing of neutrophil to T cell ratio is crucial to recovery.

Broad changes in circulating immune cells in other viral infections are associated with alterations to circulating inflammatory mediators, such as cytokines and chemokines. These are potent modifiers of bone marrow output, immune cell survival and cell-recruitment to the inflamed lung. We used multiplex bead array to assess soluble inflammatory mediators in serum from patients at recruitment to the study. Of the 13 mediators analyzed in serum IL-6, IL-10, monocyte-chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1) and interferon gamma-induced protein 10 (IP-10) were significantly increased in COVID-19 patients and tracked with disease severity (Fig. S2A). No significant changes in other cytokines or chemokines measured, including IFN-, IL-1, IL-8 and TNF- were observed in COVID-19 patients (Fig. S2B).

Interestingly, longitudinal analysis (examined as above from the day of reported disease onset) of IL-6, MCP-1 and IP-10 in mild and severe patients revealed that the highest levels of these cytokines and chemokines occurred early in the disease trajectory at recruitment to the study (Fig. S2C). Indeed, there was a significant decrease in IL-6 and IP-10 in patients upon recovery (Fig. S2D). There was a dramatic reduction in IL-6, IP-10 and MCP-1 upon admission of severe patients into ICU from the ward (Fig. S2E), although this finding is based on just 3 patients. This may be due to the treatment modalities employed in intensive care, such as sedation, that can have immunomodulatory effects (10), and will be important to investigate further. Interestingly, the patient whose health declined rapidly following admission, and ultimately died from the disease, displayed a dramatic rebound in IL-6 and MCP-1 levels after 2 days on ICU (Fig. S2, D and E; red triangles).

To build on our basic assessment of cell populations outlined in Fig. 2, we next investigated alterations to specific T and B cell populations by flow cytometrically analyzing isolated peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs). Within the T cell compartment, we noted no dramatic alterations in CD4+ or CD8+ T cell frequencies (Fig. 3A and B). However, a slight decrease in CD4+ T cells was observed in severe COVID-19 patients (Fig. 3B). Both T cell subsets showed signs of activation in COVID-19 patients and this was more apparent in CD8+ T cells. Of note, the degree of T cell activation did not track with disease severity and was highly variable amongst patients (Fig. S3, A to D). Despite this, COVID-19 patients exhibited decreased frequencies of naive but elevated frequencies of effector TEMRA and HLA-DR+CD38+ CD8+ T cells (Fig. S3, A to C). CD8+ T cell subsets remained remarkably stable over the hospitalized disease course (Fig. S3E).

Altered phenotype of T and B cells in COVID-19 patients. (A,B) Graphs show frequencies of (A) CD8+ and (B) CD4+ T cells in freshly isolated PBMCs of healthy individuals (n=36) and recruitment samples from COVID-19 patients with mild (n=17), moderate (n=18) and severe (n=9-10) disease. (C,D) Representative flow cytometry plots and graph showing frequency of CD8+ T cells which are positive for perforin in healthy individuals (n=21 and COVID-19 patients with mild (n=16), moderate (n=12) and severe (n=7) disease. (E) Graph showing correlation of perforin+ CD8+ T cell frequency with C-reactive protein (CRP) in COVID-19 patients. (F) Graphs show frequencies of CD19+ B cells in freshly isolated PBMCs of healthy individuals (n=43) and recruitment samples from COVID-19 patients with mild (n=14), moderate (n=19) and severe (n=9) disease. (G) Representative flow cytometry plots and cumulative data show Ki-67 expression by B cells in healthy individuals (n=39) and COVID-19 patients (n=45). Correlation graph shows correlation of Ki-67+ B cells with C-reactive protein (CRP). (H) Representative flow cytometry plots and cumulative data show frequency of CD27hiCD38hi plasmablasts in healthy individuals (n=42) and COVID-19 patients (n=66). (I) Correlation graph shows correlation of plasmablasts and IgG+ B cell frequencies. (J) Graph shows frequencies of double negative (CD27-IgD-) B cells in freshly prepared PBMC of healthy individuals (n=42) and recruitment samples from COVID-19 patients with mild (n=14), moderate (n=19) and severe (n=9) disease. Graphs show individual patient data with the bar representing median values. In all graphs, open triangles represent SARS-CoV-2 PCR negative patients. Mann-Whitney U test; 3G, 3H. Kruskal Wallis with Dunns post-hoc test; 3A, 3D, 3F, 3J. One-way ANOVA with Holm-Sidak post-hoc test: 3B. Spearman ranked coefficient correlation test; 3E, 3G, 3I. (*P<0.05, **P<0.01, ***P<0.001, ****P<0.0001).

Interestingly, in 34/43 COVID-19 patients, higher perforin expression was observed in CD8+ T cells compared to healthy individuals (Fig. 3C and Fig. S3F), implying CD8+ T cells in COVID-19 patients had activated a cytotoxic program. Perforin expression in CD8+ T cells did not significantly track with disease severity (Fig. 3D), but a positive correlation was observed between the frequency of perforin+CD8+ T cells and clinical measurements of the inflammatory marker C-reactive protein (CRP) (Fig. 3E). This indicates increased frequencies of circulating perforin+ CD8+ T cells are more prevalent in highly inflamed patients. However, perforin+CD8+ T cells were found to increase over time in mild and most moderate COVID-19 patients, with highest levels immediately prior to discharge (Fig. S3, G to H), suggesting the higher frequencies seen in severe patients are not necessarily detrimental. This enhancement over time in mild and moderate patients suggests the higher frequencies seen in severe patients are not necessarily detrimental. Overall, these data demonstrate heterogeneous T cell activation in COVID-19 patients, but a consistent cytotoxic profile in the CD8+ T cell compartment.

Similar to the trend in whole blood (Fig. 2B), B cell frequency was reduced in PBMCs of COVID-19 patients. Decreases were particularly striking in severe patients compared to those with mild and moderate disease (Fig. 3F) and persisted with time (Fig. S4A). Although reduced in frequency, B cells displayed increased expression of Ki-67 (indicative of proliferation), which positively correlated with CRP levels (Fig. 3G). When examining B cell subsets, we observed an expansion of antibody-secreting plasmablasts (CD27hiCD38hiCD24), that positively correlated with IgG expression by B cells (Fig. 3H and I). Further, we observed a decrease in unswitched memory (CD27+IgD+IgM+) B cells but no global differences in frequencies of other B cell subsets (Fig. S4B). Of note, the differences in B cell subsets did not track with disease severity (Fig. S4C). The only subpopulation of B cells dramatically expanded in patients with severe COVID-19, compared to patients with mild and moderate disease, was double negative (DN) B cells (CD27IgD) (Fig. 3J). This subset was relatively stable throughout patient hospitalization and associated with a worse disease trajectory (Fig. S4D). DN B cells have previously been associated with an exhausted phenotype in patients with HIV (11), suggesting that patients with severe COVID-19 may have an impaired capacity to generate an effective B cell response.

COVID-19 research to date has primarily focused on T and B cells, although recent publications have highlighted alterations to monocyte phenotype (12). Monocytes can contribute significantly to inflammatory disease directly or via differentiation to macrophages and dendritic cells (13, 14). When released into the blood stream, monocytes will be affected by circulating cytokines and chemokines, including MCP-1, which we define as raised early in COVID-19 sera (Fig. S2A). In COVID-19 patients, we observed an expansion of intermediate CD14+CD16+ monocytes that tended to be highest in patients with a mild disease outcome (Fig. S5, A and B). Enhanced expression of CD64, the high affinity Fc receptor for monomeric IgG (FcRI), was apparent on classical CD14+ monocytes (Fig. 4A) and again was most evident in mild disease.

Dysregulation of circulating monocytes in COVID-19. (A) Graphs show levels of CD64 expression as assessed by mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) on CD14+ classical monocytes in freshly prepared PBMC of healthy individuals (n=25) and recruitment samples from all COVID-19 patients (n=58). COVID-19 patients were also stratified into mild (n=12), moderate (n=10) and severe (n=8) disease. (B) Graphs show frequencies of TNF-+ CD14+ monocytes following LPS stimulation of freshly prepared PBMC from healthy individuals (n=41) and COVID-19 patients (n=59). COVID-19 patients were also stratified into mild (n=14), moderate (n=15) and severe (n=7) disease. (C) Representative FACS plots demonstrating intracellular COX2 expression by CD14+ monocytes from healthy individuals and COVID-19 patients. (D, E) Graphs showing (D) frequencies of COX-2+ CD14+ monocytes and (E) COX-2 expression level as determined by MFI in CD14+ monocytes following LPS stimulation of freshly prepared PBMC from healthy individuals (n=33) and total COVID-19 patients (n=51). COVID-19 patients were also stratified into mild (n=12), moderate (n=11) and severe (n=6) disease. (F) Representative FACS plots demonstrating intracellular Ki-67 staining by CD14+ monocytes. (G) Graphs show frequencies of Ki-67+ CD14+ monocytes following LPS stimulation of freshly prepared PBMC from healthy individuals (n=37) and total COVID-19 patients (n=60). COVID-19 patients were also stratified into mild (n=14), moderate (n=14) and severe (n=8) disease. (H) Correlation of Ki-67 (% of monocytes expressing Ki-67) with CRP in COVID-19 patients. (I-K) Longitudinal time course of frequencies of CD14+ monocytes that are positive for (I) TNF-, (J) COX2 and (K) Ki-67 following LPS stimulation in mild (green shapes, n=6-7) and severe (black shapes, n=4-6) COVID-19 patients with lines connecting data from the same patient. On all graphs x axis values represent the number of days since onset of symptoms and the dotted line represents the median value from healthy individuals. (L) Graphs showing frequencies of monocytes which are TNF-+, COX-2 and Ki-67+ following LPS stimulation at the first and last time points in (left) mild patients (green circles) and (right) severe patients (black circles). Graphs show individual patient data with the bar representing median values. In all graphs, open triangles represent SARS-CoV-2 PCR negative patients. Mann-Whitney U test; 4A, 4B. 4D, 4E, 4G. Kruskal Wallis with Dunns post-hoc test; 4B, 4D, 4E, 4G. One-way ANOVA with Holm-Sidak post-hoc test:.4A. Spearman ranked coefficient correlation test; 4H. Paired t-test; 4L. (*P<0.05, **P<0.01, ***P<0.001, ****P<0.0001).

We next examined monocyte activation by stimulating with lipopolysaccharide (LPS); stimulation frequencies of viable cells were high (greater than 90%) and similar in COVID-19 patients and healthy controls. Following stratification for final disease severity, TNF- was enhanced in patients with mild disease (Fig. 4B and Fig. S5C). In contrast, IL-1 production was lower in monocytes from COVID-19 patients compared to monocytes from healthy individuals (Fig. S5D), although this was not related to disease severity. These data highlight that monocytes from COVID-19 patients exhibit a modified cytokine profile upon activation. As well as cytokines, monocytes are major producers of lipid mediators, such as prostaglandins (15) and so we also examined cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) expression (a rate-limiting enzyme in prostaglandin synthesis). Notably, in LPS-stimulated monocytes a reduction in COX-2 was evident in all COVID-19 patients and was most apparent in those with severe disease (Fig. 4, C to E). Accordingly, expression of COX-2 in stimulated monocytes was inversely correlated to systemic levels of the cytokine MCP-1 (Fig. S5E), which were highest in severe COVID-19 patients (Fig. S2A).

One possible reason that monocytes in COVID-19 patients display altered functionality in the periphery is due to inflammation-induced emergency myelopoiesis (3). This process occurs during infection where hematopoietic stem cells and myeloid progenitors expand in the bone marrow in order to provide more cells to combat viral infection. However, if egress is too fast then monocytes exit in an altered state. For example, unusually high expression of the cell cycle marker Ki-67 is observed in peripheral monocytes during H1N1 influenza (16) and Ebola virus (17) infection. We therefore, investigated expression of the proliferation marker Ki-67 in COVID-19. A striking increase in Ki-67+ monocytes (<5% in monocytes from most healthy controls) was evident in COVID-19 patients, but was most dramatic in patients with severe disease (Fig. 4, F and G). Ki-67 expression strongly correlated with CRP levels (Fig. 4H), and with systemic levels of the cytokines IL-6, MCP-1, IP-10 and IL-10 (Fig. S5F), cytokines that were enhanced in COVID-19 patients and tracked with severity (Fig. S2A). Enhancement of Ki-67 expression was also observed in unstimulated monocytes from COVID-19 patients (Fig. S5G).

We next assessed how monocyte alterations varied over the patients hospital stay and noted that patients with mild COVID-19 had consistently higher TNF- and COX-2 expression in LPS-activated monocytes compared to patients with severe disease (Fig. 4, I and J). Indeed, COX-2 remained low in severe patients throughout intensive care but levels were restored upon recovery in mild patients (Fig. 4L). IL-1 was consistently low over time in both severity groups with no significant differences in monocyte production of IL-1 between the first and last measured time points from mild or severe patients (Fig. S5H). Ki-67 expression, however, was highest at recruitment and decreased in patients (back down to levels seen in healthy controls) during the progression of disease, independent of severity category or final outcome (Fig. 4, K and L). Thus, defined alterations to monocyte function, specifically to TNF- and COX-2, are maintained across the disease time-course and levels of expression are associated with severity. Taken together, these findings highlight alterations to monocyte phenotype and function as key features of disease progression and severity in COVID-19.

Respiratory viruses continue to cause devastating global disease. This detailed, prospective, observational analysis of COVID-19 patients of varying severity and outcome, in real time, has revealed specific immunological features that track with disease severity, providing important information concerning pathogenesis that should influence clinical trials and therapeutics. Of particular importance, increased expression of the cell cycle marker Ki-67 in blood monocytes, reduced expression of COX-2, and a high neutrophil to T cell ratio are early predictors of disease severity that could be used to stratify patients upon admission for therapeutics. Critically, the majority of aberrant immune parameters studied reverted in patients with good outcome. Unexpectedly, multiple aspects of inflammation that were high upon admission, diminished as patients progressed in severity and were admitted to intensive care. In particular, levels of IP-10 and Ki-67 expression by monocytes were reduced after admission to intensive care, even in patients who did not recover. These data indicate that treating patients early after hospitalization is likely to be most beneficial, while cytokine levels and immune functions are disrupted.

Though other studies have focused on defects in adaptive immunity in COVID-19 pathogenesis (18), we demonstrate here considerable abnormalities in the innate immune system, in particular within myeloid cells. Profound neutrophilia exists in severe COVID-19, supportive of a role for neutrophils in acute respiratory distress syndrome (19, 20) and in line with the excess neutrophils seen in the autopsied lungs of patients that died from COVID-19 (21). Neutrophils assist in the clearance of pathogens through phagocytosis, oxidative burst and by liberating traps (neutrophil extracellular traps or NETs) that capture pathogens. The latter two functions, however, can also promote inflammation and are associated with many of the features seen in COVID-19 (22). Indeed, elevated neutrophil products have been identified in the sera of COVID-19 patients and correlate with clinical parameters such as C-reactive protein, D-dimer, and lactate dehydrogenase (23).

Altered monocyte phenotypes were also seen in COVID-19 patients, with patient blood monocytes expressing the cell cycle marker Ki-67 (up to 98%); a feature not observed in health. This likely represents either early or enhanced release of monocytes from the bone marrow due to systemic inflammatory signals and is similar to that described in pandemic H1N1 influenza (16) and Ebola virus infections (17). Equally remarkable was the reduced expression of COX-2 in monocytes in patients with severe disease, which was evident across their disease trajectory. COX-2 facilitates the production of prostanoids including prostaglandin E2 (PGE2), and other viruses are known to target this pathway to enhance viral replication (24). However, its reduction in monocytes in response to viral lung infection has not previously been reported. Reduced COX-2 alongside high IL-6 and IP-10, as seen here in severe COVID-19 patients, is an immune profile associated with pathology in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) (25). Therefore, our data indicate a possible fibrotic signature in patients with severe disease, supporting studies observing an unusual pattern of fibrosis in the lungs of COVID-19 patients.

Our data concur with several features of COVID-19 studied in Wuhan, China, as well as with more recent studies from across the globe (26, 27) and are also corroborated by single cell RNA sequencing of bronchoalveolar lavage cells at a single time point (28). Similarities include elevated CRP and IL-6 in patients at the time of hospitalization who eventually died (29) and increased IP-10 in those who later developed severe disease (30). IP-10 is an interferon-inducible chemokine that facilitates directed migration of many immune cells (31) and is elevated in other coronavirus infections including MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV (32), as well as in Influenza virus of swine origin (H1N1) (33, 34). The heightened levels of monocyte-chemoattractant protein 1 (MCP-1) upon admission further indicate dysregulation of monocyte function and migration in patients with severe disease. Importantly, IL-6, IP-10 and MCP-1 levels are generally the highest around the time of hospital admission but are reduced rapidly as patients are admitted to intensive care, which may well signify exhaustion of the immune cells producing these mediators.

Examining cells of the adaptive immune system, we identified lymphopenia which is now a well-established hallmark of COVID-19 patients (3538). Despite this being a key feature of COVID-19, the drivers of loss of T and B cell numbers in peripheral blood remain obscure and could equally reflect either cell death and/or elevated trafficking to the site of inflammation. Focusing on T cells, the phenotype and function of circulating T cells remain an issue with conflicting reports within the literature. Consistent with previous reports, our data show modest increases in T cell activation (27, 39, 40), primarily driven by a substantial heterogeneity between patients. Despite this, the frequencies of T cells with activated phenotypes remained stable across the disease trajectory, implying most changes to these adaptive mediators could have occurred prior to hospitalization. Importantly our data highlight activation of a cytotoxic program in CD8+ T cells, evidenced by perforin expression, which would support effective viral clearance that has previously been suggested (41). Focusing on B cells, patients with severe COVID-19 displayed a dramatic expansion of CD27IgD double negative (DN) B cells. This is in agreement with a recent study reporting lupus-like hallmarks of extrafollicular B cell activation in critically unwell COVID-19 patients (42). DN B cells are also associated with immune senescence as a result of excessive immune activation, and an exhausted phenotype is observed in patients with HIV (11). Further studies evaluating the functional capacity of expanded DN B cells will be critical to understand their contribution to severe COVID-19.

There are, of course, limitations to any study of samples during a viral pandemic for which there is no vaccine. However, we believe that these do not diminish the importance of the major findings from our study. A longitudinal analysis in real time for phenotypic, functional and soluble markers naturally limits the number of patients interrogated. In-depth analysis of smaller cohorts however, is necessary to gain insight into mechanism and is of interest to the pharmaceutical industry. It takes time to recruit the appropriate number of control subjects of the approximate gender and age of COVID patients and also with the span of comorbidities associated with the greatest risk from SARS-CoV-2. The majority of our controls were drawn from frontline workers, who produced remarkably similar results to each other. The only other potential limitation is that patients may not accurately define the onset of symptoms. As data are plotted per patient, however, this does not affect the interpretation of the results.

There are clinical implications of our data. Using non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) remains controversial (43) and our study would suggest they may not be desirable, as this may compound the already low COX-2 (44). Since most of the pathogenic mechanisms involve myeloid cells, neutrophils and monocytes, it would be advantageous to reduce their influx to the lung once lung pathology is established. Relevant strategies include inhibition of the complement anaphylatoxin C5a (45) or IL-8 (CXCL8), which are strong chemoattractants for many immune cells, including neutrophils. Antagonism of CXCR2 that mobilizes neutrophil and monocyte from the bone marrow, neutrophil elastase inhibitors and inhibition of G-CSF, IL-23 and IL-17 that promote neutrophil survival, are also options (46). Anti-IL-6, IL-1RA and anti-TNF- agents are already being investigated for COVID-19 treatment and are relevant to neutrophils, which express the requisite cytokine receptors. Furthermore, JAK inhibitors are currently in clinical trials and may also reduce neutrophil levels (47). Targeting toxic products of neutrophils such as S100A1/A2, HMGB1 and free radicals, but also the formation of NETs, could be beneficial (21).

In summary, this is a key longitudinal study immune profiling COVID-19 patients that places equal emphasis on innate and adaptive immunity. We identify substantial alterations in the myeloid compartment in COVID-19 patients that have not previously been reported. It would appear that comparable innate immune features have been evident in past pandemics with similar or even different viruses and so focusing immune modulation strategies on neutrophils and monocytes is an urgent priority.

Between 29th March and 7th May, 2020, adults requiring hospital admission with suspected COVID-19 were recruited from 4 hospitals in the Greater Manchester area. Our research objective was to undertake an observational study to (1) examine the kinetics of the immune response in COVID-19 patients and (2) identify early indicators of disease severity. Informed consent was obtained for each patient. Peripheral blood samples were collected at Manchester University Foundation Trust (MFT), Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust (SRFT) and Pennine Acute NHS Trust (PAT) under the framework of the Manchester Allergy, Respiratory and Thoracic Surgery (ManARTS) Biobank (study no M2020-88) for MFT or the Northern Care Alliance Research Collection (NCARC) tissue biobank (study no. NCA-009) for SRFT and PAT (REC reference 15/NW/0409 for ManARTS and 18/WA/0368 for NCARC). Clinical information was extracted from written/electronic medical records. Patients were included if they tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by reverse-transcriptasepolymerase-chain-reaction (RT-PCR) on nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal swabs or sputum. Patients with negative nasopharyngeal RT-PCR results were also included if there was a high clinical suspicion of COVID-19, the radiological findings supported the diagnosis and there was no other explanation for symptoms. Patients were excluded if an alternative diagnosis was reached, where indeterminate imaging findings were combined with negative SARS-CoV-2 nasopharyngeal (NP) test or there was another confounding acute illness not directly related to COVID-19. The severity of disease was scored each day, based on degree of respiratory failure (Fig. 1B). Patients were not stratified for disease severity if there was no available clinical observation data or patients were recruited more than 7 days after hospital admission. Where severity of disease changed during admission, the highest disease severity score was selected for classification. The first available time point was used for all cross-sectional comparisons between mild, moderate and severe disease. Peripheral blood samples were collected as soon after admission as possible and at 1-2 day intervals thereafter. For longitudinal analysis we elected to correlate clinical data with immune parameters directly, rather than using the WHO ordinal scale on account of the small range of values this affords our inpatient cohort, which our study would not be powered to discern. Healthy blood samples were obtained from frontline workers at Manchester University and NHS Trusts (age range 28-69; median age=44.5 years; 42.5% males). Samples from healthy donors were examined alongside patient samples.

Whole venous blood was collected in tubes containing EDTA or serum gel clotting activator (Starstedt). Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) were isolated by density gradient centrifugation using Ficoll-Paque Plus (GE Healthcare) and 50 ml SepMate tubes (STEMCELL technologies) according to the manufacturers protocol. Serum was separated by centrifuging serum tubes at 2000 g at 4C for 20 min.

Red blood cell lysis was carried out using 10x volume of distilled water for 10 s followed by addition of 10x PBS to re-establish a 1x PBS solution and stop lysis. Cells were centrifuged at 500 g for 5 min and lysis repeated if necessary.

White blood cells from lysed whole blood and isolated PBMCs separated by density gradient centrifugation were stained immediately on receipt. The following antibodies were used: BDCA-2 (clone 201A), CCR7 (clone G043H7), CD11b (clone ICRF44), CD11c (clone 3.9 or Bu15), CD123 (clone 6H6), CD14 (clone 63D3), CD16 (clone 3G8), CD19 (clone H1B19), CD24 (clone M1/69 or ML5), CD27 (clone M-T271), CD3 (clone OKT3 or UCHT1), CD38 (clone HIT2), CD4 (clone SK3), CD45 (clone 2D1), CD45RA (clone HI100), CD56 (clone MEM-188), CD62L (clone DREG-56), CD8 (clone SK1), HLA-DR (clone L234), ICOS (clone C398.4A), IgD (clone IA6-2), IgM (clone MHM-88), IgG (clone M1310G05), Ki-67 (clone Ki-67 or 11F6), PD-1 (clone EH12.2H7), perforin (clone dG9), CD66b (clone G10F5), CD64 (clone 10.1), IL-1 (clone H1b-98) and TNF- (clone MAb11), all from Biolegend; and COX-2 (clone AS67) from BD Biosciences. PBMCs were also stimulated in vitro for 3 hours with 10 ng/ml LPS in the presence of 10 g/ml brefeldin A to allow accumulation and analysis of intracellular proteins by flow cytometry. Cells were cultured in RPMI containing 10% fetal calf serum, L-Glutamine, Non-essential Amino Acids, HEPES and penicillin plus streptomycin (Gibco). For surface stains samples were fixed with BD Cytofix (BD Biosciences) prior to acquisition and for intracellular stains (Ki-67, COX-2, TNF- and IL-1) the Foxp3/Transcription Factor Staining Buffer Set (eBioscience) was used. All samples were acquired on a LSRFortessa flow cytometer (BD Biosciences) and analyzed using FlowJo (TreeStar).

Thirteen different mediators associated with anti-viral responses were measured in serum using LEGENDplex assays (BioLegend, San Diego, USA) according to the manufacturer's instructions.

Results are presented as individual data points with medians. Statistical analysis was performed using Prism 8 Software (GraphPad). Normality tests were performed on all datasets. Groups were compared using an unpaired t-test (normal distribution) or Mann-Whitney test (failing normality testing) for healthy individuals versus COVID-19 patients. Paired t-test (normal distribution) or Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test (failing normality testing) was used for longitudinal data where first and last time points were examined. One-way ANOVA with Holm-Sidak post-hoc testing (normal distribution) or Kruskal-Wallis test with Dunns post-hoc testing (failing normality testing) was used for multiple group comparisons. Correlations were assessed with Pearson correlation coefficient (normal distribution) or Spearmans rank correlation coefficient test (failing normality testing) for separate parameters within the COVID-19 patient group. Information on tests used is detailed in figure legends. In all cases, a p-value of 0.05 was considered significant. ns, not significant; p < 0.05, p < 0.01, p < 0.001.

immunology.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/5/51/eabd6197/DC1

Figure S1. Immune cell types in COVID-19 patients.

Figure S2. Serum cytokines and chemokines in COVID-19 patients.

Figure S3. T cell activation in COVID-19 patients.

Figure S4. B cell subsets in COVID-19 patients.

Figure S5. Monocytes in COVID-19 patients.

Table S1. Raw data file (Excel spreadsheet).

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution license, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Here is the original post:
Longitudinal immune profiling reveals key myeloid signatures associated with COVID-19 - Science

Read More...

Bioprinted therapeutic offers novel solution for treating Type 1 Diabetes – Canada NewsWire

Tuesday, September 22nd, 2020

Current treatments for diabetes are costlywith diabetes-related healthcare costs in Canada expected to increase to over $16.9 billion by 2020.They carry costs for patients as well, frequently in the form of negative side effects. One conventional method of treating T1D is the daily administration of insulin to manage blood sugar levels. This treatment is different from the control of a pancreatic cell, meaning patients are more likely to experience the debilitating consequences of improper glucose management. These can include damage to the eyes, nerves, kidneys, heart, and later life health complications.

To regain the benefits of working pancreatic cells, a more elegant approach is to simply replace those cells by transplanting insulin-producing pancreatic tissue into a T1D patient. However, this is not a viable long-term solution. A finite supply of donor working pancreatic tissue available to transplant, coupled with the requirement for the patient to administer life-long anti-rejection drugs that can themselves lead to significant health complications, means that an alternative is needed. An ideal solution is treating T1D with insulin made by pancreatic cells in the patient's own body, like a transplant but in a way that hides those cells from the patient's immune system so anti-rejection drugs are not needed.

In a collaborative project with Dr. Timothy Kieffer of the University of British Columbia (UBC), Vancouver-based company Aspect Biosystems is producing a bioprinted therapeutic of pancreatic cells surrounded by a protective layer that can be implanted in T1D patients. This bioprinted therapeutic will contain genetically modified stem-cell derived pancreatic cells that will take over the production of insulin and thereby regulate blood sugar levels naturally. This could serve as an effective and scalable therapy for individuals with T1D, allowing them to move away from both daily insulin injections and long-term treatment with anti-rejection drugs.

"This generous and strategic support from Genome BC allows us to strengthen our existing collaboration with Dr. Kieffer, a world leader in the development of stem cell-derived pancreatic beta cells for clinical use," said Dr. Sam Wadsworth, Chief Scientific Officer, Aspect Biosystems. "By working together, we look forward to developing a bioprinted pancreatic therapeutic that could significantly improve the quality of life for millions of people globally."

This collaboration, supported through Genome BC's GeneSolve program, represents a novel technological and genomics-based approach that will circumvent the shortcomings of existing methods. "This therapeutic design thoughtfully addresses the risks that current treatments pose to patients and incorporates genomics tools to test the system and make it safer," says Dr. Pascal Spothelfer, President and CEO, Genome BC. "It could represent a big step forward for patients and for the healthcare system."

About Genome British Columbia:

Genome BC is a not-for-profit organization supporting world-class genomics research and innovation to grow globally competitive life sciences sectors and deliver sustainable benefits for British Columbia, Canada and beyond. The organization's initiatives are improving the lives of British Columbians by advancing health care in addition to addressing environmental and natural resource challenges. In addition to scientific programming, Genome BC works to integrate genomics into society by supporting responsible research and innovation and foster an understanding and appreciation of the life sciences among educators, students and the public. http://www.genomebc.ca

About Aspect Biosystems:

Aspect Biosystems is a privately held biotechnology company combining the power of microfluidics and 3D bioprinting to fuel medical research and the development of bioprinted therapeutics. By adopting Aspect's microfluidic 3D bioprinting platform and collaborating within Aspect's network, researchers worldwide are accelerating the development and commercialization of 3D bioprinted tissues. In addition, Aspect is advancing its internal regenerative medicine programs focused on metabolic diseases and musculoskeletal injuries and disorders and partnering with key industry players to bring bioprinted therapeutics to the clinic. Learn more at http://www.aspectbiosystems.com

SOURCE Genome British Columbia

For further information: Jennifer Boon, Communications Manager, Sectors, Genome BC, Mobile: 778.327.8374, Email: [emailprotected], @genomebc #genomebc

http://www.genomebc.ca

Read the original post:
Bioprinted therapeutic offers novel solution for treating Type 1 Diabetes - Canada NewsWire

Read More...

Oncologie Announces New Data and Analyses from Clinical Programs and Name Change to OncXerna Therapeutics – GlobeNewswire

Tuesday, September 22nd, 2020

OncXernas RNA-based biomarker platform successfully identified responders versus non-responders in trials with late-stage cancer patients

Interim results from a Phase 2 trial of bavituximab with KEYTRUDA (pembrolizumab) demonstrates a 19% overall response rate (ORR)and 43% (3/7) ORR from an exploratory analysis in a biomarker-driven subgroup of advanced gastric cancer patients

OncXernas RNA-based biomarker panel predicts enhanced response in a Phase 1b trial of navicixizumab in late-stage ovarian cancer patients. Patients in thebiomarker positive panel achieved a 70% ORR, and excludedall who had progressive disease, compared with a 31% ORR for patients in the biomarker negativepanel

WALTHAM, Mass., Sept. 18, 2020 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Oncologie, Inc., a precision medicine company using an innovative RNA-based biomarker platform to predict patient responses for potentially first-in-class targeted oncology therapies, today announced new data and analyses from its lead clinical programs, bavituximab and navicixizumab. On the basis of these positive data, the company also announced its rebranding to OncXerna Therapeutics, Inc., a change that reinforces the companys focus on using its RNA-based approach to guide novel, targeted treatments to specific people with cancer.

With a deep understanding of the tumor microenvironment biology at the RNA-level through our novel biomarker panel, we aim to dramatically improve clinical outcomes by matching patients to therapies with a mechanism of action that targets that specific biology, said Laura Benjamin, Ph.D., President and Chief Executive Officer at OncXerna Therapeutics. Todays results demonstrate a clear ability of our first panel to distinguish responders versus non-responders in our bavituximab and navicixizumab programs, and we are excited to deploy this approach in the next prospectively-defined trials that could support registration.

Interim results from Phase 2 (ONCG100) trial of bavituximab and KEYTRUDA

Trial design and background:

The Phase 2 (ONCG100) trial is a multicenter, open-label, single-arm global trial designed to assess the safety, tolerability, and antitumor activity of the investigational agent bavituximab, a chimeric monoclonal antibody that targets phosphatidylserine, in combination with KEYTRUDA, Mercks anti-PD-1 therapy, in patients with advanced gastric and gastroesophageal cancer who have progressed on or after at least one prior standard therapy. Bavituximab previously demonstrated clinical activity in a post-hoc subset analysis in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who were given a PD-1 inhibitor following bavituximab treatment, suggesting that a treatment combination of bavituximab and a PD-1 inhibitor could generate similar activity in a prospective clinical trial. In addition to measuring safety and antitumor activity in this trial, OncXerna is deploying its proprietary RNA biomarker platform (TME Panel-1) to identify patients based on their response to treatment and the dominant biology of their tumor microenvironment with the potential to dramatically improve outcomes in the next, prospectively designed trial.

Approximately 80 patients in the U.S., United Kingdom, South Korea and Taiwan are planned for enrollment in two separate groups of patients: Checkpoint inhibitor-nave and checkpoint inhibitor-relapsed. The trial is continuing to enroll both groups with planned updates from all patients during the first half of 2021.

Interim results:

Interim results provided today, from the first 36 patients enrolled and with a post-baseline scan in the checkpoint inhibitor-nave group, include the following:

Next steps:

These data are being presented at the European Society for Molecular Oncology (ESMO) Virtual Congress 2020 taking place September 19-21, 2020.

OncXerna plans to conduct additional clinical trials designed to prospectively enrich for TME Panel-1 biomarker positive patients, as well as to explore additional solid tumor types.

OncXerna biomarker analysis from Phase 1b trial evaluating navicixizumab in ovarian cancer

Previously announced data and background:

OncXernas navicixizumab is a bispecific antibody designed to inhibit both Delta-like ligand 4 (DLL4) in the Notch cancer stem cell pathway as well as vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). Interim data from a Phase 1b dose escalation and expansion trial of navicixizumab plus paclitaxel in 44 platinum-resistant ovarian cancer patients who had failed more than two prior therapies and/or received prior Avastin (bevacizumab) therapy were presented virtually at the 2020 Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SGO) Annual Meeting in May 2020. Treatment with navicixizumab and paclitaxel demonstrated an ORR of 43%in all patients, and 64% and 33% in bevacizumab-nave, and bevacizumab pre-treated patients, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events were manageable and included hypertension (58%), headache (29%), fatigue (26%) and pulmonary hypertension (18%).

Updated biomarker analyses and results:

Using its RNA-based biomarker TME Panel-1, OncXerna recently analyzed patient tissue samples obtained from 28 of the 44 patients from the Phase 1b trial. Results from this analysis revealed the following:

Next steps:

As a result of these analyses, OncXerna plans to conduct additional clinical trials designed to prospectively enrich for TME Panel-1 biomarker positive patients with ovarian cancer who are platinum-resistant and Avastin-experienced to support registration, as well as to explore additional solid tumor types.

About Bavituximab

Bavituximab is an investigational antibody that reverses immune suppression by inhibiting phosphatidylserine (PS) signaling and is currently in Phase 2 clinical trials to treat a specific subset of patients with advanced gastric cancer to improve their response to anti-PD-1 treatment. The mechanism of action of bavituximab is to block tumor immune suppression signaling from PS to multiple immune cell receptor families (e.g., TIMs and TAMs). The dominant biology targeted by bavituximab may be relevant for patients with many types of solid tumors whose immune systems are too suppressed to benefit from currently available immune oncology therapies. Our clinical trials currently combine bavituximab with KEYTRUDA to test the hypothesis that relieving immunosuppression can enhance responses to checkpoint inhibitors. Bavituximab is an investigational agent that has not been licensed or approved anywhere globally, and it has not been demonstrated to be safe or effective for any use, including for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer.

About Navicixizumab

Navicixizumab is an investigational anti-DLL4/VEGF bispecific antibody that has demonstrated antitumor activity in patients who have progressed on Avastin (bevacizumab) in a Phase 1a/b clinical trial. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration granted Fast Track designation to navicixizumab for the treatment of high-grade ovarian, primary peritoneal or fallopian tube cancer in patients who have received at least three prior therapies and/or prior treatment with Avastin. OncXerna is targeting patients whose dominant tumor biology is driven by angiogenesis with a focus beyond VEGF to include broader anti-angiogenic pathways. Navicixizumab is an investigational agent that has not been licensed or approved anywhere globally, and it has not been demonstrated to be safe or effective for any use, including for the treatment of advanced ovarian cancer.

About OncXerna Therapeutics

OncXerna is aiming to deliver next-generation precision medicine for a larger group of cancer patients by leveraging the companys deep understanding of how to prospectively identify patients based on the dominant, RNA-based biology of their tumor microenvironments. This allows OncXerna to pair those patients with OncXernas clinical-stage therapies and known mechanism of action that directly address these biologies, to dramatically improve patient outcomes. For more information on OncXerna, please visit oncxerna.com/

About OncXernas RNA-based Biomarker Platform

Existing precision medicines target only approximately 10% of cancersthose with gene mutations or oncogenic drivers for a small number of genes. Using its proprietary biomarker platform, OncXerna is leveraging the companys deep understanding of tumor biology at the RNA level to identify the dominant biology underlying a patients cancer. OncXernas first biomarker panel is specific to the tumor microenvironment (TME Panel-1). Initial results from TME Panel-1 reveal 4 different dominant biologies, demonstrating the presence of specific patient subgroups and their predictive value in responding to treatment. OncXerna is further optimizing the biomarker platforms tumor microenvironment panel through multiple research collaborations, including a collaboration with Moffitt Cancer Center.

KEYTRUDA is a registered trademark of Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA.

Investor and Media Contact:

Ashley R. RobinsonLifeSci Partners, LLCarr@lifesciadvisors.com

Go here to read the rest:
Oncologie Announces New Data and Analyses from Clinical Programs and Name Change to OncXerna Therapeutics - GlobeNewswire

Read More...

How the single product brand trend could be an environmental home run for the beauty industry – GlobalCosmeticsNews

Tuesday, September 22nd, 2020

As beauty professionals, Id hazard a guess that were all well acquainted, and more than a little embarrassed, about our industrys negative association with environmental issues. As one of the worlds most prolific offenders of plastic waste, we are, despite ongoing and progressive initiatives and packaging developments, one of the worst culprits of single-use products destined for landfill.

So, what about the effect of the increasing popularity of single-product beauty launches? Rather than single use, although they are creeping into the mix, the recent upsurge in single product skincare regimes is becoming a popular marketing tactic for brands and also creating a new breed of skincare founders capitalizing on the popularity of the new trend. In terms of skincare, it seems that maximalism is out, and minimalism is in.

Augustinus Bader kickstarted the movement with the launch of his stem cell moisturizer, The Cream, last year. The launch came without bells and whistles, no add on items and the range was notable for its minimalist offering just one product. The skincare guru has seemingly paved the way. Founders of cult beauty brand Summer Fridays got into game in 2018 with one product the Jet Lag Mask (although I wonder how thats faring in the current climate). While theyve since expanded to a core product range of six, the mask was the hero, and only, sell-out offering for some time.

But what effect does this new skincare approach have in terms of sustainability in comparison to its multi-step predecessor? The more is more, previously much-loved, approach to skincare promotes shelves packed with products aimed at 12-step programs to create perfect skin. This generates, to put it simply, a mass of trash. Multiple bottles of what are likely potions and lotions more a marketers dream, and an environmentalists nightmare, than a skin care holy grail. But would we use less of each bottle, and therefore limit the turnover of throw-away packaging?

Meanwhile, while the latest en vogue trend on the block, single product skincare, has been lauded as a minimalist approach to perfect skin. While some could argue that using one product will promote a much higher usage, therefore a faster rotation of treasure to trash, if having to choose between the two youd obviously lean towards the manufacturing of fewer bottles, tubes and, ultimately,waste. Less is more, as they say. And with the nature of the shopper being to increasingly seek out the new, consumers across all target market groups baby boomers to gen z are also desperately searching for efficacious products that also fulfil their desire to be a green buyer.

Craigs Resurfacing Compoundseems to have hit the nail on the head. Sold out in 48 hours, the serum was two-years in the making and is said to cut beauty regimes in half with its tantalizing mix of ingredients she pulled out the big guns; retinol, antioxidants, glycolic acid and lactic acids it also comes encased in a full recyclable bottle.

With COVID-19 teaching the world to slow down and take a breath, the same could be said for our skincare routines. As stated by Vogue, a more considered approach to beauty is both needed and being lapped up by consumers. The upsurge in single-product launches is seemingly capitalizing on a desire for less is more and causing a marketing furore to boot. Less production, less waste, and, put simply, a swift U-turn from the maximalist approach of old. Get the packaging right recycledandrecyclable if you please and the industry could be on to a winner both commercially and environmentally.

The rest is here:
How the single product brand trend could be an environmental home run for the beauty industry - GlobalCosmeticsNews

Read More...

How to Live Longer: A Look at the Science Behind the Longevity Movement – Vogue

Tuesday, September 22nd, 2020

If fasting is not exactly your speed, diet is still tremendously important. As for what you should eat, the gold standard remains the Mediterranean dietone that is high in vegetables, fruits, whole grains, beans, nuts, seeds, and olive oil, and low on red meatthe only diet, says Barzilai, proven by clinical research to decrease cardiovascular mortality. A recent study in the medical journal Gut found that following it for just one year slowed the development of age-related inflammatory processes.

David Sinclair, Ph.D., Harvard geneticist and author of the bestseller Lifespan: Why We Ageand Why We Dont Have To, says the Mediterranean diet essentially tricks the body into thinking weve been doing exercise and fasting. Of course, this is not a permission slip for bottomless bowls of rigatoni; too much of a good thing is too much. Dan Buettner, the National Geographic Fellow who helped popularize the idea of the blue zonesthe five areas worldwide with the longest-lived denizenssays he follows a rule practiced by the residents of Okinawa, Japan, and stops eating when his stomach is 80 percent full. And perhaps consider occasionally skipping dessert: Research shows that sugar intake accelerates age-related inflammation. The more sugar you eat, the faster you age, says Robert Lustig, professor of pediatric endocrinology at the University of California, San Francisco. (The American Heart Association recommends that women keep it under six teaspoons per day.)

Other crucial life practices: adequate sleep and stress management. In blue zones, says Buettner, people downshift all day long, through prayer, meditation, or just taking naps. And scientists are also coming to more fully understand the role that other people play in prolonging life. A 2019 study in the journal SSM-Population Health found that social relationships significantly increase life span in older adults. Neuroscientist Daniel Levitin, author of this years Successful Aging, has found that friendships at age 80 are a bigger predictor of health than cholesterol level. Friends and even neighbors, he writes, protect your brain, while loneliness has been implicated in just about every medical problem you can think of.

But what about the factors you cant control? Most of us dont know whats lurking in our genome and are not often aware we might inherit some disease until we see the symptoms. That is changing, with tests that are leagues beyond 23andMe. The new Preventive Genomics Clinic at Brigham and Womens Hospital in Boston is the first academic clinic in the country to offer comprehensive DNA sequencing and interpretation of nearly 6,000 disease-associated genes, ranging from common cancers to the rare Fabry disease, which impairs fat breakdown in cells and affects the heart. Roughly 20 percent of people will be carrying a variant for a rare disease, such as hereditary heart problems, says director Robert Green, M.D., medical geneticist at Brigham and Womens. Where a full panel of tests used to cost many hundreds of thousands of dollars, the clinic charges $250 for a smaller panel and $1,900 for full sequencing and interpretation. (These costs are not yet covered by most insurance.)

In the near future, says Barzilai as we finish our walk, we can be healthy and vital in our 90s and beyond. He laughs. It may sound like science fiction, but I promise you, its science. While I can comprehend the misgivings about prolonging life, Ill admit that Im still programmed to crave those extra years, and will adopt what changes I can to make them more vibrant. My role model here is Gloria Steinem, now 86. I plan to live to be 100, she once remarked. Which I would have to do anyway, just to meet my deadlines.

Go here to see the original:
How to Live Longer: A Look at the Science Behind the Longevity Movement - Vogue

Read More...

Healthy Aging Month observed nationwide in September – News – The Hutchinson News

Tuesday, September 22nd, 2020

September is Healthy Aging Month, an annual observance that deserves more attention this year as the nation deals with a pandemic unlike anything we have experienced for a century. Medical Author Dr. William W. Shiel, Jr. defines aging as the process of becoming older. Aging is not the same for any two people, due to factors including lifestyle, environment and family genetics. According to medical experts, the first signs of aging appears on the surface of the skin during the mid-20s.

More than 80,000 Americans are over the age of 100 and 20,000 have surpassed their 105th birthday, two statistics that continue to grow. Many remain active and live independently. Both major party candidates for president this year are more than 70 years of age.

Aging has been called the greatest known risk factor for most human diseases and can be either physical or psychological. Approximately 150,000 people die daily worldwide, two thirds of which are from age-related issues. Older adults and those who have underlying health conditions such as heart and lung issues and diabetes are at increased risk of severe illness, including COVID-19. Adults 65 years of age and older account for 16 percent of the nations population, but 80 percent of COVID-19 deaths claim this group of people.

The pandemic has resulted in increased stress in the lives of all Americans, and, in particular, those who are older or confined to home.

The effects of stress include:

Needless fear and worry about ones healthChanges in sleep or eating patternsDifficulty concentratingWorsening of chronic health problemsWorsening of mental health conditionsIncreased use of tobacco and/or alcohol

Stories regarding accomplishments of older Americans are more frequent these days and serve as encouragement for all. In 2014, 90-year-old Ernie Andrus walked, or as he said, "jogged" across America to honor the ship he served on during World War I. That same year, former President George H.W. Bush, to celebrate his 90th birthday, parachuted out of an airplane, smiling all the way to the ground, as his frightened family watched nearby.

Locally, Judge Wesley Brown, appointed a federal judge in 1962, served one-year shy of a half-century before passing away in 2011 at the age of 104. In an Associated Press interview on the year of his death, Judge Brown was asked to explain his longevity as a member of the federal judiciary, and his response was brief, to the point, and similar to his traditional courtroom demeanor. "As a federal judge, I was appointed for life or good behavior, whichever I lose first," Brown said. In a follow-up question, the reporter asked how he planned to exit the job, he said, "Feet first."

So, what advice can a healthcare professional possibly give to hearty souls to ensure they will continue healthy living, particularly in these unprecedented times? Keep masks, tissues, and hand sanitizer in your possession when venturing out. If possible, avoid others who are not wearing masks. Ask others around you to wear masks. Make certain your vaccinations and other preventive services are current, stay physically active and practice healthy habits to cope with stress. People of all ages who adhere to these precautionary measures will hasten the day when COVID-19 will be an event of the past. That day could not come any too soon.

Ken Johnson is President and CEO of Hutchinson Regional Healthcare System.

Read the rest here:
Healthy Aging Month observed nationwide in September - News - The Hutchinson News

Read More...

Massive Growth in Precision Medicine Software Market to Witness Robust Expansion by 2026 with Top Key Players like Syapse, Allscripts, Qiagen, Roper…

Tuesday, September 22nd, 2020

Precision Medicine Software Marketresearch report is the new statistical data source added byA2Z Market Research. It uses several approaches for analyzing the data of target market such as primary and secondary research methodologies. It includes investigations based on historical records, current statistics, and futuristic developments.

The report gives a thorough overview of the present growth dynamics of the global Precision Medicine Software with the help of vast market data covering all important aspects and market segments. The report gives a birds eye view of the past and present trends as well the factors expected to drive or impede the market growth prospects of the Precision Medicine Software market in the near future.

Precision Medicine Software Market is growing at a High CAGR during the forecast period 2020-2026. The increasing interest of the individuals in this industry is that the major reason for the expansion of this market.

Get Sample PDF Copy (Including FULL TOC, Graphs and Tables) of this report @: https://www.a2zmarketresearch.com/sample?reportId=79150

Note In order to provide more accurate market forecast, all our reports will be updated before delivery by considering the impact of COVID-19.

Top Key Players Profiled in this report are:

Syapse, Allscripts, Qiagen, Roper Technologies, Fabric Genomics, Foundation Medicine, Sophia Genetics, PierianDx, Human Longevity, Translational Software, Gene42, Lifeomic Health.

The key questions answered in this report:

Various factors are responsible for the markets growth trajectory, which are studied at length in the report. In addition, the report lists down the restraints that are posing threat to the global Precision Medicine Software market. It also gauges the bargaining power of suppliers and buyers, threat from new entrants and product substitute, and the degree of competition prevailing in the market. The influence of the latest government guidelines is also analyzed in detail in the report. It studies the Precision Medicine Software markets trajectory between forecast periods.

Get up to 20% Discount on this Premium Report @: https://www.a2zmarketresearch.com/discount?reportId=79150

The cost analysis of the Global Precision Medicine Software Market has been performed while keeping in view manufacturing expenses, labor cost, and raw materials and their market concentration rate, suppliers, and price trend. Other factors such as Supply chain, downstream buyers, and sourcing strategy have been assessed to provide a complete and in-depth view of the market. Buyers of the report will also be exposed to a study on market positioning with factors such as target client, brand strategy, and price strategy taken into consideration.

The report provides insights on the following pointers:

Market Penetration:Comprehensive information on the product portfolios of the top players in the Precision Medicine Software market.

Product Development/Innovation:Detailed insights on the upcoming technologies, R&D activities, and product launches in the market.

Competitive Assessment: In-depth assessment of the market strategies, geographic and business segments of the leading players in the market.

Market Development:Comprehensive information about emerging markets. This report analyzes the market for various segments across geographies.

Market Diversification:Exhaustive information about new products, untapped geographies, recent developments, and investments in the Precision Medicine Software market.

Table of Contents

Global Precision Medicine Software Market Research Report 2020 2026

Chapter 1 Precision Medicine Software Market Overview

Chapter 2 Global Economic Impact on Industry

Chapter 3 Global Market Competition by Manufacturers

Chapter 4 Global Production, Revenue (Value) by Region

Chapter 5 Global Supply (Production), Consumption, Export, Import by Regions

Chapter 6 Global Production, Revenue (Value), Price Trend by Type

Chapter 7 Global Market Analysis by Application

Chapter 8 Manufacturing Cost Analysis

Chapter 9 Industrial Chain, Sourcing Strategy and Downstream Buyers

Chapter 10 Marketing Strategy Analysis, Distributors/Traders

Chapter 11 Market Effect Factors Analysis

Chapter 12 Global Precision Medicine Software Market Forecast

Buy Exclusive Report @: https://www.a2zmarketresearch.com/buy?reportId=79150

If you have any special requirements, please let us know and we will offer you the report as you want.

About A2Z Market Research:

The A2Z Market Research library provides syndication reports from market researchers around the world. Ready-to-buy syndication Market research studies will help you find the most relevant business intelligence.

Our Research Analyst Provides business insights and market research reports for large and small businesses.

The company helps clients build business policies and grow in that market area. A2Z Market Research is not only interested in industry reports dealing with telecommunications, healthcare, pharmaceuticals, financial services, energy, technology, real estate, logistics, F & B, media, etc. but also your company data, country profiles, trends, information and analysis on the sector of your interest.

Contact Us:

Roger Smith

1887 WHITNEY MESA DR HENDERSON, NV 89014

[emailprotected]

+1 775 237 4147

Excerpt from:
Massive Growth in Precision Medicine Software Market to Witness Robust Expansion by 2026 with Top Key Players like Syapse, Allscripts, Qiagen, Roper...

Read More...

Gyroscope Therapeutics Granted FDA Fast Track Designation for GT005, an Investigational Gene Therapy for Dry Age-Related Macular Degeneration -…

Tuesday, September 22nd, 2020

LONDON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Gyroscope Therapeutics Limited, a clinical-stage retinal gene therapy company, today announced that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted Fast Track designation to GT005 for the treatment of geographic atrophy (GA) secondary to dry age-related macular degeneration (AMD). GT005 is an investigational one-time AAV-based gene therapy that is delivered under the retina and is intended to slow the progression of GA that can lead to blindness.

Fast Track designation was granted to GT005 for the treatment of people with GA who have specific mutations in their Complement Factor I (CFI) gene and low levels of the CFI protein in their blood. Enrolment in the Phase II EXPLORE study [NCT04437368] to evaluate GT005 in this group of people is underway.

Dry AMD is a life-altering diagnosis and there are currently no FDA-approved medicines available. Research suggests people with dry AMD who have certain CFI mutations that correlate with low CFI levels in the blood have a higher risk of developing AMD,1 said Nadia Waheed, M.D., MPH, Chief Medical Officer. We are pleased to receive Fast Track designation for our investigational gene therapy for this high-risk group. We look forward to working with the FDA as we advance our clinical programme evaluating the safety and effectiveness of GT005.

In addition to EXPLORE, Gyroscope also plans to initiate a second Phase II trial in 2020 that will evaluate GT005 in a broader group of people with GA.

The FDAs Fast Track programme streamlines the review of drugs for serious conditions without FDA-approved treatment options available. Fast Track designation gives applicants access to more frequent communication with the FDA throughout the review process, and the potential to apply for Accelerated Approval and Priority Review if relevant criteria are met, as well as Rolling Review, which means that completed sections of the Biologic License Application can be submitted for review before the entire FDA application is complete.

About Age-Related Macular Degeneration (AMD) and Geographic Atrophy (GA)

AMD is a leading cause of blindness affecting an estimated 196 million people globally.2 AMD typically affects people aged 50 and older, and causes a gradual and permanent loss of central vision that worsens over time.3 There are no approved treatments for the dry form of AMD, which is the most common, impacting approximately 90% of people with the disease.4 As dry AMD advances it leads to GA, an irreversible degeneration of retinal cells. This vision loss can be devastating, severely impacting a persons daily life as they lose the ability to drive, read, and even see the faces of loved ones.

Gyroscope estimates that nearly 3.5 million people in the United States and EU5 European countries have GA, and that more than 100,000 people with GA have certain CFI mutations that correlate with low CFI levels in the blood and a higher risk of developing AMD.5, 6, 7

About Gyroscope: Vision for Life

Gyroscope Therapeutics is a clinical-stage retinal gene therapy company developing and delivering gene therapy beyond rare disease to treat a leading cause of blindness, dry AMD. Our lead investigational gene therapy, GT005, is a one-time therapy delivered under the retina. GT005 is designed to restore balance to an overactive complement system by increasing production of the Complement Factor I protein. GT005 is currently being evaluated in a Phase I/II clinical trial called FOCUS and a Phase II clinical trial called EXPLORE.

Syncona Ltd, our lead investor, helped us create the only retinal gene therapy company to combine discovery, research, drug development, a manufacturing platform and surgical delivery capabilities. Headquartered in London with locations in Philadelphia and San Francisco, our mission is to preserve sight and fight the devastating impact of blindness. For more information visit: http://www.gyroscopetx.com and follow us on Twitter (@GyroscopeTx) and on LinkedIn.

References

__________________________

1 Kavanagh D, Yu Y, Schramm EC, et al. Rare genetic variants in the CFI gene are associated with advanced age-related macular degeneration and commonly result in reduced serum factor I levels. Hum Mol Genet. 2015;24(13):3861-3870.2 Wong WL, Su X, Li X, et al. Global prevalence of age-related macular degeneration and disease burden projection for 2020 and 2040: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Glob Health 2014;2:e106116.3 National Eye Institute. Age-Related Macular Degeneration. https://www.nei.nih.gov/learn-about-eye-health/eye-conditions-and-diseases/age-related-macular-degeneration.4 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Age-Related Macular Degeneration. https://www.cdc.gov/visionhealth/basics/ced/.5 Friedman DS, O'Colmain BJ, Muoz B, et al. Prevalence of age-related macular degeneration in the United States [published correction appears in Arch Ophthalmol. 2011 Sep;129(9):1188]. Arch Ophthalmol. 2004;122(4):564-572.6 Rudnicka AR, Kapetanakis VV et al. Incidence of late-stage age-related macular degeneration in American whites: systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Ophthalmol 2015;160:85-93.7 Data on File.

Read this article:
Gyroscope Therapeutics Granted FDA Fast Track Designation for GT005, an Investigational Gene Therapy for Dry Age-Related Macular Degeneration -...

Read More...

BioLife Solutions to Acquire SciSafe, a High-Growth Biostorage Service Provider to the Cell and Gene Therapy Industry – BioSpace

Tuesday, September 22nd, 2020

BOTHELL, Wash., Sept. 21, 2020 /PRNewswire/ -- BioLife Solutions. (NASDAQ: BLFS)("BioLife" or the "Company"), a leading developer and supplier of a portfolio of class-defining bioproduction tools for cell and gene therapies, today announced it has entered into a definitive agreement to acquire SciSafe, a privately held multi-facility provider of biological materials storage to the cell and gene therapy and pharmaceutical industries. The transaction is expected to close on September 30th.

SciSafe had 2019 unaudited revenue of $6 million and positive EBITDA and is anticipated to be accretive during 2021.

Under the terms of the agreement, BioLife will pay $15 million in cash and $15 million in newly issued shares of BioLife common stock for 100% of the outstanding shares of SciSafe. SciSafe's shareholders are also eligible over the next four years to receive up to 626,000 additional shares of BioLife common stock based on the achievement of annual revenue milestones.

Mike Rice, Chief Executive Officer of BioLife Solutions, commented, "This acquisition enables BioLife to offer even more value to our cell and gene therapy customers through an established business with an excellent reputation, marquee customers and seasoned team. Through SciSafe, we are accelerating profitable growth by expanding into the high growth biostorage segment with a robust quality system, a scalable business model and strong financial performance. We anticipate several vertical integration cost synergies including using SciSafe facilities for cGMP storage of our biopreservation media products, leveraging our CBS facility to manufacture walk-in freezer rooms for SciSafe and deploying our evo Smart Shippers and evoIS cloud app for the thousands of annual inbound and outbound biologic materials shipments managed by SciSafe."

Garrie Richardson, President of SciSafe, remarked, "I'm thrilled to be joining forces with BioLife. With BioLife's stellar reputation in the cell and gene therapy market, key customer relationships, financial resources and commitment to fund our growth, the SciSafe team is poised to deliver significant high-margin incremental revenue to BioLife's growing enterprise."

Benefits of the Transaction

Entry into the fast-growing biostorage segment

Cross-selling opportunities

Potential vertical integration cost synergies

Financial Impact of SciSafe Acquisition

BioLife expects the acquisition of SciSafe to impact the Company's financial performance as follows:

About SciSafeFounded in 2010, SciSafe offers dedicated pharmaceutical and biological specimen storage in its four fully cGMP-compliant state-of-the-art sample management facilities. SciSafe has built flourishing relationships with over 300 of the world's leading and most admired organizations. Clients have repeatedly chosen to store their most valued and irreplaceable biological samples because they trust SciSafe to care for them as if they were their own. SciSafe values and respects its long-term client relationships. With over 60 years combined experience specifically in life sciences, SciSafe personnel fully appreciate the vital requirements of all areas of specimen storage and cold chain management. For more information, please visit http://www.scisafe.com.

About BioLife SolutionsBioLife Solutions is a leading supplier of a portfolio of class-defining cell and gene therapy bioproduction tools and services. Our tools portfolio includes our proprietaryCryoStorfreeze media and HypoThermosolshipping and storage media, ThawSTARfamily of automated, water-free thawing products, evocold chain management system, and Custom Biogenic Systemshigh capacity storage freezers. Services include SciSafe biologic and pharmaceutical materials storage. For more information, please visit http://www.biolifesolutions.com, and follow BioLife on Twitter.

Cautions Regarding Forward Looking Statements Except for historical information contained herein, this press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements concerning the expected financial performance of the company following the completion of its acquisition of SciSafe, the expected synergies between the company and SciSafe, the company's ability to realize all or any of the anticipated benefits associated with the acquisition of SciSafe, the company's ability to implement its business strategy and anticipated business and operations, including following the acquisition of SciSafe, the potential utility of and market for the company's and SciSafe's products and services, guidance for financial results for 2020 and 2021, including regarding SciSafe's revenue, and potential revenue growth and market expansion, including with consideration to our acquisition of SciSafe. All statements other than statements of historical fact are statements that could be deemed forward-looking statements. These statements are based on management's current expectations and beliefs and are subject to a number of risks, uncertainties and assumptions that could cause actual results to differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements, including among other things, uncertainty regarding unexpected costs, charges or expenses resulting from the company's acquisition of SciSafe or the 2019 acquisitions, charges or expenses resulting from the acquisition of SciSafe; market adoption of the company's products (including the company's recently acquired products) or SciSafe's products; the ability of the SciSafe acquisition to be accretive on the company's financial results; the ability of the company to implement its business strategy; uncertainty regarding third-party market projections; market volatility; competition; litigation; the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic; and those other factors described in our risk factors set forth in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission from time to time, including our Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and Current Reports on Form 8-K. We undertake no obligation to update the forward-looking statements contained herein or to reflect events or circumstances occurring after the date hereof, other than as may be required by applicable law.

Media & Investor RelationsRoderick de GreefChief Financial Officer(425) 686-6002rdegreef@biolifesolutions.com

View original content to download multimedia:http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/biolife-solutions-to-acquire-scisafe-a-high-growth-biostorage-service-provider-to-the-cell-and-gene-therapy-industry-301134474.html

SOURCE BioLife Solutions, Inc.

Original post:
BioLife Solutions to Acquire SciSafe, a High-Growth Biostorage Service Provider to the Cell and Gene Therapy Industry - BioSpace

Read More...

Advantages of Oncolytic Viruses as Immunotherapies to be Discussed by Catalent Gene Therapy Expert at World Vaccine Congress – PR Web

Tuesday, September 22nd, 2020

SOMERSET, N.J. (PRWEB) September 22, 2020

Catalent, the leading global provider of advanced delivery technologies, development, and manufacturing solutions for drugs, biologics, cell and gene therapies, and consumer health products, today announced that George Buchman, Ph.D., Vice President, Preclinical & Process Development, Catalent Cell & Gene Therapy, will present at the World Vaccine Congress, which will take place virtually on Sept. 28 October 1, 2020.

On Sept. 30 at 4:05 p.m. EST, Dr. Buchman will present Next-Generation Vaccines and Oncolytic Viruses: Current Challenges and Future Promise, giving an overview of the benefits and limitations of oncolytic viruses as immunotherapies. His presentation will discuss the manufacturing and analytical considerations, as well as a collaborative study that evaluates a new technology to assess transfection efficiency.

Dr. Buchman joined Catalent through its acquisition of Paragon Gene Therapy in 2019. He has more than 30 years of experience in the biotech industry, and has held roles at companies including Life Technologies (now Thermo Fisher), Celera Genomics and Gene Logic. Dr. Buchman obtained a bachelors degree in biochemistry from Albright College, Reading, Pennsylvania, and a doctorate in biochemistry from University of Maryland.

For more information, please visit https://biologics.catalent.com/events/world-vaccine-congress/.

About Catalent Cell & Gene TherapyWith deep experience in viral vector scale-up and production, Catalent Cell & Gene Therapy is a full-service partner for adeno-associated virus (AAV) and lentiviral vectors, and CAR-T immunotherapies. When it acquired MaSTherCell, Catalent added expertise in autologous and allogeneic cell therapy development and manufacturing to position it as a premier technology, development and manufacturing partner for innovators across the entire field of advanced biotherapeutics. Catalent has a global cell and gene therapy network of dedicated, large-scale clinical and commercial manufacturing facilities, and fill-finish and packaging capabilities located in both the U.S. and Europe. An experienced partner, Catalent Cell & Gene Therapy has worked with industry leaders across 70+ clinical and commercial programs. For more information, visit biologics.catalent.com/cell-gene-therapy/

About CatalentCatalent is the leading global provider of advanced delivery technologies, development, and manufacturing solutions for drugs, biologics, cell and gene therapies, and consumer health products. With over 85 years serving the industry, Catalent has proven expertise in bringing more customer products to market faster, enhancing product performance and ensuring reliable global clinical and commercial product supply. Catalent employs approximately 14,000 people, including around 2,400 scientists and technicians, at more than 45 facilities, and in fiscal year 2020 generated over $3 billion in annual revenue. Catalent is headquartered in Somerset, New Jersey. For more information, visit http://www.catalent.com

More products. Better treatments. Reliably supplied.

Share article on social media or email:

Continue reading here:
Advantages of Oncolytic Viruses as Immunotherapies to be Discussed by Catalent Gene Therapy Expert at World Vaccine Congress - PR Web

Read More...

MeiraGTx Announces Data from Ongoing Clinical Trial of AAV-RPGR for the Treatment of X-Linked Retinitis Pigmentosa to be Presented at EURETINA 2020…

Tuesday, September 22nd, 2020

LONDONandNEW YORK, Sept. 22, 2020 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- MeiraGTx Holdings plc(Nasdaq: MGTX), a vertically integrated, clinical stage gene therapy company, today announced nine-month results from the ongoing Phase 1/2 clinical trial(NCT03252847) of AAV-RPGR, an investigational gene therapy for the treatment of X-linked retinitis pigmentosa (XLRP), will be presented in an oral session at the EURETINA 2020 Virtual Meeting taking place October 2-4, 2020.

Details of the presentation are listed below. Data is embargoed until the date and time of presentation.

Title: Phase 1/2 Clinical Trial of AAV-RPGR Gene Therapy for RPGR-Associated X-Linked Retinitis Pigmentosa: 9-month ResultsPresenter: Michel Michaelides, BSc MB BS MD(Res) FRCOphth FACSDate and Time: Saturday, October 3, 10:45am EDT (4:45pm CEST)Session: EURETINA Session 11: Late Breaking & Reviews

MeiraGTx and Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Janssen), one of the Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, are jointly developing AAV-RPGR as part of a broader collaboration to develop and commercialize gene therapies for the treatment of inherited retinal diseases.

In July 2020, MeiraGTx announced six-month data from the ongoing Phase 1/2 MGT009 clinical trial, which demonstrated AAV-RPGR was generally well tolerated and produced significant improvement in vision in the dose escalation phase of the trial.

About AAV-RPGRAAV-RPGR is an investigational gene therapy for the treatment of patients with X-Linked Retinitis Pigmentosa (XLRP) caused by mutations in the eye specific form of theRPGRgene (RPGRORF15). AAV-RPGR is designed to deliver functional copies of theRPGRgene to the subretinal space in order to improve and preserve visual function.MeiraGTxand development partner Janssen are currently conducting a Phase 1/2 clinical trial of AAV-RPGR in patients with XLRP with mutations inRPGRORF15. AAV-RPGR has been granted Fast Track and Orphan Drug designations by theU.S. Food and Drug Administration(FDA) and PRIME, ATMP and Orphan designations by theEuropean Medicines Agency (EMA).

About the Phase 1/2 MGT009 Clinical TrialMGT009 is a multi-center, open-label Phase 1/2 trial (NCT03252847) of AAV-RPGR gene therapy for the treatment of patients with XLRP associated with disease-causing variants in theRPGRgene. MGT009 consists of three phases: dose-escalation, dose-confirmation, and dose-expansion. Each patient was treated with subretinal delivery of AAV-RPGR in the eye that was more affected at baseline. The patients other eye served as an untreated control. In dose-escalation (n=10), adults were administered low, intermediate, or high dose AAV-RPGR. The primary endpoint was safety. Visual function was assessed at baseline, three, six, nine and 12 months with Octopus 900 full-field static perimetry and mesopic fundus-guided microperimetry (MP); mean retinal sensitivity, visual field modeling and analysis (VFMA; Hill-of-vision volumetric measure), and pointwise comparisons were examined.

About X-Linked Retinitis Pigmentosa (XLRP)XLRP is the most severe form of retinitis pigmentosa (RP), a group of inherited retinal diseases characterized by progressive retinal degeneration and vision loss. In XLRP, both rods and cones function poorly, leading to degeneration of the retina and total blindness. The most frequent cause of XLRP is disease-causing variants in theRPGRgene, accounting for more than 70% of cases of XLRP, and up to 20% of all cases of RP. There are currently no approved treatments for XLRP.

AboutMeiraGTxMeiraGTx(Nasdaq: MGTX) is a vertically integrated, clinical stage gene therapy company with six programs in clinical development and a broad pipeline of preclinical and research programs.MeiraGTx has core capabilities in viral vector design and optimization and gene therapy manufacturing, as well as a potentially transformative gene regulation technology. Led by an experienced management team,MeiraGTxhas taken a portfolio approach by licensing, acquiring and developing technologies that give depth across both product candidates and indications. MeiraGTxs initial focus is on three distinct areas of unmet medical need: inherited retinal diseases, neurodegenerative diseases and severe forms of xerostomia. Though initially focusing on the eye, central nervous system and salivary gland,MeiraGTxintends to expand its focus in the future to develop additional gene therapy treatments for patients suffering from a range of serious diseases.

For more information, please visitwww.meiragtx.com.

Forward Looking StatementThis press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. All statements contained in this press release that do not relate to matters of historical fact should be considered forward-looking statements, including, without limitation, statements regarding the development and efficacy of AAV-RPGR, plans to advance AAV-RPGR into Phase 3 clinical trial and anticipated milestones regarding our clinical data and reporting of such data and the timing of results of data, including in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as statements that include the words expect, intend, plan, believe, project, forecast, estimate, may, should, anticipate and similar statements of a future or forward-looking nature. These forward-looking statements are based on managements current expectations. These statements are neither promises nor guarantees, but involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other important factors that may cause actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements, including, but not limited to, our incurrence of significant losses; any inability to achieve or maintain profitability, acquire additional capital, identify additional and develop existing product candidates, successfully execute strategic priorities, bring product candidates to market, expansion of our manufacturing facilities and processes, successfully enroll patients in and complete clinical trials, accurately predict growth assumptions, recognize benefits of any orphan drug designations, retain key personnel or attract qualified employees, or incur expected levels of operating expenses; the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the status, enrollment, timing and results of our clinical trials and on our business, results of operations and financial condition; failure of early data to predict eventual outcomes; failure to obtain FDA or other regulatory approval for product candidates within expected time frames or at all; the novel nature and impact of negative public opinion of gene therapy; failure to comply with ongoing regulatory obligations; contamination or shortage of raw materials or other manufacturing issues; changes in healthcare laws; risks associated with our international operations; significant competition in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries; dependence on third parties; risks related to intellectual property; changes in tax policy or treatment; our ability to utilize our loss and tax credit carryforwards; litigation risks; and the other important factors discussed under the caption Risk Factors in our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter endedMarch 31, 2020, as such factors may be updated from time to time in our other filings with theSEC, which are accessible on the SECs website atwww.sec.gov. These and other important factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those indicated by the forward-looking statements made in this press release. Any such forward-looking statements represent managements estimates as of the date of this press release. While we may elect to update such forward-looking statements at some point in the future, unless required by law, we disclaim any obligation to do so, even if subsequent events cause our views to change. Thus, one should not assume that our silence over time means that actual events are bearing out as expressed or implied in such forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements should not be relied upon as representing our views as of any date subsequent to the date of this press release.

Contacts

Investors:MeiraGTxElizabeth (Broder) Anderson (646) 860-7983elizabeth@meiragtx.com

Or

Media:W2O pureChristiana Pascale(212) 257-6722cpascale@purecommunications.com

Read this article:
MeiraGTx Announces Data from Ongoing Clinical Trial of AAV-RPGR for the Treatment of X-Linked Retinitis Pigmentosa to be Presented at EURETINA 2020...

Read More...

Gene Therapy will the NHS lead or follow? – Health Service Journal

Tuesday, September 22nd, 2020

This is paid-for content from our commercial partners.Find out more

Gene therapies are set to revolutionise healthcare by treating diseases at the genetic level. They address the underlying cause of disease and can restore a patient to normal or near normal health. As one-time, personalised treatments, gene therapies have the potential to transform current care pathways by offering eligible patients durable outcomes when successful.

Sponsored by

They offer a one-time intervention, when often the alternative is decades of chronic treatment and monitoring, benefitting both patients and carers. Health and social care systems could also benefit, when complex chronic care regimes can be eliminated or greatly reduced, with significant resources re-deployed across the health and social care system; pertinent in a post-covid-19 world. Of course, gene therapy, as well as the procedure needed to prepare patients to receive it, can have serious side effects and there must be a rigorous assessment of potential risks and benefits to identify the right patients for the treatment.

Additionally, the cost-effectiveness of gene therapies, depends very much on their capacity of delivery health and social savings over a patients lifetime. As many patients treated with gene therapies will be children and young adults, the treatment may deliver additional societal gains over decades.

There are currently over 950 companies worldwide developing Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products, with therapies being tested in 1052 clinical trials, as of Q3 2019.1 Many of these are gene therapies that may become available in the UK over the next five years.

Provision needs to be made urgently for aligned regulatory assessment, health technology appraisal and NHS managed introduction, both in terms of infrastructure as well as reallocated budget. Life science companies also have a responsibility to set value-based prices and should consider alternative payment models and risk share agreements in collaboration with the NHS and government to further ensure value and affordability.

Gene therapies are positive and disruptive technologies that require whole system change to ensure that a post-Brexit NHS is at the forefront of provision rather than lagging behind its European neighbours. There is a window of opportunity for the MHRA with renewed responsibilities in 2021, as well as the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence currently conducting its Methods Review to ensure both regulatory and appraisal systems are aligned for optimal assessment of modern medicines, including gene therapies.

NICEs review of the methods is highly significant as it will set the framework for how England and Wales will provide access to new and breakthrough medicines. Areas of focus should include wider recognition of gene therapies and their benefits, including the one-off treatment offer to patients, gains to the health and social care system, plus pragmatic ways to address inherent lifetime uncertainty.

Crucially, for paediatric and young adult patients, there is an additional challenge the NICE methods review needs to resolve. High economic discount rates used in the health economic assessment process by NICE has a prejudicial impact on the cost-effectiveness of treatments that are intended to offer benefits over decades, such as gene therapies. This issue can be easily addressed if Treasury guidance for utilising lower discount rates is adopted.

A successful NICE Methods Review would ensure that the UK has a fit-for-purpose medicines assessment process. This will help to achieve world-leading status for bringing new medicines such as gene therapy to patients and will sustain UK-based research and development investment. This should be prioritised as the end of the EU exit transition period approaches, to ensure the governments vision of a vibrant post-Brexit economy, fuelled by science and technology, allows the UK to lead the world in healthcare innovation.

1. Alliance for Regenerative Medicine. Quarterly regenerative medicine sector report Q3. 2019. Available at: https://alliancerm.org/?smd_process_download=1&download_id=5556 [Accessed 11 February 2020].

See more here:
Gene Therapy will the NHS lead or follow? - Health Service Journal

Read More...

Page 10«..9101112..2030..»


2025 © StemCell Therapy is proudly powered by WordPress
Entries (RSS) Comments (RSS) | Violinesth by Patrick