header logo image


Page 769«..1020..768769770771..780790..»

Curious Kids: how do magpies detect worms and other food underground? – The Conversation AU

December 30th, 2019 4:13 am

How do magpies detect worms and other food sources underground? I often see them look or listen, then rapidly hop across the ground and start digging with their beak and extract a worm or bug from the earth Catherine, age 10, Perth.

You have posed a very good question.

Foraging for food can involve sight, hearing and even smell. In almost all cases learning is involved. Magpies are ground foragers, setting one foot before the other looking for food while walking, called walk-foraging. It looks like this:

Finding food on the ground, such as beetles and other insects, is not as easy as it may sound. The ground can be uneven and covered with leaves, grasses and rocks. Insects may be hiding, camouflaged, or staying so still it is hard for a magpie to notice them.

Read more: Curious Kids: why is a magpie's poo black and white?

Detecting a small object on the ground requires keen vision and experience, to discriminate between the parts that are important and those that are not.

Magpie eyes, as for most birds, are on the side of the head (humans and other birds of prey, by contrast, have eyes that face forward).

To see a small area in front of them, close to the ground, birds use both eyes together (scientists call this binocular vision). But birds mostly see via the eyes looking out to the side (which is called monocular vision).

This picture gives you an idea of what a magpie can see with its left eye, what it can see with its right eye and what area it can see with both eyes working together (binocular vision).

You asked about underground foraging. Some of that foraging can also be done by sight. Worms, for instance, may leave a small mound (called a cast) on the surface and, to the experienced bird, this indicates that a worm is just below.

Magpies can also go a huge step further. They can identify big scarab larvae underground without any visual help at all.

Scarab larvae look like grubs. They munch on grassroots and can kill entire grazing fields. Once they transform into beetles (commonly called Christmas beetles) they can do even more damage by eating all the leaves off eucalyptus trees.

Here is the secret: magpies have such good hearing, they can hear the very faint sound of grass roots being chewed.

We know this from experiments using small speakers under the soil playing back recorded sounds of scarab beetle larvae. Magpies located the speaker every time and dug it up.

So how do they do it? Several movements are involved.

To make certain that a jab with its beak will hit the exact spot where the juicy grub is, the magpie first walks slowly and scans the ground. It then stops and looks closely at the ground seemingly with both eyes working together.

Then, holding absolutely still, the magpie turns its head so the left side of the head and ear is close to the ground for a final confirming listen.

Finally, the bird straightens up, then executes a powerful jab into the ground before retrieving the grub.

That is very clever of the magpies. Very few animals can extract food they cant see. Only great apes and humans were thought to have this ability. Clever magpies indeed. And farmers love them for keeping a major pest under control.

Read more: Curious Kids: Why do birds sing?

Hello, curious kids! Have you got a question youd like an expert to answer? Ask an adult to send your question to curiouskids@theconversation.edu.au

Original post:
Curious Kids: how do magpies detect worms and other food underground? - The Conversation AU

Read More...

Introducing Medigen Biotechnology (GTSM:3176), The Stock That Slid 62% In The Last Five Years – Simply Wall St

December 30th, 2019 4:12 am

We think intelligent long term investing is the way to go. But unfortunately, some companies simply dont succeed. For example, after five long years the Medigen Biotechnology Corp. (GTSM:3176) share price is a whole 62% lower. We certainly feel for shareholders who bought near the top.

View 2 warning signs we detected for Medigen Biotechnology

Medigen Biotechnology wasnt profitable in the last twelve months, it is unlikely well see a strong correlation between its share price and its earnings per share (EPS). Arguably revenue is our next best option. When a company doesnt make profits, wed generally expect to see good revenue growth. Thats because its hard to be confident a company will be sustainable if revenue growth is negligible, and it never makes a profit.

In the last half decade, Medigen Biotechnology saw its revenue increase by 5.6% per year. Thats not a very high growth rate considering it doesnt make profits. This lacklustre growth has no doubt fueled the loss of 17% per year, in that time. Wed want to see proof that future revenue growth is likely to be significantly stronger before getting too interested in Medigen Biotechnology. When a stock falls hard like this, some investors like to add the company to a watchlist (in case the business recovers, longer term).

The graphic below depicts how earnings and revenue have changed over time (unveil the exact values by clicking on the image).

Balance sheet strength is crucial. It might be well worthwhile taking a look at our free report on how its financial position has changed over time.

Its nice to see that Medigen Biotechnology shareholders have received a total shareholder return of 49% over the last year. Theres no doubt those recent returns are much better than the TSR loss of 17% per year over five years. This makes us a little wary, but the business might have turned around its fortunes. I find it very interesting to look at share price over the long term as a proxy for business performance. But to truly gain insight, we need to consider other information, too. For example, weve discovered 2 warning signs for Medigen Biotechnology (of which 1 is major) which any shareholder or potential investor should be aware of.

But note: Medigen Biotechnology may not be the best stock to buy. So take a peek at this free list of interesting companies with past earnings growth (and further growth forecast).

Please note, the market returns quoted in this article reflect the market weighted average returns of stocks that currently trade on TW exchanges.

If you spot an error that warrants correction, please contact the editor at editorial-team@simplywallst.com. This article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. Simply Wall St has no position in the stocks mentioned.

We aim to bring you long-term focused research analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Thank you for reading.

See the original post here:
Introducing Medigen Biotechnology (GTSM:3176), The Stock That Slid 62% In The Last Five Years - Simply Wall St

Read More...

$1.14 Earnings Per Share Expected for BIO-TECHNE Corp (NASDAQ:TECH) This Quarter – Riverton Roll

December 30th, 2019 4:12 am

Equities research analysts forecast that BIO-TECHNE Corp (NASDAQ:TECH) will report earnings of $1.14 per share for the current fiscal quarter, according to Zacks. Four analysts have provided estimates for BIO-TECHNEs earnings. The lowest EPS estimate is $1.12 and the highest is $1.16. BIO-TECHNE reported earnings of $1.06 per share during the same quarter last year, which would indicate a positive year-over-year growth rate of 7.5%. The company is expected to report its next quarterly earnings report on Tuesday, February 4th.

On average, analysts expect that BIO-TECHNE will report full-year earnings of $4.94 per share for the current year, with EPS estimates ranging from $4.85 to $5.04. For the next year, analysts expect that the business will post earnings of $5.77 per share, with EPS estimates ranging from $5.45 to $6.07. Zacks earnings per share averages are an average based on a survey of research analysts that cover BIO-TECHNE.

BIO-TECHNE (NASDAQ:TECH) last posted its earnings results on Tuesday, October 29th. The biotechnology company reported $1.06 earnings per share for the quarter, topping the consensus estimate of $0.92 by $0.14. The firm had revenue of $183.24 million during the quarter, compared to analysts expectations of $179.38 million. BIO-TECHNE had a return on equity of 13.36% and a net margin of 12.68%. The firms revenue was up 12.4% compared to the same quarter last year. During the same quarter in the previous year, the business earned $0.98 earnings per share.

Several equities research analysts recently weighed in on TECH shares. TheStreet upgraded BIO-TECHNE from a c+ rating to a b- rating in a research note on Wednesday, November 27th. ValuEngine cut BIO-TECHNE from a buy rating to a hold rating in a research note on Tuesday, December 3rd. BidaskClub upgraded BIO-TECHNE from a sell rating to a hold rating in a research note on Tuesday, September 17th. Zacks Investment Research cut BIO-TECHNE from a hold rating to a sell rating in a research note on Saturday, November 2nd. Finally, Stifel Nicolaus started coverage on BIO-TECHNE in a research note on Thursday, November 14th. They issued a buy rating and a $235.00 price objective for the company. One analyst has rated the stock with a sell rating, three have issued a hold rating and five have assigned a buy rating to the companys stock. The stock has an average rating of Hold and a consensus target price of $224.50.

In other BIO-TECHNE news, CEO Charles R. Kummeth sold 703 shares of the businesss stock in a transaction that occurred on Tuesday, December 10th. The stock was sold at an average price of $222.01, for a total value of $156,073.03. The sale was disclosed in a legal filing with the Securities & Exchange Commission, which is available at this link. Also, Director Roeland Nusse sold 8,347 shares of the businesss stock in a transaction that occurred on Monday, November 25th. The shares were sold at an average price of $219.33, for a total value of $1,830,747.51. Following the completion of the sale, the director now owns 15,721 shares of the companys stock, valued at approximately $3,448,086.93. The disclosure for this sale can be found here. In the last quarter, insiders sold 34,271 shares of company stock valued at $7,503,700. 4.20% of the stock is owned by company insiders.

Hedge funds and other institutional investors have recently modified their holdings of the business. Invesco Ltd. raised its stake in shares of BIO-TECHNE by 97.1% during the second quarter. Invesco Ltd. now owns 1,064,196 shares of the biotechnology companys stock worth $221,874,000 after purchasing an additional 524,216 shares during the last quarter. Nuveen Asset Management LLC raised its stake in shares of BIO-TECHNE by 6,323.4% during the second quarter. Nuveen Asset Management LLC now owns 126,091 shares of the biotechnology companys stock worth $26,289,000 after purchasing an additional 124,128 shares during the last quarter. BNP Paribas Arbitrage SA raised its stake in shares of BIO-TECHNE by 229.8% during the second quarter. BNP Paribas Arbitrage SA now owns 47,344 shares of the biotechnology companys stock worth $9,871,000 after purchasing an additional 32,989 shares during the last quarter. Massachusetts Financial Services Co. MA raised its stake in shares of BIO-TECHNE by 3.4% during the third quarter. Massachusetts Financial Services Co. MA now owns 951,301 shares of the biotechnology companys stock worth $186,141,000 after purchasing an additional 31,700 shares during the last quarter. Finally, Candriam Luxembourg S.C.A. raised its stake in shares of BIO-TECHNE by 20.2% during the third quarter. Candriam Luxembourg S.C.A. now owns 129,857 shares of the biotechnology companys stock worth $25,000 after purchasing an additional 21,840 shares during the last quarter. Institutional investors own 93.11% of the companys stock.

TECH stock traded down $5.29 during trading on Friday, hitting $213.02. 122,699 shares of the companys stock were exchanged, compared to its average volume of 117,811. The business has a 50-day moving average price of $212.32 and a two-hundred day moving average price of $204.52. The stock has a market capitalization of $8.22 billion, a price-to-earnings ratio of 56.06, a PEG ratio of 4.61 and a beta of 1.23. BIO-TECHNE has a 52-week low of $132.75 and a 52-week high of $222.87. The company has a current ratio of 4.44, a quick ratio of 3.41 and a debt-to-equity ratio of 0.47.

The company also recently disclosed a quarterly dividend, which was paid on Friday, November 22nd. Shareholders of record on Friday, November 8th were paid a $0.32 dividend. This represents a $1.28 dividend on an annualized basis and a yield of 0.60%. The ex-dividend date was Thursday, November 7th. BIO-TECHNEs dividend payout ratio is currently 33.68%.

BIO-TECHNE Company Profile

Bio-Techne Corporation, together with its subsidiaries, develops, manufactures, and sells biotechnology reagents, instruments, and clinical diagnostic controls worldwide. It operates in three segments: Biotechnology, Protein Platforms, and Diagnostics. The Biotechnology segment offers specialized proteins, such as cytokines and growth factors, immunoassays, antibodies, and related reagents to the biotechnology research community; and in situ hybridization, media, and other cell culture products and reagents.

Featured Article: What causes a recession?

Get a free copy of the Zacks research report on BIO-TECHNE (TECH)

For more information about research offerings from Zacks Investment Research, visit Zacks.com

Receive News & Ratings for BIO-TECHNE Daily - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings for BIO-TECHNE and related companies with MarketBeat.com's FREE daily email newsletter.

See the rest here:
$1.14 Earnings Per Share Expected for BIO-TECHNE Corp (NASDAQ:TECH) This Quarter - Riverton Roll

Read More...

Why The Pentagon Is Warning US Military Not To Use Recreational Genetic Test Kits – Forbes

December 30th, 2019 4:10 am

US Pentagon in Washington DC.

For years, many of us in the genetics community have strongly suggested thatconsumers think long and hard beforeordering recreational genetic test kits for Christmas or any other occasion. But when thePentagon sends a stern warningto its military members, even Santa needs to listen.

Military Mission at dusk

Why would the Pentagon be worried about our military using at-home DNA kits?A memo issued to service membersfrom the Office of the Secretary of Defensestates that recreational genetic kits could give military personnel inaccurate information about their health. These inaccurate results couldhave negative professional consequences,particularly because military members, who are required to report medical problems, are not covered bytheGenetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA),which prohibits genetic discrimination by employers and health insurers.

It is already well known that thesekits should not be usedto answer serious medical questions based on a personal or family history of disease. Anyone with such a history shouldconsult a certified genetic counselorto ensure that an accurate test is ordered and interpreted correctly.The Pentagon concurs, saying they dont advise against genetic testing altogether, but recommend that service members get genetic information from a licensed professional rather than a recreational kit.

But are there other reasons the Pentagon may be warning against recreational genetic test kits? Couldthis genetic information lead to genetic surveillance, tracking, and grave privacy concerns for military personnel and others who use these kits?

China has already demonstratedthat genetic technology and research findings, intended to help people, can instead be used to harm. It is believed that the Chinese government has collected DNA samples from its citizens throughmandatory physicals to create a large databasethats being used to weed out up to one million Uighurs to be sent toconcentration camps. Although U.S. citizens, thankfully, enjoy greater protections than those in China, this example illustrates that our DNA can give insight into ancestry and ethnic origins that can be used for grave harm.

In fact, genetic data can reportedly be usedto determine how gay a person is, and if you are a 23andMe user who shared your data for research, you may have contributed to this study. Could DNA data be used to determine if military personnel may be gay? And if so, could that information beused against them?

And, of course, none of these companies can guarantee that their databases wont be hacked,as has happened in the past. Recently, GEDmatch, the genealogy company used to track down the Golden State Killer, wasacquired by a company created to work with crime labs. Other testing companies have chosen toshare their user data with the FBI.How will all of this consumer data be used, for good or evil? The truth is, we dont know.

finger print with DNA code at background

What we do know is thatundercover military agentscould likely be identified using a small sample of blood or saliva and large DNA databases. This may be true whether or not they personally have undergone recreational genetic testing,since one of their relatives probably has. For our military working undercover, this means that anonymity is likely a thing of the past.

Read more:
Why The Pentagon Is Warning US Military Not To Use Recreational Genetic Test Kits - Forbes

Read More...

Heartbreaking News, Then Tumor Find Leads to Genetic Testing – Medscape

December 30th, 2019 4:10 am

When Anne Weber became pregnant with her first child at age 28, little did she suspect that, rather than bringing home a bundle of joy, she would have to contend with a cancer diagnosis that would change the course of her life.

At her first ultrasound, not only did she find out that she had miscarried but also that she had a large cyst on one of her ovaries. That cyst turned out to be cancer.

"Because I didn't have a strong family history of cancer, everyone assumed it would be benign," she recalled in an interview with Medscape Medical News. "We were all very surprised when the pathology report came back with ovarian cancer."

Although the incidental finding may have been heartbreaking, it may also have been lifesaving. Because it was caught early, her ovarian cancer was of stage I. She underwent surgery and is now telling her story, 10 years later.

Weber is now a patient advocate at FORCE (Facing Our Risk of Cancer Empowered), a national nonprofit organization dedicated to individuals affected by hereditary breast, ovarian, and related cancers, andpreviously worked for a while at genetic testing company Myriad Genetics.

How Weber developed ovarian cancer at such a young age was initially a mystery. Without a family history and without symptoms or personal risk factors for it, her physician did not suspect a hereditary cancer even though at the time, National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines recommended that physicians consider genetic testing for anyone younger than 50 who are found to have ovarian cancer. However, her physician didn't offer genetic testing, or even counsel her about it.

Weber was left with nagging questions. She wanted to know why she'd gotten ovarian cancer and how she could prevent a recurrence. So she started sleuthing around on the Internet.

"When I was diagnosed, I knew nothing about this. Literally, I didn't know what terms to type into the search engine," she said.

When she stumbled onto an online forum that linked her to the NCCN guidelines, the pieces of the puzzle began fitting together.

This was 2009, and she was living in Atlanta at the time. She asked her physician about genetic testing, and her doctor referred her to the only genetic counselor in the city, who was at Emory University. At that time, the wait time for genetic testing was 6 months.

"Six months when you're dealing with something like cancer can be pretty dire," Anne said.

Genetic testing for breast and ovarian cancer has not always been straightforward, and fast-moving research means that genetic testing is becoming more and more complex all the time.

The NCCN may have recently provided a step in the right direction. On December 4, the NCCN released updated clinical practice guidelines on genetic/familial high-risk assessment for breast and ovarian cancer.

The guidelines represent a fairly radical shift from previous recommendations, which focused on BRCA genes, according to Robert Pilarski, MS, LGC, MSW, LSW, a genetics counselor and professor of clinical internal medicine at Ohio State University's Comprehensive Cancer Center. He was also vice chair of the NCCN guidelines panel that updated the guidelines.

The NCCN recommendations remain anchored in strong, unbiased evidence and reflect a conservative approach regarding genes for which there is lack of evidence, he said. But the guidelines also acknowledge a shift toward panel testing and include a table of 17 moderate- and high-penetrance genes that should be considered in addition to BRCA genes. They also provide management recommendations for people who carry these genes.

"Most people now are doing panel testing where the panel involves multiple genes besides BRCA," Pilarski said, "This guideline update is the closest that we've got to a consensus [regarding breast, ovarian, and pancreatic cancer] because it now specifies a set of genes that are reasonable to include in at least a basic panel."

The use of multigene panels is controversial, as previously reported by Medscape Medical News. A study published in early 2019 in the Journal of Clinical Oncology suggested that roughly half of breast cancer patients who carry a pathogenic or likely pathogenic mutation are missed by current genetic testing guidelines. That study used an 80-gene panel, and the authors recommended expanded panel testing for all patients with breast cancer.

Critics shot back, arguing that universal testing is not warranted and that large, multigene panels may create undue anxiety among patients as well as confusion among physicians. Research is in its infancy for many of these genes, and physicians don't know how or even whether to act on results for some of them. That's especially true for variants of unknown significance, which have not been confirmed to increase risk for disease.

Perhaps in response to this controversy, the NCCN guidelines do not recommend universal testing for breast or ovarian cancer. Instead, they provide clinical scenarios in which genetic testing is clinically indicated, may be considered, or has low probability of clinical utility. The NCCN authors hedge their bets by not endorsing for or against multigene panel testing.

"I think we held back from becoming too definitive because there may be times when other genes are appropriate," Pilarski explained. "We didn't want to lock patients out of insurance coverage, and we didn't want to lock ourselves into a set of genes that could change next week with changing evidence."

This "wishy-washiness" over multigene panels creates a problem for Mehmet Copur, MD, FACP, an oncologist who wrote a critical response to the study published earlier this year. He is affiliated with the Morrison Cancer Center in Hastings, Nebraska, and is an adjunct professor at the University of Nebraska Medical Center in Omaha.

"I believe they have tried to please both parties, and they have been too nice," he said. "My personal opinion is that I would go for high-penetrance genes in clinically suspicious settings. I would ignore that disclaimer note and say, 'I'm going to do this 17-gene panel.' "

Going one step further, he suggested the creation of commercially available gene panels based on the NCCN recommendations for these 17 genes.

"There are a wide variety of panels available with different genes on different panels. There is a lack of consensus among experts regarding which genes should be tested in different clinical scenarios. If possible, it would be helpful to create commercially available gene panels based on the updated NCCN recommendations," he said.

In another major change, the guidelines now include pancreatic cancer for the first time. But in contrast to breast and ovarian cancer, the NCCN recommends that all patients with newly diagnosed pancreatic cancer receive genetic testing.

"Approximately 1 in 20 patients with pancreatic cancer will have an inherited susceptibility gene. Most people with pancreatic cancer who carry these mutations do not have a family history of pancreatic cancer, so you can't rely on family history to guide you about who should get genetic testing," Michael Goggins, MD, MBBCH, who was also involved in updating the NCCN guidelines, told Medscape Medical News. Goggins is director of the Pancreatic Cancer Early Detection Laboratory at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.

Advantages of genetic testing for pancreatic cancer include guidance regarding choice of chemotherapy and the possibility of cascade testing for prevention or earlier detection of pancreatic cancer in family members.

Other additions to the guidelines include new recommendations for genetic testing for individuals with Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry, as well as new or updated recommendations for Li-Fraumeni syndrome and Cowden/PTEN hamartoma tumor syndrome.

The guidelines also offer an expanded section on genetics risk assessment and genetic counseling. Genetic testing has become increasingly complex, and the NCCN emphasizes the importance of genetic counseling throughout the testing process.

It has been 10 years since Anne Weber was diagnosed with ovarian cancer. Because she was diagnosed at a young age (28 years) and her other ovary was unaffected, she opted for surgery to remove only the ovary with the tumor.

After her own Internet research and at her own request, Weber underwent genetic testing. She found out that she is a carrier of the BRCA2 mutation, which carries high risk for breast, ovarian, and pancreatic cancer.

Current recommendations are that people with BRCA2 mutations start breast cancer screening at age 25, so Weber was screened immediately.

Her first breast MRI revealed a mass that was found to be stage I breast cancer. At that point, she chose to have her other ovary removed, as well as both fallopian tubes and both breasts, which significantly reduces her risk for recurrence.

"I'm so incredibly grateful that I found the information. All the guidelines say that I shouldn't even have had my first mammogram at my current age of 39. So there is low likelihood that I would have been diagnosed by now, and it certainly would not have been stage I," she said.

Since her diagnosis, she and her husband have adopted a child.

"Genetic testing isn't right for everyone. People aren't going to make the same decisions I did," she said. "The biggest thing is to understand that being positive doesn't mean that you're going to get cancer. It just allows you to have that circle of care to try to prevent cancer, or at least catch it earlier, when it's more treatable."

NCCN. Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast, Ovarian, and Pancreatic Version 1.2020. Full text

Follow Medscape on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube.

Follow this link:
Heartbreaking News, Then Tumor Find Leads to Genetic Testing - Medscape

Read More...

NIH Director on Human Gene Editing: ‘We Must Never Allow our Technology to Eclipse our Humanity’ – Discover Magazine

December 30th, 2019 4:10 am

Often, science moves ahead incrementally. Yet sometimes it advances in dramatic leaps and bounds that can stir new hopes for medical benefits while shaking society to its very core. We saw both in 2019, as work using the gene-editing tool CRISPR gained momentum.

The year opened with the scientific community scrambling to respond to the news that Chinese researcher He Jiankui had used CRISPR technology to edit the genomes of human embryos. The experiments resulted in the November 2018 birth of twin girls, the first humans with genetically altered germline cells which means their genetic changes are heritable and can be passed on to future generations.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH), a crucial public supporter of biomedical research, is among the many who consider such experiments both irresponsible and unethical. The NIH has not funded any use of heritable gene-editing technologies in human embryos, and it has no intention of doing so.

But NIHs strong stance against heritable gene editing does not mean that we think CRISPR has no role in the future of clinical medicine. This innovative technology possesses enormous potential for therapeutic good if used for making nonheritable genetic changes. In that approach, genetic material is altered only in relevant somatic (nonreproductive) cells, so there is no chance of passing those changes on to future offspring.

NIHs highest priorities in 2019 included supporting research aimed at using nonheritable gene editing to help people with life-threatening disorders, such as sickle cell disease, HIV infection, cancer and muscular dystrophy. Indeed, such applications may offer the best hope not only for treating, but for curing, many of the nearly 6,000 human genetic diseases that still lack treatments.

Now, scientists and leaders around the globe have an obligation to consider the appropriate use if any of heritable human gene editing. This involves scrutinizing the safety of such experiments, including the risk of unintended mutations, as well as a clear-eyed analysis of actual medical need. In our view, the current arguments that the benefits outweigh the risks are surprisingly uncompelling. But our deliberations should not stop there. We must weigh the profound social, ethical and moral issues associated with modifying the germline in ways that could change the human species forever.

Given the significance of these decisions, in March, leading scientists from seven countries led by Eric Lander and including CRISPR pioneers Feng Zhang and Emmanuelle Charpentier called for a five-year international moratorium on the use of gene editing to modify the human germline for clinical purposes. The NIH supports such a moratorium.

Despite the calls for caution, some researchers are forging ahead. In June, Russian molecular biologist Denis Rebrikov announced plans to implant gene-edited embryos into women. Like his Chinese counterpart, Rebrikov planned to use CRISPR to target the CCR5 gene to protect against HIV; he later changed course to focus on GJB2, a gene linked to heritable hearing loss.

Direct editing of embryos is not the only way to alter the human germline in heritable ways: In August, New York-based reproductive biologist Gianpiero Palermo went public with his plans to use CRISPR technology to target a gene that increases cancer risk in human sperm.

But such moves continued to meet vigorous opposition. In August, a number of research groups working on gene-editing therapeutics issued a statement asserting heritable gene editing is currently inappropriate for use in human clinical studies. That same month, a group of international research societies convened to discuss recommendations for appropriate research, which are slated for completion in spring of 2020.

Meanwhile, the World Health Organizations new expert advisory committee, convened in the wake of Hes experiments, sidestepped the issue of a moratorium at its August meeting. It did, however, establish a global registry to track all kinds of human gene-editing research and to offer consultation on governance of such technologies.

A moratorium of at least five years on heritable human gene editing would provide us time to engage in proactive, rather than reactive, discussions about the future of such technology. That discussion has to be inclusive of many societal perspectives. We must never allow our technology to eclipse our humanity. As an interconnected global society, we have a responsibility to ask ourselves some very hard questions about heritable gene editing and the dangers of human hubris. While difficult, this is a debate that we simply cannot afford to postpone.

Francis S. Collins is the director of the National Institutes of Health.

Read more from the original source:
NIH Director on Human Gene Editing: 'We Must Never Allow our Technology to Eclipse our Humanity' - Discover Magazine

Read More...

2 Things That Will Propel Seattle Genetics Stock Even Higher in 2020 – The Motley Fool

December 30th, 2019 4:10 am

Seattle Genetics' (NASDAQ:SGEN) shares soaredas much as 6% after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved its bladder cancer drug this month, and the stock now is heading for a total gain of more than 86% for 2019. The biotech company, which has a pipeline of candidate treatments for various cancers, now has a new product on the market and is optimistic about an investigational treatment that recently earned the FDA's "breakthrough" label.

IMAGE SOURCE: GETTY IMAGES.

Let's have a closer look at the two elements that could lift the shares in 2020, even after this year's spectacular performance.

Seattle Genetics announced the accelerated approvalof Padcev (generic name: enfortumab vedotin-ejfv) on Dec. 18 for the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer. It's the most common kind of bladdercancer, and develops in the cells lining the inside of the bladder. The approval is specifically for adult patients who have previously been treated with platinum-based chemotherapy and a PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitor. PD-1 and PD-L1 are proteins in the body, and in some cases, they help cancer cells hide from an immune system attack. Inhibitors prevent this from happening. As for Padcev, it targetsthe Nectin-4 protein and leads to the destruction of cancer cells.

A key point in this approval news is that Padcev is the only FDA-approveddrug for this patient set, meaning that it will be an obvious choice and welcome option for many. Seattle Genetics has said about 2,000 to 4,000 new patients per year may be candidates for Padcev, but CEO Clay Siegall said it's difficult to forecast an exact patient population. However, according to GrandView Research, the global urothelial cancer drug market will reach $3.6 billion by 2023, with a compound annual growth rate of 23%. In the U.S., about80,000 new cases of bladder cancer are diagnosed per year, and about 90% of cases are of the urothelial type. So a foothold in this market is a definite growth opportunity for Seattle Genetics.

Seattle Genetics aims to submit tucatinib, its investigational treatment for HER2-positive breast cancer, to the FDA in the first quarter. That's a positive development, but even better is the fact that the FDA already grantedtucatinib breakthrough status based on data from a phase 3 clinical trial. Tucatinib was administered along with Roche'sHerceptin and another drug, and riskof death declined by 34%. The study also showed a 46% decline in risk of disease progression. HER2stands for a protein -- human epidermal growth factor receptor 2. In HER2-positive breast cancer, high levels of this protein within tumors lead to the spread of cancer cells. Tucatinib inhibits enzymes that activate this type of protein.

Breakthrough status is meant to expedite review and approval for treatments that address life-threatening illnesses, so if all goes well, Seattle Genetics could have a third drug on the market sooner rather than later. (The company also sells Adcetrisfor Hodgkin lymphoma.) The market for HER2-positive breast cancer is expected to increase by 54% from its 2015 level to $9.89 billion in 2025, according to GlobalData.

Padcev and tucatinib both address conditions where the need for new treatments is obvious. Though Seattle Genetics' earningshistory hasn't been great -- it missed its EPS forecasts in the past two quarters -- its recent product news offers investors reasons for optimism about revenue streams to come. A new drug on the market and high hopes for another approval are catalysts that should help its share price make healthy gains in the new year.

Excerpt from:
2 Things That Will Propel Seattle Genetics Stock Even Higher in 2020 - The Motley Fool

Read More...

Ohio family faces uncertainty as 2 sons, husband diagnosed with rare genetic disorder – The Columbus Dispatch

December 30th, 2019 4:10 am

Nathan Anderson and two of his four sons, Griffin, 10, and Brennan, 4, have been diagnosed with a rare mutation on their Runx1 gene. Besides causing easy bruising, excessive bleeding and a tendency to develop hematomas, the mutation predisposes them to certain blood cancers. Wife and mother, Joy Anderson, has become an outspoken advocate for the condition and her family.

As Joy Anderson tucked her four boys into their beds one recent evening, she asked each of them to reflect on the difficult year the family has had.

Oldest son Griffin, 10, expressed anger and sadness, especially because he isnt allowed to play contact sports anymore.

Maxwell, 9, said hes worried about his siblings and parents.

Nolan, 8, said hes tried to be more compassionate, as you never know what someone is facing.

And then theres sweet-yet-rambunctious Brennan. At just 4 years old, he doesnt really understand whats been going on, only that hes had many doctors visits and needle pricks lately.

A little over a year ago, the Anderson family received news that rocked their world: Brennan had tested positive for the Runx1 gene mutation.

It was the third such blow for the family, who hails from Arlington, a village in Hancock County outside of Findlay, in just a few short months. Griffin first received the same diagnosis in August 2018, followed by their father, Nathan, in November that year and now Brennan.

Maxwell and Nolan, fortunately, do not share the mutation.

Its like a 50-50 chance of being passed down, Joy said. In that case, I felt like we were a living statistic.

But their situation is anything but routine: Only 120 individuals in the world have been diagnosed with the mutation.

Visible symptoms of the disease, which causes platelet abnormalities, include easy bruising, excessive bleeding and a tendency to develop hematomas. But the most distressing part is its predisposition (40% to 70%) to certain blood cancers.

I felt like I couldnt breathe, like I was having a panic attack, the 41-year-old mother said of the diagnoses. I tried to Google everything to learn more about it, and there isnt really much out there.

Three people she loves dearly half her family now must be followed regularly by a hematologist and undergo bone marrow biopsies annually to monitor for cancer.

Little did I know we would have such a domino effect after we all got tested, she said.

***

The Andersons had spent much of the first nine years of Griffins life trying to figure out what caused his bruising and the huge goose eggs that would form on his body.

Sure, he was an active boy, but with each small accident, his parents couldnt help notice the extreme results that sometimes landed him in the hospital to ensure his blood had clotted.

Doctors in Toledo offered a general diagnosis of low platelets and a blood disorder when Griffin was 3 and prescribed special medication to use during surgeries.

He began seeing various hematologists at Nationwide Childrens Hospital. However, the family still had few answers until a doctor suggested genetic testing in August 2018.

Thats when the Andersons met Elizabeth Varga, a genetic counselor at Childrens, who counseled them what results might yield.

Four weeks after Griffin had blood drawn for the genetic tests, Varga called to say they found something.

Runx1 is a gene involved in the making of blood cells. If there is an abnormality, it can impair the production of platelets, which help blood clot.

Patients are predisposed to something called myelodysplastic syndrome, which is essentially a pre-leukemia state that can evolve and change to be a cancer of the blood, Varga told the family.

Typically, thats acute myeloid leukemia, which is most common in adults over 60, but the Runx1 mutation increases the risk for AML in all ages.

So basically from the time of birth youre kind of set up to have that evolution, Varga said. However, not all patients that have a Runx1 abnormality will ever get cancer right now we dont have a great way to gauge who will and who wont.

To deliver this news to Joy was very difficult, said Varga, who has three young sons.

Each phone call, Joy said, felt like a sucker punch, as she struggled to learn what this would mean for their family.

***

In the days leading up to Griffin and Brennans first bone marrow biopsy in December 2018, the elder brother watched YouTube videos of the minor but uncomfortable procedure, which is the best way to monitor changes.

I was interested in it, the fifth grader said. I want to be an ER doctor when I grow up.

Joy and Nathan Anderson said its a bit of an odd blessing that two sons have the diagnosis as they dont have to be alone.

I usually tell Brennan to be brave and we can do it, Griffin said, adding that his youngest brothers silly antics calm his nerves.

The mutation presents differently in Griffin and Brennan. Both bruise easily, but its much more pronounced in Griffin.

Brennan has dealt with a slew of pulmonology issues asthma, seven bouts with pneumonia that may be linked with the gene mutation.

Discovered only 20 years ago, very little research has been done on the mutation, making it difficult to discern what symptoms are caused by it, said Katrin Ericson, executive director of the Runx1 Research Program, a California-based nonprofit group that funds research and provides patient support.

Earlier this year, Joy Anderson was the first patient family representative to speak at the organizations annual conference. Shes become very active in increasing awareness of the Runx1 mutation, which is underdiagnosed, Ericson said.

Based on epidemiological estimates, between 2,000 and 18,000 people in the United States could be living with it.

Ericson said the organization is thrilled that, in May, the National Institutes of Health launched the first longitudinal, natural history study of Runx1. The Andersons are one of 25 or so families participating, and they traveled to Bethesda, Maryland, in June for testing.

These patients have really been struggling with this most of their lives, Ericson said. They had no idea they had this mutation. Maybe they were misdiagnosed at first.

There can be guilt felt by parents for passing it unknowingly to their children, and Joy said her husband feels this way.

Nathan his parents tested negative never experienced symptoms, he said. However, looking back, routine blood work often showed low platelet counts.

Shortly after the diagnosis, I was at a charity event for work and I was chopping wood, Nathan said. I noticed that I had bruises up and down my arm.

During his first bone marrow biopsy at Ohio State Universitys Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital last December, doctors discovered he had myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), or pre-leukemia. Hes unsure what this means for the future, except continued monitoring.

Nathan and his two sons will travel to the NIH in the summer for follow-up biopsies. (Griffin and Brennan had a second one in June with zero changes.)

The boys also have blood drawn every few months.

Our hope is if we do more frequent surveillance for MDS, that we will hopefully be able to be preemptive, Varga said. If we do see any progression, the only cure right now is a bone marrow transplant.

However, a bone marrow transplant which requires chemotherapy and a lifetime of immunity-suppressing drugs is a procedure that wouldnt be done without good reason, Varga said.

***

One of the biggest challenges of having a genetic disorder, Joy and Nathan agreed, is explaining it to others.

Some people think were dying and some think were getting chemotherapy, said Nathan, who has taken up running to cope with the diagnosis and keep himself healthy. Others think its not a big deal.

People have questioned the necessity of putting our kids through all this, Joy said. Others have said that everyone would find something wrong if they did genetic testing, she said.

Were trying to monitor and learn more, she said. Im all about being proactive. I feel like what if we never even did anything about it, and then one day this has progressed to leukemia and its so far into it, we cant do anything to help.

That attitude, Varga said, represents a shift shes detected.

Previous generations, there was much more of I dont want to know, Varga said. There was a fear of stigma or discrimination, but younger generations are more embracing (of) knowledge and being powerful.

***

For now though, the Anderson boys will continue to climb on top of their swing set and run in the field behind their house. Theyll fish and ride bikes and wrestle.

Theyre boys still, and we want them to live a normal life, Nathan said. We dont stop.

Griffin has recently fallen in love with playing drums and though his parents dont always appreciate the noise, theyre thankful Griffin has found an outlet other than sports.

The family is thankful for the power the knowledge of this diagnosis ultimately brings them, and with how strong it has shown the six of them to be.

Its a reminder of just how precious life is, Nathan said. You might live a long life or you might run into complications. Its a constant reminder to live every day to the fullest.

award@dispatch.com

@AllisonAWard

Here is the original post:
Ohio family faces uncertainty as 2 sons, husband diagnosed with rare genetic disorder - The Columbus Dispatch

Read More...

Business of Health Care: Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing – KWBU

December 30th, 2019 4:10 am

Genetic tests sold directly to consumers have been growing in popularity. And Im not just referring to the tests that show your ethnic ancestry, but also those that claim to identify genetic-based health risks. Experts warn that these tests should not be used to inform health decisions without further scrutiny, as the results of these tests can easily be misinterpreted or unreliable.

Business of Healthcare | December 27, 2019

Most genetic testing is done through healthcare providers such as physicians, nurse practitioners and genetic counselors. These providers determine which test is needed, order the test from a laboratory, collect and send the DNA sample, interpret the test results, and share the results with the patient.

Direct-to-consumer genetic testing is different. These tests can be bought online or in stores. Customers send the company a DNA sample and receive their results directly via a secure website or mailed report. Direct-to-consumer genetic testing provides access to genetic information without necessarily involving a healthcare provider.

Dozens of companies offer these tests for a variety of purposes. The most popular uncover genetic variations to make predictions about health, provide information about common traits, andyesoffer clues about a persons ancestry. While the number of companies providing direct-to-consumer genetic testing is growing, along with the range of health conditions and traits tested for, there is very little regulation of these services.

That means if you do use one of these tests to get genetic information about your health, dont make any decisions based on the results without talking to a medical professional.

Continued here:
Business of Health Care: Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing - KWBU

Read More...

Resolving for a healthy 2020? Talking to your family is a great way to start – Eagle & Times

December 30th, 2019 4:10 am

(BPT) - An estimated 130 million Americans make resolutions for 2020 with more than half of them focused on health. However, most resolutions are broken by February.

Marjan Champine, a board-certified and licensed genetic counselor at Ancestry, the global leader in family history and consumer genomics, shares tips for thinking about your health in 2020:

1. Small choices matter for a healthier you in the New Year.

Day in and day out, the small choices we make can end up making a big difference in how we feel and our overall health. The journey to better health can be as simple as to:

2. Talking to your family can unlock valuable insights into your health.

Understanding your familys health history and screening for common genetic conditions can provide information about some potential health risks. Armed with this information, there are powerful choices and actions you can take to improve your health, and your familys health, now and in the future.

You dont need to be alone in trying to make sense out of all of this. Genetic counselors can help you connect the dots of your family health history and the results of genetic health screening tests. Services like those offered by Ancestry, which recently launched AncestryHealth, can also empower you with genetic insights to put you on the path to a better, healthier you. When you and your health care provider know more about your risks for certain conditions, thats the start on the path toward better health.

3. Your genes dont need to be your destiny.

While genetics plays an important role in our health, the daily choices we make about our activity, sleep, nutrition and how we handle stress can also play a role in our quest for better health.

Because families share genetics as well as other health-related risk factors such as diet, lifestyle and environment family history is again important in this regard. Most people understand the health benefits of a good diet and exercise. But whats often overlooked is the importance of knowing your familys health history. By sharing your family health history in addition to any genetic health test results with your health care provider, you can work together to create a personalized plan of action to treat, manage and, in some cases, even prevent certain diseases.

4. Specific, achievable, actionable and enjoyable.

I am always looking for fun ways to improve my health. As part of that goal, my resolution this year is to spend more quality time with my family, share stories about our history and keep a record of our health history all in one place using AncestryHealths family health history tool.

If you havent made a New Years health resolution yet, think of a goal thats specific, actionable and achievable. Also think of goals that can be achieved in ways you enjoy.

5. The time is now.

Now is the perfect time to jump in and begin tackling your 2020 New Years health resolutions. Your family health history and genetic screening results could unlock important information that will allow you to manage your health.

The more you know about your genetic risk factors, including your family health history, the more you can take proactive steps, in collaboration with your health care provider. Taking this information and sharing it with your health care provider is important so that, together, you can create a personalized plan of action for a healthier 2020.

Marjan Champine is a board-certified and licensed genetic counselor at Ancestry with a passion for family, health and helping others.

Read the original:
Resolving for a healthy 2020? Talking to your family is a great way to start - Eagle & Times

Read More...

Science made astonishing progress. It was also hijacked by those with an axe to grind – The Guardian

December 30th, 2019 4:10 am

The 2010s were the decade in which we were reminded that science is just a method, like the rhythm method. And just like the rhythm method, it can be more or less rigorously applied, sabotaged, overrated, underrated and ignored. If you dont treat it with respect, you may not get the optimal result, but thats not the methods fault.

That may be where the similarities end, because when its done well, science is very effective, and this decade furnished its fair share of breakthroughs to make us gasp. Physicists detected phenomena that were predicted decades ago gravitational waves, the Higgs boson particle indicating that they have been on broadly the right track in their understanding of how the universe works. Astronomers added awe-inspiring detail. Nasa probes found towering ice mountains on Pluto and organic chemistry the stuff of life on Mars and a moon of Saturn. And who could forget the exoplanets those planets orbiting distant stars? Thousands of them were discovered in just the past 10 years. No wonder science fiction is booming.

Biologists didnt slack either. They honed an immunological defence mechanism found in bacteria, Crispr-Cas9, into a powerful gene-editing tool that works in plants and animals including humans. They added several new ancestors to the human family tree and discovered ghostly traces of others as yet unseen and unnamed. And very old DNA started giving up its secrets, after researchers succeeded in extracting it from ancient bodily remains and sequencing it. This threw open a huge window on our species past, revealing that every person alive today is the product of multiple migrations and that relations between different waves of migration have always been complicated. Neanderthals and modern humans probably clobbered each other, for example, but they also interbred.

But this was also the decade in which science was commandeered by all kinds of people with political, social and economic axes to grind. Ancient DNA researchers understood early on the potential for their discoveries to be politicised the science of human origins always has been but they still werent able to fully control the message. Thus we learned about white supremacists engaging in sinister milk-chugging parties in America, supposedly designed to smoke out people of non-European heritage who cant digest lactose, and baseless claims made by some Hindu nationalists that the speakers of the original Indo-European language hailed from the Indian subcontinent. Ancient DNA researchers themselves were accused of engaging in an undignified bone rush, and disrespecting indigenous remains.

Dissing the dead is one thing, dissing the living quite another. The world was shocked when, in 2018, the Chinese biophysicist He Jiankui announced he had used Crispr to edit the genomes of twin girls the first humans born with edited DNA they can pass on. Ethical concerns were raised over whos entitled to know what about private health records as genetic testing becomes mainstream, and over the prohibitive pricing of gene therapies after the first of these was approved in 2012 then taken off the market.

We welcomed the boon of artificial intelligence the fruit of massively increased computing power, cheap memory, advances in data management and new maths and statistics and fretted over its potential negative impact on us.

The first vaccine against Ebola was approved. In the Democratic Republic of the Congo, where Ebola continues to rage, health workers are battling not only the disease, but also hesitation about getting vaccinated. This is now a global problem, and though the reasons for it are complicated and vary according to who is hesitating in the UK and US Andrew Wakefield has a lot to answer for. He abused the scientific method in a previous decade, when he made false claims about a link between the MMR vaccine and autism. Fear of vaccines has come home to roost most visibly, in the form of a global resurgence of measles. Its not all down to him, though. Weve been so well served by vaccines that relatively few people alive today remember what life was like before them how, for example, people wept with joy when Jonas Salks polio vaccine was announced in 1955.

We heard a lot in this decade about how trust in experts has waned, but its difficult to know how much of that perception is real and how much of it comes down to minority opinions bellowed through the sousaphone of social media. In 2019, the US-based organisation Scholars at Risk reported that attacks on higher education communities had more than doubled globally over the previous three years ranging from restrictions on academic expression to wrongful imprisonment and even violence. On the other hand, surveys suggest that trust in scientists is quite stable over the long term, and science funding has been slowly increasing in the worlds richest countries.

Taken together, perhaps what these indicators reflect is that, like the rhythm method, the scientific method is one we should be glad to have in our armoury, but that both have the potential to wreak havoc in the context of a toxic relationship.

Laura Spinney is a science journalist based in Paris. Her latest book is Pale Rider: The Spanish Flu of 1918 and How it Changed the World

See more here:
Science made astonishing progress. It was also hijacked by those with an axe to grind - The Guardian

Read More...

DNA tests might be a fun holiday gift, but beware of the hype – HalifaxToday.ca

December 30th, 2019 4:10 am

This article, written byMichael Mackley, Dalhousie University, originally appeared on The Conversation and is republished here with permission:

Youve likely heard about direct-to-consumer DNA testing kits. In the past few years, at-home genetic testing has been featured in the lyrics of chart-topping songs, and has helped police solve decades-old cold cases, including identifying the Golden State Killer in California.

Even if you dont find a DNA testing kit under your own Christmas tree, theres a good chance someone you know will.

Whether youre motivated to learn about your health or where your ancestors came from, it is important to understand how these tests work before you spit in the tube.

While exciting, there are things that these genetic testing kits cannot tell users and important personal implications that consumers should consider.

Health, traits and ancestry kits

My main area of research is around clinical genome sequencing, where we look through all of a persons DNA to help diagnose diseases. With a PhD in genetics, I often get questions from friends and family about which direct-to-consumer genetic test they should buy, or requests to discuss results. Most questions are about two types of products: ancestry and health kits.

The most popular ancestry kit is from AncestryDNA. These kits are aimed at giving users insight into where their ancestors might be from. They can also connect users with family members who have used the service and have opted into having their information shared. Another option is Living DNA, which has a smaller dataset but provides more precise information on the U.K. and Ireland.

The most popular health kit is from 23andMe. Depending on the users preference, results include information on predispositions for diseases such as diabetes and Alzheimers, as well as on the likelihood of having certain traits such as hair colour and taste. This company also offers ancestry analysis, as well as ancestry and trait-only kits that dont provide health information. The kit offered by the newer MyHeritage DNA also provides a combined ancestry and health option.

There are other kits out there claiming to evaluate everything from athletic potential to relationship compatibility. But gift-buyers beware: for most of these, in contrast to those above, the evidence is seriously lacking.

How these tests work

For all of these tests, customers receive a kit in the mail. The kits contain instructions for collecting a saliva sample, which you mail back to the company for analysis.

During this analysis, these popular tests do not look at the entire genome. Instead, they employ single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotyping. As humans we all share 99.9 per cent of our DNA. SNPs are essentially what is left: all of the points at which we can differ from our neighbour, making us unique. SNP genotyping looks at a subset of these sites to survey the users genome.

These SNPs are then compared to reference datasets of individuals with known conditions or ancestry. Most results are based on the SNPs shared with a given group. For example, if your results say that you are 42 per cent Southeast Asian, its because 42 per cent of your SNPs were most likely to have come from a group in the reference dataset labelled Southeast Asian. The same goes for traits and health conditions.

How they differ from clinical tests

Direct-to-consumer genetic tests are not a substitute for clinical assessment. The methods used differ dramatically from what is done to diagnose genetic diseases.

In a clinical setting, when suspicion of a genetic condition is high, entire genes are often analyzed. These are genes where we understand how changes in the DNA cause cellular changes that can cause the disease. Furthermore, clinical assessment includes genetic counselling that is often key to understanding results.

In contrast, findings from direct-to-consumer genetic tests are often just statistical links; there is commonly no direct disease-causing effect from the SNPs.

Users may interpret a result as positive, when the risk increase is only minimal, or entirely false. These tests can also give false reassurance because they do not sequence genes in their entirety and can miss potentially harmful variants.

Before you spit in a tube, stop and think

These tests are exciting: they introduce new audiences to genetics and get people thinking about their health. Theyre also helping to build vast genetic databases from which medical research will be conducted.

But for individual users, there are important caveats to consider. Recent reports have questioned the accuracy of these tests: identical twins can receive different results. Furthermore, a lack of diversity in the reference data has caused particular concern regarding accuracy of results for ethnic minorities.

There are also concerns about the way these tests emphasize racial categories that science considers to be social constructs and biologically meaningless.

A recent paper in the British Medical Journal suggests four helpful questions for users to consider. First, users should ask themselves why they want the test. If it is to answer a medical question, then they should speak with their doctor. Users should also think about how they might feel when they receive results containing information they would rather not know.

Users should also consider issues around security and privacy. It is important to read the fine print of the service youre using, and determine whether youre comfortable sharing personal information, now and in the future.

In Canada, policies around genetics have not always kept up with the science. At present, direct-to-consumer genetic testing is unregulated. And, although Canadians have legislative protections against genetic discrimination, those laws are being challenged in the courts, and could change.

Finally, it may also be worth discussing DNA testing with relatives. We share half of our genome with our immediate family members, and smaller fractions with more distant relatives. Genetic results not only affect us, but our family.

Bottom line: Its all for fun

Some users may feel they learn more about themselves. For others, results may bring people closer together not a bad outcome for the holiday season.

At the end of the day, these genetic testing kits are for entertainment: they should not be used to assess health risk in any meaningful way.

If you have any questions related to your health or a genetic disease, discuss these with your family doctor or a suitable health-care professional.

Michael Mackley, Junior Fellow, MacEachen Institute for Public Policy and Governance; Medical Student, Dalhousie University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Go here to read the rest:
DNA tests might be a fun holiday gift, but beware of the hype - HalifaxToday.ca

Read More...

Seattle Genetics Submits New Drug Application to the US FDA for Tucatinib – OncoZine

December 30th, 2019 4:10 am

Based on the results of the pivotal HER2CLIMB Trial (NCT02614794) presented at the 42nd San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium (SABCS) held in San Antonio, Texas, December 10 14, 2019, and data published in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), Seattle Genetics confirmed that the company completed the submission of a New Drug Application (NDA) to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for tucatinib.

Tucatinib is an investigational, oral, small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI). Tyrosine kinases are enzymes that are a part of many cell functions, including cell signaling, growth, and division. But in some cases they may be too active or found at high levels in some types of cancer cells. In that case, blocking them may help keep cancer cells from growing.

Tucatinib is highly selective for HER2.

HER2-positive breast cancerPatients with HER2-positive breast cancer have tumors with high levels human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), a protein which promotes the aggressive spread of cancer cells.

According to the American Cancer Society, in the United Stated, an estimated 271,270 new cases of invasive breast cancer were diagnosed in in 2019.[1] In addition, based on the available data, between 15% and 20% of all diagnosed breast cancer cases worldwide are HER2-positive.[2]

Historically, HER2-positive breast cancer tends to be more aggressive and more likely to recur than HER2-negative breast cancer.[2][3][4]

In patients with metastatic breast cancer, the most common site of first metastasis is in bone, followed by lung, brain, and liver.[5][6] In about 50% of metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer cases, patients develop brain metastases over time. [2][7]

Although there have been many advances in the treatment of metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer, there is still a significant unmet medical need for new therapies that can impact metastatic disease, especially brain metastases. There are currently no approved therapies demonstrating progression-free survival or overall survival benefit for the treatment of patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer after progression following treatment with trastuzumab emtanzine.[8][9][10]

Combination therapyIn their NDA, Seattle Generics requested the FDA to approve tucatinib in combination with capecitabine (Xeloda; Genentech/Roche) and trastuzumab (Herceptin; Genentech/Roche) for treatment of patients with locally advanced unresectable or metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer, including patients with brain metastases, who have received at least three prior HER2-directed agents separately or in combination, in the neoadjuvant, adjuvant or metastatic setting.

This setting is the same setting for which the investigational drug was recently granted Breakthrough Therapy designation by the FDA and included patients with brain metastases, who have been treated with trastuzumab, pertuzumab (Perjeta; Genentech/Roche), and trastuzumab emtanzine (Kadcyla; Genentech/Roche).

HER2CLIMB TrialThe HER2CLIMB study is a multinational randomized (2:1), double-blind, placebo-controlled, active comparator, pivotal clinical trial included data from 612 enrolled patients.

The trial results published in the NEJM, presented at the SABCS by Rashmi K. Murthy, M.D., assistant professor of Breast Medical Oncology, demonstrated that tucatinib significantly improved progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with advanced HER2-positive breast cancer, with and without brain metastasis.

The trial met its primary endpoint of the study demonstrated that the treatment combination reduced the risk of death by 46% compared with trastuzumab and capecitabine alone. The trial also met its secondary endpoints at interim analysis, demonstrating prolonged OS, reduced the risk of death by 34% and extended PFS by 52% among patients with brain metastasis.

Furthermore, with 41%, the overall response rate was higher in the tucatinib group compared with 23% in the standard of care treatment.

This is a uniquely designed trial in that it allowed patients to enroll if they had untreated, treated stable or previously treated, but progressive brain metastasis, Murthy noted.

Brain metastasizes are common in up to half of patients during the disease course, but there are limited systemic treatment options because most available agents have difficulty crossing the blood brain barrier, she added.

Well toleratedThe study results demonstrated that the triplet combination of tucatinib + capecitabine + trastuzumab was generally well tolerated with no unexpected toxicities. In the tucatinib arm the investigators observed diarrhea, hand-foot syndrome, nausea, fatigue, and vomiting, all mostly low grade, as the reported adverse events. Furthermore, there was a low drug discontinuation rate of 5.7% in the triplet arm compared with 3% in the control arm.

This trial verified that tucatinib is both a safe and effective treatment, Murthy explained during the SABCS.

These results are realy unprecedented for late line therapy in locally advanced, metastatic, breast cancer. This is a major treatment advance for patients who have significant unmet medical need. I believe that tucatinib in combination with trastuzumab and capecitabine could be the new standard of care for patients pretreated with multiple anti-HER2 agents including patients with brain metastasis, Murthy said.

Todays submission marks another important milestone for Seattle Genetics and tucatinib, and a potential advance for patients with either locally advanced or metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer, including those with and without brain metastases, said Roger Dansey, MD, Chief Medical Officer at Seattle Genetics.

We look forward to working with the FDA on the review of this application, he concluded.

Clinical trialsTucatinib, Trastuzumab, and Capecitabine for the Treatment of HER2+ LMD NCT03501979A Study of Tucatinib vs. Placebo in Combination With Ado-trastuzumab Emtansine (T-DM1) for Patients With Advanced or Metastatic HER2+ Breast Cancer NCT03975647A Study of Tucatinib vs. Placebo in Combination With Capecitabine & Trastuzumab in Patients With Advanced HER2+ Breast Cancer (HER2CLIMB) NCT02614794

References[1] American Cancer Society, Cancer Facts and Figures 2018-2019.[2] Loibl S, Gianni L (2017). HER2-positive breast cancer. The Lancet 389(10087): 2415-29.[3] Slamon D, Clark G, Wong S, et al. (1987). Human breast cancer: correlation of relapse and survival with amplification of the HER-2/neu oncogene. Science 235(4785): 177-82.American Cancer Society (ACS) (2018). Breast cancer HER2 status. Last accessed: December 20, 2018.[4] Kennecke H, Yerushalmi R, Woods R, et al. (2010). Metastatic Behavior of Breast Cancer Subtypes. Journal of Clinical Oncology 28(20): 3271-7.[5] Berman AT, Thukral AD, Hwang W-T, et al. (2013). Incidence and Patterns of Distant Metastases for Patients With Early-Stage Breast Cancer After Breast Conservation Treatment. Clinical Breast Cancer 13(2): 88-94.[6] Duchnowska R, Loibl S, Jassem J (2018). Tyrosine kinase inhibitors for brain metastases in HER2-positive breast cancer. Cancer Treatment Reviews 67: 71-7.[7] Verma S, Miles D, Gianni L, et al. (2012). Trastuzumab Emtansine for HER2-Positive Advanced Breast Cancer. New England Journal of Medicine 367(19): 1783-91.[8] Geyer CE, Forster J, Lindquist D, et al. (2006). Lapatinib plus Capecitabine for HER2-Positive Advanced Breast Cancer. New England Journal of Medicine 355(26): 2733-43.[9] Blackwell KL, Burstein HJ, Storniolo AM, et al. (2012). Overall Survival Benefit With Lapatinib in Combination With Trastuzumab for Patients With Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer: Final Results From the EGF104900 Study. Journal of Clinical Oncology 30(21): 2585-92.

Original post:
Seattle Genetics Submits New Drug Application to the US FDA for Tucatinib - OncoZine

Read More...

Marcus Smart had to deal with a blindness scare from eye infection – Boston Herald

December 30th, 2019 4:08 am

TORONTO Marcus Smart had a simple word to express how things have been as hes dealt with a serious eye infection the last few weeks:

Hell.

The Celtic guard missed his seventh straight game Christmas Day, but hes appreciative that he wont be losing the gift of eyesight. That frightening possibility existed for a time during this process, and Smart and his doctors are still being cautious.

Just really, really painful and really not knowing, Smart said of his condition during these recent weeks. I thought I was going to go blind for a while. The doctors said it was the worst case of viral conjunctivitis that theyve seen, so basically I was a guinea pig to see how to handle this if it ever happens again with anybody else.

But it was the worst pain that Ive been through in a very long time, and I dont wish it on anybody. But Im here. The eyes feel better. Im still trying to adjust to some lights, light sensitivity. But everything, the contagious part is gone. They cleared me. They said from here on everything should be OK. I still have to see them kind of on a daily basis. They say its so my cornea doesnt get white spotted behind it and mess up my eyesight. So its definitely a process. Its an annoying process, but Im just blessed to be able to come back and get through this.

Smart went through a workout here and was set to go through another session when the Celtics get back to Boston later in the day. He is hoping to play in Saturdays game at the Garden against these same Raptors, but nothing can be certain.

Especially considering the scare that he might suffer some form of blindness.

The way it was going, they were so worried about it affecting my cornea and my vision, so it was a little scary, Smart said before the holiday game. At first we thought it was an allergic reaction, because I broke out in hives like the day before my eyes started having allergic reaction. But we caught it so early that the same symptoms came off, and then about three days later it transferred from my left eye to my right eye, and thats when we ruled out that an allergic reaction was the cause. They said it was a virus called the (adenovirus), and it was caused by having a cold already and being sick, so it makes sense because right before that, those two days after the Denver game, Dec. 6th, the 7th and 8th, I came down with an allergic reaction and a really bad cold.

The Celtics actually sent me home, because I was feeling really bad, and it just kind of broke my immune system down and opened it up for everything else. Everything else in my body went haywire. It was just some unfortunate events that happened, but on the good side, I got to rest and heal up the injuries that I had and just let my body do what it does.

But, Smart noted, it was difficult going through these last weeks.

It was painful, it was burning, it was really hard. I couldnt see, he said. I had outdoor sunglasses everywhere I went. Even in the darkI was wearing sunglasses. It was that bad. Just every morning I would wake up (and) just having this sticky discharge coming out of my eyes that was sealing my eyes shut. It was really just gross. It got so bad that my eyes, my eye lids started forming these mucus membranes, and they literally had to go in and pry the mucus membranes out. I actually have a picture that I showed the guys. It was prettygross. I was bleeding tears every time they did it for like a day. They did that for about four days straight.

The first day was probably the worst, just because it built up so much that it started to scab under my eyelids, and they had to open the scab and then pull it out. It felt like they were putting needles in my eyes. They were using the tweezers and vice grips to hold my eyes and actually get into my eyelids, both the bottom and top. So it was definitely some pain, and I never want to go through it again and, like I said, I never want anybody else to go through it.

Smart remains under care to prevent further issues or any type of relapse.

Every day they were checking my corneas, theyre checking my eyesight and just making sure that my corneas werent being affected by it, he said. I have to go back pretty much every day for a while now just to monitor it. Because they say that even though Im healthy and everything is cleared up, my corneas could still be affected and get like white spots behind it and really affect my vision, so theyre trying to make sure that doesnt happen. Theyve got me on these special eye drops that I have to take four times a day. Im on two different sets of eye drops. I was on three, so thats I guess progress. But definitely yes, its scary, and Im glad that it hasnt (come back), and I hope it doesnt.

As for his readiness to play, Smart put himself at about 80%. I was able to get the last two days, workouts in and just was really getting my body back to playing shape and adjust and making sure Ive got my strength back and my conditioning and wind back. If it was up to me, obviously I would try to play (Wednesday). But just with everything happening, being more cautious than ever, and just giving myself and my body extra time to recuperate and get back into shape.

View original post here:
Marcus Smart had to deal with a blindness scare from eye infection - Boston Herald

Read More...

2020 ADA Standards of Care just arrived and now includes AI to prevent blindness – PRNewswire

December 30th, 2019 4:08 am

CORALVILLE, Iowa, Dec. 23, 2019 /PRNewswire/ --The nation's leading association that fights against diabetes released a new set of clinical standards that for the first time include the use of autonomous artificial intelligence (AI).

The American Diabetes Association (ADA)'s 2020 Standards of Medical Care in Diabetesstates that, "AI systems that detect more than mild diabetic retinopathy and diabetic macular edema authorized for use by the FDA represent an alternative to traditional screening approaches."

To date, IDx-DR is the first and only FDA-authorizedautonomous AI diagnostic system for the detection of diabetic retinopathy and macular edema. It is currently in use at a number of large health systems that each serve tens of thousands of people with diabetes and have struggled to implement diabetic retinopathy eye exams at scale for their large diabetes population.

"The ADA's inclusion of our technology in its Standards of Care marks a significant move toward mainstream adoption of autonomous AI in clinical care," said Michael Abramoff, MD, PhD, Founder and Executive Chairman at IDx. "Our early customers are visionary leaders who foresaw that autonomous AI would one day become a standard of care for diabetic retinopathy screening, and taking that leap is paying off for them. Already, health systems that are using IDx-DR have experienced significant improvements in accessibility, efficiency and compliance rates, unleashing massive potential for cost savings and improved patient outcomes."

The Standards of Care were published last week in Diabetes Care, the highest-ranked, peer-reviewed journal in the field of diabetes treatment and prevention. Physicians, healthcare systems, health insurers and quality of care organizations look to the ADA's Standards of Care for consensus and evidence-based best practices to improve health outcomes for people with diabetes.

About IDx-DRIDx-DR is an FDA-authorized AI-based diagnostic system designed for use at the front lines of care to detect diabetic retinopathy and macular edema, common complications of diabetes and leading causes of blindness. IDx-DR is cleared by the FDA to make an assessment without the need for a clinician to interpret the image or results, making it usable by health care providers who may not normally be involved in eye care.

The exam typically takes 5-10 minutes. Operators use a robotic fundus camera to take pictures of the patient's retinas the back part of the eye, which are then analyzed by the autonomous AI's algorithms for signs of diabetic retinopathy. An immediate diagnostic report is produced at the point of care, allowing the physician to discuss the results with the patient while they are still in the office.

About IDxIDxis a leading AI diagnostics company on a mission to transform the quality, accessibility, and affordability of healthcare. Founded in 2010 by a team of world-renowned clinician scientists, the company is focused on developing clinically-aligned autonomous algorithms that detect disease in medical images. By enabling diagnostic assessment in primary care settings, IDx aims to increase patient access to high-quality, affordable disease detection.

The company's first product, IDx-DR, is an FDA-cleared AI-based diagnostic system that detects diabetic retinopathy and macular edema. IDx is developing additional AI-based diagnostic systems for the detection of macular degeneration, glaucoma, stroke risk and ear infection.

IDx2300 Oakdale BlvdCoralville, IA 52241Phone: 319-248-5620www.eyediagnosis.net

IDx Contact:Laura ShoemkerDirector of Marketing Communications1-319-248-5620lshoemaker@eyediagnosis.net

SOURCE IDx

http://www.eyediagnosis.net

Original post:
2020 ADA Standards of Care just arrived and now includes AI to prevent blindness - PRNewswire

Read More...

These blind Malaysians experienced the annular solar eclipse through their ears. Wait, how? – Mashable SE Asia

December 30th, 2019 4:08 am

In case you weren't aware, the annular solar eclipse took place on December 26, 2019.

People from around the world were able to witness the phenomenon which some have dubbed the "ring of fire" and "ring of light".

The third solar eclipse for the year was also the most dangerous. Watching the close to four-hour long eclipse without any protection for the eyes can lead to total blindness.

But that didn't stop many experiencing the eclipse for themselves with some purchasing solar eclipse glasses while others using clever cost effective methods.

However, these 31 blind individuals were given an experience of a lifetime. They got to "listen" to the annular solar eclipse - a first in Malaysia.

They were members of the Penang Branch of the Society for the Blind Malaysia and St Nicholas Home.

Tech Dome Penang Chief Executive Officer Khong Yoon Loong, who spoke to Malay Mail Online, said LightSound 2.0, a device capable of converting sun light into high-pitch sound, was used to give the blind individuals an unforgettable experience.

The sound will slowly change and go down to a lower pitch as the eclipse happens so the blind can hear the difference in the sounds, he explained.

At the start of the phenomenon, 11.15 am, the LightSound 2.0 began transmitting high pitched sound into the room which the individuals were in.

The sound gradually changed to a low pitch as the eclipse progressed before peaking again.

The LightSound 2.0 was brought from the University of Harvard. Apart from the Tech Dome Penang, it was also placed in Tanjung Piai in Johor and in Serian, Sarawak, to record the annular solar eclipse.

The sounds recorded from all three locations would be compiled to form a unique melody.

For Johari Saad who is blind, "listening" to the annular solar eclipse was a surreal experience.

"It felt as though the space above was singing," the 48-year-old said to Berita Harian.

Johari was not blind when the phenomenon previously occurred on August 28, 1998.

"That time I was still a kid with good vision. This program takes me back to my childhood and I'm extremely thankful to the people who made the LightSound 2.0. I understand the phenomenon better through it."

Meanwhile, S Bumah Devi said she was thrilled when she could tell the difference of frequency when the eclipse happened.

"This is the first time I'm listening to the sound of sun light absorbed to be turned into sound. Exciting stuff," the 48-year-old said.

The next annular solar eclipse will take place on May 21 in 2031. Mark your calendars!

Cover image supplied by Kaveenesh Sagar / Tech Dome Penang.

Link:
These blind Malaysians experienced the annular solar eclipse through their ears. Wait, how? - Mashable SE Asia

Read More...

This New Years Eve Dont Shoot Your Eye Out! – Oil City News

December 30th, 2019 4:08 am

Its that time of year again when we celebrate the New Year with friends and loved ones. But did you know it can be risky for eyes? Sparkling apple cider and champagne glasses will be flowing, but this is the time to review how to keep your eyes, and those of your friends and family, safe from trauma.

Did you say 50 miles per hour?

Yes, when released from the bottle, corks travel more than twice as fast as your car in a school zone! In fact, corks can travel so fast that they can shatter glass. Imagine what can happen to your eye at that speed.

The initial impact to the eye can cause injuries that can range from a severe scratch on the cornea all the way up to a laceration of the eye itself. These injuries usually require surgery, but still can lead to blindness or loss of the eye. But also keep in mind that consequences of the injury can be delayed, often by many decades. One example is delayed-onset glaucoma which leads to painless vision loss and blindness over time.

Article continues below...

So, what steps can you take to protect yourself and others?

We are glad you asked. Whether you toast with sparkling cider or champagne, remember the bottle corks are under pressure and if the proper precautions are not taken, the cork could fly off and injure your eye.

Here are some simple steps you can follow to keep all those eyes safe on New Years Eve. Follow these steps to keep your evening a fun one:

A toast to a happy and safe New Years for your family and friends and remember the joy your eyes bring to the celebration!

Wyoming Ophthalmological Society

See the article here:
This New Years Eve Dont Shoot Your Eye Out! - Oil City News

Read More...

New 2020 ADA Standards of Care Points to AI to Prevent Blindness – dLife.com

December 30th, 2019 4:08 am

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) released a new set of clinical standards that for the first time include the use of autonomous artificial intelligence (AI).

The ADAs2020 Standards of Medical Care in Diabetesstates that AI systems that detect more than mild diabetic retinopathy and diabetic macular edema authorized for use by the FDA represent an alternative to traditional screening approaches.

To date, IDx-DR is the first and onlyFDA-authorizedautonomous AI diagnostic system for the detection of diabetic retinopathy and macular edema.

It is currently in use at a number of large health systems that each serves tens of thousands of people with diabetes and has struggled to implement diabetic retinopathy eye exams at scale for their large diabetes population.

The ADAs inclusion of our technology in its Standards of Care marks a significant move toward mainstream adoption of autonomous AI in clinical care, said Dr. Michael Abramoff, founder, and executive chairman at IDx. Our early customers are visionary leaders who foresaw that autonomous AI would one day become a standard of care for diabetic retinopathy screening, and taking that leap is paying off for them.

The Standards of Care were published last week inDiabetes Care, the highest-ranked, peer-reviewed journal in the field of diabetes treatment and prevention. Physicians, healthcare systems, health insurers and quality of care organizations look to the ADAs Standards of Care for consensus and evidence-based best practices to improve health outcomes for people with diabetes.

The Standards of Care published last week inDiabetes Care can be accessed here.

IDx-DR is an FDA-authorized AI-based diagnostic system designed for use at the front lines of care to detect diabetic retinopathy and macular edema, common complications of diabetes and leading causes of blindness.

The exam typically takes 5-10 minutes. Operators use a robotic fundus camera to take pictures of the patients retinas the back part of the eye, which are then analyzed by the autonomous AIs algorithms for signs of diabetic retinopathy.

An immediate diagnostic report is produced at the point of care, allowing the physician to discuss the results with the patient while they are still in the office.

See the rest here:
New 2020 ADA Standards of Care Points to AI to Prevent Blindness - dLife.com

Read More...

3 Biotech Stocks That Crushed It in 2019 – The Motley Fool

December 30th, 2019 4:08 am

This has been a great year for the overall stock market and a banner year for a handful of drugmakers that don't even have a product to sell yet.

These three biotech stocks entered 2019 ready to provide market-thumping returns, and they delivered. Let's look at what made them the industry's top stocks this year to see if they can do it again in 2020 and beyond.

Data source: Yahoo! Finance.

Unnecessary blood vessel growth in the retina is the leading cause of progressive blindness in older adults, and injections of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors to halt that growth is a huge business. Sales of the leading VEGF inhibitor, Eylea from Regeneron (NASDAQ:REGN) reached a whopping $5.5 billion during the first nine months of 2019 but could face fierce competition soon from Kodiak Sciences' lead candidate, KSI-301, in a few short years.

With Eylea, patients need to receive injections every other month, and there's usually a few days between doses where patients aren't protected. Shares of Kodiak Sciences soared this year thanks to surprisingly good results from a VEGF inhibitor called KSI-301, which show it remains at therapeutic concentrations for more than twice as long as Eylea.

Kodiak recently secured $225 million in financing from one of the most successful biotech-focused funds on the planet, Baker Brothers, in return for a 4.5% royalty on KSI-301's potential sales. The company will use the funds to run pivotal studies that could lead to Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval in 2022 of KSI-301 for the treatment of retinal vein occlusion. Also in 2022, the company expects to submit applications that could expand KSI-301's purview to age-related macular degeneration, diabetic macular edema, and diabetic retinopathy.

Image source: Getty Images.

Patients with myelofibrosis produce so many unnecessary blood cells that their bone marrow becomes permanently damaged. Blood cell overproduction also causes the spleen to swell, along with a variety of other symptoms.

There's just one myelofibrosis treatment at the moment, Jakafi from Incyte (NASDAQ:INCY). Jakafi's a kinase inhibitor that reduces blood cell proliferation for the vast majority of myelofibrosis patients, but its benefits tend to drop off after a few years. Constellation Pharmaceuticals stock soared this year after an interim analysis of an ongoing study with its lead candidate, CPI-0601, which produced some compelling evidence of efficacy for patients who had stopped responding to Jakafi.

Constellation's lead candidate is a potential first-in-class BET inhibitor thatreduced spleen volume for 94% of patients and reduced total symptom scores for 93% of patients. Among a subset of 13 patients who relied on frequent blood transfusions going into the study, four became transfusion independent.

Constellation will begin a placebo-controlled pivotal trial in 2020 with CPI-0601 plus Jakafi. Sales of Incyte's drug are expected to reach $1.7 billion in 2019, and CPI-0601 sales could peak at more than $1 billion annually if it continues to produce results in line with those we've already seen.

Image source: Getty Images.

Neurology's come a long way in recent years, but the brain is so complex that we still don't understand the root cause of most mental health issues. One thing we're sure of is that certain drugs tend to amplify each other's effects when combined.

Instead of relying on trial and error to come up with a new depression drug, Axsome Therapeutics is taking advantage of a well-known interaction between bupropion, a decades-old antidepressant, and dextromethorphan, the main ingredient in over-the-counter cough syrup.

There wasn't a lot of enthusiasm for AXS-05 at the beginning of 2019, but one clinical trial victory after another has sent the stock higher. Around 16 million Americans experience a bout of major depressive disorder each year, but available treatments don't get the job done for a majority of them. If AXS-05 earns a widely expected approval to treat this enormous population, the stock could keep on rising in 2020 and beyond.

Now that the market caps of these three drugmakers have reached 10 figures, another year like 2019 isn't likely. For example, if Axsome were to repeat its 2019 performance, it would end 2020 worth about as much asAmgen.

Another year of market-beating gains, though, is well within the realm of possibility for all three of these biotech stocks. Although nobody's ever gone broke by taking profits following huge run-ups, it's probably a good idea to hang on to shares of these stocks for the long run.

Read this article:
3 Biotech Stocks That Crushed It in 2019 - The Motley Fool

Read More...

Glaucoma, The Sneak Thief of Sight, Continues to Affect Vision of Millions of Americans – PR Web

December 30th, 2019 4:08 am

Prevent Blindness provides free resources to the public for Januarys National Glaucoma Awareness Month

CHICAGO (PRWEB) December 26, 2019

According to estimates from the Prevent Blindness report, Future of Vision: Forecasting the Prevalence and Costs of Vision Problems, more than 3.2 million Americans ages 40 and over have glaucoma in the year 2020. The number is expected to increase as the population ages. Glaucoma, often referred to as the The Sneak Thief of Sight, is a leading cause of vision loss that damages the optic nerve. Although symptoms may not be noticeable at first, glaucoma slowly diminishes peripheral vision (side vision), making activities such as driving increasingly difficult.

January is National Glaucoma Awareness Month and Prevent Blindness, the nations oldest volunteer eye health and safety nonprofit organization, seeks to educate the public on the disease, including risk factors, types of glaucoma, treatment options and more. Prevent Blindness offers a dedicated web page providing patients and their caregivers with free information at https://www.preventblindness.org/glaucoma or its online resource, Living Well with Low Vision at https://lowvision.preventblindness.org.

More women than men have glaucoma. Risk factors for glaucoma also include:

The American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO) also states that those with diabetes, migraines, high blood pressure, poor blood circulation or other health problems affecting the whole body are at increased risk of glaucoma.

The year 2020 is an ideal reminder for all of us to make the resolution today to save our vision for tomorrow, said Jeff Todd, president and CEO of Prevent Blindness. By detecting vision problems and treating them early, including those from glaucoma, we can help to avoid significant vision impairment.

The AAOs EyeCare America program provides eye care at no out-of-pocket cost to medically underserved seniors age 65 and older, and glaucoma exams to those at increased risk. For more information, visit https://www.aao.org/eyecare-america.

Allergan is supporting the efforts of Prevent Blindness in its public outreach efforts to protect vision from glaucoma. Allergan is a leading global pharmaceutical company with a more than 70-year heritage in eye care has launched over125 eye care products and invested billions of dollars in treatments for the most prevalent eye conditions including glaucoma, ocular surface disease, and retinal diseases such as diabetic macular edema and retinal vein occlusion. Recently, Allergan launched the My Glaucoma campaign which is designed to help people understand the burden of living with glaucoma and empower those with the disease and their caregivers to feel comfortable speaking with their doctor about a treatment regimen that fits their lifestyle. For more information, visit http://www.MyGlaucoma.com.

For more information on glaucoma, or other financial assistance programs, including Medicare coverage, please call Prevent Blindness at (800) 331-2020 or visit https://www.preventblindness.org/glaucoma.

About Prevent Blindness Founded in 1908, Prevent Blindness is the nation's leading volunteer eye health and safety organization dedicated to fighting blindness and saving sight. Focused on promoting a continuum of vision care, Prevent Blindness touches the lives of millions of people each year through public and professional education, advocacy, certified vision screening and training, community and patient service programs and research. These services are made possible through the generous support of the American public. Together with a network of affiliates, Prevent Blindness is committed to eliminating preventable blindness in America. For more information, or to make a contribution to the sight-saving fund, call 1-800-331-2020. Or, visit us on the Web at preventblindness.org or facebook.com/preventblindness.

Share article on social media or email:

Read the original post:
Glaucoma, The Sneak Thief of Sight, Continues to Affect Vision of Millions of Americans - PR Web

Read More...

Page 769«..1020..768769770771..780790..»


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