The Arizona Bioscientist URL has been moved the the Flinn Foundation's home page.
Please access news and information about Aizona's Research in the Biosceinces at:
Bio Briefs (Research): www.flinn.org/bio-briefs/topic/Research
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Arizona's TGen joins with Michigan's Van Andel Research Institute in alliance promoting worldwide science and health
[Source: TGen] - The Translational Genomics Research Institute (TGen) and the Van Andel Research Institute (VARI) will forge a strategic alliance that will enable both to maximize their worldwide contributions to science and health.
The non-profit researcher institutes jointly announced today the initiation of an "alliance and affiliation agreement."
The partnership between Phoenix, Ariz.-based TGen and Grand Rapids, Mich.-based VARI will enable both institutes to speed up their mutual goals of moving research discoveries about cancer and other debilitating medical conditions as quickly as possible from laboratories to patient care.
"Combining many of the scientific, educational, financial and business potentials of TGen and VARI will advance the research of both institutions and enhance the economic development of both Arizona and Western Michigan," said Dr. Jeffrey Trent, President and Scientific Director of TGen since its founding in 2002.
"This alliance will elevate both organizations in the world of scientific research," said Dr. Trent, who will retain his roles at TGen, but upon implementation of the agreement also will become President and Research Director of VARI.
VARI is the research arm of the Van Andel Institute (VAI), established in 1996 as a philanthropic research and educational organization by the late Jay and Betty Van Andel.
"We are excited to welcome Dr. Trent and TGen as they combine forces with us in our mission to conquer cancer and human disease," said VAI Chairman and CEO David Van Andel. "This alliance demonstrates that VARI and TGen are at the forefront of redefining a borderless, collaborative, national and international scientific community that transcends geographical limitations."
The alliance combines the groundbreaking basic research expertise of VARI with the cutting-edge translational genomics and analysis of TGen.
Dr. Trent will replace Dr. George Vande Woude, who in 1998 was appointed the founding Director of VARI.
"The search for a new director has ended with the best possible results - a renowned, research director in Dr. Trent, who will now lead VARI, and an alliance that strengthens two of the nation's fast-emerging leaders in biomedical research," David Van Andel said.
Dr. Vande Woude, a member of the prestigious National Academy of Sciences, will remain at VARI as head of the Laboratory of Molecular Oncology. Dr. Vande Woude, who held top-level administrative posts at the National Cancer Institute since the early 1980's, will be able to achieve a long-held desire to return to the lab full-time.
"This is a great moment for both Institutions. I have known Dr.Trent professionally for nearly 20 years and have always admired him as one of the nation's leading scientists. One of Dr. Trent's greatest attributes is bringing together researchers from many disciplines to work on problems that will improve human health," Dr. Vande Woude said.
TGen is dedicated to conducting groundbreaking research with life changing results. Research at TGen is focused on helping patients with diseases such as cancer, neurological disorders, diabetes and infectious diseases. TGen is on the cutting edge of translational research, in which investigators unravel the genetic basis of complex diseases and medical conditions.
VARI opened its facility in 2000. Its 18 research laboratories are primarily dedicated to molecular cancer research, but it also focuses on conditions such as diabetes, Parkinson's disease, osteoporosis, and heart disease. VARI will open a 240,000 square-foot building expansion this fall, which will allow it to broaden its efforts to include additional neurological disorders and chronic illnesses. VARI's primary work has been in basic research - looking for what occurs to cause disease in individual cells, and using that information to identify "biomarkers" that can help predict and diagnose diseases, and lead to the development of safer, more effective drugs.
"VARI is on the verge of expanding its already strong basic research programs and implementing further translational research," said Dr. Daniel Von Hoff, TGen's Physician-In-Chief and a world-renowned cancer scientist.
"TGen is poised to translate the discoveries generated in laboratories from both organizations into real solutions for patients," said Dr. Von Hoff, who also is Chief Scientific Officer of TGen Clinical Research Services at Scottsdale Healthcare. "This is a terrific opportunity to work together and increase our chances of making a difference for our patients."
Both TGen and VARI are relatively young organizations that have triggered regional growth of the life sciences and biomedical industries in Arizona and Western Michigan.
Both organizations have a strong focus on cancer, collaborations and expansion locally, nationally and internationally.
The "alliance and affiliation agreement" is expected to become effective July 1, 2009.
The non-profit researcher institutes jointly announced today the initiation of an "alliance and affiliation agreement."
The partnership between Phoenix, Ariz.-based TGen and Grand Rapids, Mich.-based VARI will enable both institutes to speed up their mutual goals of moving research discoveries about cancer and other debilitating medical conditions as quickly as possible from laboratories to patient care.
"Combining many of the scientific, educational, financial and business potentials of TGen and VARI will advance the research of both institutions and enhance the economic development of both Arizona and Western Michigan," said Dr. Jeffrey Trent, President and Scientific Director of TGen since its founding in 2002.
"This alliance will elevate both organizations in the world of scientific research," said Dr. Trent, who will retain his roles at TGen, but upon implementation of the agreement also will become President and Research Director of VARI.
VARI is the research arm of the Van Andel Institute (VAI), established in 1996 as a philanthropic research and educational organization by the late Jay and Betty Van Andel.
"We are excited to welcome Dr. Trent and TGen as they combine forces with us in our mission to conquer cancer and human disease," said VAI Chairman and CEO David Van Andel. "This alliance demonstrates that VARI and TGen are at the forefront of redefining a borderless, collaborative, national and international scientific community that transcends geographical limitations."
The alliance combines the groundbreaking basic research expertise of VARI with the cutting-edge translational genomics and analysis of TGen.
Dr. Trent will replace Dr. George Vande Woude, who in 1998 was appointed the founding Director of VARI.
"The search for a new director has ended with the best possible results - a renowned, research director in Dr. Trent, who will now lead VARI, and an alliance that strengthens two of the nation's fast-emerging leaders in biomedical research," David Van Andel said.
Dr. Vande Woude, a member of the prestigious National Academy of Sciences, will remain at VARI as head of the Laboratory of Molecular Oncology. Dr. Vande Woude, who held top-level administrative posts at the National Cancer Institute since the early 1980's, will be able to achieve a long-held desire to return to the lab full-time.
"This is a great moment for both Institutions. I have known Dr.Trent professionally for nearly 20 years and have always admired him as one of the nation's leading scientists. One of Dr. Trent's greatest attributes is bringing together researchers from many disciplines to work on problems that will improve human health," Dr. Vande Woude said.
TGen is dedicated to conducting groundbreaking research with life changing results. Research at TGen is focused on helping patients with diseases such as cancer, neurological disorders, diabetes and infectious diseases. TGen is on the cutting edge of translational research, in which investigators unravel the genetic basis of complex diseases and medical conditions.
VARI opened its facility in 2000. Its 18 research laboratories are primarily dedicated to molecular cancer research, but it also focuses on conditions such as diabetes, Parkinson's disease, osteoporosis, and heart disease. VARI will open a 240,000 square-foot building expansion this fall, which will allow it to broaden its efforts to include additional neurological disorders and chronic illnesses. VARI's primary work has been in basic research - looking for what occurs to cause disease in individual cells, and using that information to identify "biomarkers" that can help predict and diagnose diseases, and lead to the development of safer, more effective drugs.
"VARI is on the verge of expanding its already strong basic research programs and implementing further translational research," said Dr. Daniel Von Hoff, TGen's Physician-In-Chief and a world-renowned cancer scientist.
"TGen is poised to translate the discoveries generated in laboratories from both organizations into real solutions for patients," said Dr. Von Hoff, who also is Chief Scientific Officer of TGen Clinical Research Services at Scottsdale Healthcare. "This is a terrific opportunity to work together and increase our chances of making a difference for our patients."
Both TGen and VARI are relatively young organizations that have triggered regional growth of the life sciences and biomedical industries in Arizona and Western Michigan.
Both organizations have a strong focus on cancer, collaborations and expansion locally, nationally and internationally.
The "alliance and affiliation agreement" is expected to become effective July 1, 2009.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
RECOMB: The 13th Annual International Conference on Research in Computational Molecular Biology May 17-21
Registration is now open for the RECOMB 2009, the 13th Annual International Conference on Research in Computational Molecular Biology. The conference is hosted by the BIO5 Institute and will be held in Tucson. Keynote presenters scheduled to date include: Carlos Bustamante, Cornell University; Eran Halperin, Navigenics; Michael Hammer, The University of Arizona; Joanna Mountain, 23andMe; Stephen Quake, Stanford University; Pardis Sabeti, Harvard University; and Michael Snyder, Yale University. RECOMB is a well-established scientific conference bridging the computational, mathematical, and biological sciences. More information: http://www.bio5.org/recomb2009/
Arizona Board of Regents approves new cancer prevention company
The Arizona Board of Regents gave approval for a UA researcher to take on part ownership of the new Tucson company Cancer Prevention Pharmaceuticals (CPP). CPP's work may one day help prevent colon cancer in those at high risk for the disease. UA Professor of Cell Biology and Anatomy Eugene Gerner will run CPP with his colleague Frank L. Meyskens, Jr., Professor of Medicine and Director of the Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center at the University of California in Irvine. Gerner is a member of UA's BIO5 Institute and the Arizona Cancer Center. (Read More)
Renowned researcher Dr. Fernando Martinez to lead UA’s BIO5 Institute
One of the most highly regarded researchers worldwide in childhood lung diseases, Fernando Martinez, has accepted the position of interim director for the BIO5 Institute at The University of Arizona (UA) beginning February 9, 2009. Dr. Martinez is the Swift-McNear Professor of Pediatrics, the director of the UA College of Medicine's Arizona Respiratory Center, and a long time BIO5 faculty member. (Read More)
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Atrium Innovations acquires Arizona-based Nutri-Health Supplements
[Source: StockHouse.com] - Quebec-based Atrium Innovations (TSX: T.ATB, Stock Forum) announced Monday morning that it has acquired Nutri-Health Supplements, LLC of Arizona.
Atrium acquired NHS for a first consideration of US$23.9 million, with additional earn-out payments structured based on NHS' 2009 and 2010 EBITDA growth, says the company.
NHS owns proprietary Multi-Probiotic blends which include 16 probiotic strains that are “matrix encapsulated to survive stomach acid and deliver a high concentration of active cell cultures per capsule,” says Atrium.
"Buying Nutri-Health marks our first acquisition into the DTC segment with a company aligned with our values and objectives. NHS allows us to acquire complementary expertise in this market segment in which we had a limited business presence until now. This opens the door to promising, synergistic development opportunities within Atrium," said Pierre Fitzgibbon, president and chief executive officer of Atrium.
Atrium develops, manufactures and markets products for the health and nutrition industries. NHS markets, via multi-channel distribution, specialty niche products endorsed by health professionals.
Atrium acquired NHS for a first consideration of US$23.9 million, with additional earn-out payments structured based on NHS' 2009 and 2010 EBITDA growth, says the company.
NHS owns proprietary Multi-Probiotic blends which include 16 probiotic strains that are “matrix encapsulated to survive stomach acid and deliver a high concentration of active cell cultures per capsule,” says Atrium.
"Buying Nutri-Health marks our first acquisition into the DTC segment with a company aligned with our values and objectives. NHS allows us to acquire complementary expertise in this market segment in which we had a limited business presence until now. This opens the door to promising, synergistic development opportunities within Atrium," said Pierre Fitzgibbon, president and chief executive officer of Atrium.
Atrium develops, manufactures and markets products for the health and nutrition industries. NHS markets, via multi-channel distribution, specialty niche products endorsed by health professionals.
Monday, January 5, 2009
Breast Cancer: Diet High In Vegetables, Fruit And Fiber May Cut Risk Of Cancer Recurrence In Women Without Hot Flashes
[Source: ScienceDaily ] - A secondary analysis of a large, multicenter clinical trial has shown that a diet loaded with fruits, vegetables and fiber and somewhat lower in fat compared to standard federal dietary recommendations cuts the risk of recurrence in a subgroup of early-stage breast cancer survivors – women who didn't have hot flashes – by approximately 31 percent. These patients typically have higher recurrence and lower survival rates than breast cancer patients who have hot flashes.
The study team, led by researchers at the Moores Cancer Center at the University of California, San Diego, along with six other sites, including the University of California, Davis, reported its results online December 15, 2008, in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.
The results come on the heels of a report last year on the findings of the original study, the Women's Healthy Eating and Living Trial (WHEL), which compared the effects of the two diets on cancer recurrence in more than 3,000 early-stage breast cancer survivors. That study showed no overall difference in recurrence among the two diet groups.
"Women with early stage breast cancer who have hot flashes have better survival and lower recurrence rates than women who don't have hot flashes," said Ellen B. Gold, Ph.D., professor and chair of the UC Davis Department of Public Health Sciences and first author of the study. "Our results suggest that a major change in diet may help overcome the difference in prognosis between women with and without hot flashes."
"Our interest in looking at this subgroup came because hot flashes are associated with lower circulating estrogen levels, while the absence of hot flashes is associated with higher estrogen levels. Reducing the effect of estrogen is a major treatment strategy in breast cancer," said the WHEL study principal investigator John P. Pierce, Ph.D., Sam M. Walton Professor for Cancer Prevention and director of Cancer Prevention and Control at the UC San Diego School of Medicine and the Moores UCSD Cancer Center. "It appears that a dietary pattern high in fruits, vegetables and fiber, which has been shown to reduce circulating estrogen levels, may only be important among women with circulating estrogen levels above a certain threshold."
About 30 percent of the original group of 3,088 breast cancer survivors did not report hot flashes at study entry. The women had been randomly assigned to one of the two diets between 1995 and 2000 and were followed until 2006. About one-half (447) of the "no hot flashes" group were randomized to the special, "intervention" high-vegetable fruit diet while the other half (453) was given the generally recommended diet of five servings of fruits and vegetables a day. The team found that those on the intervention diet had a significantly lower rate of a second breast cancer event (16.1 percent) compared to those eating the government-recommended five-a-day dietary pattern (23.6 percent).
The dietary effect was even larger (a 47 percent lower risk) in women who had been through menopause.
According to Pierce, another possible mechanism has been proposed recently for why this diet may have affected only 30 percent of the WHEL study population. Women with estrogen receptor-positive cancers usually receive hormone therapy (tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitors) aimed at combating the effect of circulating estrogen. However, more than 30 percent of these women appear to have a gene-drug interaction that prevents them from getting an effective dose of this therapy.
"This hypothesis says that if the endocrine therapy is working, no further reduction in estrogen levels would be needed," said Pierce. "If your genes are preventing you from getting a therapeutic dose, then following this rigorous dietary pattern may reduce estrogen levels enough to reduce risk." Because this is speculation, he said, the research team will be using biological samples collected throughout the study to further investigate the mechanisms behind the study diet's protective effects.
Other co-authors include: Cheryl Rock, Ph.D., Barbara Parker, M.D., Lisa Madlensky, Ph.D., Loki Natarajan, Ph.D., Linda Wasserman, M.D., Vicky Jones, M.D., Gail Laughlin, Ph.D., Nazmus Saquib M.D., Ph.D., Sheila Kealey MPH, Shirley Flatt, Jennifer Emond and Minya Pu, UCSD; Joanne Mortimer, M.D., City of Hope; Marcia Stefanek, Ph.D., Stanford University; Bette Caan, Dr.P.H, Kaiser Permanente, Oakland, Cynthia Thomson, Ph.D., University of Arizona, Njeri Karanja, Ph.D., Kaiser Permanente, Portland, OR; Richard Hajek, Ph.D., M.D. Anderson Cancer Center.
The study team, led by researchers at the Moores Cancer Center at the University of California, San Diego, along with six other sites, including the University of California, Davis, reported its results online December 15, 2008, in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.
The results come on the heels of a report last year on the findings of the original study, the Women's Healthy Eating and Living Trial (WHEL), which compared the effects of the two diets on cancer recurrence in more than 3,000 early-stage breast cancer survivors. That study showed no overall difference in recurrence among the two diet groups.
"Women with early stage breast cancer who have hot flashes have better survival and lower recurrence rates than women who don't have hot flashes," said Ellen B. Gold, Ph.D., professor and chair of the UC Davis Department of Public Health Sciences and first author of the study. "Our results suggest that a major change in diet may help overcome the difference in prognosis between women with and without hot flashes."
"Our interest in looking at this subgroup came because hot flashes are associated with lower circulating estrogen levels, while the absence of hot flashes is associated with higher estrogen levels. Reducing the effect of estrogen is a major treatment strategy in breast cancer," said the WHEL study principal investigator John P. Pierce, Ph.D., Sam M. Walton Professor for Cancer Prevention and director of Cancer Prevention and Control at the UC San Diego School of Medicine and the Moores UCSD Cancer Center. "It appears that a dietary pattern high in fruits, vegetables and fiber, which has been shown to reduce circulating estrogen levels, may only be important among women with circulating estrogen levels above a certain threshold."
About 30 percent of the original group of 3,088 breast cancer survivors did not report hot flashes at study entry. The women had been randomly assigned to one of the two diets between 1995 and 2000 and were followed until 2006. About one-half (447) of the "no hot flashes" group were randomized to the special, "intervention" high-vegetable fruit diet while the other half (453) was given the generally recommended diet of five servings of fruits and vegetables a day. The team found that those on the intervention diet had a significantly lower rate of a second breast cancer event (16.1 percent) compared to those eating the government-recommended five-a-day dietary pattern (23.6 percent).
The dietary effect was even larger (a 47 percent lower risk) in women who had been through menopause.
According to Pierce, another possible mechanism has been proposed recently for why this diet may have affected only 30 percent of the WHEL study population. Women with estrogen receptor-positive cancers usually receive hormone therapy (tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitors) aimed at combating the effect of circulating estrogen. However, more than 30 percent of these women appear to have a gene-drug interaction that prevents them from getting an effective dose of this therapy.
"This hypothesis says that if the endocrine therapy is working, no further reduction in estrogen levels would be needed," said Pierce. "If your genes are preventing you from getting a therapeutic dose, then following this rigorous dietary pattern may reduce estrogen levels enough to reduce risk." Because this is speculation, he said, the research team will be using biological samples collected throughout the study to further investigate the mechanisms behind the study diet's protective effects.
Other co-authors include: Cheryl Rock, Ph.D., Barbara Parker, M.D., Lisa Madlensky, Ph.D., Loki Natarajan, Ph.D., Linda Wasserman, M.D., Vicky Jones, M.D., Gail Laughlin, Ph.D., Nazmus Saquib M.D., Ph.D., Sheila Kealey MPH, Shirley Flatt, Jennifer Emond and Minya Pu, UCSD; Joanne Mortimer, M.D., City of Hope; Marcia Stefanek, Ph.D., Stanford University; Bette Caan, Dr.P.H, Kaiser Permanente, Oakland, Cynthia Thomson, Ph.D., University of Arizona, Njeri Karanja, Ph.D., Kaiser Permanente, Portland, OR; Richard Hajek, Ph.D., M.D. Anderson Cancer Center.
The Gold Standard: Nanoparticles Used To Make 3-D DNA Nanotubes
[Source: ScienceDaily ] - Arizona State University researchers Hao Yan and Yan Liu imagine and assemble intricate structures on a scale almost unfathomably small. Their medium is the double-helical DNA molecule, a versatile building material offering near limitless construction potential.
In the January 2, 2009 issue of Science, Yan and Liu, researchers at ASU's Biodesign Institute and faculty in the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, reveal for the first time the three-dimensional character of DNA nanotubules, rings and spirals, each a few hundred thousandths the diameter of a human hair. These DNA nanotubes and other synthetic nanostructures may soon find their way into a new generation of ultra-tiny electronic and biomedical innovations.
Yan and Liu are working in the rapidly proliferating field of structural DNA nanotechnology. By copying a page from nature's guidebook, they capitalize on the DNA molecule's remarkable properties of self-assembly. When ribbonlike strands of the molecule are brought together, they fasten to each other like strips of Velcro, according to simple rules governing the pairing of their four chemical bases, (labeled A, C, T and G). From this meager alphabet, nature has wrung a mind-bending multiplicity of forms. DNA accomplishes this through the cellular synthesis of structural proteins, coded for by specific sequences of the bases. Such proteins are fundamental constituents of living matter, forming cell walls, vessels, tissues and organs. But DNA itself can also form stable architectural structures, and may be artificially cajoled into doing so.
In his research, Yan has been much inspired by nanoscale ingenuity in the natural world: "Unicellular creatures like oceanic diatoms," he points out, "contain self-assembled protein architectures." These diverse forms of enormous delicacy and organismic practicality are frequently the result of the orchestrated self-assembly of both organic and inorganic material.
Scientists in the field of structural DNA nanotechnology, including Dr. Yan's team, have previously demonstrated that pre-fab DNA elements could be induced to self-assemble, forming useful nanostructural platforms or "tiles." Such tiles are able to snap together—with jigsaw puzzle-piece specificity—through base pairing, forming larger arrays.
Yan and Liu's work in Science responds to one of the fundamental challenges in nanotechnology and materials science, the construction of molecular-level forms in three dimensions. To do so, the team uses gold nanoparticles, which can be placed on single-stranded DNA, compelling these flexible molecular tile arrays to bend away from the nanoparticles, curling into closed loops or forming spring-like spirals or nested rings, roughly 30 to 180 nanometers in diameter.
The gold nanoparticles, which coerce DNA strands to arc back on themselves, produce a force known as "steric hindrance," whose magnitude depends on the size of particle used. Using this steric hindrance, Yan and Liu have shown for the first time that DNA nanotubules can be specifically directed to curl into closed rings with high yield.
When 5 nanometer gold particles were used, a milder steric hindrance directed the DNA tiles to curl up and join complementary neighboring segments, often forming spirals of varying diameter in addition to closed rings. A 10 nanometer gold particle however, exerted greater steric hindrance, directing a more tightly constrained curling which, produced mostly closed tubules. Yan stresses that the particle not only participates in the self-assembly process as the directed material, but also as an active agent, inducing and guiding formation of the nanotube.
With the assistance of Anchi Cheng and Jonanthan Brownell at the Scripps Research Institute, they have used an imaging technique known as electron cryotomography to provide the first glimpses of the elusive 3-D architecture of DNA nanotubules. "You quickly freeze the sample in vitreous ice," he explains, describing the process. "This will preserve the native conformation of the structure." Subsequent imaging at various tilted angles allows the reconstruction of the three-dimensional nanostructure, with the gold particles providing enough electron density for crisp visualization.
DNA nanotubules will soon be ready to join their carbon nanotube cousins, providing flexible, resilient and manipulatable structures at the molecular level. Extending control over 3-D architectures will lay the foundation for future applications in photometry, photovoltaics, touch screen and flexible displays, as well as for far-reaching biomedical advancements.
"The ability to build three-dimensional structures through self-assembly is really exciting, " Yan says. "It's massively parallel. You can simultaneously produce millions or trillions of copies."
Yan and Liu believe that controlled tubular nanostructures bearing nanoparticles may be applied to the design of electrical channels for cell-cell communication or used in the construction of various nanoelectrical devices.
In the January 2, 2009 issue of Science, Yan and Liu, researchers at ASU's Biodesign Institute and faculty in the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, reveal for the first time the three-dimensional character of DNA nanotubules, rings and spirals, each a few hundred thousandths the diameter of a human hair. These DNA nanotubes and other synthetic nanostructures may soon find their way into a new generation of ultra-tiny electronic and biomedical innovations.
Yan and Liu are working in the rapidly proliferating field of structural DNA nanotechnology. By copying a page from nature's guidebook, they capitalize on the DNA molecule's remarkable properties of self-assembly. When ribbonlike strands of the molecule are brought together, they fasten to each other like strips of Velcro, according to simple rules governing the pairing of their four chemical bases, (labeled A, C, T and G). From this meager alphabet, nature has wrung a mind-bending multiplicity of forms. DNA accomplishes this through the cellular synthesis of structural proteins, coded for by specific sequences of the bases. Such proteins are fundamental constituents of living matter, forming cell walls, vessels, tissues and organs. But DNA itself can also form stable architectural structures, and may be artificially cajoled into doing so.
In his research, Yan has been much inspired by nanoscale ingenuity in the natural world: "Unicellular creatures like oceanic diatoms," he points out, "contain self-assembled protein architectures." These diverse forms of enormous delicacy and organismic practicality are frequently the result of the orchestrated self-assembly of both organic and inorganic material.
Scientists in the field of structural DNA nanotechnology, including Dr. Yan's team, have previously demonstrated that pre-fab DNA elements could be induced to self-assemble, forming useful nanostructural platforms or "tiles." Such tiles are able to snap together—with jigsaw puzzle-piece specificity—through base pairing, forming larger arrays.
Yan and Liu's work in Science responds to one of the fundamental challenges in nanotechnology and materials science, the construction of molecular-level forms in three dimensions. To do so, the team uses gold nanoparticles, which can be placed on single-stranded DNA, compelling these flexible molecular tile arrays to bend away from the nanoparticles, curling into closed loops or forming spring-like spirals or nested rings, roughly 30 to 180 nanometers in diameter.
The gold nanoparticles, which coerce DNA strands to arc back on themselves, produce a force known as "steric hindrance," whose magnitude depends on the size of particle used. Using this steric hindrance, Yan and Liu have shown for the first time that DNA nanotubules can be specifically directed to curl into closed rings with high yield.
When 5 nanometer gold particles were used, a milder steric hindrance directed the DNA tiles to curl up and join complementary neighboring segments, often forming spirals of varying diameter in addition to closed rings. A 10 nanometer gold particle however, exerted greater steric hindrance, directing a more tightly constrained curling which, produced mostly closed tubules. Yan stresses that the particle not only participates in the self-assembly process as the directed material, but also as an active agent, inducing and guiding formation of the nanotube.
With the assistance of Anchi Cheng and Jonanthan Brownell at the Scripps Research Institute, they have used an imaging technique known as electron cryotomography to provide the first glimpses of the elusive 3-D architecture of DNA nanotubules. "You quickly freeze the sample in vitreous ice," he explains, describing the process. "This will preserve the native conformation of the structure." Subsequent imaging at various tilted angles allows the reconstruction of the three-dimensional nanostructure, with the gold particles providing enough electron density for crisp visualization.
DNA nanotubules will soon be ready to join their carbon nanotube cousins, providing flexible, resilient and manipulatable structures at the molecular level. Extending control over 3-D architectures will lay the foundation for future applications in photometry, photovoltaics, touch screen and flexible displays, as well as for far-reaching biomedical advancements.
"The ability to build three-dimensional structures through self-assembly is really exciting, " Yan says. "It's massively parallel. You can simultaneously produce millions or trillions of copies."
Yan and Liu believe that controlled tubular nanostructures bearing nanoparticles may be applied to the design of electrical channels for cell-cell communication or used in the construction of various nanoelectrical devices.
Arizona Health Query Uses SAS® to Create a Unique Community Health Data System
[Source: Business Wire] - A model collaboration between academia and the healthcare community is benefiting Arizona communities and citizens, thanks to advanced analytics software from business analytics leader SAS. The Arizona Health Query database (AZHQ) is using SAS® software to integrate and analyze millions of anonymized healthcare records. Analyzing data over time and across health systems, researchers identify specific community health needs, inform public policy and, ultimately, lower costs.
Created by Arizona State University’s Center for Health Information and Research (CHiR), AZHQ consolidates health information from dozens of healthcare organizations in Arizona to form a community health data system. Previously, patient data was spread across different healthcare providers, which hindered effective research of community health issues. With more than 40 data partners, including the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (AHCCCS) – the state’s Medicaid system – that is no longer an issue.
“With the participation of many public and private healthcare data partners, we’re able to apply SAS data integration and analytics capabilities to track patients over time and location, and identify trends and patterns in healthcare within and across communities,” said Wade Bannister, creator of the AZHQ database and Associate Director for CHiR.
Researchers have also used AZHQ to analyze health disparities in Hispanic and non-Hispanic children, the evolution of Valley fever, asthma patterns in Arizona, and the efficacy of hospitals in serving the needy. It has also been used to conduct community health assessments.
A good example of how AZHQ is affecting community health is the program’s study of MRSA (Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus), a staph infection that is resistant to antibiotics. By tracking the disease’s spread by zip code, researchers were able to postulate how and why it was spreading.
Since its inception, AZHQ has consolidated data on 9 million people and 200 million healthcare encounters, pulling data from more than 60 healthcare delivery institutions, including hospitals, insurers and employers. Patient privacy is paramount; AZHQ complies with HIPAA regulations and is regularly audited to ensure continuing compliance. AZHQ received the university’s President’s Medal for Social Embeddedness in 2005 and 2008.
SAS predictive analytics present an opportunity for cost savings, according to William Johnson, who founded AZHQ and directs CHiR. Using SAS, he and fellow researchers analyzed AHCCCS data to develop a model that predicts risk associated with future high-cost Medicaid users.
“By assessing risk factors and predicting costs of patient care years in advance, steps can be taken to alleviate costs through intervention and more informed budget decisions,” said Johnson.
“The breadth of data in the system makes it unique in the US,” said Johnson. “With the advanced research capabilities we have, we’re confident our partnership with the community impacts Arizona healthcare in a very positive way.”
Created by Arizona State University’s Center for Health Information and Research (CHiR), AZHQ consolidates health information from dozens of healthcare organizations in Arizona to form a community health data system. Previously, patient data was spread across different healthcare providers, which hindered effective research of community health issues. With more than 40 data partners, including the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (AHCCCS) – the state’s Medicaid system – that is no longer an issue.
“With the participation of many public and private healthcare data partners, we’re able to apply SAS data integration and analytics capabilities to track patients over time and location, and identify trends and patterns in healthcare within and across communities,” said Wade Bannister, creator of the AZHQ database and Associate Director for CHiR.
Researchers have also used AZHQ to analyze health disparities in Hispanic and non-Hispanic children, the evolution of Valley fever, asthma patterns in Arizona, and the efficacy of hospitals in serving the needy. It has also been used to conduct community health assessments.
A good example of how AZHQ is affecting community health is the program’s study of MRSA (Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus), a staph infection that is resistant to antibiotics. By tracking the disease’s spread by zip code, researchers were able to postulate how and why it was spreading.
Since its inception, AZHQ has consolidated data on 9 million people and 200 million healthcare encounters, pulling data from more than 60 healthcare delivery institutions, including hospitals, insurers and employers. Patient privacy is paramount; AZHQ complies with HIPAA regulations and is regularly audited to ensure continuing compliance. AZHQ received the university’s President’s Medal for Social Embeddedness in 2005 and 2008.
SAS predictive analytics present an opportunity for cost savings, according to William Johnson, who founded AZHQ and directs CHiR. Using SAS, he and fellow researchers analyzed AHCCCS data to develop a model that predicts risk associated with future high-cost Medicaid users.
“By assessing risk factors and predicting costs of patient care years in advance, steps can be taken to alleviate costs through intervention and more informed budget decisions,” said Johnson.
“The breadth of data in the system makes it unique in the US,” said Johnson. “With the advanced research capabilities we have, we’re confident our partnership with the community impacts Arizona healthcare in a very positive way.”
Blind man "sees," cruising through obstacle course without a hitch
[Source Scientific American, Coco Ballantyne ] - A man left totally blind by a massive stroke navigated a complex maze of boxes, chairs and other objects without stumbling or colliding into any of the obstacles.
Brain scans showed that after suffering two consecutive strokes, the man, 56, lost all function in his visual cortex, the brain's primary vision-processing center. But despite the loss, an international research team (from the U.S. and five other countries) reports in the journal Current Biology that "he could successfully navigate down the extent of a long corridor in which various barriers were placed."
Neuroscientists call this ability blindsight. People with blindsight, "usually tell you that they cannot see a thing…. They cannot consciously see but they have some type of awareness," says Susana Martinez-Conde, a neuroscientist at the Barrow Neurological Institute in Phoenix, Ariz. For instance, she notes, they will correctly guess the number on flashcards more than 50 percent of the time even though their eyesight is shot.
In a person with normal vision, information is passed from the retina (light sensitive area at the back of the eyes) to the visual cortex (the brain's vision center), which relays it to other brain processing areas such as the posterior parietal cortex. In this man's case, the retinas worked perfectly well, but the information highway to the brain was blocked at the visual cortex.
This means that the man must have been using alternative pathways (that bypassed the visual cortex) to connect to the other brain processing regions, Martinez-Conde says, noting that most people likely have these alternate routes but don't rely on them because the dominant visual cortex pathway functions properly.
This study is not the first to document blightsightness, but it is first to describe the phenomenon in a patient who had suffered destruction of the visual cortex in both hemispheres of the brain, according to Nature News.
Over the past several years, scientists have identified brain circuits that may serve as alternative routes, but have yet to pinpoint which ones enable blindsightness, and exactly how they function. But Martinez-Conde says that a combo of electroencephalography (EEG), which measures electrical activity in the brain over time, and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), which shows blood flow to areas of the brain that are active, may shed light on these circuits.
Brain scans showed that after suffering two consecutive strokes, the man, 56, lost all function in his visual cortex, the brain's primary vision-processing center. But despite the loss, an international research team (from the U.S. and five other countries) reports in the journal Current Biology that "he could successfully navigate down the extent of a long corridor in which various barriers were placed."
Neuroscientists call this ability blindsight. People with blindsight, "usually tell you that they cannot see a thing…. They cannot consciously see but they have some type of awareness," says Susana Martinez-Conde, a neuroscientist at the Barrow Neurological Institute in Phoenix, Ariz. For instance, she notes, they will correctly guess the number on flashcards more than 50 percent of the time even though their eyesight is shot.
In a person with normal vision, information is passed from the retina (light sensitive area at the back of the eyes) to the visual cortex (the brain's vision center), which relays it to other brain processing areas such as the posterior parietal cortex. In this man's case, the retinas worked perfectly well, but the information highway to the brain was blocked at the visual cortex.
This means that the man must have been using alternative pathways (that bypassed the visual cortex) to connect to the other brain processing regions, Martinez-Conde says, noting that most people likely have these alternate routes but don't rely on them because the dominant visual cortex pathway functions properly.
This study is not the first to document blightsightness, but it is first to describe the phenomenon in a patient who had suffered destruction of the visual cortex in both hemispheres of the brain, according to Nature News.
Over the past several years, scientists have identified brain circuits that may serve as alternative routes, but have yet to pinpoint which ones enable blindsightness, and exactly how they function. But Martinez-Conde says that a combo of electroencephalography (EEG), which measures electrical activity in the brain over time, and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), which shows blood flow to areas of the brain that are active, may shed light on these circuits.
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
8 ASU faculty elected as AAAS Fellows
[Source ASU, Skip Derra] - Eight Arizona State University faculty members are among the 486 newly elected Fellows of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), a prestigious international scientific society. AAAS is the world's largest general scientific society.
Brad Allenby, Richard Creath, James Elser, Patricia Gober, Nancy Grimm, Sudhir Kumar, Thomas Moore and John Spence will be recognized Feb. 14 at the Fellows forum, during the 2009 AAAS annual meeting in Chicago.
This year's election brings the total number of AAAS Fellows at Arizona State University to 54.
Becoming a Fellow is in recognition of efforts toward advancing science applications that are deemed scientifically or socially distinguished. Within that general framework, each awardee is honored for contributions to a specific field.
Braden Allenby is cited by the AAAS for "distinguished contributions to earth systems engineering and management, design for environment, industrial ecology and science and technology policy." He is a professor in ASU's Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, as well as a professor of law and of engineering and ethics with the Joan and David Lincoln Center for Applied Ethics. Recognized as a pioneer of modern industrial ecology, Allenby is co-director of the Center for Sustainable Engineering and is helping establish a new Center of Earth Systems Engineering and Management. He recently was named as one of the U.S. Professors of the Year for 2008 by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and the Council for Advancement and Support of Higher Education.
Richard Creath is cited by AAAS for "achievements in archiving and interpreting key documents in the historical development of scientific philosophy and demonstrating their relevance to current problems." Creath, a professor in the School of Life Sciences, is a philosopher of science and epistemologist who uses historical methods to illuminate fundamental questions about the nature of scientific reasoning and knowledge. He is one of the world's foremost authorities on philosophers Rudolf Carnap and W.V.O. Quine. As general editor of the multi-volume Carnap Project, he leads an international team of two dozen leading researchers.
James Elser is cited by AAAS for "pioneering work in developing the theories of ecological and biological stoichiometry to integrate levels of biology from the genome to the biosphere and thereby improve our management of renewable resources." Elser, a professor in the School of Life Sciences, has built a career asking questions about evolutionary biology and energy and material flows in ecosystems, traveling from Antarctica to alpine lakes of Norway and Colorado to the Mongolian grasslands of China, to find answers. Understanding the balance of carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus in systems forms the backbone of Elser's worldview, known as "stoichiometric theory." He has taught more than 10,000 students and his pioneering studies have shaped young minds and jumpstarted new research approaches, as well as provided insights into nutrient limitation, trophic dynamics, and biogeochemical cycling, evolution and integrated levels of organization from molecules to cells to ecosystems.
Patricia Gober, a human geographer and demographer, is co-director of the National Science Foundation's Decision Center for a Desert City, part of ASU's Global Institute of Sustainability, and a professor in the School of Geographical Sciences. A former president of the Association of American Geographers, Gober's research focuses on the use of science and visualization for real-world decision-making, particularly in tackling the difficult water management decisions necessary in the face of growing climatic uncertainty in metropolitan Phoenix. Gober is cited by AAAS for her "outstanding record of scholarship and disciplinary leadership" and because she "clearly established herself as a leader within the discipline and has left a permanent mark within American geography."
Nancy Grimm is cited by AAAS for "pioneering studies of urban social-ecological systems that conceptually expand urban resource management, and for innovative contributions in stream ecology and biogeochemistry that have stimulated decades of research." Grimm, a professor in ASU's School of Life Sciences, has for the past 10 years led the Central Arizona-Phoenix Long-Term Ecological Research project. CAP-LTER is centered on the analysis of urban-semi-arid ecosystem relationships. Through her collaborative work, Grimm has established a conceptual basis for including human choice and action in theory of urban ecosystem dynamics. The work on biogeochemistry, species distribution and abundance, and designed aquatic ecosystems in cities has revealed that many ecological features are best explained by combinations of social and biophysical drivers.
Sudhir Kumar directs the Center for Evolutionary Functional Genomics in ASU's Biodesign Institute and is a professor of biology in the School of Life Sciences. He is cited by AAAS for "exemplary contributions in evolutionary bioinformatics, particularly in developing high-impact comparative analysis software for biologists and in illuminating the evolutionary dynamics of mutations and species through comparative genomics." Among his pioneering efforts was the software analysis of gene expression patterns from early gene expression patterns of fruit fly development, advanced work using protein molecular clocks to illuminate the Evolutionary Timescale of Life and the Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis (MEGA) software package that makes useful methods of comparative sequence analysis easily accessible to the scientific community for research and education. Kumar also has received an Innovation Award in Functional Genomics from the Burroughs Wellcome Fund in 2000.
Thomas Moore, a biochemist, is cited by AAAS for "pioneering research in artificial photosynthesis including the design of artificial reaction centers, antenna and assembling an energy-converting artificial photosynthetic membrane." Moore is a professor in ASU's chemistry and biochemistry department and director of the Center for Bioenergy and Photosynthesis. Most recently, he served on the U.S. Department of Energy Basic Energy Sciences Grand Challenges Committee, which produced "Directing Matter and Energy: Five Challenges for Science and the Imagination," outlining research priorities for the foreseeable future. Moore and colleagues collaborate on research in artificial photosynthesis, which is aimed at providing a deeper understanding of natural photosynthesis and the design, synthesis and assembly of bio-inspired constructs capable of sustainable energy production and conversion for human use.
John C.H. Spence is a Regents Professor in ASU's Department of Physics. He was cited by the AAAS for "distinguished contributions to diffraction physics, especially atomic-resolution electron microscopy, electron diffraction studies of the chemical bond and diffractive (lens-less) x-ray imaging." Spence undertakes experiments in condensed matter physics based around the use of electron beams for imaging, spectroscopy and diffraction. The work requires Spence's group to build or modify advanced instruments in order to do their experiments. Spence is currently working with others to get femtosecond "snapshots" of individual proteins using the first hard x-ray laser facility in the U.S., which will begin operation next year.
Brad Allenby, Richard Creath, James Elser, Patricia Gober, Nancy Grimm, Sudhir Kumar, Thomas Moore and John Spence will be recognized Feb. 14 at the Fellows forum, during the 2009 AAAS annual meeting in Chicago.
This year's election brings the total number of AAAS Fellows at Arizona State University to 54.
Becoming a Fellow is in recognition of efforts toward advancing science applications that are deemed scientifically or socially distinguished. Within that general framework, each awardee is honored for contributions to a specific field.
Braden Allenby is cited by the AAAS for "distinguished contributions to earth systems engineering and management, design for environment, industrial ecology and science and technology policy." He is a professor in ASU's Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, as well as a professor of law and of engineering and ethics with the Joan and David Lincoln Center for Applied Ethics. Recognized as a pioneer of modern industrial ecology, Allenby is co-director of the Center for Sustainable Engineering and is helping establish a new Center of Earth Systems Engineering and Management. He recently was named as one of the U.S. Professors of the Year for 2008 by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and the Council for Advancement and Support of Higher Education.
Richard Creath is cited by AAAS for "achievements in archiving and interpreting key documents in the historical development of scientific philosophy and demonstrating their relevance to current problems." Creath, a professor in the School of Life Sciences, is a philosopher of science and epistemologist who uses historical methods to illuminate fundamental questions about the nature of scientific reasoning and knowledge. He is one of the world's foremost authorities on philosophers Rudolf Carnap and W.V.O. Quine. As general editor of the multi-volume Carnap Project, he leads an international team of two dozen leading researchers.
James Elser is cited by AAAS for "pioneering work in developing the theories of ecological and biological stoichiometry to integrate levels of biology from the genome to the biosphere and thereby improve our management of renewable resources." Elser, a professor in the School of Life Sciences, has built a career asking questions about evolutionary biology and energy and material flows in ecosystems, traveling from Antarctica to alpine lakes of Norway and Colorado to the Mongolian grasslands of China, to find answers. Understanding the balance of carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus in systems forms the backbone of Elser's worldview, known as "stoichiometric theory." He has taught more than 10,000 students and his pioneering studies have shaped young minds and jumpstarted new research approaches, as well as provided insights into nutrient limitation, trophic dynamics, and biogeochemical cycling, evolution and integrated levels of organization from molecules to cells to ecosystems.
Patricia Gober, a human geographer and demographer, is co-director of the National Science Foundation's Decision Center for a Desert City, part of ASU's Global Institute of Sustainability, and a professor in the School of Geographical Sciences. A former president of the Association of American Geographers, Gober's research focuses on the use of science and visualization for real-world decision-making, particularly in tackling the difficult water management decisions necessary in the face of growing climatic uncertainty in metropolitan Phoenix. Gober is cited by AAAS for her "outstanding record of scholarship and disciplinary leadership" and because she "clearly established herself as a leader within the discipline and has left a permanent mark within American geography."
Nancy Grimm is cited by AAAS for "pioneering studies of urban social-ecological systems that conceptually expand urban resource management, and for innovative contributions in stream ecology and biogeochemistry that have stimulated decades of research." Grimm, a professor in ASU's School of Life Sciences, has for the past 10 years led the Central Arizona-Phoenix Long-Term Ecological Research project. CAP-LTER is centered on the analysis of urban-semi-arid ecosystem relationships. Through her collaborative work, Grimm has established a conceptual basis for including human choice and action in theory of urban ecosystem dynamics. The work on biogeochemistry, species distribution and abundance, and designed aquatic ecosystems in cities has revealed that many ecological features are best explained by combinations of social and biophysical drivers.
Sudhir Kumar directs the Center for Evolutionary Functional Genomics in ASU's Biodesign Institute and is a professor of biology in the School of Life Sciences. He is cited by AAAS for "exemplary contributions in evolutionary bioinformatics, particularly in developing high-impact comparative analysis software for biologists and in illuminating the evolutionary dynamics of mutations and species through comparative genomics." Among his pioneering efforts was the software analysis of gene expression patterns from early gene expression patterns of fruit fly development, advanced work using protein molecular clocks to illuminate the Evolutionary Timescale of Life and the Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis (MEGA) software package that makes useful methods of comparative sequence analysis easily accessible to the scientific community for research and education. Kumar also has received an Innovation Award in Functional Genomics from the Burroughs Wellcome Fund in 2000.
Thomas Moore, a biochemist, is cited by AAAS for "pioneering research in artificial photosynthesis including the design of artificial reaction centers, antenna and assembling an energy-converting artificial photosynthetic membrane." Moore is a professor in ASU's chemistry and biochemistry department and director of the Center for Bioenergy and Photosynthesis. Most recently, he served on the U.S. Department of Energy Basic Energy Sciences Grand Challenges Committee, which produced "Directing Matter and Energy: Five Challenges for Science and the Imagination," outlining research priorities for the foreseeable future. Moore and colleagues collaborate on research in artificial photosynthesis, which is aimed at providing a deeper understanding of natural photosynthesis and the design, synthesis and assembly of bio-inspired constructs capable of sustainable energy production and conversion for human use.
John C.H. Spence is a Regents Professor in ASU's Department of Physics. He was cited by the AAAS for "distinguished contributions to diffraction physics, especially atomic-resolution electron microscopy, electron diffraction studies of the chemical bond and diffractive (lens-less) x-ray imaging." Spence undertakes experiments in condensed matter physics based around the use of electron beams for imaging, spectroscopy and diffraction. The work requires Spence's group to build or modify advanced instruments in order to do their experiments. Spence is currently working with others to get femtosecond "snapshots" of individual proteins using the first hard x-ray laser facility in the U.S., which will begin operation next year.
UA losing major bioscience researcher
[Source: Aaron Mackey, ARizona Daily Star] - The leader of the UA's top research institute — whom colleagues hail as a key architect of the region's burgeoning bioscience industry — is leaving to head a San Francisco-based non-profit's scientific endeavors, the university announced Monday.
Vicki Chandler, director of the University of Arizona's Bio5 Institute, played a critical role in establishing the collaborative research center, which has brought tens of millions of grant dollars to the UA, including a $50 million award thought to be the largest grant in Arizona history.
The second high-profile professor with ties to Bio5 to leave the UA this year, Chandler will become chief program officer for the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation's science efforts in February.
In July, Bio5 founder Thomas Baldwin left the UA to become dean of UC-Riverside's College of Natural and Agricultural Sciences. Baldwin founded the program, which at the time was known as the Institute for Biomedical Science and Biotechnology, in 2001.
Besides being one of the UA's premier scientists, Chandler has become a regional ambassador for bioscience research, lobbying for state money to build research facilities while striving to tell the public about the importance of the work.
"She had a vision for Bio5 that was about much more than just scientific research," said Leslie Tolbert, the UA's vice president for research. "She has an enthusiasm for outreach and the role a university can play in community development."
Taking over Bio5 in 2002, Chandler led several efforts that culminated in the UA's landing a $50 million grant in January to establish the iPlant Collaborative, a research program aimed at unlocking the secrets of plant biology. That alone accounted for roughly 10 percent of the UA's overall $500 million research budget.
The project, co-led by Chandler, was seeded by state support in research funding and new buildings — both of which Chandler lobbied for, Tolbert said.
Chandler "has been a strong spokesperson with the Legislature and with private donors as well," Tolbert said. "She gets them to see that it isn't just about the institute in the abstract, but the people doing the science and getting results."
The Bio5 Institute is the UA's most prominent interdisciplinary research center, blending researchers from five fields —agriculture, medicine, pharmacy, basic science and engineering — with industry leaders to find solutions to common problems, such as disease.
The institute has been a pipeline for grants and also has proved successful at creating a number of spin-off companies that use technologies developed in UA laboratories.
Managing the complex relationships between business leaders and researchers, Chandler was integral in convincing several bioscience companies to either expand in or move to Tucson, said Joe Snell, president and CEO of Tucson Regional Economic Opportunities Inc.
"Her leadership has been incredibly valuable in helping to position Tucson as the next bioscience hub," he said.
"I don't think we would be where we're at or where we're going without her efforts."
Chandler also has helped build interest in science among high school students and UA undergraduates. She holds summer programs that get high schoolers in laboratories with researchers and often touts how half the Bio5 researchers are undergrads.
She also has narrated the UA-produced PBS show "WaveLengths," which provides a 30-minute snapshot of some of the research produced on campus.
On top of that, Chandler maintains a full-time lab and conducts field research as a Regents Professor in both the plant science and molecular and cellular biology departments. She also holds the Weiler Endowed Chair for Excellence in Agriculture and Life Sciences.
Chandler, who has been at the UA since 1997, said she has mixed emotions about her new role.
"It's always exciting to take on a new challenge, but I poured my heart and soul into the University of Arizona and really care deeply for it," she said.
The move will take her back to her roots. She grew up in Northern California and studied at the University of California-Berkeley and UC-San Francisco while later working at Stanford after earning her Ph.D.
The foundation she is joining invests $300 million each year in projects, including science and environmental conservation research around San Francisco.
Even with her new job, Chandler will be in Tucson often. She plans to retain her endowed chair and conduct research as part of the iPlant Collaborative, a process she says will take up about 20 percent of her time.
"The university has been incredibly gracious to allow me to continue to research," she said. "By keeping my feet squarely planted in science, it will hopefully help me in my new position."
The UA will name an interim director of Bio5 early next year and plans to conduct a national search for a permanent replacement, Tolbert said.
Vicki Chandler, director of the University of Arizona's Bio5 Institute, played a critical role in establishing the collaborative research center, which has brought tens of millions of grant dollars to the UA, including a $50 million award thought to be the largest grant in Arizona history.
The second high-profile professor with ties to Bio5 to leave the UA this year, Chandler will become chief program officer for the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation's science efforts in February.
In July, Bio5 founder Thomas Baldwin left the UA to become dean of UC-Riverside's College of Natural and Agricultural Sciences. Baldwin founded the program, which at the time was known as the Institute for Biomedical Science and Biotechnology, in 2001.
Besides being one of the UA's premier scientists, Chandler has become a regional ambassador for bioscience research, lobbying for state money to build research facilities while striving to tell the public about the importance of the work.
"She had a vision for Bio5 that was about much more than just scientific research," said Leslie Tolbert, the UA's vice president for research. "She has an enthusiasm for outreach and the role a university can play in community development."
Taking over Bio5 in 2002, Chandler led several efforts that culminated in the UA's landing a $50 million grant in January to establish the iPlant Collaborative, a research program aimed at unlocking the secrets of plant biology. That alone accounted for roughly 10 percent of the UA's overall $500 million research budget.
The project, co-led by Chandler, was seeded by state support in research funding and new buildings — both of which Chandler lobbied for, Tolbert said.
Chandler "has been a strong spokesperson with the Legislature and with private donors as well," Tolbert said. "She gets them to see that it isn't just about the institute in the abstract, but the people doing the science and getting results."
The Bio5 Institute is the UA's most prominent interdisciplinary research center, blending researchers from five fields —agriculture, medicine, pharmacy, basic science and engineering — with industry leaders to find solutions to common problems, such as disease.
The institute has been a pipeline for grants and also has proved successful at creating a number of spin-off companies that use technologies developed in UA laboratories.
Managing the complex relationships between business leaders and researchers, Chandler was integral in convincing several bioscience companies to either expand in or move to Tucson, said Joe Snell, president and CEO of Tucson Regional Economic Opportunities Inc.
"Her leadership has been incredibly valuable in helping to position Tucson as the next bioscience hub," he said.
"I don't think we would be where we're at or where we're going without her efforts."
Chandler also has helped build interest in science among high school students and UA undergraduates. She holds summer programs that get high schoolers in laboratories with researchers and often touts how half the Bio5 researchers are undergrads.
She also has narrated the UA-produced PBS show "WaveLengths," which provides a 30-minute snapshot of some of the research produced on campus.
On top of that, Chandler maintains a full-time lab and conducts field research as a Regents Professor in both the plant science and molecular and cellular biology departments. She also holds the Weiler Endowed Chair for Excellence in Agriculture and Life Sciences.
Chandler, who has been at the UA since 1997, said she has mixed emotions about her new role.
"It's always exciting to take on a new challenge, but I poured my heart and soul into the University of Arizona and really care deeply for it," she said.
The move will take her back to her roots. She grew up in Northern California and studied at the University of California-Berkeley and UC-San Francisco while later working at Stanford after earning her Ph.D.
The foundation she is joining invests $300 million each year in projects, including science and environmental conservation research around San Francisco.
Even with her new job, Chandler will be in Tucson often. She plans to retain her endowed chair and conduct research as part of the iPlant Collaborative, a process she says will take up about 20 percent of her time.
"The university has been incredibly gracious to allow me to continue to research," she said. "By keeping my feet squarely planted in science, it will hopefully help me in my new position."
The UA will name an interim director of Bio5 early next year and plans to conduct a national search for a permanent replacement, Tolbert said.
Monday, December 22, 2008
Economic downturn hurts ASU nursing school
[Source: Jahna Berry, The Arizona Republic] - Arizona State University's nursing school capped a historic and challenging year this week, honoring a record-breaking graduating class.
"It's been an unbelievable journey," graduate Gina Dioguardi, 24, said Wednesday as she helped fellow graduate Leticia Medina, 22, put on her cap and gown. The two were part of 276 graduates from ASU's College of Nursing and Healthcare Innovation who were recognized at the Phoenix Convention Center.
Like any new degree-holder, the nurses are worried about jobs.
"Because of the economy, there aren't a lot of places that are hiring," Medina said.
Even though the state has a nursing shortage, some employers have a limited number of slots for entry-level nurses because they cost more to train, Medina added.
The economic downturn is also taking a toll on the school.
As the nursing school celebrated its 50th year, the college was one of several ASU divisions hurt by university-wide budget cuts.
Officials say enrollment will be cut from 80 students to 40 at ASU's Polytechnic campus this spring and by the same amount at the West campus next fall.
Enrollment at the downtown Phoenix campus will remain the same. ASU plans to cut enrollment because it expects to lose some state funding.
The nursing school has 1,800 students. The college is based in downtown Phoenix, but students can take nursing classes on several ASU campuses.
The nursing cuts would come at a time when Arizona is struggling with a nursing shortage.
Last year, the state had 681 registered nurses per 100,000 people, below the national average of 825 registered nurses per 100,000, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
"It's been an unbelievable journey," graduate Gina Dioguardi, 24, said Wednesday as she helped fellow graduate Leticia Medina, 22, put on her cap and gown. The two were part of 276 graduates from ASU's College of Nursing and Healthcare Innovation who were recognized at the Phoenix Convention Center.
Like any new degree-holder, the nurses are worried about jobs.
"Because of the economy, there aren't a lot of places that are hiring," Medina said.
Even though the state has a nursing shortage, some employers have a limited number of slots for entry-level nurses because they cost more to train, Medina added.
The economic downturn is also taking a toll on the school.
As the nursing school celebrated its 50th year, the college was one of several ASU divisions hurt by university-wide budget cuts.
Officials say enrollment will be cut from 80 students to 40 at ASU's Polytechnic campus this spring and by the same amount at the West campus next fall.
Enrollment at the downtown Phoenix campus will remain the same. ASU plans to cut enrollment because it expects to lose some state funding.
The nursing school has 1,800 students. The college is based in downtown Phoenix, but students can take nursing classes on several ASU campuses.
The nursing cuts would come at a time when Arizona is struggling with a nursing shortage.
Last year, the state had 681 registered nurses per 100,000 people, below the national average of 825 registered nurses per 100,000, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
UA provost suggests pay cuts
[Source: AzCentral/AP] - When it comes to fixing budget shortfalls, some high earners at the University of Arizona should cut their pay.
That suggestion comes from one of the school's highest paid employees, University of Arizona Provost Meredith Hay, who earns more than $100,000 a year.
The number of employees making more than six figures at the UA has increased 45 percent since 2005 while costs of paying those workers jumped 53 percent, according to an Arizona Daily Star analysis.
Officials acknowledge there are more employees earning more than $100,000 in what they call the reality of the highly competitive academic market and a product of growth in programs such as the UA's medical school in Phoenix.
They add it's not as if those workers are getting raises at the expense of lower-paid staffers.
It costs the UA $76 million to pay 2,323 workers who earn less than $50,000 a year and account for nearly half of all state-paid employees.
It also costs about $71 million to pay the 568 employees making more than $100,000.
The idea to cut into UA employee earnings has gained steam as officials look at ways to offset what they expect to be a series of state cuts that could leave them $50 million in the red by next summer.
Cutting pay could pose potential long-term consequences that could affect the UA's ability to hire and retain employees.
"What does that do for our competitiveness? We're already below where we need to be," said Allison Vaillancourt, UA's vice president for human resources. "If we take another whack at employees, who will come to work for us? Will we be able to attract people in the future?"
Overall salary costs have increased by 18 percent since 2005, putting UA in line with other universities, she said.
Faculty members who get raises actually save the UA money in the long run because it's cheaper than advertising for an open position and training a new employee, university officials said.
"If they need lab equipment or special office space, we could be looking at several hundred thousand dollars," Vaillancourt said. "It doesn't make any sense for us to spend that money if we don't have to."
That suggestion comes from one of the school's highest paid employees, University of Arizona Provost Meredith Hay, who earns more than $100,000 a year.
The number of employees making more than six figures at the UA has increased 45 percent since 2005 while costs of paying those workers jumped 53 percent, according to an Arizona Daily Star analysis.
Officials acknowledge there are more employees earning more than $100,000 in what they call the reality of the highly competitive academic market and a product of growth in programs such as the UA's medical school in Phoenix.
They add it's not as if those workers are getting raises at the expense of lower-paid staffers.
It costs the UA $76 million to pay 2,323 workers who earn less than $50,000 a year and account for nearly half of all state-paid employees.
It also costs about $71 million to pay the 568 employees making more than $100,000.
The idea to cut into UA employee earnings has gained steam as officials look at ways to offset what they expect to be a series of state cuts that could leave them $50 million in the red by next summer.
Cutting pay could pose potential long-term consequences that could affect the UA's ability to hire and retain employees.
"What does that do for our competitiveness? We're already below where we need to be," said Allison Vaillancourt, UA's vice president for human resources. "If we take another whack at employees, who will come to work for us? Will we be able to attract people in the future?"
Overall salary costs have increased by 18 percent since 2005, putting UA in line with other universities, she said.
Faculty members who get raises actually save the UA money in the long run because it's cheaper than advertising for an open position and training a new employee, university officials said.
"If they need lab equipment or special office space, we could be looking at several hundred thousand dollars," Vaillancourt said. "It doesn't make any sense for us to spend that money if we don't have to."
Friday, December 19, 2008
Telemedicine protects Arizona, its many regional communities
[Source: Nogales International, Roger Conroy] - Centered in Phoenix and Tucson, a beneficial net covers Arizona communities from Ajo to Nogales to Yuma, the New Mexico communities of Bloomfield, Crownpoint, Gallup, Shiprock and Tohatchi and Utah’s Fort Duchesne and Salt Lake City.
The Arizona Telemedicine Network gives people in Santa Cruz County access to specialty care--that’s care beyond what is offered at Mariposa--applying the latest technology, said Mariposa Health Clinic CEO Jim Weldon. “Doctor (Ronald S.) Weinstein founded the program, and it’s very innovative--a national model.” Weinstein was the third guest speaker in the Mariposa Series on Thursday at Holiday Inn Express in Nogales.
The network gives local clinics access to information and specialties above the level normally available in Nogales, Mariposa chief of medicine Eladio Pereira said. Mariposa Clinic uses rheumatology, dermatology and gastroenterology services over the Telemedicine Network. “It’s incredible--speed, accuracy, consults right away. It’s very, very important.”
There are several cases each month that are aided by use of the network at Mariposa, Pereira said.
The network had it’s beginnings at Massachusetts General in 1968, Weinstein said. Telepathology, or remote diagnosis began in the 1980s. The concept is illustrated by the television shows “CSI,: and earlier, “Quincy, M.E.,” Weinstein said.
Arizona Sen. Robert Burns was instrumental in the establishment of the network, Weinstein said. “He’s now president of the Arizona state senate. He founded it. He came to us and asked us to do it.”
The network began at the Phoenix campus of the University of Arizona College of Medicine, where Weinstein is director of the program. It now includes 171 sites in 71 communities. “Doctor Pereira is the best director in those 71 communities,” Weinstein said. “He has been a supporter of Mariposa efforts in telemedicine since the beginning.”
24-hour access
The network gives 24/7 access to pathology (the study of disease) at the UA College of Medicine. “Telemedicine is a large program that provides services at a distance,” Weinstein said.
Nogales came on board through a grant from the Department of Agriculture. Originally, the program was designed for “end of the dirt road” clinics, Weinstein said. Mariposa was brought on to allow doctors in Phoenix and Tucson to travel to a remote site that was easily accessible to evaluate the network in the beginning.
The U of A created a unique network for Arizona. In 1996, there was a problem of broadband access in Arizona, and the U of A created the Telemedicine Network outside the Internet to meet its telecommunications needs, Weinstein said.
By 1998 there were 55 sites, including Nogales. Nogales was the first rural site, Weinstein said.
Communities served include remote Indian reservations and prisons in rural settings. The Department of Corrections facilities are placed in remote locations in Arizona. The Indian reservations saved $200,000 in costs over the last year. “The dollar savings in the Department of Corrections is enough to fund the entire program,” Weinstein said.
It is easier to use telemedicine for the prison system than to transport prisoners, and the prisoners like it better, Weinstein said.
Radiology is huge in the prison system, Weinstein said, but it is only one of the specialties that use the Telemedicine Network.
Real-time use
One example is doctors use real-time ultrasound to diagnose fetal problems. There are many applications, Weinstein said. They include tele-psychiatry, tele-dermatology, tele-cardiology, tele-ophthalmology, infectious disease diagnosis and family teleconferencing.
There are many times a patient is confined for long periods at a hospital and the family is in a remote community. The system allows families to continue interpersonal relations, which benefit the patient, Weinstein said.
Tele-pediatrics and tele-trauma, which began in Douglas, are also important, Weinstein said. “It provides a telepresence for trauma physicians. “It saves lives,” Weinstein said.
Broadband access promises more access for remote communities in the future, Weinstein said. “Many sites are now interoperable over the broadband network. Many of the communications issues are not minimized because of the availability of the Internet. That’s a real advance.”
Thus far, the network has handled more than 700,000 cases. More than 150 physicians from the college of medicine handle cases. “We have a long way to go,” Weinstein said. “The university still doesn’t have access to all the information to assist in all cases.”
That is due to the fragmented nature of the U.S. health-care system, Weinstein said. Some patient records may not be accessible through the network.
The latest advance is in digital mammography, Weinstein said. “The Navajo Nation wants to be first in telemedicine. They now have a 45-minute turn-around for digital mammography, where the follow up was only 50 percent, and entailed a long wait.”
Patients are often without communications on reservations, Weinstein explained. The network shortened a weeklong turnaround to allow patients to remain at the clinic to hear results.
Dramatic change
The change is dramatic. “It has altered the way physicians look at disease,” Weinstein said. It gives physicians the opportunity to communicate and to compare things.
Still, one of four to six visits should be in person, for most cases, Weinstein said. Some procedures can be completely remote, such as the digital mammography, with the on-site physician handling consultation.
The Mariposa Series of lectures is an opportunity to bring folks together for lunch and to hear about the latest developments in medical care from a well-respected speaker, Weldon said. The series began in 2007 and is held twice a year, said Norma Villasenor executive assistant to the CEO.
The Arizona Telemedicine Network gives people in Santa Cruz County access to specialty care--that’s care beyond what is offered at Mariposa--applying the latest technology, said Mariposa Health Clinic CEO Jim Weldon. “Doctor (Ronald S.) Weinstein founded the program, and it’s very innovative--a national model.” Weinstein was the third guest speaker in the Mariposa Series on Thursday at Holiday Inn Express in Nogales.
The network gives local clinics access to information and specialties above the level normally available in Nogales, Mariposa chief of medicine Eladio Pereira said. Mariposa Clinic uses rheumatology, dermatology and gastroenterology services over the Telemedicine Network. “It’s incredible--speed, accuracy, consults right away. It’s very, very important.”
There are several cases each month that are aided by use of the network at Mariposa, Pereira said.
The network had it’s beginnings at Massachusetts General in 1968, Weinstein said. Telepathology, or remote diagnosis began in the 1980s. The concept is illustrated by the television shows “CSI,: and earlier, “Quincy, M.E.,” Weinstein said.
Arizona Sen. Robert Burns was instrumental in the establishment of the network, Weinstein said. “He’s now president of the Arizona state senate. He founded it. He came to us and asked us to do it.”
The network began at the Phoenix campus of the University of Arizona College of Medicine, where Weinstein is director of the program. It now includes 171 sites in 71 communities. “Doctor Pereira is the best director in those 71 communities,” Weinstein said. “He has been a supporter of Mariposa efforts in telemedicine since the beginning.”
24-hour access
The network gives 24/7 access to pathology (the study of disease) at the UA College of Medicine. “Telemedicine is a large program that provides services at a distance,” Weinstein said.
Nogales came on board through a grant from the Department of Agriculture. Originally, the program was designed for “end of the dirt road” clinics, Weinstein said. Mariposa was brought on to allow doctors in Phoenix and Tucson to travel to a remote site that was easily accessible to evaluate the network in the beginning.
The U of A created a unique network for Arizona. In 1996, there was a problem of broadband access in Arizona, and the U of A created the Telemedicine Network outside the Internet to meet its telecommunications needs, Weinstein said.
By 1998 there were 55 sites, including Nogales. Nogales was the first rural site, Weinstein said.
Communities served include remote Indian reservations and prisons in rural settings. The Department of Corrections facilities are placed in remote locations in Arizona. The Indian reservations saved $200,000 in costs over the last year. “The dollar savings in the Department of Corrections is enough to fund the entire program,” Weinstein said.
It is easier to use telemedicine for the prison system than to transport prisoners, and the prisoners like it better, Weinstein said.
Radiology is huge in the prison system, Weinstein said, but it is only one of the specialties that use the Telemedicine Network.
Real-time use
One example is doctors use real-time ultrasound to diagnose fetal problems. There are many applications, Weinstein said. They include tele-psychiatry, tele-dermatology, tele-cardiology, tele-ophthalmology, infectious disease diagnosis and family teleconferencing.
There are many times a patient is confined for long periods at a hospital and the family is in a remote community. The system allows families to continue interpersonal relations, which benefit the patient, Weinstein said.
Tele-pediatrics and tele-trauma, which began in Douglas, are also important, Weinstein said. “It provides a telepresence for trauma physicians. “It saves lives,” Weinstein said.
Broadband access promises more access for remote communities in the future, Weinstein said. “Many sites are now interoperable over the broadband network. Many of the communications issues are not minimized because of the availability of the Internet. That’s a real advance.”
Thus far, the network has handled more than 700,000 cases. More than 150 physicians from the college of medicine handle cases. “We have a long way to go,” Weinstein said. “The university still doesn’t have access to all the information to assist in all cases.”
That is due to the fragmented nature of the U.S. health-care system, Weinstein said. Some patient records may not be accessible through the network.
The latest advance is in digital mammography, Weinstein said. “The Navajo Nation wants to be first in telemedicine. They now have a 45-minute turn-around for digital mammography, where the follow up was only 50 percent, and entailed a long wait.”
Patients are often without communications on reservations, Weinstein explained. The network shortened a weeklong turnaround to allow patients to remain at the clinic to hear results.
Dramatic change
The change is dramatic. “It has altered the way physicians look at disease,” Weinstein said. It gives physicians the opportunity to communicate and to compare things.
Still, one of four to six visits should be in person, for most cases, Weinstein said. Some procedures can be completely remote, such as the digital mammography, with the on-site physician handling consultation.
The Mariposa Series of lectures is an opportunity to bring folks together for lunch and to hear about the latest developments in medical care from a well-respected speaker, Weldon said. The series began in 2007 and is held twice a year, said Norma Villasenor executive assistant to the CEO.
Firms hope their compounds will be tomorrow’s medicines
[Source: Phoenix Business Journal, Angela Gonzales] - While only a handful of big pharmaceutical firms have a presence in Arizona, the Grand Canyon State is home to a plethora of smaller companies in the early stages of drug development.
The problem is, it’s getting more expensive and taking longer to get drugs to market, and most of the drugs being tested are failing long before they hit the shelves.
Only 16 new medicines were approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 2007 — one of the lowest totals in more than two decades, said Dr. Ray Woosley, president and CEO of the Tucson-based Critical Path Institute, which is working with big pharma and the FDA to get drugs to market quickly and safely.
As a result, the world’s pharmaceutical industry is turning its attention to biotech companies, hoping their compounds are tomorrow’s answer to today’s diseases.
Local biotech companies are positioning themselves to catch big pharma’s attention as they test their novel compounds in animal studies and early human trials. Many of them are counting on getting licensing agreements before their compounds reach the expensive phase three clinical trials.
For example, InNexus Biotechnology Inc. has a commitment from Ontario, Canada-based Royalty Pharma Inc. for $34.5 million in funding to help get its compounds through the early phases of human clinical trials. At that point, the goal is to hand the drugs off to the pharmaceutical industry, said Jeff Morhet, president and CEO of InNexus.
“Given this market, distinction is critical,” he said. “You’ve got to be able to show what you’ve been able to produce is going to provide value.”
John Carroll, editor of FierceBiotech, which tracks the industry nationwide, said it has been a seller’s market for quite some time, which has been good for biotech companies.
“I’ve seen some very sweet deals,” he said. “Pharma companies need these new therapies, and they haven’t done well coming up with new major drugs to replace the blockbusters that they’re losing off of patent.”
However, Carroll said the tide changed in October.
“It’s not a seller’s market anymore,” he said. “It’s more of a buyer’s market.”
Now, big pharma is in a position to swoop in and buy struggling biotech firms’ assets at a mark-down, he said.
“If you’re a little biotech company and got two years of operating capital, that’s OK,” he said. “It’s all a question of positioning right now.”
He’s seeing biotech companies laying off 25 percent to 40 percent of their work forces nationwide.
“Usually, if I had one biotech restructuring or laying off staff as a result of an FDA rejection or failure, that was not uncommon,” Carroll said. “Now, you’re just seeing a whole slate of different biotech companies laying off.”
2009 will be a ‘long, hard row’
Carroll said he doesn’t see any short-term prospects for a turnaround.
“We’re just getting into it,” he said. “2009 is going to be a long, hard row for a lot of people to hoe.”
Biotech companies that have two years of operating capital will be able to weather the storm, he said, but he doesn’t see many with that much capital.
Pharma doesn’t have to be so desperate anymore, according to Steven Burrill, president and CEO of San Francisco-based Burrill & Co., a financial firm that focuses on life sciences.
“They know biotechs will come and talk with them,” he said. “They can hang back and wait. They do have rapidly depleting pipelines, but they don’t have to be in as big a hurry and they may not have to pay as much.”
Michael Wilhelm, president and CEO of Scottsdale-based ImmuneRegen BioSciences Inc., said he hopes a large biotech or pharma will acquire or license his company’s drugs.
“Those conversations are happening more so than they were,” he said.
Spreading out the Risk
Large pharma companies have invested a lot of money in research and development, and they have not seen a commensurate increase in the number of drugs that have been approved, said Hal Siegel, chief scientific officer for ImmuneRegen.
“They’re looking to spread out the risk by partnering with small companies earlier in development so they can fund the research in a broad number of compounds that are still early-stage,” he said. “They’re hedging their bets, making larger investments in better compounds later on.”
Gail Thurston, vice president of corporate and business development for Apthera Inc. in Scottsdale, said the pharmaceutical companies have distribution networks set up to take new drugs to market — something Apthera and other small biotechs don’t have.
“We will provide the tools for a big pharma company to go out there and get the numbers that we projected for sale over the next decade or so,” she said. “Our patents are quite young. They won’t turn into generics any time soon anyway.”
She said she hopes Apthera’s compound will enter phase three clinical trials by the end of next year, with a global partner to co-develop its portfolio of cancer drugs.
“There are not a heck of a lot of companies like ours that have late-stage products that are available for licensing,” she said. “People are taking notice.”
Jeffrey Berk, president of Scottsdale-based MedPredict Market Research, said it’s crucial for biotech and pharmaceutical firms to trudge forward in their research efforts for new drugs and therapies.
He pointed to Novartis Pharma US’ 9-year-old drug, Gleevec, which treats chronic myeloid leukemia. Before the drug was invented, patients with that disease would live for about a year. With Gleevec, their life expectancy increases to eight to 10 years. About 4,500 Americans get the disease each year. Now, fewer than 400 die from it each year.
“You have to understand what pharma can deliver,” Berk said.
The problem is, it’s getting more expensive and taking longer to get drugs to market, and most of the drugs being tested are failing long before they hit the shelves.
Only 16 new medicines were approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 2007 — one of the lowest totals in more than two decades, said Dr. Ray Woosley, president and CEO of the Tucson-based Critical Path Institute, which is working with big pharma and the FDA to get drugs to market quickly and safely.
As a result, the world’s pharmaceutical industry is turning its attention to biotech companies, hoping their compounds are tomorrow’s answer to today’s diseases.
Local biotech companies are positioning themselves to catch big pharma’s attention as they test their novel compounds in animal studies and early human trials. Many of them are counting on getting licensing agreements before their compounds reach the expensive phase three clinical trials.
For example, InNexus Biotechnology Inc. has a commitment from Ontario, Canada-based Royalty Pharma Inc. for $34.5 million in funding to help get its compounds through the early phases of human clinical trials. At that point, the goal is to hand the drugs off to the pharmaceutical industry, said Jeff Morhet, president and CEO of InNexus.
“Given this market, distinction is critical,” he said. “You’ve got to be able to show what you’ve been able to produce is going to provide value.”
John Carroll, editor of FierceBiotech, which tracks the industry nationwide, said it has been a seller’s market for quite some time, which has been good for biotech companies.
“I’ve seen some very sweet deals,” he said. “Pharma companies need these new therapies, and they haven’t done well coming up with new major drugs to replace the blockbusters that they’re losing off of patent.”
However, Carroll said the tide changed in October.
“It’s not a seller’s market anymore,” he said. “It’s more of a buyer’s market.”
Now, big pharma is in a position to swoop in and buy struggling biotech firms’ assets at a mark-down, he said.
“If you’re a little biotech company and got two years of operating capital, that’s OK,” he said. “It’s all a question of positioning right now.”
He’s seeing biotech companies laying off 25 percent to 40 percent of their work forces nationwide.
“Usually, if I had one biotech restructuring or laying off staff as a result of an FDA rejection or failure, that was not uncommon,” Carroll said. “Now, you’re just seeing a whole slate of different biotech companies laying off.”
2009 will be a ‘long, hard row’
Carroll said he doesn’t see any short-term prospects for a turnaround.
“We’re just getting into it,” he said. “2009 is going to be a long, hard row for a lot of people to hoe.”
Biotech companies that have two years of operating capital will be able to weather the storm, he said, but he doesn’t see many with that much capital.
Pharma doesn’t have to be so desperate anymore, according to Steven Burrill, president and CEO of San Francisco-based Burrill & Co., a financial firm that focuses on life sciences.
“They know biotechs will come and talk with them,” he said. “They can hang back and wait. They do have rapidly depleting pipelines, but they don’t have to be in as big a hurry and they may not have to pay as much.”
Michael Wilhelm, president and CEO of Scottsdale-based ImmuneRegen BioSciences Inc., said he hopes a large biotech or pharma will acquire or license his company’s drugs.
“Those conversations are happening more so than they were,” he said.
Spreading out the Risk
Large pharma companies have invested a lot of money in research and development, and they have not seen a commensurate increase in the number of drugs that have been approved, said Hal Siegel, chief scientific officer for ImmuneRegen.
“They’re looking to spread out the risk by partnering with small companies earlier in development so they can fund the research in a broad number of compounds that are still early-stage,” he said. “They’re hedging their bets, making larger investments in better compounds later on.”
Gail Thurston, vice president of corporate and business development for Apthera Inc. in Scottsdale, said the pharmaceutical companies have distribution networks set up to take new drugs to market — something Apthera and other small biotechs don’t have.
“We will provide the tools for a big pharma company to go out there and get the numbers that we projected for sale over the next decade or so,” she said. “Our patents are quite young. They won’t turn into generics any time soon anyway.”
She said she hopes Apthera’s compound will enter phase three clinical trials by the end of next year, with a global partner to co-develop its portfolio of cancer drugs.
“There are not a heck of a lot of companies like ours that have late-stage products that are available for licensing,” she said. “People are taking notice.”
Jeffrey Berk, president of Scottsdale-based MedPredict Market Research, said it’s crucial for biotech and pharmaceutical firms to trudge forward in their research efforts for new drugs and therapies.
He pointed to Novartis Pharma US’ 9-year-old drug, Gleevec, which treats chronic myeloid leukemia. Before the drug was invented, patients with that disease would live for about a year. With Gleevec, their life expectancy increases to eight to 10 years. About 4,500 Americans get the disease each year. Now, fewer than 400 die from it each year.
“You have to understand what pharma can deliver,” Berk said.
When Medicine Meets Marketing
[Source: Newsweek, Mary Carmichael] - Dallas Hextell was just a baby when his parents bought him a walker—not because he was late reaching a milestone, but because they worried he might never toddle on his own. At 9 months he had been diagnosed with cerebral palsy, a form of brain injury caused by oxygen deprivation in utero or at birth. A neurologist had told Derak and Cynthia Hextell there was no cure, that it was best to wait and see if their son improved. But Cynthia, after months of research, enrolled Dallas in a highly experimental trial at Duke University, where a pediatric-transplant surgeon infused him with a sample of his own stem cells harvested from his umbilical-cord blood. A few days later, Derak and Cynthia went home with their son, who was 18 months old and still not crawling, much less walking or talking. They "stared at him" for a week, says Cynthia. "One day he just started saying, 'Mama, mama, mama.' And I started crying." The Hextells ended up donating the walker to another child. By 2, Dallas was not only walking unaided, he was chasing the family dogs.
If the Hextells' names sound familiar to some readers, it is because, in the wake of their son's remarkable recovery, they have become minor celebrities. Their story has appeared on the "Today" show and in advertisements in almost every pregnancy magazine in the country. The ads are not for the trial at Duke, which remains a small, academic endeavor. They are for a company called Cord Blood Registry, which charges parents $2,000-plus to freeze and store samples of their children's umbilical-cord blood, a fluid rich in stem cells. Cynthia Hextell paid the company to freeze Dallas's cord blood at his birth. That sample was the source of the stem cells used in the Duke trial—and as the ads remind parents, it was available only because the Hextells had paid for it to be.
The Hextells' story has become the centerpiece of CBR's marketing efforts. Recently the company invited about 30 obstetricians and midwives to the Westin La Paloma resort in Tucson, Ariz., for a weekend of sun, golf and medical briefings, including dinner in a ballroom with the Hextells as guest speakers. Since these doctors had collected cord blood for CBR clients in the past, the company hoped to turn them into evangelists. The next day, the group went for a tour of CBR's glittering 60,000-square-foot lab. The agenda also included more time at the La Paloma, home to a Jack Nicklaus golf course, a spa, five restaurants and a swim-up bar. CBR can easily afford to put on this kind of show. Ten years ago it was a fledgling business with 10,000 clients. Today it is the country's largest private cord-blood bank, with 250,000 samples in storage, 300 employees and $100 million in annual revenue.
In medicine, money often comes with controversy—and right now, CBR has plenty of both. The company says it is providing precious biological insurance, that to freeze a child's cord-blood stem cells is to provide him a medical option for the future, perhaps a lifesaving treatment for childhood cancer or brain injuries. But critics, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, accuse private cord-blood banks like CBR of making exaggerated medical promises and exploiting vulnerable new parents. Cord blood's uses are limited at best, they say. The blood does not provide enough cells to cure an adult of a disease or injury; it is not appropriate for treating genetic conditions; and thus far there have been few trials to determine how effectively the cells can repair damaged tissue. Even Joanne Kurtzberg, the Duke transplant specialist who treated Dallas Hextell, is skeptical. She says it's difficult to know if his improvement is related to the cells or would have occurred without them—he probably would have gotten better on his own; some cerebral-palsy patients do—and she points out that her trial is small and yet to be analyzed and published. But CBR has a response for this. It says more uses for cord-blood stem cells will surely be discovered in the future. It also knows the power of a good story. David Zitlow, the company's senior vice president of public affairs, says doctors "haven't made a big enough deal about anecdotes" like the Hextells'.
So what are other parents, faced with the choice of banking their children's cord blood or brushing off the idea as a luxury—the medical equivalent of an $800 stroller—supposed to make of Dallas Hextell's case? Is it a breakthrough, a harbinger? Or is it ultimately just an anecdote, a moving tale with a happy outcome that may or may not have anything to do with cord blood and stem cells?
Doctors have been wondering if cord blood is something of a miracle cure for the past 15 years. The blood—which is usually thrown away in delivery rooms—contains a distinct type of stem cell that may act as a biochemical foreman, helping to build healthy tissues and repair damaged ones. In the early 1990s— before embryonic stem cells took over the spotlight—researchers began to explore whether cord-blood cells might be of practical medical use. At Duke, Kurtzberg performed a few cord-blood transplants on patients with leukemia and rare types of bone-marrow failure, sending them into remission. Meanwhile, the National Institutes of Health started funding public banks of frozen, donated cord-blood samples, modeled on adult blood banks. A cord-blood stem-cell transplant at that point was a long shot, an experiment to see if stem cells could either become new tissue or trick the body into fixing itself. But the idea behind the public banks was to make the option available to all families who might want to try it as a last resort.
It was around this time, in 1992, that Tom Moore, a technology and pharmaceutical executive with passion for startups, hatched a plan to found a cord-blood bank of his own. Unlike the NIH banks, this one would operate for profit. Its clients would retain exclusive access to their own genetically identical samples, for a fee of $1,500 up front plus $125 for each year of storage. One problem: Moore "didn't really know anything about stem cells except the name," he admits. So he sought out David Harris, a University of Arizona immunologist and cord-blood researcher, to serve as CBR's scientific director; meanwhile, as the CEO, he took care of the business side. Now it takes care of him. CBR is the largest of 30-some private cord-blood banks in the United States, with a 45 percent share of the $250 million market. It's probably not done growing yet. Moore's "big, hairy, audacious goal" is a million clients, quadruple the company's current size.
A number of trends have likely contributed to CBR's growth, including the enormous boom in the baby-products market and the hype around stem cells in general. But one thing that has not been a factor is a rapid rise in medical uses for cord blood—because there hasn't been one yet. Just as it was in the '90s, a cord-blood stem-cell transplant is still an experimental procedure. This hasn't deterred CBR from publicizing the results of a few positive studies, including a small, preliminary trial in kids with type 1 diabetes from last year.
In Dallas Hextell, CBR has another case to promote. In ads, the Hextells call the cord-blood treatment "a miracle." But nobody really knows what has happened in Dallas's brain. The story sounds less clear-cut coming from Kurtzberg, the doctor who performed the transfusion and who examined Dallas again in November. "He has made progress, there's no question," she says. "But he still has a global developmental delay of about a year. He looks like where we would have expected him to be without cells." When she saw him at his follow-up visit, she adds, "I thought, wow, he doesn't look as good as I was expecting based on what's been in the press." (The Hextells find Kurtzberg's assessment frustrating and note that Dallas's therapists at home—who knew him before the transfusion—are impressed and surprised at his improvement.) Kurtzberg also has not completed the follow-up and analysis of the study or published the results from 50 other kids with cerebral palsy who have enrolled in her trial thus far.
Kurtzberg, it turns out, is not a big booster for private cord-blood banks; although she uses samples from CBR, she does not receive funding from the company, and also uses cells from public banks and other companies. In fact, she's one of the authors of a statement the American Academy of Pediatrics put out last year discouraging parents from using private banks on the grounds that the science isn't solid enough yet to justify a multi-thousand-dollar gamble. (The AAP does support public, nonprofit banks, which patients can use for free.) The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists released its own statement in February, noting that "there is no reliable estimate of a child's likelihood of actually using his or her own saved cord blood later." Then it made a guess anyway: 1 in 2,700, which Kurtzberg calls "generous."
Why is this number so small? There are reasons to think cord-blood treatment will never be a widespread medical procedure. The blood contains only enough stem cells to treat a small child; unlike embryonic stem cells, cord-blood cells cannot be multiplied into self-rejuvenating "lines" in a petri dish. The cells are limited in other ways, too. There's little point in treating a genetic condition with a patient's own cord-blood cells, which have the same DNA and thus the same deleterious mutations. Scientists could someday overcome these hurdles; they could develop new ways of cultivating and genetically tweaking cord-blood cells in the lab. But by then, the same scientists will probably know much more about all stem cells, especially once restrictions on embryonic research are lifted—and there may be better ways of getting safe, usable cells from other sources, ways that won't require a lot of technological wizardry.
These difficulties don't deter everyone, of course. The pediatrician Robert Sears, a talk-show regular and the coauthor of popular parenting books, supports private cord-blood banking; he froze his own kids' samples with CBR. It's also possible that 1 in 2,700 is too conservative. CBR's executives toss around much more dramatic odds. Harris, the scientific director, puts them at a breathtaking 1 in 3. His calculations, unlike the professional groups', include injuries to the brain. There is, he notes, "no genetic predisposition to falling out of a crib"—so as he sees it, every child, technically, is at risk.
Until widespread trials of cord-blood treatment take place, both sides will be able to use arbitrary calculations. Those trials, alas, are probably far off: rare conditions are difficult to study on a large scale, since by definition there aren't many patients to enroll. Three years ago, Congress tried to put cord-blood trials on a faster track by expanding funds for the NIH's public banks—more donations to the banks could mean more studies—but the law hasn't made much of an impact. Public banks have collected cord blood from just 105,000 babies, and fewer than 200 hospitals in the U.S. are able to draw and ship the blood to public centers. The private banks, of course, have larger stores. But they are not huge contributors to research either: only 100 of CBR's 250,000 clients have enrolled in trials thus far.
For now, parents are left to make the same speculative wager at the heart of CBR's business model: how much should you invest in science that's promising but not proven? Back in the ballroom in Tucson, the OBs and midwives on the CBR junket were considering that question too. They pressed Cynthia Hextell for more details. How were the other kids in the Kurtzberg trial doing? Cynthia said the few other families she had talked to had seen improvements like Dallas's. And what risks were they warned about? "The only risk was that it wouldn't work and we would be out the money," she said. "But we just knew in our hearts that it was going to work." Other parents will have to decide whether they have that kind of faith.
If the Hextells' names sound familiar to some readers, it is because, in the wake of their son's remarkable recovery, they have become minor celebrities. Their story has appeared on the "Today" show and in advertisements in almost every pregnancy magazine in the country. The ads are not for the trial at Duke, which remains a small, academic endeavor. They are for a company called Cord Blood Registry, which charges parents $2,000-plus to freeze and store samples of their children's umbilical-cord blood, a fluid rich in stem cells. Cynthia Hextell paid the company to freeze Dallas's cord blood at his birth. That sample was the source of the stem cells used in the Duke trial—and as the ads remind parents, it was available only because the Hextells had paid for it to be.
The Hextells' story has become the centerpiece of CBR's marketing efforts. Recently the company invited about 30 obstetricians and midwives to the Westin La Paloma resort in Tucson, Ariz., for a weekend of sun, golf and medical briefings, including dinner in a ballroom with the Hextells as guest speakers. Since these doctors had collected cord blood for CBR clients in the past, the company hoped to turn them into evangelists. The next day, the group went for a tour of CBR's glittering 60,000-square-foot lab. The agenda also included more time at the La Paloma, home to a Jack Nicklaus golf course, a spa, five restaurants and a swim-up bar. CBR can easily afford to put on this kind of show. Ten years ago it was a fledgling business with 10,000 clients. Today it is the country's largest private cord-blood bank, with 250,000 samples in storage, 300 employees and $100 million in annual revenue.
In medicine, money often comes with controversy—and right now, CBR has plenty of both. The company says it is providing precious biological insurance, that to freeze a child's cord-blood stem cells is to provide him a medical option for the future, perhaps a lifesaving treatment for childhood cancer or brain injuries. But critics, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, accuse private cord-blood banks like CBR of making exaggerated medical promises and exploiting vulnerable new parents. Cord blood's uses are limited at best, they say. The blood does not provide enough cells to cure an adult of a disease or injury; it is not appropriate for treating genetic conditions; and thus far there have been few trials to determine how effectively the cells can repair damaged tissue. Even Joanne Kurtzberg, the Duke transplant specialist who treated Dallas Hextell, is skeptical. She says it's difficult to know if his improvement is related to the cells or would have occurred without them—he probably would have gotten better on his own; some cerebral-palsy patients do—and she points out that her trial is small and yet to be analyzed and published. But CBR has a response for this. It says more uses for cord-blood stem cells will surely be discovered in the future. It also knows the power of a good story. David Zitlow, the company's senior vice president of public affairs, says doctors "haven't made a big enough deal about anecdotes" like the Hextells'.
So what are other parents, faced with the choice of banking their children's cord blood or brushing off the idea as a luxury—the medical equivalent of an $800 stroller—supposed to make of Dallas Hextell's case? Is it a breakthrough, a harbinger? Or is it ultimately just an anecdote, a moving tale with a happy outcome that may or may not have anything to do with cord blood and stem cells?
Doctors have been wondering if cord blood is something of a miracle cure for the past 15 years. The blood—which is usually thrown away in delivery rooms—contains a distinct type of stem cell that may act as a biochemical foreman, helping to build healthy tissues and repair damaged ones. In the early 1990s— before embryonic stem cells took over the spotlight—researchers began to explore whether cord-blood cells might be of practical medical use. At Duke, Kurtzberg performed a few cord-blood transplants on patients with leukemia and rare types of bone-marrow failure, sending them into remission. Meanwhile, the National Institutes of Health started funding public banks of frozen, donated cord-blood samples, modeled on adult blood banks. A cord-blood stem-cell transplant at that point was a long shot, an experiment to see if stem cells could either become new tissue or trick the body into fixing itself. But the idea behind the public banks was to make the option available to all families who might want to try it as a last resort.
It was around this time, in 1992, that Tom Moore, a technology and pharmaceutical executive with passion for startups, hatched a plan to found a cord-blood bank of his own. Unlike the NIH banks, this one would operate for profit. Its clients would retain exclusive access to their own genetically identical samples, for a fee of $1,500 up front plus $125 for each year of storage. One problem: Moore "didn't really know anything about stem cells except the name," he admits. So he sought out David Harris, a University of Arizona immunologist and cord-blood researcher, to serve as CBR's scientific director; meanwhile, as the CEO, he took care of the business side. Now it takes care of him. CBR is the largest of 30-some private cord-blood banks in the United States, with a 45 percent share of the $250 million market. It's probably not done growing yet. Moore's "big, hairy, audacious goal" is a million clients, quadruple the company's current size.
A number of trends have likely contributed to CBR's growth, including the enormous boom in the baby-products market and the hype around stem cells in general. But one thing that has not been a factor is a rapid rise in medical uses for cord blood—because there hasn't been one yet. Just as it was in the '90s, a cord-blood stem-cell transplant is still an experimental procedure. This hasn't deterred CBR from publicizing the results of a few positive studies, including a small, preliminary trial in kids with type 1 diabetes from last year.
In Dallas Hextell, CBR has another case to promote. In ads, the Hextells call the cord-blood treatment "a miracle." But nobody really knows what has happened in Dallas's brain. The story sounds less clear-cut coming from Kurtzberg, the doctor who performed the transfusion and who examined Dallas again in November. "He has made progress, there's no question," she says. "But he still has a global developmental delay of about a year. He looks like where we would have expected him to be without cells." When she saw him at his follow-up visit, she adds, "I thought, wow, he doesn't look as good as I was expecting based on what's been in the press." (The Hextells find Kurtzberg's assessment frustrating and note that Dallas's therapists at home—who knew him before the transfusion—are impressed and surprised at his improvement.) Kurtzberg also has not completed the follow-up and analysis of the study or published the results from 50 other kids with cerebral palsy who have enrolled in her trial thus far.
Kurtzberg, it turns out, is not a big booster for private cord-blood banks; although she uses samples from CBR, she does not receive funding from the company, and also uses cells from public banks and other companies. In fact, she's one of the authors of a statement the American Academy of Pediatrics put out last year discouraging parents from using private banks on the grounds that the science isn't solid enough yet to justify a multi-thousand-dollar gamble. (The AAP does support public, nonprofit banks, which patients can use for free.) The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists released its own statement in February, noting that "there is no reliable estimate of a child's likelihood of actually using his or her own saved cord blood later." Then it made a guess anyway: 1 in 2,700, which Kurtzberg calls "generous."
Why is this number so small? There are reasons to think cord-blood treatment will never be a widespread medical procedure. The blood contains only enough stem cells to treat a small child; unlike embryonic stem cells, cord-blood cells cannot be multiplied into self-rejuvenating "lines" in a petri dish. The cells are limited in other ways, too. There's little point in treating a genetic condition with a patient's own cord-blood cells, which have the same DNA and thus the same deleterious mutations. Scientists could someday overcome these hurdles; they could develop new ways of cultivating and genetically tweaking cord-blood cells in the lab. But by then, the same scientists will probably know much more about all stem cells, especially once restrictions on embryonic research are lifted—and there may be better ways of getting safe, usable cells from other sources, ways that won't require a lot of technological wizardry.
These difficulties don't deter everyone, of course. The pediatrician Robert Sears, a talk-show regular and the coauthor of popular parenting books, supports private cord-blood banking; he froze his own kids' samples with CBR. It's also possible that 1 in 2,700 is too conservative. CBR's executives toss around much more dramatic odds. Harris, the scientific director, puts them at a breathtaking 1 in 3. His calculations, unlike the professional groups', include injuries to the brain. There is, he notes, "no genetic predisposition to falling out of a crib"—so as he sees it, every child, technically, is at risk.
Until widespread trials of cord-blood treatment take place, both sides will be able to use arbitrary calculations. Those trials, alas, are probably far off: rare conditions are difficult to study on a large scale, since by definition there aren't many patients to enroll. Three years ago, Congress tried to put cord-blood trials on a faster track by expanding funds for the NIH's public banks—more donations to the banks could mean more studies—but the law hasn't made much of an impact. Public banks have collected cord blood from just 105,000 babies, and fewer than 200 hospitals in the U.S. are able to draw and ship the blood to public centers. The private banks, of course, have larger stores. But they are not huge contributors to research either: only 100 of CBR's 250,000 clients have enrolled in trials thus far.
For now, parents are left to make the same speculative wager at the heart of CBR's business model: how much should you invest in science that's promising but not proven? Back in the ballroom in Tucson, the OBs and midwives on the CBR junket were considering that question too. They pressed Cynthia Hextell for more details. How were the other kids in the Kurtzberg trial doing? Cynthia said the few other families she had talked to had seen improvements like Dallas's. And what risks were they warned about? "The only risk was that it wouldn't work and we would be out the money," she said. "But we just knew in our hearts that it was going to work." Other parents will have to decide whether they have that kind of faith.
TGen, Scottsdale Healthcare, Mayo Clinic study starts for new drug that could bolster the immune systems of cancer victims
[Source: TGen] - The Translational Genomics Research Institute (TGen), Scottsdale Healthcare and Mayo Clinic are testing a new drug that could help cancer patients by stimulating the immune system.
Clinical trials of the drug VTX-2337 are being conducted at TGen Clinical Research Services at Scottsdale Healthcare, a partnership of Phoenix-based TGen and Scottsdale-based Scottsdale Healthcare Corp., and at Mayo Clinic in Arizona.
Dr. Ramesh Ramanathan, Medical Director of TGen Clincal Research Services at Scottsdale Healthcare, said the new drug appears promising.
"VTX-2337 is a new, novel, small molecule aimed at stimulating the immune cells in the blood, lymph nodes, and in and around the tumor. It represents an exciting new class of agents for cancer therapy with good preclinical evidence of activity," Dr. Ramanathan said.
The Phase I trial, a yearlong first-in-humans test, will study the drug's safety. If successful, a Phase II trial will test the drug's effectiveness on tumors.
A weakened immune system is often the result of advanced cancer. The hope is that this new drug will actually help enable the immune system to slow down the growth of tumors, and perhaps even shrink them, Dr. Ramanathan said.
VTX-2337 is the first drug of its kind developed by San Diego-based VentiRx Pharmaceuticals Inc. The biopharmaceutical company is focused on the development of new Toll-Like Receptor 8 (TLR8) agonists, which are small molecules that prompt a response in the body's immune system. The drugs are intended to treat cancer, respiratory and autoimmune diseases.
"VentiRx is very excited to be working with TGen, Scottsdale Healthcare and Mayo Clinic on this important and novel program," said Michael Kamdar, Executive Vice President and Chief Business Officer at VentiRx. "Entering Phase I clinical trials represents a significant milestone for VentiRx and our TLR efforts in that we have rapidly advanced into a clinical development company with a novel molecule that may play an important role and have broad application in the treatment of cancer."
VTX-2337 is a small molecule TLR8 agonist that is expected to be used in combination with standard of care for the treatment of patients with cancer. Preclinical evaluation of VTX-2337 suggests that it may play a key role in augmenting the innate arm of the immune system.
There are two broad components of the immune system, the innate arm, and the adaptive arm. Both generally aim to eliminate viruses and bacteria.
-- The innate arm senses infectious agents as they infect the body by recognizing structures they have in common, such as lipids, proteins, sugars, and nucleic acids (DNA and RNA). This is an initial rapid response, which is not precise but potent.
-- The adaptive arm of the immune system is instructed by the innate arm to devise more specific responses to unique components of the invading pathogens. This is a more precise response and takes longer, especially when an infectious agent is encountered for the first time.
The first clinical trial at TCRS at Scottsdale Healthcare will investigate the safety and pharmacology of multiple doses of VTX-2337 in patients with late-stage cancer. For more information about this clinical trial, please call Joyce Ingold, R.N., research patient care coordinator for Scottsdale Healthcare, at 480-323-1339.
The clinical trial coordinator for Mayo Clinic is Dianna Boughter, who can be reached at 480-301-9875.
"VTX-2337 is the first selective TLR8 compound to reach the clinic, and we are hopeful that modulation of the innate immune response will provide a benefit to patients in a number of oncology indications," said Dr. Robert Hershberg, Executive Vice President and Chief Medical Officer at VentiRx.
Clinical trials of the drug VTX-2337 are being conducted at TGen Clinical Research Services at Scottsdale Healthcare, a partnership of Phoenix-based TGen and Scottsdale-based Scottsdale Healthcare Corp., and at Mayo Clinic in Arizona.
Dr. Ramesh Ramanathan, Medical Director of TGen Clincal Research Services at Scottsdale Healthcare, said the new drug appears promising.
"VTX-2337 is a new, novel, small molecule aimed at stimulating the immune cells in the blood, lymph nodes, and in and around the tumor. It represents an exciting new class of agents for cancer therapy with good preclinical evidence of activity," Dr. Ramanathan said.
The Phase I trial, a yearlong first-in-humans test, will study the drug's safety. If successful, a Phase II trial will test the drug's effectiveness on tumors.
A weakened immune system is often the result of advanced cancer. The hope is that this new drug will actually help enable the immune system to slow down the growth of tumors, and perhaps even shrink them, Dr. Ramanathan said.
VTX-2337 is the first drug of its kind developed by San Diego-based VentiRx Pharmaceuticals Inc. The biopharmaceutical company is focused on the development of new Toll-Like Receptor 8 (TLR8) agonists, which are small molecules that prompt a response in the body's immune system. The drugs are intended to treat cancer, respiratory and autoimmune diseases.
"VentiRx is very excited to be working with TGen, Scottsdale Healthcare and Mayo Clinic on this important and novel program," said Michael Kamdar, Executive Vice President and Chief Business Officer at VentiRx. "Entering Phase I clinical trials represents a significant milestone for VentiRx and our TLR efforts in that we have rapidly advanced into a clinical development company with a novel molecule that may play an important role and have broad application in the treatment of cancer."
VTX-2337 is a small molecule TLR8 agonist that is expected to be used in combination with standard of care for the treatment of patients with cancer. Preclinical evaluation of VTX-2337 suggests that it may play a key role in augmenting the innate arm of the immune system.
There are two broad components of the immune system, the innate arm, and the adaptive arm. Both generally aim to eliminate viruses and bacteria.
-- The innate arm senses infectious agents as they infect the body by recognizing structures they have in common, such as lipids, proteins, sugars, and nucleic acids (DNA and RNA). This is an initial rapid response, which is not precise but potent.
-- The adaptive arm of the immune system is instructed by the innate arm to devise more specific responses to unique components of the invading pathogens. This is a more precise response and takes longer, especially when an infectious agent is encountered for the first time.
The first clinical trial at TCRS at Scottsdale Healthcare will investigate the safety and pharmacology of multiple doses of VTX-2337 in patients with late-stage cancer. For more information about this clinical trial, please call Joyce Ingold, R.N., research patient care coordinator for Scottsdale Healthcare, at 480-323-1339.
The clinical trial coordinator for Mayo Clinic is Dianna Boughter, who can be reached at 480-301-9875.
"VTX-2337 is the first selective TLR8 compound to reach the clinic, and we are hopeful that modulation of the innate immune response will provide a benefit to patients in a number of oncology indications," said Dr. Robert Hershberg, Executive Vice President and Chief Medical Officer at VentiRx.
Thursday, December 18, 2008
Vit. E, selenium don't cut risk of prostate cancer, big study finds
[Source: Arizona Daily Star, Evan Pellegrino] - Two natural supplements that have been promoted as possibly helping prevent prostate cancer actually have no effect, according to a national study that included University of Arizona researchers at the Arizona Cancer Center.
According to the study, vitamin E and selenium supplements do not aid in preventing prostate cancer, the most common cancer in American men other than skin cancers.
The study examined the effects of both supplements in more than 35,000 men nationally, including several hundred in Tucson. It was the largest trial ever on prostate-cancer prevention, according to officials at the Arizona Cancer Center. The study included the Southern Arizona VA Health Care System.
Called SELECT (the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial), the study was funded by the National Cancer Institute and coordinated through the Southwest Oncology Group.
"A large trial like SELECT is the only way to determine for certain the real value of supplements," said Frederick Ahmann, professor of medicine and director of the Hematology/Oncology Fellowship Program at the Arizona Cancer Center, in a news release.
"Using science to study and determine whether there is value to taking a specific substance for health or disease prevention is vital, telling us what is helpful, what is harmful and what is not useful to take."
Millions of Americans take dietary supplements such as vitamins, minerals and herbs with the thought that they can help prevent or cure illnesses and ailments.
The Food and Drug Administration considers supplements foods, not drugs, so they don't need to be approved by the FDA before going on the market.
The SELECT study on vitamin E and the trace mineral selenium was based on previous research on other cancers that suggested the supplements might reduce the risk of prostate cancer.
In 1998, a study of 29,133 male smokers in Finland who took vitamin E to prevent lung cancer showed 32 percent fewer prostate cancers. In 1996, a study of 1,312 men and women with skin cancer who took selenium showed that men who took the supplement had 52 percent fewer prostate cancers than those who did not take it, according a National Cancer Institute news release.
Based on these and other earlier findings, men age 50 and older were recruited to participate in SELECT earlier this decade. The men were randomly chosen and grouped to take one of four combinations of supplements or placebos. One group took selenium and vitamin E; one took selenium and a vitamin E placebo; one took vitamin E and a selenium placebo; and the final group received placebos of both supplements.
It was a blinded study — neither the men nor their physicians knew who was taking supplements.
Now, five years after the trial phase of SELECT began, an initial, independent analysis of the study data determined that taking vitamin E and selenium together or alone didn't prevent prostate cancer.
The study actually showed very small increases in the number of cases of prostate cancer in men taking only vitamin E as well as diabetes in men taking only selenium, but researchers dismissed the increase as statistically insignificant.
Participants in the study are being told to stop taking their supplements; however, they will continue to have their health monitored.
Researchers intend to follow the participants for about three years to determine the long-term effects of having taken the supplements.
"As we continue to monitor the health of these 35,000 men, this information may help us understand why two nutrients that showed strong initial evidence to be able to prevent prostate cancer did not do so," said Eric Klein, a study co-chair for SELECT and a physician at the Cleveland Clinic, in the national news release.
The $114 million study was funded by the National Cancer Institute, with additional support from the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine.
According to the study, vitamin E and selenium supplements do not aid in preventing prostate cancer, the most common cancer in American men other than skin cancers.
The study examined the effects of both supplements in more than 35,000 men nationally, including several hundred in Tucson. It was the largest trial ever on prostate-cancer prevention, according to officials at the Arizona Cancer Center. The study included the Southern Arizona VA Health Care System.
Called SELECT (the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial), the study was funded by the National Cancer Institute and coordinated through the Southwest Oncology Group.
"A large trial like SELECT is the only way to determine for certain the real value of supplements," said Frederick Ahmann, professor of medicine and director of the Hematology/Oncology Fellowship Program at the Arizona Cancer Center, in a news release.
"Using science to study and determine whether there is value to taking a specific substance for health or disease prevention is vital, telling us what is helpful, what is harmful and what is not useful to take."
Millions of Americans take dietary supplements such as vitamins, minerals and herbs with the thought that they can help prevent or cure illnesses and ailments.
The Food and Drug Administration considers supplements foods, not drugs, so they don't need to be approved by the FDA before going on the market.
The SELECT study on vitamin E and the trace mineral selenium was based on previous research on other cancers that suggested the supplements might reduce the risk of prostate cancer.
In 1998, a study of 29,133 male smokers in Finland who took vitamin E to prevent lung cancer showed 32 percent fewer prostate cancers. In 1996, a study of 1,312 men and women with skin cancer who took selenium showed that men who took the supplement had 52 percent fewer prostate cancers than those who did not take it, according a National Cancer Institute news release.
Based on these and other earlier findings, men age 50 and older were recruited to participate in SELECT earlier this decade. The men were randomly chosen and grouped to take one of four combinations of supplements or placebos. One group took selenium and vitamin E; one took selenium and a vitamin E placebo; one took vitamin E and a selenium placebo; and the final group received placebos of both supplements.
It was a blinded study — neither the men nor their physicians knew who was taking supplements.
Now, five years after the trial phase of SELECT began, an initial, independent analysis of the study data determined that taking vitamin E and selenium together or alone didn't prevent prostate cancer.
The study actually showed very small increases in the number of cases of prostate cancer in men taking only vitamin E as well as diabetes in men taking only selenium, but researchers dismissed the increase as statistically insignificant.
Participants in the study are being told to stop taking their supplements; however, they will continue to have their health monitored.
Researchers intend to follow the participants for about three years to determine the long-term effects of having taken the supplements.
"As we continue to monitor the health of these 35,000 men, this information may help us understand why two nutrients that showed strong initial evidence to be able to prevent prostate cancer did not do so," said Eric Klein, a study co-chair for SELECT and a physician at the Cleveland Clinic, in the national news release.
The $114 million study was funded by the National Cancer Institute, with additional support from the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine.
UA Vice President Dr. William Crist to Lecture on Childhood Cancer
[Source: East Valley Living] - Conquering Childhood Cancer: A Paradigm for Translational Research; Lecture to be Held Wednesday January 14, 2009 at Virginia G. Piper Auditorium
PHOENIX - The advances in treatment of childhood cancer in the last generation have been nothing less than life-changing, says William M. Crist, MD, the new vice president for health affairs for The University of Arizona.
The University of Arizona College of Medicine-Phoenix in partnership with Arizona State University and the Flinn Foundation will host Dr. Crist, who will talk about his experience in a presentation titled, “Conquering Childhood Cancer: A Paradigm for Translational Research,” on Wednesday, Jan. 14, 2009, 5:30 p.m., in the Virginia G. Piper Auditorium, 550 E. Van Buren, in downtown Phoenix. The lecture is free and open to the public. Parking in the College of Medicine lot, with entrance on Seventh Street, also is free. (Dr. Crist also will speak in Tucson on Thursday, Jan. 15, 5 p.m., at DuVal Auditorium at University Medical Center, 1501 N. Campbell Ave.)
Dr. Crist is among the scientists credited with dramatically improving our understanding of childhood leukemias and their treatments. He spent much of his career from the 1970s through the 1990s in the field of pediatric hematology and oncology first at the University of Alabama, Birmingham, the University of Tennessee College of Medicine at Memphis, and St. Jude Children’s Hospital in Memphis before becoming chairman of pediatric and adolescent medicine at Mayo Medical Center in Rochester, Minn. Dr. Crist had been serving as dean of the School of Medicine at the University of Missouri before being named UA vice president for health affairs last summer. He began his new duties Oct. 31.
The Donald K. Buffmire Visiting Lectureship in Medicine, begun in 1997, continues the Flinn Foundation’s commitment to bringing to Arizona leading practitioners and thinkers in the medical field. The lectureship aims to offer to physicians, students and community members opportunities to hear from distinguished leaders in the field of medicine and medical education. In 2008, the annual lecture was expanded to a biannual basis and includes presentations in both Phoenix and Tucson.
The lectureship is named for late Donald K. Buffmire, MD, in recognition of his distinguished career as a medical practitioner in Arizona and his leadership role with the Flinn Foundation in supporting the College of Medicine. Dr. Buffmire, who died this year, served as a board director from 1965-99, including 15 years as president and chairman.
The Phoenix-based Flinn Foundation is a privately endowed organization that awards grants to nonprofit organizations in Arizona, primarily to improve the competitiveness of the state’s biomedical-research enterprise.
The UA College of Medicine is the only MD degree-granting college in Arizona. Beginning in 1967 with a class of 32 students on its Tucson campus, the college today encompasses full, four-year medical-education programs in Tucson and since 2007, in Phoenix.
PHOENIX - The advances in treatment of childhood cancer in the last generation have been nothing less than life-changing, says William M. Crist, MD, the new vice president for health affairs for The University of Arizona.
The University of Arizona College of Medicine-Phoenix in partnership with Arizona State University and the Flinn Foundation will host Dr. Crist, who will talk about his experience in a presentation titled, “Conquering Childhood Cancer: A Paradigm for Translational Research,” on Wednesday, Jan. 14, 2009, 5:30 p.m., in the Virginia G. Piper Auditorium, 550 E. Van Buren, in downtown Phoenix. The lecture is free and open to the public. Parking in the College of Medicine lot, with entrance on Seventh Street, also is free. (Dr. Crist also will speak in Tucson on Thursday, Jan. 15, 5 p.m., at DuVal Auditorium at University Medical Center, 1501 N. Campbell Ave.)
Dr. Crist is among the scientists credited with dramatically improving our understanding of childhood leukemias and their treatments. He spent much of his career from the 1970s through the 1990s in the field of pediatric hematology and oncology first at the University of Alabama, Birmingham, the University of Tennessee College of Medicine at Memphis, and St. Jude Children’s Hospital in Memphis before becoming chairman of pediatric and adolescent medicine at Mayo Medical Center in Rochester, Minn. Dr. Crist had been serving as dean of the School of Medicine at the University of Missouri before being named UA vice president for health affairs last summer. He began his new duties Oct. 31.
The Donald K. Buffmire Visiting Lectureship in Medicine, begun in 1997, continues the Flinn Foundation’s commitment to bringing to Arizona leading practitioners and thinkers in the medical field. The lectureship aims to offer to physicians, students and community members opportunities to hear from distinguished leaders in the field of medicine and medical education. In 2008, the annual lecture was expanded to a biannual basis and includes presentations in both Phoenix and Tucson.
The lectureship is named for late Donald K. Buffmire, MD, in recognition of his distinguished career as a medical practitioner in Arizona and his leadership role with the Flinn Foundation in supporting the College of Medicine. Dr. Buffmire, who died this year, served as a board director from 1965-99, including 15 years as president and chairman.
The Phoenix-based Flinn Foundation is a privately endowed organization that awards grants to nonprofit organizations in Arizona, primarily to improve the competitiveness of the state’s biomedical-research enterprise.
The UA College of Medicine is the only MD degree-granting college in Arizona. Beginning in 1967 with a class of 32 students on its Tucson campus, the college today encompasses full, four-year medical-education programs in Tucson and since 2007, in Phoenix.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)