header logo image


Page 28«..1020..27282930..40..»

Archive for the ‘Genetics’ Category

$125 million for Inscripta may usher in the next wave of genetic engineering – TechCrunch

Tuesday, December 10th, 2019

In these waning days of the second decade of the twenty-first century, technologists and investors are beginning to lay the foundations for new, truly transformational technologies that have the potential to reshape entire industries and rewrite the rules of human understanding.

It may sound lofty, but new achievements from businesses and research institutions in areas like machine learning, quantum computing and genetic engineering mean that the futures imagined in science fiction are simply becoming science.

And among the technologies that could potentially have the biggest effect on the way we live, nothing looms larger than genetic engineering.

Investors and entrepreneurs are deploying hundreds of millions of dollars to create the tools that researchers, scientists and industry will use to re-engineer the building blocks of life to perform different functions in agriculture, manufacturing and medicine.

One of these companies, 10X Genomics, which gives users hardware and software to determine the functionality of different genetic code, has already proven how lucrative this early market can be. The company, which had its initial public offering earlier this year, is now worth $6 billion.

Another, the still-private company Inscripta, is helmed by a former 10X Genomics executive. The Boulder, Colo.-based startup is commercializing a machine that can let researchers design and manufacture small quantities of new organisms. If 10X Genomics is giving scientists and businesses a better way to read and understand the genome, then Inscripta is giving those same users a new way to write their own genetic code and make their own organisms.

Its a technology that investors are falling over themselves to finance. The company, which closed on $105 million in financing earlier in the year (through several tranches, which began in late 2018), has just raised another $125 million on the heels of launching its first commercial product. Investors in the round include new and previous investors like Paladin Capital Group, JS Capital Management, Oak HC/FT and Venrock.

Biology has unlimited potential to positively change this world, says Kevin Ness, the chief executive of Inscripta . Its one of the most important new technology forces that will be a major player in the global economy.

Ness sees Inscripta as breaking down one of the biggest barriers to the commercialization of genetic engineering, which is access to the technology.

While genome centers and biology foundries can manufacture massive quantities of new biological material for industrial uses, its too costly and centralized for most researchers. We can put the biofoundry capabilities into a box that can be pushed to a global researcher, says Ness.

Earlier this year, the company announced that it was taking orders for its first bio-manufacturing product; the new capital is designed to pay for expanding its manufacturing capabilities.

That wasnt the only barrier that Inscripta felt that it needed to break down. The company also developed a proprietary biochemistry for gene editing, hoping to avoid having to pay fees to one of the two laboratories that were engaged in a pitched legal battle over who owned the CRISPR technology (the Broad Institute and the University of California both had claims to the technology).

Originally posted here:
$125 million for Inscripta may usher in the next wave of genetic engineering - TechCrunch

Read More...

Veritas Genetics, the start-up that can sequence a human genome for less than $600, ceases US operations and is in talks with potential buyers – CNBC

Tuesday, December 10th, 2019

Veritas Genetics had big plans to lower the price of sequencing the human genome, making it on par with the price of buying an Apple Watch or a fancy dinner.

The company, which was the first in the world to map out a person's DNA for less than $1,000 back in 2016, just shared with customers via email that it is ceasing operations in the U.S.

"Due to an unexpected adverse financing situation, we are being forced to suspend our operations in the U.S. for the time being," the email, which was viewed by CNBC, reads. "We are currently assessing all paths forward, including strategic options."

The company also laid off the bulk of its employees based in the U.S., about 50 people, earlier this week, according to a source familiar with the company. The source asked not to be named because they were not authorized to speak for Veritas Genetics.

"I can clarify this temporarily affects U.S. operations only," a spokesperson for the company said. "All of the customers outside of the U.S. will continue to be served by Veritas Europe and Latin America."

Veritas, which made this year's CNBC Disruptor 50 list, hoped to expand to millions more consumers in the coming years by bringing down the price of whole genome sequencing to just a few hundred dollars. It raised more than $50 million in financing since it got its start in 2015.

But the company's investors, including Simcere Pharmaceutical and Lilly Asia Ventures, are based in China, at a time when the Trump administration is cracking down on Chinese firms making investments in U.S. companies. Earlier this year, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States,or CFIUS, forced a health-tech company called PatientsLikeMe to find a buyer after ordering its Chinese owner to divest its stake. PatientsLikeMe eventually sold to UnitedHealth.

For Veritas, it meant that new investors who were interested in the business got skittish because of the potential for oversight from CFIUS, according to the person familiar with the company. As a result, Veritas has also been in talks with potential acquirers in recent months, said the person.

If Veritas is able to figure out a path forward, it hopes to be competitive with companies such as Ancestry and 23andMe by offering more information for about the same price. 23andMe has dabbled with offering sequencing to its customers, but currently provides only genotyping services, meaning it looks at specific parts of the genome which are known to be associated with a certain condition or trait.

While 23andMe and Ancestry primarily sell tests for people interested in their ancestral composition and wellness traits, Veritas has long stressed that it's different because it provides potentially actionable insights into its users' health.

Veritas' decision to stop selling its tests in the U.S. comes as other consumer-facing DNA testing companies report that sales have slowed. One potential factor is that people have grown more concerned about protecting their privacy, especially in the wake of high-profile news events such as the Golden State Killer case. That stoked fears about whether individuals could be found and convicted for past crimes based on distant relatives' DNA.

But for Veritas, which bills itself as more of a medical company, sales of its tests have been increasing since it dropped its price in July, according to the person familiar.

Veritas in November experienced a security breach that included some customer information, the start-up confirmed to Bloomberg. The company stressed that only a handful of people were affected.

Follow @CNBCtech on Twitter for the latest tech industry news.

See original here:
Veritas Genetics, the start-up that can sequence a human genome for less than $600, ceases US operations and is in talks with potential buyers - CNBC

Read More...

Does the ‘genetics revolution’ unsettle you? Here is a guide, and reasons to be hopeful – Genetic Literacy Project

Tuesday, December 10th, 2019

Its that time of year again an avalanche of ads urging us to drool into tubes so companies can spit back verdicts on our pasts, presents, and futures. Judging from my emails, those unceasing ads have inspired many questions about genetics in general.

Among the emails that pinged in recently:

So I started a list of my e-mails, with apologies to Hillary, and extracted three recurring themes: transgender identity, when a human life begins, and by far the largest group: interpreting DNA test results, either consumer or clinical.

What do you think about a new studythat found 20 genetic markers of transgender identity? asked a reporter from The Times of London In March 2018. Id suggested just such a study a year earlier, which hed found here.

Impressed with the study, I agreed to comment. But the reporter forgot to distinguish me from the researcher, and so throughout Europe, I was suddenly an expert on transgender genes. And that inspired some telling emails.

The first, from a trans woman born in 1948, shared her 70-page story:

As far back as I can remember I thought nothing of going into my mothers closet, pulling down her nightgowns, and putting them on. They were soft, they smelled of her, and they felt so perfect. This was me. Everything feminine fascinated me. Anything male repelled me. I wanted to emerge myself in the female world. But no matter what I did, I just couldnt look like Mommy.

Another transgender woman wrote:

I would love to have that degree of certainty that a genetic study would show. Parents would be able to perhaps work with their children instead of ignoring it either intentionally or out of ignorance.

A recent email from 58-year-old Edith brought up nature v nurture:

Two of my nine nieces and nephews are transitioning. My family has an overall fluid concept of gender identity, which we discussed with each other before either child made it known they were trans. I find myself wondering if this is true in other families.

Me too.

I repost 17 timepoints whenever womens reproductive rights are threatened, or I read or hear a comment that indicates ignorance of biology. The idea of the list came to me when considering that an embryos genome turns on at day 5, but it cant possibly exist at that point outside of a womans body.

One woman asked about fetal rights. Her ex had given her an herbal abortion tea without her knowledge when she was pregnant. Her baby so far is healthy, but she wants a court to recognize the tea-poisoning as child abuse. At what point in utero does a fetus have rights? It seems to vary state to state, she wrote.

Celia Collias, a statistics major at the University of North Carolina, offered a compelling perspective: distinguishing two types of viability. Natural ability to be physiologically independent for a human fetus is around 24 weeks. Technologically assisted viability for a human fetus is 21 weeks.

If we dont use natural viability as the cut off for reproductive rights, Ms. Collias argues, then those rights will erode as technology sets back the age of assisted viability:

Technologically assisted viability is not free. If we allow that to be the benchmark, its going to cost society a lot to care for all those fetuses where would that money come from?

Good question.

Is he really my brother? asked the woman who sent me scanned columns of genetic markers. I circled 16 of 38 that they share and sent it back: Yes.

I dont have mutations in BRCA1 or 2, so Im ok, right? I do have a mutation in ATM (or p53 or CHEK2 or PTEN or RAD51 or a few dozenothers). Inherited mutations for cancer risk go beyond the most common ones in the BRCA pair, and altogether they account for only 5 percent of cases. Yes, shes at high risk.

BRCA brings up the limited variant problem. Consumer DNA tests, for cancer or single-gene diseases, are likely to check for only the most common variants, such as a handful of mutations in the CFTR gene behind cystic fibrosis, which has more than 1,700. These health reports may provide a false sense of reassurance and should not be used for making any health decisions without confirmation testing, said Edward Esplin, MD, of Invitae, a clinical testing company, at the American Society of Human Genetics conference in October, catalyzing a flood of headlines.

I had a prenatal screen for 125 genes and one is a variant of uncertain significance. What the heck is a VUS? Do I have a mutation or not?

A VUS is a gene variant that isnt common, but hasnt shown up in someone with a disease and reported in the medical literature. Yet. I explain here.

My ethnicity estimate changed overnight. Huh? When an ancestry company adds a new group to its database of reference populations, the sections of those pie charts can shift, or a new one appear.

Im 20 weeks pregnant. The fetus has a microduplication of chromosome 18. Is that a problem? The healthy dad-to-be also had the tiny extra bit of DNA. So, no.

I just found out that I have an extra Y chromosome. Ive had severe acne since my early teens, and today Im 62 and weigh 295 pounds. Im a biker, football player, and served time for selling pot. Did my extra chromosome get me arrested?

Probably not. Being in the wrong place at the wrong time, before decriminalization, was more likely at fault.

Because most of my email brings up medical matters, heres a short guide to getting help in making sense of DNA test results related to health. (For interpreting ancestry findings, the International Society of Genetic Genealogy is an excellent resource.)

Its important to distinguish consumer DNA tests, which anyone can take by purchasing a kit and spitting or swizzling a cheekbrush, from clinical DNA tests, which a health care provider orders and the FDAs Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) regulate.

Like mushrooms materializing after a warm rain, articles, websites, books and companies are springing up to help consumers navigate test-taking and interpretation.

Finding an expert specifically trained at the graduate level in genetics a genetic counselor, PhD geneticist, or MD with genetics/genomics training is challenging because their priorities are in clinical testing, not the entertainment/education space that the consumer companies so ceaselessly promote. Other scientists may be helpful molecular biologists, biochemists but genetics as a discipline transcends DNA, including developmental, transmission, and population and evolutionary genetics too. Ancestry testing in particular melds these levels of genetics.

Assuming a sit-down with an expert to intrepret consumer DNA data isnt happening easily, here are some places to turn.

A longstanding helpful website is Genetics Home Reference, from the NIH.

A newer resource is this report from ConsumersAdvocate.org. Their researchers recently sent DNA anonymously to 9 leading consumer DNA testing companies, interpreted the data, and then wrote a detailed, clear analysis that compares the services, privacy/security measures, online resources, and cost of tests.

Consumer DNA testing is a fast-growing industry with over 26 million users worldwide. That number is expected to grow to 100 million by 2021, Sam Klau, Community Outreach at the organization, told me.

An excellent new book is DNA Nation: How the Internet of Genes is Changing Your Life, by PhD molecular biologist Sergio Pistoi. And my human genetics textbook will be out in a new edition in September. Ive added a chapter called The Genetics of Identity, inspired by having my past rewritten recently thanks to ancestry testing.

The testing company websites, like that of 23andme, provide clear and well-written info on interpreting test results. But without any prior knowledge of genetics, misinterpretation and misplaced angst can arise.

Does the average person know the difference in significance between revealing a pattern of genome-wide single-base variations (SNPs) associated with elevated risk of a trait or illness, and detecting a well-studied mutation in a single gene?

The raw data dump from consumer DNA testing can be overwhelming, and to paraphrase Elizabeth Warren: Theres a company for that. A consumer can pay to avoid bushwhacking through dense SNP forests.

Strategene, for example, is a genetic reporting tool that uses 23andMe data to identify SNPs in a few dozen well-studied, health-related genes, and not every SNP under the sun. The $45 is a sound investment; it would take hours to sort through Google Scholar to DIY. But the client needs to know about the limited variant issue of checking only for common SNPs.

(I was briefly fooled into confusing the company with 1980s biotech giant Stratagene, but its off by one letter and one capitalization. The only person named on the company website is a naturopath referred to many times as Dr., which wouldnt necessarily denote a genetics expert.)

Im curious to see how soon the medical profession catches up. Right now, genetic counselors in the US number only about 5,000. But professional organizations are stepping in. The American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics, for example, offers online continuing medical education, ACMG Genetics 101 for Healthcare Providers.

But doctors Ive encountered recently still go deer-in-the-headlights when I ask a genetics question, just to be obnoxious. And so a company like ActXmakes sense in helping medical professionals keep pace with the growing tide of patients coming in waving consumer DNA test results. The company helps physicians and patients apply 23andMe raw data to select drugs, order clinical tests to help diagnose specific conditions, and to confirm carrier status for single-gene diseases.

When I started my career as a Drosophila geneticist, mutating flies to grow legs out of their heads, I never imagined at-home DNA testing. When I started my career as a science writer and textbook author, I still couldnt have predicted at-home DNA testing. Now that its here, Im thrilled that DNA science has become so much more tangible and practical. Yet we must use the information in our strings of A, C, T, and G wisely.

Ricki Lewis is the GLPs senior contributing writer focusing on gene therapy and gene editing. She has a PhD in genetics and is a genetic counselor, science writer and author of The Forever Fix: Gene Therapy and the Boy Who Saved It, the only popular book about gene therapy. BIO. Follow her at her website or Twitter @rickilewis

Go here to see the original:
Does the 'genetics revolution' unsettle you? Here is a guide, and reasons to be hopeful - Genetic Literacy Project

Read More...

New Data from Ambry Genetics Showed Concurrent RNA and DNA Testing Identified More Patients with Hereditary Breast Cancer than DNA Testing Alone -…

Tuesday, December 10th, 2019

ALISO VIEJO, Calif., Dec. 10, 2019 /PRNewswire/ --Researchers atAmbry Genetics(Ambry), a leading clinical genetic testing lab, will announce new data showing that conducting RNA and DNA tests for hereditary cancer risk at the same time identifies more patients with mutations that increase cancer risk than DNA testing alone. To be presented at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium (SABCS) this week, the data come from a study of 746 patients with breast cancer that received +RNAinsight, paired RNA and DNA genetic testing for hereditary cancer risk.

Standard DNA testing for hereditary cancer risk excludes large portions of DNA, thereby missing some mutations. In addition, DNA testing can produce inconclusive results and fail to determine that an error in our DNA increases cancer risk. These limitations impact patients and their families because doctors may not have the information needed to recommend appropriate preventive, early detection, or therapeutic steps. Additionally, relatives may not be referred for genetic testing and obtain the care they would otherwise have gotten if they had learned they had mutations.

Adding RNA to DNA testing overcomes these limitations for a substantial number of patients as it provides considerably more evidence than DNA testing alone about whether our DNA has mutations.

The data showed that adding RNA genetic testing to DNA testing increased the diagnostic yield the number of people found to have a mutation that increases cancer risk across 16 hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer genes. As a result of +RNAinsight, five breast cancer patients were identified to have mutations in clinically-actionable genes that would have otherwise been missed completely or the patient would have received inconclusive results if they had received DNA testing only. These findings included three women with mutations in BRCA1/2, one woman with a mutation in ATM, and one woman with a mutation in PMS2. Additionally, paired RNA and DNA genetic testing decreased the number of inconclusive results, giving patients more definitive answers about whether their breast cancers were hereditary. Additional results will be presented on an expanded breast cancer cohort at the meeting on Saturday, December 14th.

"These data further prove that paired RNA and DNA genetic testing for hereditary cancer should be the industry standard," said Holly LaDuca, MS, CGC, senior manager of Ambry's clinical affairs research. "Our research has consistently shown that +RNAinsight provides clinicians with more accurate results, better informing patient care."

Researchers from Ambry will also present at SABCS new data from a pre-and post-test clinician survey that assessed how genetic testing for hereditary cancer impacted medical management, such as screening recommendations. The survey found that positive genetic testing results frequently lead to changes in management recommendations in both high risk (e.g. BRCA1) and moderate risk (e.g. ATM) genes. Changes to mammogram, breast MRI, and/or preventive surgery options were reported in 77.3% of positive individuals. Moreover, medical management changes largely adhered to published guidelines, indicating that cliniciansare applying recommendations appropriately based on test results.

"With this survey data, clinicians are showing us that they truly do use genetic testing results to implement personalized recommendations, which can be life-saving for a patient," said Carrie Horton, MS, CGC, senior researcher in Ambry's clinical affairs team. "These data provide further evidence that genetic testing is essential to comprehensive cancer care. Continued study in this area will aid clinicians, laboratories, health plans, and ultimately patients."

Below are summaries of each of the four studies that Ambry will present at SABCS 2019.

Friday, December 13, 5:00- 7:00 PM CST

P5-07-06,Black M, et. al., Performance of Polygenic Risk Score Combined with Clinical Assessment for Breast Cancer Risk

Saturday, December 14, 7:00 9:00 AM CST

P6-08-35,Horton C, et. al., Impact of Multigene Panel Testing on Medical Management: Preliminary Results of a Pre- and Post- Test Clinician Survey

P6-08-08,LaDuca H, et. al., Concurrent DNA and RNA Genetic Testing Identifies More Patients with Hereditary Breast Cancer than DNA Testing Alone

P6-08-04,Yadav S, et. al., Germline Mutations in Cancer Predisposition Genes in Patients with Invasive Lobular Carcinoma of the Breast

ABOUT AMBRY GENETICS

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

For more information on risk factors for hereditary cancer, please visit cancer.gov's fact sheet on hereditary cancer and genetic testing.

ABOUT +RNAINSIGHT

+RNAinsight, paired with Ambry Genetics' hereditary cancer DNA tests, uses next-generation sequencing to concurrently analyze a patient's DNA and RNA, another layer of genetic information. +RNAinsight identifies more patients who have mutations that increase their cancer risks than through standard DNA-only testing by overcoming limitations of DNA testing. +RNAinsight enables more accurate identification of patients with increased genetic risks for cancer, finds actionable results that may otherwise be missed, and decreases the frequency of inconclusive results. +RNAinsight is now available through doctors and genetic counselors around the country. For more information on +RNAinsight, please go toambrygen.com/RNAinsight.

Press Contact:Liz Squirepress@ambrygen.com (202) 617-4662

View original content:http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/new-data-from-ambry-genetics-showed-concurrent-rna-and-dna-testing-identified-more-patients-with-hereditary-breast-cancer-than-dna-testing-alone-300972165.html

SOURCE Ambry Genetics

Read more:
New Data from Ambry Genetics Showed Concurrent RNA and DNA Testing Identified More Patients with Hereditary Breast Cancer than DNA Testing Alone -...

Read More...

Caris Life Sciences, Ambry Genetics Team on New Hereditary Cancer Panel – Clinical OMICs News

Tuesday, December 10th, 2019

Caris Life Sciences has announced it will begin offering Ambry Genetics 67- gene CancerNext Expanded panel to evaluate hereditary risks for cancer. That test will now be available combined with Caris somatic (tumor) tests that analyze a cancers detailed molecular makeup. In a release, Caris says this will be: The most comprehensive, clinically relevant molecular and genetic offering on the market today to guide treatment and management of cancer. The combined Caris and Ambry testing is already available nationwide.

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

According to the National Cancer Institute, about 10% of cancers are hereditary. Inherited cancers often occur at a relativelyearly age and involve pathogenic variants in one or more genes. The most common hereditary cancer syndromes in women include hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome, Lynch syndrome, LiFraumeni syndrome, Cowden syndrome, PeutzJeghers syndrome, and hereditary diffuse gastric cancer. A hereditary cancer risk assessment identifies patients and families who may be at increased risk of developing certain types of cancer.

Caris currently offers clinicians Caris Molecular Intelligence, a proprietary, comprehensive tumor profiling approach that assesses DNA, RNA, and proteins that are unique to an individuals cancer, among other products. The Molecular Intelligence test reveals a molecular blueprint aimed to guide more precise and individualized treatment decisions.

Through the partnership, Caris will now also offer Ambrys CancerNext-Expandedhereditary cancer panel, which analyzes 67 genes associated with an increased hereditary risk of cancer, including brain, breast, colon, ovarian, pancreatic, prostate, renal, uterine, and many other cancers. This test identifies inherited risks for cancer in order for clinicians to accurately diagnose, treat, and manage cancer risks for each patients needs.

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

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

In further news from Caris, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) updated their treatment guidelines for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC), which stress the importance ofRNA profilingand noteDNA-based next-generation sequencing may under-detectNTRK1andNTRK3fusions.Caris offers a suite of molecular profiling offerings, including whole transcriptome sequencing with MI Transcriptome which they say provides themost comprehensive and unique RNA analysis available and covers all 22,000 genes.

See the original post here:
Caris Life Sciences, Ambry Genetics Team on New Hereditary Cancer Panel - Clinical OMICs News

Read More...

Is It Time To Let Out The Genetic Genie Out Of Its Bottle? – Forbes

Tuesday, December 10th, 2019

Test tube with DNA moleculeon abstract background,3d rendering,conceptual image.

Genomics has been playing a role within healthcare policy in the last month, with Matt Hancock, Secretary for Health and Socal Care in the U.K., announcing a "healthcare revolution". But what role should genomics play in providing health and social care?

As reported in theDaily Telegraph, Hancock confirmed that in the future tests would be "routinely offered" alongside standard checks on newborns as a way to identify any risk of genetic diseases. Addressing the Genomics England Research Conference on November 4, 2019, the minister said that this sort of testing would also pave the way for predictive, personalised care.

Genomic, also known as DNA, testing has also seen success with consumers. According to KPMG, there are already over 250 companies offering customers DNA tests in applications including forensics, ancestry, health, pharmacogenomics, fitness and nutrition. By 2020, the market value is expected to be valued more than $1 billion (approximately 761 million).

So when I was approached by Genomics company, Circle DNA, to try out its DNA testing kit, initially, I had my doubts. I posed the question to them, "What makes you different from all the other kits out there?"

As it turns out, the company, which launched its DNA testing kit in the U.K. this week, claims to have the most "accurate" consumer DNA testing kit out there. It is owned by Southeast Asian company Prenetics Limited, which, to date, has performed more than 300,000 DNA tests.

According to the company's website, its DNA testing kit uses advanced Whole Exome Sequencing (also known as WES) technology to sequence DNA to over 99.9 percent analytical accuracy. This method has been externally validated by The Croucher Laboratory for Human Genomics (CLHG), CUHK. In terms of what it means for providing information, the WES technology covers over 31 million data points that may contribute to a person's or their family's health. Other companies in the marketplace use older technology known as genotyping, which according to Circle DNA, missing approximately 98 percent of mutations for breast cancer. They also analyse around one million data points.

Avi Lasarow, chief executive officer at Circle DNA, leads the company and comes with a wealth of knowledge of the U.K. market. "I have worked in life sciences for many years and always had a clear vision of making the latest science available to benefit the consumer like never before," he explains. "We are at a very exciting time in the world of genomics and genomic medicine; the U.K. Minister of Health is pushing precision health into the NHS, and the Genome 100k project is making the U.K. a global dominant leader in the space."

Circle DNA's premium DNA kit provides 500 reports, with 20 categories, and comes with a hefty price tag of 499. Even its "Vital" testing kit has a price tag of 199, which is higher than competitor 23andMe. But as Lasarow explains, these prices have fallen dramatically since DNA testing went mainstream. For example, purely for a paternity test in the U.K., a person would be looking at spending between 239 and 350.

There is also the question around governance. The Science and Technology Committee started conducted an enquiry into commercial genomic testing in March 2019, to establish what safeguards need to be adhered to so people and their data are protected. Lasarow attended a committee meeting to give evidence, alongside Carla Newell, chief legal officer and chief risk officer, Ancestry.com, and Kathy Hibbs, chief legal and regulatory officer, 23andMe.

"[The government] is looking at areas around accuracy, data protection and the impact to the NHS," the Circle DNA CEO tells me. "Together with 23andMe and Ancestry, we called for regulation and better, more advanced technology, exactly that of which Circle provides - Whole Exome Sequencing."

And what does Lasarow think of Hancock's vision to use genome sequencing at birth? Genome Sequencing at birth is not a matter of if but when; countries like Estonia are starting to lead the way in terms of advancing health care that is underpinned by mass genomics sequencing of the entire population (now at 15 percent).

"Following the introduction of genetic screenings from birth in 2001, Estonia has an advanced personalised healthcare system, with doctors having access to unparalleled genetic information on patients, which ultimately means they can tailor care plans with exact precision on a daily basis.

"The genetic genie is out of the bottle, and it's not going back in.

Continue reading here:
Is It Time To Let Out The Genetic Genie Out Of Its Bottle? - Forbes

Read More...

Review: Cooks new thriller sheds light on genetic genealogy – The San Diego Union-Tribune

Tuesday, December 10th, 2019

mutilated corpses, forensic pathologists brandishing scalpels can be found there. So its no surprise that Robin Cook has set 12 of his medical thrillers at the facility, including his latest, Genesis.

As the novel begins, its business as usual at OCME, but it all changes when Dr. Aria Nichols arrives to spend a month there as part of her training. The young woman is bright, and she possesses an encyclopedic knowledge of pathology, but her superiors and co-workers cant stand her. Thats because she ignores rules and orders and cant open her mouth without uttering profanities.

One day, Aria autopsies the body of a social worker who was found rotting in her apartment after an apparent drug overdose. To her surprise, Aria finds an embryo lodged in the corpses uterus.

Aria cant forgive the unknown man who got the social worker pregnant and then abandoned her. She wants to find him and learn what role he played in the tragedy.

The deceased womans colleague and best friend, Madison Bryant, suggests that they look for him in genetic genealogys DNA databases. Since the DNA of the mother and her fetus are already known, identifying the father couldnt be difficult, she says.

Aria agrees, but the next day, Madison is pushed under a subway car, and while she is in the hospital, shes murdered.

The familiar protagonists of Cooks OCME series, Laurie Montgomery and Jack Stapleton, appear in Genesis, but they are mired in family problems, so they do little to make the novel suspenseful.

Scaring his readers silly isnt what Cook is aiming at. With his thrillers, he clearly hopes to educate the public about a major scientific topic of the day. With Genesis, he successfully sheds light on genetic genealogy and some privacy concerns involving its ever-expanding DNA databases.

Originally posted here:
Review: Cooks new thriller sheds light on genetic genealogy - The San Diego Union-Tribune

Read More...

Extinction of farm animals threatens food security and genetic diversity – ABC News

Tuesday, December 10th, 2019

Australian agriculture is rapidly breeding out diversity within farmed animals, genetics which could one day be the key to stopping diseases and adapting to changing environments.

The University of Western Australia's Catie Gressier said while extinction and biodiversity were issues often associated with native species, heritage and rare breeds of agricultural animals were also under threat, and many had already been lost.

"It's really quite alarming," she said.

"Globally, since the early '90s, we've been losing a breed a month it's a really massive issue.

"With the industrialisation of agriculture, there's been a really strong focus on profitability and there's been a real shift towards a small number of productive hybrids that now dominate the industry almost totally worldwide."

Wessex Saddleback pigs are 'at risk' of extinction in Australia.

(Supplied: James Bennett)

Wessex Saddleback pigs are 'at risk' of extinction in Australia.

Dr Gressier said most breeds had been lost over the past 30 years with market forces dominating what breeds were farmed for meat.

And she said that could be to the peril of agriculture's long-term sustainability.

"Having a biodiverse environment is so critical in order to have a responsiveness and an adaptability to unforeseen changes occurring climatically [and] economically, in terms of consumer preferences, and also in terms of profitability," she said.

Dr Gressier pointed to the current threat of African Swine Fever on the pig industry as a global disease where a range of genetics within existing breeds could be examined for naturally occurring tolerance or resistance.

British White cattle is known for its high eating quality but it is listed as "at risk" by the Rare Breeds Trust of Australia.

(ABC Central Victoria: Larissa Romensky)

British White cattle is known for its high eating quality but it is listed as "at risk" by the Rare Breeds Trust of Australia.

ABC Central Victoria: Larissa Romensky

"Different genetic pools have different capabilities to demonstrate resistance to various diseases," she said.

"We need to have that agility for these new risks.

"In terms of improving stock, a diversity of genetics is really valuable but [so is] mitigating against some of the risks around disease and climate changes that are occurring."

Poultry breeders say it is becoming very difficult to get new genetics for some types of ducks and chickens.

(Contributed: Pip Rumble)

Poultry breeders say it is becoming very difficult to get new genetics for some types of ducks and chickens.

Dr Gressier said Australia had no cryo-conservation facilities to collect and store sperm and embryos and laws for some species, such as pigs, did not permit the importation of genetic material.

"The whole conservation effort is in the hands of individual farmers, volunteer organisations, and rare breed societies such as the Rare Breeds Trust of Australia," she said.

She urged consumers to buy meat from rare breed animals in order to support continued commercial production.

"For example, pork that's coming from Hampshires or Tamworths or Wessex Saddlebacks [pig breeds] that are in a really endangered states," she said.

"If you can support farmers that are growing these breeds that's a really positive step.

"To preserve these animals in our economic situation, it really is about finding how they can have some sort of economic viability."

In the West Australian wheatbelt, Linton and Kerry Batt have run a commercial herd of Berkshire pigs for the past 10 years.

Berkshires produce fewer pigs per litter and are slower to grow in comparison to the Landrace or Large White breeds which dominate commercial piggeries.

Mr Batt said he marketed his Berkshire pork as being the wagyu of the pork sector.

Linton Batt supplies a boutique market with his Berkshire pork, which he says competes on flavour.

(Supplied: Linton Batt)

Linton Batt supplies a boutique market with his Berkshire pork, which he says competes on flavour.

"Our production is aimed at a very small niche; it's a domestic market for super premium pork," he said.

"We've done the numbers, and we know that we need a price premium for our production.

"There is only a small market of people who will pay that price but for us, we're small enough to fill that gap, along with some other excellent Berkshire breeders, and it's worth doing."

Mr Batt said in order for his operation, and his pigs' genetics to survive, he is careful to keep the business viable but is concerned about the agricultural sector losing genetics.

"It should be a concern for everybody; we're seeing gene pools shrink and the loss of diversity," he said.

"We're always looking at the numbers to make sure they are viable and that the business stands on its own merit."

Tina the Wessex saddleback pig. Her breed is listed as "at risk" of extinction by the Rare Breeds Trust of Australia.

(ABC Hobart: Damien Peck)

Tina the Wessex saddleback pig. Her breed is listed as "at risk" of extinction by the Rare Breeds Trust of Australia.

Dr Gressier said the Rare Breeds Trust of Australia had a comprehensive list of animals lost, critical, endangered, or vulnerable.

It lists six breeds of sheep as lost, four of pigs, and 10 of cattle.

"In Australia we used to have a really diverse dairy industry with a number of breeds producing milk," she said.

"Now it's about 70 per cent Holstein which produce milk in the kinds of volumes of scale required to meet market demands.

"Chickens are also faring really poorly, particularly meat birds.

"There are very few farmers who are managing to commercially produce meat chickens that aren't the Ross or the Cobb breed."

Dr Gressier is about to lead a UWA-based study of rare breeds being farmed across Australia to understand why farmers stick with rare breed farming and how their work can be better supported.

Excerpt from:
Extinction of farm animals threatens food security and genetic diversity - ABC News

Read More...

Clinical study on genetic screenings of fertilized eggs to involve several thousand women – The Japan Times

Tuesday, December 10th, 2019

Japan will drastically expand its clinical study on genetic screenings of fertilized eggs to cover several thousand women, the Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology has said.

More than 3,500 women at dozens of medical institutions will take part in the expanded study on preimplantation genetic screenings, which check eggs fertilized in vitro for chromosome abnormalities and put back into the uterus only eggs without abnormalities.

The medical society long banned the screenings, which are often criticized on ethical grounds. But it eased the rule to accept only clinical studies, including those to check their effects in reducing the risk of miscarriage.

The society has started a small-scale clinical study involving 80 women at four institutions. For comparison, the society created another group of women and transplanted into them fertilized eggs that were not put through the screenings.

In the upcoming large-scale study, the society will gather more than 3,500 women by easing participant qualifications.

A paper on the small-scale study said the screenings did not lead to a decrease in miscarriages.

The society says the expansion is needed to evaluate the effects of the screenings more accurately. Meanwhile, critics say the expansion is an effective full lifting of the ban on the screenings.

View original post here:
Clinical study on genetic screenings of fertilized eggs to involve several thousand women - The Japan Times

Read More...

This microbe no longer needs to eat food to grow, thanks to a bit of genetic engineering – Science Magazine

Wednesday, November 27th, 2019

An engineered version of this Escherichia coli bacterium gets all the carbon it needs to grow from carbon dioxide, just like plants.

By Robert F. ServiceNov. 27, 2019 , 11:00 AM

Synthetic biologists have performed a biochemical switcheroo. Theyve re-engineered a bacterium that normally eats a diet of simple sugars into one that builds its cells by absorbing carbon dioxide (CO2), much like plants. The work could lead to engineered microbes that suck CO2 out of the air and turn it into medicines and other high-value compounds.

The implications of this are profound, says Dave Savage, a biochemist at the University of California, Berkeley, who was not involved with the work. Such advances, he says, could ultimately make us change the way we teach biochemistry.

Biologists typically break the world up into two types of organisms: autotrophs like plants and some bacteria that mostly use photosynthesis to convert CO2 into sugars and other organic compounds they need to build their cells. Meanwhile, the heterotrophs (thats us and pretty much everything else) get those building blocks from the organisms they consume.

Synthetic biologists have long tried to engineer plants and autotrophic bacteria to produce valuable chemicals and fuels from water and CO2, because it has the potential to be cheaper than other routes. But so far theyve been far more successful at getting the heterotrophic bacterium Escherichia coliknown to most people as the microbe that lives in our guts and sometimes triggers food poisoningto produce ethanol and other desired chemicals more cheaply than other approaches. Its not always cheap, however; these engineered E. coli strains must eat a steady diet of sugars, increasing the costs of the effort.

So, Ron Milo, a synthetic biologist at the Weizmann Institute of Science in Rehovot, Israel, and his colleagues decided to see whether they could transform E. coli into an autotroph. To do so, they re-engineered two essential parts of the bacteriums metabolism: how it gets energy and what source of carbon it uses to grow.

On the energy side, the researchers couldnt give the bacterium the ability to carry out photosynthesis, because the process is too complex. Instead, they inserted the gene for an enzyme that enabled the microbe to eat formate, one of the simplest carbon-containing compounds, and one other strains of E. coli cant eat. The microbes could then transform the formate into ATP, an energy-rich molecule that cells can use. That diet gave the microbe the energy it needed to use the second batch of three new enzymes it receivedall of which enabled it to convert CO2 into sugars and other organic molecules. The researchers also deleted several enzymes the bacterium normally uses for metabolism, forcing it to depend on the new diet to grow.

The changes didnt initially produce bacteria capable of living on formate and CO2, however. The researchers suspected the nutrients were still being directed toward its natural metabolism. So, they placed batches of the engineered E. coli in vessels that allowed them to carefully control the microbes diet. The team started with basically a starvation diet of xylose, a sugar, along with formate and CO2. This allowed the microbes to at least survive and reproduce.

It also set the stage for evolution: If any bacterial offspring acquired genetic mutations that allowed them to thrive on that diet, they would produce more offspring than those that didnt evolve. The researchers steadily decreased the amount of xylose available to the microbes as well. After 300 days and hundreds of generations of mutating E. coli, the xylose was gone. Only those bacteria that had evolved into autotrophs survived.

In all, the evolved bacteria picked up 11 new genetic mutations that allowed them to survive without eating other organisms, the team reports today in Cell. It really shows how amazing evolution can be, in that it can change something so fundamental as cellular metabolism, Milo says.

I bow to them for making it succeed, says Pam Silver, a systems biologist at Harvard Medical School in Boston, who devoted years to a similar project.

Scientists have previously developed dozens of tools to manipulate E. colis genes so that it produces different compounds, such as pharmaceuticals and fuels. That means researchers should be able to insert these changes autotrophic E. coli that eat formate, which is readily made by zapping CO2 in water with electricity. As a result, formate produced from wind and solar power could help engineered bacteria make ethanol and other fuels, or pharmaceuticals, such as the malaria-fighting drug artemisinin. Not bad for a makeover.

See the original post:
This microbe no longer needs to eat food to grow, thanks to a bit of genetic engineering - Science Magazine

Read More...

Testing for Genetic Variants Informed the Use of Cancer Risk Assessments – Cancer Therapy Advisor

Wednesday, November 27th, 2019

Testingpatients for certain pathogenic variants associated with increased cancer riskchanged the management of those patients, with patients almost always followingprovider recommendations for cancer screening, according to a recent study.

The studylooked at de-identified personal and family history data from 654 individualswith pathogenic variants in PALB2, ATM, CHEK2, NBN, BRIP1, RAD51C, and/orRAD51D. Data were analyzed to quantify pretest and posttest candidacyfor guideline-recommended management of cancer risk.

Amongpatients with CHEK2, ATM, PALB2, or NBN variants, only 24% wereappropriate for consideration of annual breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)prior to genetic testing. The remaining 76% were only deemed appropriatecandidates for MRI after testing.

Similarly,no patients with BRIP1, RAD51C, or RAD51D variants would havebeen considered candidates for risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) priorto undergoing genetic testing.

No consensus management recommendations exist for individuals at average risk or increased risk for ovarian cancer based on family history; therefore, no individuals were deemed appropriate candidates for consideration of RRSO based on family history, the researchers wrote. After testing, 100% of these individuals were appropriate candidates for RRSO.

Finally, onthe basis of personal or family history, only 17% of 309 individuals with CHEK2variants were considered appropriate for earlier and more frequent colonoscopyprior to genetic testing the remaining 83% were only considered appropriatecandidates after receiving genetic testing.

Read more here:
Testing for Genetic Variants Informed the Use of Cancer Risk Assessments - Cancer Therapy Advisor

Read More...

Rapid genetic test traces spread of fungus that kills frogs, reveals new strain in Southeast Asia – Mongabay.com

Wednesday, November 27th, 2019

Protecting frogs against the invisible killer called chytrid was never going to be easy. The fungus has already wiped out more species than any other known disease. But a recent study of the worldwide spread of the fungus shows that the task will be even harder than scientists expected.

The study is the first to use skin swabs from amphibians to identify the major strains of the fungus. Researchers found regions where strains could combine into deadly hybrids. They also found a previously unknown variant in Southeast Asia, which has not yet spread globally.

The findings, published Sept. 23 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, show that ecologists will need to track these distinct fungal variants to protect frogs more fully. Mutations in the fungus make it a moving target in much the same way as the ever-shifting influenza virus.

There [are] amazing, last vestiges of really diverse amphibian communities, said environmental scientist Erica Bree Rosenblum of the University of California, Berkeley, senior author of the study. If we can protect them from having a really deadly chytrid strain, that would be great.

Chytrid infects the thin, moist skin frogs use to absorb water and balance their levels of sodium, chloride and potassium. An infected frog, unable to maintain a steady heartbeat, will die of a heart attack. The fungus then releases spores into the water to infect the next frog. This deadly cycle is responsible for the decline of more than 500 amphibian species. About 90 species have gone extinct in the past 50 years, ecologists believe, including Australias Mount Glorious torrent frog (Taudactylus diurnus), last seen in 1979.

Some chytrid variants are deadlier than others. However, most genetic tests only reveal whether any fungus is present. The current way to identify the lineage of a fungus is to sequence its entire genome, a time-consuming step.

Rosenblums team, including first author Allison Byrne at UC Berkeley, devised a less laborious approach: a genetic test that works on small amounts of low-quality DNA. They tested 222 frog skin swabs from six continents and 24 countries. The massive international collaboration mobilized 30 co-authors.

The tests uncovered a new variant in China, Indonesia and the Philippines, which fits scientists understanding that the disease probably started in Asia. Researchers also found variants in unexpected places. For example, a lineage previously reported in Europe and Africa also turned up on frogs in Latin America.

This paper has been a long time coming, said evolutionary biologist Timothy James of the University of Michigan, who was not involved in the study. It validates some hypotheses and shows the way forward.

Many regions hosted multiple strains of the fungus. In some cases, frogs with different variants lived within meters of each other. That proximity worries Rosenblum. Strains could form deadlier hybrids in places like Brazil, where American bullfrogs (Lithobates catesbeianus) are farmed as pets and food. The new skin swab genetic test could allow officials to screen shipments of frogs before they go overseas, Rosenblum has proposed.

The teams approach could also help scientists learn how chytrid became so deadly to begin with. Museum samples have shown that the fungus existed on frogs collected in the early 1900s. However, mass die-offs didnt begin until the 1970s. Museum archives, examined with the new test, could identify what changed: from tweaks in the genetics of the fungus to the rise of international amphibian trade and global travel.

The effects of globalization for disease transmission around the world are so palpable, Rosenblum said. If were worried about moving diseases around the world for our own species, then we should also be worried about moving diseases around the world for other species.

Citation

Byrne, A. Q., et al. (2019). Cryptic diversity of a widespread global pathogen reveals expanded threats to amphibian conservation.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,116(41), 20382-20387. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1908289116

Jonathan Wosen (@JonathanWosen) is a graduate student in the Science Communication Program at the University of California, Santa Cruz. Other Mongabay stories produced by UCSC students can be found at https://news.mongabay.com/list/ucsc/

Visit link:
Rapid genetic test traces spread of fungus that kills frogs, reveals new strain in Southeast Asia - Mongabay.com

Read More...

Dispensed Business Insider weekly healthcare newsletter November 26 – Business Insider

Wednesday, November 27th, 2019

Hello,

Welcome to a very special mid-week edition of Dispensed, in which the smell of pies baking is already starting to fill the air and we're looking forward to a long weekend filled with Thanksgiving treats.

Are you new to the newsletter? You cansign uphere.

Allow us to fuel some conversations for your weekends with family and friends.

At HLTH, I spoke with 23andMe CEO Anne Wojcicki and Ancestry CEO Margo Georgiadis, and one of the big questions I had was about the "softness" hitting the direct-to-consumer genetics market.

The market for consumer genetics while making its way into pop culture, thanks, Lizzo hasn't grown at the clip companies expected it to.

Here's a look at their respective strategies as well as a check-in with what's going on at Helix, which initially set out to be the "app store" of genetics for consumers.

Hollis Johnson/Business Insider

I've also personally shipped my spit off to a number of these players. In time for the inevitable holiday rush, here's my most recent thoughts about what you should keep in mind when sending in a spit sample (beyond, of course, the privacy considerations).

You can find more detailed reviews of what I learned from 23andMe and Ancestryhere.

It's Clarrie Feinstein's final day with us as her fellowship wraps up! We're going to miss having her in the office.

For her final post, she profiled a company looking to change the way radiologists practice.

Elsewhere, Joseph Zeballos-Roig took a look at an important element of the Medicare for All debate: how much doctors and hospitals will get paid. He spoke to folks who ran through the caveats that will need to be kept in mind during what would likely be a bumpy transition.

Allana Akhtar, Business Insider's jobs reporter, spoke with nurses who told her which questions patients shouldn't hesitate to ask their doctors.

Zach Tracer and I will be at the Forbes Healthcare Summit in New York next Thursday. Be sure to say hi if you see us milling about! As always, you can reach me at lramsey@businessinsider.com and the entire healthcare team at healthcare@businessinsider.com.

Hope everyone has a great Thanksgiving. This year, I'm grateful for you, dear readers. See you in December!

- Lydia

The rest is here:
Dispensed Business Insider weekly healthcare newsletter November 26 - Business Insider

Read More...

‘One among millions’: DNA is not the only genetic molecule – Big Think

Wednesday, November 27th, 2019

Simply put, the so-called central dogma of biology asserts that genetic information flows from DNA to RNA to proteins, and once that information is passed to a protein, it cannot be returned as DNA or RNA again. It's dubbed the central dogma because it seems to be universal amongst all living organisms. There are some exceptions to the linear flow described in the popular version of the central dogma information can be passed back and forth between RNA and DNA or between DNA and DNA or RNA and RNA, but the central players remain the same: DNA, RNA, and proteins.

But what if this didn't have to be the case? Could genetic information be stored in media other than the two nucleic acids of DNA and RNA? New research published in the Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling suggests that there might not be just a handful of alternative molecules for storing genetic information, but millions.

The central dogma of biology asserts that the genetic information is transcribed from DNA to RNA, which then translates that information into useful products like proteins. This new research, however, suggests that DNA and RNA are just two options out of millions of others.

Shutterstock

Analogues to nucleic acids exist, many of which serve as the foundation for important drugs for treating viruses like HIV and hepatitis as well as for treating cancers, but until recently, no one was sure of how many unknown nucleic acid analogues could be out there.

"There are two kinds of nucleic acids in biology," said co-author Jim Cleaves, "and maybe 20 or 30 effective nucleic acid-binding nucleic acid analogues. We wanted to know if there is one more to be found or even a million more. The answer is, there seem to be many more than was expected."

Cleaves and colleagues decided to conduct a chemical space analysis in essence, a sophisticated computer technique that generates all possible molecules that adhere to a set of defined criteria. In this case, the criteria were to find compounds that could serve as nucleic acid analogues and as a means of storing genetic information.

"We were surprised by the outcome of this computation," said co-author Markus Meringer. "It would be very difficult to estimate a priori that there are more than a million nucleic acidlike scaffolds. Now we know, and we can start looking into testing some of these in the lab."

Though no specific analogues were targeted in this paper, it does present a long list of candidates to be explored for use as drugs for serious diseases like HIV or cancer. A more intriguing possibility suggested by the research is that life itself may have taken its very first steps using one of these alternative compounds.

Many scientists believe that before DNA became the dominant means of storing genetic information, life used RNA to code genetic data and pass it down to offspring. In part, this is because RNA can directly produce proteins, which DNA can't do on its own, and because it's a simpler structure than DNA. Over time, life likely started to opt for using DNA for storage due to its greater stability and to rely on RNA as a kind of middleman for producing proteins. But RNA on its own is still a very complicated compound and is fairly unstable; in all likelihood, something simpler came before RNA, possibly using some of the nucleic acid analogues identified in this study.

Not only does this shed light on how life may have started on Earth, but it also has implications for alien life as well. Co-author Jay Goodwin said, "It is truly exciting to consider the potential for alternate genetic systems based on these analogous nucleosides that these might possibly have emerged and evolved in different environments, perhaps even on other planets or moons within our solar system. These alternate genetic systems might expand our conception of biology's 'central dogma' into new evolutionary directions, in response and robust to increasingly challenging environments here on Earth."

When we search for extraterrestrial life, often we're looking for signs of RNA and DNA, but this may be an excessively narrow scope. After all, if millions of alternatives exist, there would need to be something very special indeed for life to universally favor using just DNA and RNA.

Related Articles Around the Web

More here:
'One among millions': DNA is not the only genetic molecule - Big Think

Read More...

Collection of genetic data leads to privacy concerns – The New Economy

Wednesday, November 27th, 2019

A DNA test can reveal surprising facts about us certain genes make us more inclined to have dry earwax, for example, and others make us more likely to sneeze when we see a bright light. Some genes even result in people being more attractive targets for mosquitoes, so if youve ever felt personally singled out by the insect during the summer months, its not a cruel conspiracy its your DNA.

Innocuous facts like these were what DNA kits were used for finding out when they first became commercially available. However, as the tests have become more sophisticated, the companies behind them have shifted their marketing focus. Users of at-home DNA tests have been known to uncover deep-rooted facts about themselves, from discovering long-lost relatives to learning of their ancestors origins and their susceptibility to genetic diseases.

Finding out that you have a pre-existing health condition might not seem like the best idea for a Christmas present, but that hasnt stopped the test kits from enjoying a surge in popularity. MIT Technology Review estimates that by the start of 2019, more than 26 million people had taken an at-home ancestry test. The market is expected to be worth $45bn by 2024.

Nevertheless, despite the emerging industrys rampant growth, there have been mounting concerns that its practices could infringe on consumers rights. Whenever people fork out $100 to $200 for a DNA test, the hidden cost of that transaction is their personal data which, from then on, is held in the databases of a private company. Once these companies obtain genetic information, its very difficult for users to get it back.

By taking DNA tests at home, many have unwittingly stumbled upon long-kept family secrets. Some have seen their parents go through a bitter divorce after their test revealed they were actually conceived through an affair

Ignorance is blissLong before people were able to take DNA tests from the comfort of their own home, psychologists worried about their possible impact on peoples mental health. Ever since the Human Genome Project was started in 1990, many scholars have maintained that DNA tests should be used with caution, on the grounds that understanding ones own health risks could lead to anxiety or depression.

Conversely, a study by the Hastings Centre found that discovering an increased risk of developing Alzheimers disease did not make people more depressed or anxious. And in the event that people discover a particularly urgent health risk like a mutation of the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes, which puts individuals at a high risk of developing cancer at a young age any adverse psychological effects are presumably worth it to obtain this life-saving information.

However, at-home DNA tests could still pose a risk to mental health, in part because they remove medical professionals from the equation. Adrian Mark Thorogood, Academic Associate at the Centre of Genomics and Policy, warned that this is far from best practice for receiving a DNA test result. Results should be communicated through a medical professional who can interpret the result in the individuals specific context, and offer a clear description of the tests limits, he told The New Economy.

Without a professionals assistance, users could be left alone to battle with a troubling revelation about their health. There is also a danger that without guidance, some people could misinterpret their test result, placing undue stress on their mental health.

There is another unpleasant discovery that people can make through a DNA test one they may be even less prepared for. By taking DNA tests at home, many have unwittingly stumbled upon long-kept family secrets. Some have seen their parents go through a bitter divorce after their test revealed they were actually conceived through an affair. Others have discovered they were conceived by rape and that their mother decided to never tell them. What began as a seemingly harmless urge to find out more about their heritage ends in psychological trauma and family breakdown.

Brianne Kirkpatrick, a genetics counsellor, is part of a growing sector of therapy specifically tailored towards helping people come to terms with receiving unexpected DNA results. One cant help but wonder whether her patients end up wishing theyd never taken the test at all.

I dont recall anyone saying they wish they could go back and not learn the truth, Kirkpatrick said. But I have had a number of people say to me they wish they had found out their shocking information from a person, rather than a computer.

While we might think wed prefer to suffer a DNA leak than a leak of our credit card details, genetic data has its own unique set of complications

The fact that virtually anyone can now find out their real parentage through a simple DNA test has wide-reaching repercussions for the accountability of paternity. Historically, men have always had a much greater ability to conceal their status as a parent, as they dont have to bear the child. The world of direct-to-consumer DNA testing blows this capacity for anonymity out of the water.

This is particularly problematic when it comes to sperm donation. Anonymity is a key selling point for many potential donors, but now all their future biological offspring has to do is swab the inside of their cheek to completely compromise that anonymity. Research suggests that we could see a drop in donor rates as a result. A 2016 study in the Journal of Law and the Biosciences found that 29 percent of potential donors would actually refuse to donate if their name was put on a registry.

The wave of parental discoveries made through direct-to-consumer DNA tests raises questions about where the responsibility of the seller sits in all this. Most health professionals recommend that individuals seek out genetics counselling once they receive DNA results. Some, like Invitae, offer counselling services but arent direct-to-consumer companies. Many of those that are including 23andMe do not offer such a service. It could be argued that this shows a certain disregard for the consequences of using their product. Unfortunately, irresponsible decisions like this have tended to characterise the industrys path to success.

Genetic Wild WestIn September 2019, 17 former employees from the Boston-based genetic testing company Orig3n accused the firm of giving consumers inaccurate results. Allegedly, if a customer took the same test twice, their results could be extremely different each time. A former lab technician produced a leaked report to Bloomberg Businessweek that revealed 407 errors like this hadoccurred over a period of three months.

Part of Orig3ns USP was that it offered advice supposedly calculated based on a consumers genetic profile. Former employees have cast doubt over the companys modus operandi by claiming that the advice they gave was in fact routinely lifted from the internet. The advice given ranged from the technically correct but uninspired to the broadly unhelpful such as telling people to eat more kale and the utterly bogus, like advising clients to eat more sugar to eliminate stretch marks.

Although Orig3n is a relatively small player in the sector, news of this scam nonetheless illustrates how little protection consumers have in this nascent market. Analysts say we are currently witnessing a Wild West period in the consumer genetics space thanks to a lack of regulation, raising concerns over whether we can trust these companies with our genetic data. While we might think wed prefer to suffer a DNA leak than a leak of our credit card details, genetic data has its own unique set of complications.

In the United States, if my social security number is stolen, that is difficult, but not impossible, to get frozen, changed, etc, said Natalie Ram, an associate professor at the University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law and a specialist in bioethics and criminal justice. But theres literally no way to change your genetic code.

Genetics platforms like 23andMe, AncestryDNA and FamilyTreeDNA are now sitting on a goldmine of very personal data. In 2013, a 23andMe board member told Fast Company that it wanted to become the Google of personalised healthcare. If this statement makes anything clear, its that the company wasnt planning on making its millions simply by selling DNA test kits: its mission was always to amass significant amounts of data on its users, which it could then monetise.

There is a wide range of reasons why companies might want to buy genetic data. Perhaps the most benign is medical research, which genetics platforms allow users to opt in or out of. But other companies might use your genetic data to better sell you products or, conversely, deny them to you for instance, one sector that would see a clear monetary value in obtaining genetic data is insurance. In the US, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 prevents employers and health insurers from using a persons genetic information when making decisions about hiring, firing or raising rates. However, this does not include life insurance or short or long-term disability insurance.

At first glance, it seems as if theres a simple solution: if users are concerned about these risks, they should just choose for their data to be kept anonymous. However, choosing this option is not as foolproof as it once was. As long ago as 2009, researchers demonstrated that they could correctly identify between 40 and 60 percent of all participants in supposedly anonymous DNA databases by comparing large sets of that data with public datasets from censuses or voter lists. Since that experiment, DNA databases have grown massively.

With access to four to five million DNA profiles, upwards of 90 percent of Americans of European descent will be identifiable, said Ram. Its verging on a comprehensive DNA database that no US state or jurisdiction has suggested would be appropriate.

Shaping the lawWith comforting statements like your privacy is very important to us (ancestry.co.uk) and we wont share your DNA (familytreedna.com) emblazoned on their websites, some genetics platforms seem to be making privacy their number one priority. In the US, 23andMe and Ancestry are part of the Coalition for Genetic Data Protection, which lobbies for privacy protection in the DNA space. However, while the coalition advocates genetic data privacy in a specific context, it argues for a one-size-fits-all policy concerning all data. By comparison, the EUs General Data Protection Regulation regards genetic information as personal data, which makes DNA unique from other kinds of data.

There is a fundamental legal problem with boxing genetic data in with all other varieties, including the data that social media websites collect about us. In most cases, what a person does on the internet implicates them alone genetic data is different. We share our DNA with members of our family, which means that sharing it without their consent can be problematic.

Even if I can consent to using my DNA to identify me, that should not extend to my ability to consent to using my DNA to identify my relatives, said Ram. The reason I think thats a really critical distinction is because genetic relatedness is almost always involuntarily foisted upon us. So we dont choose our parents, we dont choose how many siblings we have. Its a product of biology, not a product of choice.

The legal issues surrounding genetic relatedness were put to the test in 2018 when police discovered the true identity of the Golden State Killer, who terrorised California in the 1970s and 1980s in a homicidal spree. Law enforcement officials were able to convict him only because they had succeeded in connecting the DNA of the suspect with that of a family relative on GEDmatch, a genetic database in the public domain. Across the US and around the world, people celebrated the arrest of a notorious criminal. The only problem was that the means of capturing him was not necessarily legal.

Prior to the case, GEDmatchs site policy made no explicit reference to the potential use of consumers data by law enforcement. However, the company defended itself by saying that users should have assumed it could be put to that use.

While the database was created for genealogical research, it is important that GEDmatch participants understand the possible uses of their DNA, including identification of relatives that have committed crimes or were victims of crimes, said GEDmatch operator Curtis Rogers in a statement.

Some genes even result in people being more attractive targets for mosquitoes, so if youve ever felt personally singled out by the insect during the summer months, its not a cruel conspiracy its your DNA

However, privacy advocates like Ram argue that users consent for law enforcement to look at their data should not have been assumed. At least from a constitutional perspective in the United States, individuals ought to be recognised to have whats called an expectation of privacy in their genetic data, even if they use one of these services, she told The New Economy.

After the case, genetics platforms updated their policies to clarify their position on law enforcements use of peoples data. Interestingly, they took very different stances. While 23andMe and Ancestry said they would not allow law enforcement to search through their genetic genealogy databases, FamilyTreeDNA updated its policy to say it would give up data to officials, but only in the investigation of violent crimes. Users didnt know it at the time, but FamilyTreeDNAs policy update was already too little too late: in January 2019, it was revealed that the company had been secretly working with the FBI for nearly a year to solve serious crimes, without informing its users.

The Golden State Killer case exposed how little protection consumers really had in the direct-to-consumer genetics market. It showed that genetics platforms were capable of suddenly changing or contradicting their own policies and even, in the case of FamilyTreeDNA, betraying the trust of consumers.

Some might argue that this infringement on genetic privacy is simply the price we must pay to catch dangerous criminals. Of course, without the use of a genealogy database, the Golden State Killer may never have been caught. But the fact that genetic data can be harnessed to solve very serious crimes should not justify law enforcements unbridled access to such databases. Abuses of power do happen and, in the context of direct-to-consumer DNA tests, they already have: in 2018, for example, Canadian immigration officials compelled a man to take a DNA test and upload his results to FamilyTreeDNAs website. They then used the website to find and contact some of his relatives in the UK to gather more evidence in order to deport him.

Todays consumers are continually adjusting to shrinking levels of privacy. From the introduction of video surveillance and the mapping of residential areas on Google Earth to the revelation that Facebook harvests vast amounts of user data, we have seen the public react in the same way again and again: there is an initial public outcry, and then consumers simply adjust to the new level of diminished privacy. Our response to the rise of genetics platforms risks the issue being consigned to the same fate.

It is up to regulators to protect individuals right to privacy. While our genetic data may be something of a genie out of the bottle, that should not give the companies that collect it free rein over who sees it and what they choose to do with it.

Read this article:
Collection of genetic data leads to privacy concerns - The New Economy

Read More...

Genetic testing IVF embryos doesn’t improve the chance of a baby – The Conversation AU

Wednesday, November 27th, 2019

If youre going through IVF, you may be offered a test to look at your embryos chromosomes.

Pre-implantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (chromosome abnormalities), known as PGT-A, is an add on used to help choose embryos with the right number of chromosomes. Its promoted by IVF clinics as a way to increase the chance of success, especially for women over 35.

But the evidence shows that in most cases, PGT-A doesnt improve the chance of a baby.

Read more: The business of IVF: how human eggs went from simple cells to a valuable commodity

Human cells usually contain 46 chromosomes. Aneuploidy is a term that describes a chromosome number that is different from 46 either too many or too few chromosomes.

In human embryos, most aneuploidies are lethal, resulting in miscarriage, or do not result in pregnancy at all.

The chance of aneuploidy increases with the age of the woman; by the time a woman reaches age 40, approximately 80% of her embryos are aneuploid.

All couples produce some aneuploid embryos, whether they conceive naturally or with IVF. The idea behind PGT-A is that if the aneuploid embryos can be identified they can be discarded, so that only embryos capable of producing a healthy pregnancy are used.

PGT-A involves the woman having fertility drugs to produce several eggs. When they are mature, they are retrieved and mixed with sperm to create embryos.

Embryos are grown in the laboratory for five to six days. At this time, two types of cells are distinguishable: the cells that will develop into the placenta and the cells that will become the baby.

Read more: Considering using IVF to have a baby? Here's what you need to know

A few cells are removed from the future placenta for testing and the embryos are frozen until test results are available.

If the test shows there are normal embryos, one is thawed and transferred to the womans uterus. Any remaining normal embryos will be kept frozen for transfer later if the first transfer is unsuccessful.

Importantly, PGT-A doesnt correct chromosomally abnormal embryos, it simply allows couples to avoid transferring them.

Many clinics recommend PGT-A for women over 35 (more than half of women who have IVF) and those who have had repeated miscarriages or failed IVF treatments. This is because women over 35 and women with previous losses are more likely to produce aneuploid embryos.

While the theory behind PFT-A makes sense, randomised controlled trials (the gold standard evidence to tell us if an intervention makes a difference) have not demonstrated a clear benefit.

Of the two most recent trials of PGT-A, one reported fewer embryo transfers and fewer miscarriages in the PGT-A group but neither showed benefits in terms of improving the live-birth rate.

PGT-A actually has the potential to reduce the chance of a baby. It can do this in two ways.

First, PGT-A is not 100% accurate. This means that inevitably, some embryos that have the capacity to form a healthy baby will be discarded.

The most common reason for these false positive results is that a proportion of embryos are mosaic they have a mix of normal and abnormal cells. Surprisingly, mosaic chromosome abnormalities are quite common in early human embryos, and do not seem to prevent the embryo developing into a healthy baby.

However, if abnormal cells are removed and tested, the embryo will be misclassified as abnormal and discarded a lost opportunity for a healthy pregnancy.

Read more: Fertility miracle or fake news? Understanding which IVF 'add-ons' really work

Many healthy babies have been born to people who have elected to have mosaic embryos transferred because they were the only embryos they had.

In a recent study of 98 women who had mosaic embryos, 32 (33%) elected to have at least one transferred. Of these, 11 (34%) had a successful pregnancy with apparently healthy babies born.

Second, while the risk is small, embryos can be damaged in the biopsy procedure and some embryos dont survive the freezing and thawing process.

PGT-A costs around A$700 per embryo which adds up to A$2,800 if there are four embryos to test.

While doctors likely offer their patients detailed and individualised information about different treatment options, information about the possible benefits of PGT-A on clinic websites can be difficult to interpret.

Thats why independent information about the pros and cons of PGT-A is needed to help people make informed decisions. The Victorian Assisted Reproductive Treatment Authority (VARTA) has developed a downloadable resource about the current state of knowledge about PGT-A.

Some clinics are now offering a less invasive technique where, rather than removing cells from the embryo, they test the fluid that the embryo is grown in to determine if the embryo has the right number of chromosomes. Time will tell of this will improve the chance of having a baby with IVF.

In the meantime, it may help to ask the five questions recommended by Choosing Wisely:

And in the case of IVF: how will this improve my chance of a live birth?

Read more: Your questions answered on donor conception and IVF

See the article here:
Genetic testing IVF embryos doesn't improve the chance of a baby - The Conversation AU

Read More...

German shepherd stuck in ‘perpetual puppyhood’ due to rare genetic condition – Fox News

Friday, November 22nd, 2019

A purebred German shepherd will forever be the size of a pupdue to a rare genetic condition.

Ranger, 2, has pituitary dwarfism, a genetic condition that primarily affects German shepherds, but can also affect such breeds as the Saarloos wolfdog and the Karelian bear dog.

NEW YORK DOG CHEWED OFF OWN LEG WHILE LIVING IN CRATE OUTSIDE, POLICE SAY; OWNER CHARGED

Ranger the German Shepherd with pituitary dwarfism. (SWNS)

Rangers owner, Shelby Mayo, told British news agencySWNS that she knew the dog mightend up smaller than other German shepherds; he was apparentlythe runt of his litter.

When we originally got Ranger from the breeder, he was smaller than all his other littermates, but we figured that was because he had a parasite called Coccidia, said Mayo, of Phoenix.

Ranger was treated for the parasite, but he later contracted another parasite Giardia and developed an infectionon his neck.

''During this time Ranger remained very small, the vet had suspected that he may have pituitary dwarfism, a genetic mutation, she said. But we were still skeptical as this condition is very rare.

A few months later, Ranger was neutered,after which time we started to see big changes, Mayo said. Ranger began to suffer from weight and hair loss, as well as dry and flaky skin more signs of the condition, as dogs with pituitary dwarfism often experience skin and hair abnormalities, per ScienceDirect.

One of Rangers nearly 70,000 followers on Instagram who also has a German shepherd with dwarfism warned the owner that the dog may be suffering from low thyroid levels,not uncommon in dogs with the condition.

NEW JERSEY DOGS, INCLUDING 3-MONTH-OLD PITBULL, BURNED WITH BLOWTORCH, ANIMAL RESCUERS SAY

So our vet checked his thyroid levels and sure enough he was low. This can cause hair loss and a loss of appetite, said Mayo, noting that medication and a special soap remedied the condition.

Though dogs with pituitary dwarfism are more prone to health issues andtypically have shortened lifespans,Mayo told SWNS that Ranger ishealthy and happy as can be as of now and enjoys playing with her two other dogs, Hazel and Jessie.

See more here:
German shepherd stuck in 'perpetual puppyhood' due to rare genetic condition - Fox News

Read More...

This Mom Is Buying Mutant Mice From China To Find A Cure For Her Sons Rare Genetic Disease – BuzzFeed News

Friday, November 22nd, 2019

When Amber Freed first told doctors her baby boy wasnt able to move his hands, they said that wasnt possible.

Freed had given birth to twins in March 2017. While her baby girl, Riley, squirmed and babbled and crawled through the first year of her life, her fraternal twin, Maxwell, was different. He didnt crawl or babble like Riley did. I would fill out their baby books each month, and Riley had met all of these milestones. Maxwell didnt reach one, she said. Most alarmingly, however, Freed noticed that he never moved his hands.

She knew the news was going to be bad when they sent her to the sad room at the hospital, a featureless conference space filled with grim-faced doctors, to hear the diagnosis.

You take your baby to the doctor and you say, He cant move his hands. And they look at you and they say, Of course he can, said Freed.

Then they look for themselves, and you can see from the look on their faces that they have never seen anything like this.

On June 14, 2018, at the Children's Hospital Colorado in Denver, Maxwell was diagnosed with a genetic disease called SLC6A1. The diagnosis explained why the infant hadnt moved his hands or learned how to speak for the first year of his life, while Riley was thriving. But it didnt explain much else: All the doctors who diagnosed Maxwell knew about the genetic disease came from a single five-page study published in 2014, the year of its discovery. It was too rare to even have a name, she was told, so the doctors just called it by the name of the affected gene: SLC6A1.

Now her 2-year-old son is at the center of a multimillion-dollar race against time, one thats come to include genetics researchers whom Freed personally recruited, paid for by $1 million that Freed and her husband, Mark, have raised themselves. At the center of their research will be specially crafted mutant mice that Freed paid scientists in China to genetically alter to have the same disease as Maxwell. The four mice are scheduled to arrive stateside next week, but Freed said shes prepared to smuggle them into the US disguised as pets if there are any problems.

In total, Amber and Mark will need to raise as much as $7 million to test a genetic treatment for their child. And unless they can find and fund a cure, SLC6A1 will condemn Maxwell to severe epileptic seizures, most likely starting before he turns 3. The seizures may trigger developmental disabilities for a lifetime, often accompanied by aggressive behavior, hand flapping, and difficulty speaking.

And the Freeds will have to do it largely alone there are only an estimated 100 other people diagnosed with SLC6A1 in the world. This is the rarest of the rare diseases, pediatric geneticist Austin Larson of the Children's Hospital Colorado told BuzzFeed News.

SLC6A1 is just one of thousands of untreatable rare diseases, and the perilous path it has set up for Freed, half science quarterback and half research fundraiser, is one that few parents can follow. My dream is to create a playbook of how I did this for those that come after me, said Freed. I never want there to be another family that has suffered like this.

You can think of SLC6A1 as a vacuum cleaner in the brain, genetic counselor Katherine Helbig of the Childrens Hospital of Philadelphia, told BuzzFeed News. Helbig will speak at the first conference on the gene at the American Epilepsy Society meeting in Baltimore on Dec. 5, an effort organized by Freed.

The protein made by the gene acts as a stop sign to message-carrying chemicals in the brain, halting them by vacuuming them up once they reach their destination brain cell, Helbig explained.

When one of the two copies of the SLC6A1 gene in every brain cell is damaged, like in Maxwells case, too little of its protein is available to perform its vacuuming duties, leading to miscommunication between cells, developmental disorders, autism-like symptoms, and, often, severe epileptic seizures.

Maxwell is about the age when epileptic seizures typically start in kids with the genetic disease, said Helbig, adding, There probably are many more children out there who have it, but they just havent had the right test to find it. At least 100 similar genetic defects cause similar kinds of epilepsy, afflicting about 1 in 2,000 kids, she said.

I was the one who presented this diagnosis to Amber, said Larson of the Children's Hospital Colorado. There was no medicine or diet or any other treatment for SLC6A1. It wasnt an easy conversation. Most of the time when we present a diagnosis for a genetic condition, there is not a specific treatment available.

At that moment, it was just vividly clear that the only option was for me to create our own miracle, said Freed. Nobody else was going to help.

Half the battle with a rare genetic disease is getting researchers interested, said Helbig.

At that moment, it was just vividly clear that the only option was for me to create our own miracle. Nobody else was going to help.

So that is what Freed set out to do. She quit her job as a financial analyst and started making phone calls to scientists, calling 300 labs in the first three months. For those who didnt respond, she sent them snacks via Uber Eats.

Her search, and a rapid-fire education on genetic diseases, led her to conclude the best hope for helping Maxwell was an experimental technique called gene therapy.

All the roads zeroed in on one scientist: Steven Gray of the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas. In 2018, a team headed by Gray reported the first human experiments of gene transfer by spinal injection, conducted in 5 to 10 children with mutations in a gene called GAN that causes swelling in brain cells.

The GAN gene transfer in that experiment, first tested in mice, attached a corrected version of the damaged gene to a harmless virus. Viruses reproduce by infecting cells and hijacking their DNA machinery to reproduce their own genes, making more viruses. The gene therapy virus in turn leaves behind a corrected gene in the DNA of cells they infect. Injected into the spinal cord, Grays virus can travel straight to the brain, leaving behind the corrected gene after the virus has run its course.

I gave him my 30-second equity analyst pitch. I told him why Maxwell was a good patient, that we would raise $4 million to $7 million, and quarterback every step of the research, she said. And it worked. He agreed to make it a priority if we could raise the money.

The SLC6A1 researchers with the Freeds at a science meeting. From left: Terry Jo Bichell, Frances Shaffo, Amber Freed, Katty Kang, and Mark Freed.

Less than a month after meeting Gray, Freed contacted a lab at Tongji University in Shanghai that was also researching SLC6A1. The lab agreed to develop a mouse with Maxwells specific mutation for less than $50,000, using a gene modification technology called CRISPR that has revolutionized genetic engineering in the lab. CRISPR mice are much more expensive in the US, and this lab had experience with the gene, said Freed.

By July of this year, an experiment with a gene therapy virus that corrects SLC6A1 was tested on normal lab mice, which showed no sign of a toxic response, an encouraging sign. And by September, a line of CRISPR mice with Maxwells exact genetic mutation had been created at Tongji University.

It is the literal mouse version of him, said Freed. Testing a therapy in this mouse is as close as science can get to testing in my son directly.

To pay for all this, Maxwells family started fundraising last November and organized the first medical symposium on SLC6A1 in New Orleans that same month. They opened a GoFundMe account, which has raised $600,000, and held 35 fundraisers, which raised an additional $400,000 by October. In one charity competition, Larson from the Colorado Childrens Hospital, who diagnosed Maxwell, personally helped her raise $75,000.

It is the literal mouse version of him. Testing a therapy in this mouse is as close as science can get to testing in my son directly.

That money is helping to pay for the next step getting the CRISPR mice to Grays lab to test the SLC6A1-correcting virus on them. But its not as simple as putting the mice in a box and shipping them by mail. The mice will be transferred through a lab at Vanderbilt University headed by Katty Kang, an expert on the neurotransmitter disrupted by Maxwells mutation.

Amber is helping us to advance science, and everyone is making this a priority because of the young lives at stake not just Maxwell, but other children this could help, Kang told BuzzFeed News.

Once the four mice arrive, they will spend several weeks in quarantine, be tested to make sure they have Maxwells specific point mutation in the SLC6A1 gene, and breed with normal lab mice to produce generations of mixed-inheritance mice to serve as controls in future experiments. The mutant mice will be closely monitored before they head to UT Southwestern to make sure that they demonstrate the same problems and genetics as human patients with SLC6A1 and can therefore be used in any future clinical trials of gene therapy.

Right now at UT Southwestern, results from a safety test of the gene therapy virus conducted by Grays lab on young, normal lab mice is awaiting publication. If that works out, once the Chinese mice are sent over, they will also receive the gene-correcting virus. His team will see if their symptoms improve and to what extent their brain cells accept the corrected gene.

Maxwell's brain cells seen through a microscope (left), and a sample of his cells in a petri dish.

And then, Freed just needs another $5.5 million. Half a million dollars will go to test the virus in a second SLC6A1 animal model, likely a rat, as another safety step. Two million dollars will go toward creating more of the gene-correcting virus for a human safety study if that proves to be safe. And finally, if all that works out, $3 million will be needed to conduct the experiment on Maxwell and other children next year, following the path of the GAN clinical trial led by Gray.

Its a really horrible realization that the only thing standing in the way of a cure for your 2-year-old is money, said Freed.

Freed acknowledges that she has only been able to pursue a cure for Maxwell because her family has the resources to do so which she would never have had growing up in small towns in Texas, Montana, and Colorado in a poor family affected by alcoholism. I grew up visiting my parents in rehab and knew what to say to put a family member on a 72-hour psychiatric hold by age 12, she said. She dug herself out to build a career in finance, and hoped her kids would never have to experience the struggles she did growing up.

Even so, the fight hasnt been easy on them or on Maxwells sister, Riley.

Freed worries her daughter is growing up in doctors' waiting rooms, waiting on treatments for her brother to end. Maxwells disease has progressed, causing him to constantly clench his fingers, and sometimes pull his sisters hair. His 3-year-old sister will gently remind him, Soft hands, Maxie.

Families like the Freeds are at the forefront of efforts to turn diagnoses of rare genetic ailments, which often used to be the stopping point for medicine, into treatments. A similar case saw the family of a 3-year-old girl, Mila Makovec, raise $3 million for gene therapy to cure her Batten disease, a deadly genetic brain disease that affects 2 to 4 of every 100,000 children born in the US.

In a New England Journal of Medicine editorial on that case published in October, FDA officials questioned how high the agency should set the safety bar for such treatments, meant for severe diseases affecting so few people. In these cases, parents are often collaborators in developing treatments, and might not want to stop efforts that come with high risks. Even in rapidly progressing, fatal illnesses, precipitating severe complications or death is not acceptable, so what is the minimum assurance of safety that is needed? wrote senior FDA officials Janet Woodcock and Peter Marks.

This is way beyond what anyone expects of families.

Finally, Woodcock and Marks wrote, finding sustainable funding for such interventions may prove challenging, because the cost of production can be quite substantial, particularly for gene therapies.

In our era of financial inequality, the specter of wealthy parents buying custom genetic treatments for their childrens ailments while other parents desperately resort to GoFundMe accounts, or else do nothing looms as a possibility.

This is way beyond what anyone expects of families, said Larson. The pathway has been opened up by the brave new world of improved genetic diagnoses, and the coming of age of rapid genetic engineering tools like CRISPR.

But only 20 years ago, an experimental gene therapy that relied on a harmless virus killed an 18-year-old volunteer, Jesse Gelsinger, in a research misconduct case that brought gene therapy to a standstill. Now more than 2,500 gene therapy clinical trials have been conducted, and more than 370 are underway. The human genome was not sequenced until 2000; today, mapping an entire human gene map costs around $700. In this new era, customized treatments for rare genetic diseases like Maxwells are suddenly possible.

What I hope is that we are paving the way for other parents to help their children, said Freed.

Families of children with rare genetic diseases are also working together to make treatments like the one Freed is spearheading possible, said Larson.

They support each other and work together, he said. The best example might be the families of children with cystic fibrosis, who through the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation and the discovery of the gene responsible for the disease in 1989 have pushed for the discovery of new drug treatments. In October, the FDA approved a breakthrough pharmaceutical that could treat 90% of cases.

It is easier working with FDA on this kind of approach rather than starting from scratch, Gray told BuzzFeed News by email. After all, he said, its easier to follow a path that youve already walked down.

Similarly, Freed hopes the SLC6A1 Connect advocacy group she started can lead to similar treatments for other children with genetic epilepsies caused by the gene.

I dont think any parent should be expected to single-handedly cure his or her childs rare disease, said Helbig. Amber is a very tenacious and persistent person, and she will fight tooth and nail for her kids. But a lot of people dont have the resources and they shouldnt have to.

Helbig says that cautious optimism is appropriate on the chances of research yielding a genetic therapy for children like Maxwell. For SLC6A1, its really too early to say whether this is going to work.

But if it works, it might lead many more parents to get genetic tests for children that will reveal undiagnosed problems, she said. Many doctors discourage extensive genetic tests, thinking they wont find anything helpful. In the absence of known treatments, insurers are also reluctant to pay for such tests, discouraging all but the most fortunate and resourceful parents. Even for them, there are no guarantees.

The other tough reality is the possibility this treatment wont be completed in time to help Maxwell, said Freed. I love him with every ounce of my being, and I want him to know that I did everything humanly possible to change his outcome.

Here is the original post:
This Mom Is Buying Mutant Mice From China To Find A Cure For Her Sons Rare Genetic Disease - BuzzFeed News

Read More...

Genetic Resistance to Devastating Ash Tree Disease Discovered and It Could Help Save the Species – EcoWatch

Friday, November 22nd, 2019

From 2010 to 2017, the U.S. unintentionally played middleman to somewhere between 650 and 772 tons of shark fin exports, accounting for as many as 1.29 million sharks. (The exact number of sharks is difficult to determine, since most of the records NRDC managed to obtain expressed shipment size by weight, not individual parts, and different conditions translate into different weights per piece. Frozen fins weigh more than dried fins, for example).

"When we let these shark fin shipments pass through our borders without monitoring them, the U.S. becomes a weak link," says report coauthor Elizabeth Murdock, director of the NRDC's Pacific Oceans Initiative.

It doesn't have to be this way. The U.S. has a stronger legal framework and more regulatory resources than most of the world. If anything, we should be one of the strongest links in the fight against a black market trade that threatens marine biodiversity.

Back in 2000, the U.S. banned shark finning, the practice of cutting a shark's fins off and then dumping the animal back into the ocean. But it is still legal in many states to catch a shark, bring it back to shore, and cut it up into parts including fins, steaks, and other marketable items. (Possessing or selling shark fins is not always illegal just when the fins come from species protected by the Endangered Species Act or the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora).

Each year, tens of millions of sharks wind up on hooks and in nets, many of which belong to Americans. According to NRDC's report, the number of sharks we land each year makes us the seventh-largest shark-fishing nation in the world. Still, scientists seem to agree that the U.S. is doing a pretty good job of managing its shark populations. A study published in 2017 in the journal Current Biology listed America's Alaskan skate, blacktip shark, and spiny dogfish fisheries (among others) as "bright spots of sustainable shark fishing." Indeed, countries such as the U.S., Australia, Canada, and New Zealand are leading the world when it comes to harvesting sharks in ways that don't drive them toward extinction. However, the unfortunate fact remains that the vast majority (91 percent) of the world's shark fisheries are unsustainable.

Silky shark. NOAA / Teachers at Sea Program

As cargo, shark fins are not required to route through one of those 17 ports if they are not "unloaded." If that's the case, those fins can move along without a second glance. At the same time, products that qualify as "seafood" are also exempt from special port inspection unless the species involved requires a permit under the Endangered Species Act (which lists only the two hammerhead species mentioned above) or CITES (which lists only 14 of the more than 400 shark species known to science). The hammerhead fins in Hong Kong were listed as "dried seafood," which is one of the reasons why they were able to pass through Houston without closer inspection.

Murdock says sharks slip through a legal loophole because they qualify as both wildlife and seafood. This makes shark products even more difficult to regulate than, say, elephant ivory or rhino horn. "It's not a new problem," says environmental consultant David Shiffman, a marine conservation biologist at Arizona State University, "but it's one that doesn't get a lot of attention."

"One of the things is just how it's coded," Shiffman says. "In some countries shark is counted as 'seafood, frozen,' and in some cases it's 'shark fins,' and in some cases it's shark fins from a particular species. But it's not consistent from country to country, and it's not necessarily consistent from year to year, and that makes it really hard to keep track of this stuff."

So how do we help close these loopholes? Murdock says routing all shark fin shipments through the ports where officials have capacity to inspect them properly should become standard operating procedure. (This measure alone wouldn't stop every illegal wildlife shipment; Houston, after all, is one of those ports). A full-on federal ban against the shark fin trade wouldn't hurt either, she says. (Twelve states, such as Texas and California, have so far banned the shark fin trade within their borders). Other recommendations from the report are more international in scope, including ratcheting up the existing CITES resolutions; improving enforcement of fishing laws in nations where the shark products typically originate; and generally more, more, and still more partnerships between countries.

"It's clear that it's only going to get solved through international collaboration, because some of the countries from which these shipments are coming have a lot less capacity for law enforcement and inspections and monitoring than the United States does," says Murdock. So by stepping up efforts on our own shores, we can also help keep things on the up-and-up all over the world.

Shiffman says the report "has some excellent recommendations of what we should do about this," but he'd really like to see more data on how prevalent the problem is. And so would Murdock. She and her colleagues have had to scratch and claw for roughly two years to bring as many cases to the surface as they have.

"We're confident that this is just the tip of the iceberg," says Murdock. "It's just hard to know how big the iceberg is."

From Your Site Articles

Related Articles Around the Web

Read the rest here:
Genetic Resistance to Devastating Ash Tree Disease Discovered and It Could Help Save the Species - EcoWatch

Read More...

A Rare Genetic Disorder Turned These Siblings’ Blood ‘Milky’ White – Livescience.com

Friday, November 22nd, 2019

A rare genetic disorder caused three siblings' blood to flood with fat and turn "milky" white, according to a new report of the unusual case.

The three siblings consisted of one set of fraternal twins (a daughter and son) and an older son, all born to a first-cousin couple in a Pennsylvania Dutch family. In their teens and early 20s, all three siblings experienced mysterious symptoms, including bouts of abdominal pain. They had all been diagnosed with hypertriglyceridemia, a fairly common disorder that causes fatty molecules called triglycerides to build up in the blood.

Now in their 50s, the siblings recently underwent genetic testing and learned that they have a condition that's much more rare, affecting only 1 in every million people, according to the case report, published today (Nov. 18) in the journal Annals of Internal Medicine.

Those with the ultrarare disorder, known as familial chylomicronemia syndrome (FCS), may accumulate more than 1,000 milligrams of triglycerides per deciliter (mg/dL) of blood. For comparison, normal blood levels of the fat should fall below 150 mg/dL, and 500 mg/dL would be considered "very high" in a healthy person, according to the National Institutes of Health.

Indeed, in people with FCS, blood fat levels are so high that the normally crimson fluid turns the color of milk. (FCS is not the only condition that can cause milk-colored blood; the symptom may also appear in people with severe hypertriglyceridemia.)

Related: The Color of Blood: Here Are Nature's Reddest Reds (Photos)

The three siblings had long struggled to keep their triglyceride levels under control and suffered frequent inflammation of the pancreas, also known as pancreatitis a serious condition that can cause abdominal pain, fever and vomiting. At the hospital, the male twin's triglyceride levels reached as high as 5,000 mg/dL, while the other brother's levels peaked at around 6,000 mg/dL. The female twin's triglyceride levels soared highest of all, reaching 7,200 mg/dL at maximum.

The siblings hoped their doctors could help subdue those aggressive symptoms.

To confirm the sibling's rare diagnosis, the doctors looked to their patients' genes. Triglycerides typically build up in the blood due to multiple malfunctioning genes and other related health conditions, such as diabetes or high-blood pressure, according to the Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine. But when doctors probed the siblings' genetic code, the researchers spotted only one mutated gene that was key for breaking down triglycerides in the body.

In healthy people, the gene contains instructions to build a protein called lipoprotein lipase (LPL), which typically coats the blood vessels that run through muscles and fatty tissues in the body, according to the Genetics Home Reference. LPL breaks down fats carried in the blood; without an adequate supply, the siblings' blood plasma ran thick with excess triglycerides.

Related: How to Speak Genetics: A Glossary

Each sibling carried two copies of the mutated LPL gene, meaning both their parents passed down the mutated genetic code to the children, the case report noted. What's more, the particular genetic mutation in the siblings had never been seen before, the authors said. The doctors placed the siblings on a fat-restricted diet, which successfully stabilized their triglyceride levels and quelled their bouts of pancreatitis. Sometimes, when triglyceride levels spike, doctors must manually replace the fat-filled blood of their patients with healthy blood from donors, Live Science previously reported. Thankfully, the siblings' condition could be curtained with diet alone.

Originally published on Live Science.

Follow this link:
A Rare Genetic Disorder Turned These Siblings' Blood 'Milky' White - Livescience.com

Read More...

Page 28«..1020..27282930..40..»


2024 © StemCell Therapy is proudly powered by WordPress
Entries (RSS) Comments (RSS) | Violinesth by Patrick