Obtain the booster to prevent another wave- Health Authorities – Newsfirst.lk

COLOMBO (News 1st); Public should obtain the booster vaccine as soon as possible to avoid another COVID-19 wave, saysPhysiotherapist at the Colombo North Teaching Hospital,Prof. Sharmila de Silva.

Pointing out that although hospitals are not overcrowded as of yet and the death toll has not shown a substantial increase, Prof. de Silva stated that the number of patients reported each day is increasing, and the rate of new COVID-19 cases being reported in the country has risen sharply as well.

This sharp rise was noted amidst reports that the OMICRON variant becoming the fastest spreading variant in the country.

The Allergy, Immunology and Cell Biology Unit of the University of Sri Jayewardenepura also stated that two sub-lineages of the variant are spreading rapidly.

Emphasizing that many people who obtained the first and second dose of the vaccine do not show the same amount of enthusiasm to obtain the third dose, Prof. de Silva mentioned that several myths regarding the vaccine have rooted in society, such as other side-effect diseases being reported due to the vaccine or infertility and impotence being a side effect of the vaccine.

Requesting the public to not to believe in such myths, Prof. de Silva reiterated that every single person must obtain the booster dose to prevent another wave of COVID-19 in the country.

Go here to read the rest:
Obtain the booster to prevent another wave- Health Authorities - Newsfirst.lk

City of Hope and CytoImmune announce study demonstrating novel off-the-shelf chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) natural killer (NK) cell-based therapy…

DUARTE, Calif. & TOA BAJA, Puerto Rico--(BUSINESS WIRE)--City of Hope, a world-renowned cancer research and treatment organization, and CytoImmune Therapeutics, a clinical-stage immunotherapy company that is developing a novel class of natural killer (NK) cell-based cancer therapies, today announced a study published in the high-impact journal Gastroenterology that demonstrates off-the-shelf anti-prostate stem cell antigen (PSCA) chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) NK cells significantly suppressed pancreatic cancer in vitro and in vivo using a method known as freeze-thaw.

The therapy PSCA CAR_s15 NK cells, also known as CYTO NK-203 persisted more than 90 days after infusion and significantly prolonged the survival of mice with pancreatic cancer, showing that the freeze-thaw method works. For the study, PSCA CAR_s15 NK cells were produced and then frozen. The cells were then thawed and used in preclinical studies at City of Hope.

Our patients need additional ways to attack their pancreatic cancer. The work presented by City of Hopes team is distinctive and promising for two reasons: First of all, it is based on a precision medicine approach that is a special target in the patient's pancreatic cancer PSCA. Secondly, it is an immunologic approach, using human natural killer cells, which are specifically engineered to attack the patient's cancer. These findings should be accelerated to a clinical trial as rapidly as possible, said Daniel D. Von Hoff, M.D., a distinguished professor in the Molecular Medicine Division of the Translational Genomics Research Institute (TGen), an affiliate of City of Hope. He also is senior consultant-clinical investigator at City of Hope and is one of the nations leading authorities on the treatment and care of pancreatic cancer patients.

City of Hope is committed to finding more effective and innovative treatments for difficult-to-treat solid cancers, and pancreatic cancer is clearly one of them, said Saul Priceman, Ph.D., assistant professor in the Department of Hematology & Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation at City of Hope and a study author. These new PSCA CAR_s15 NK cell preclinical studies provide tremendous support for the anticipated upcoming clinical trials to evaluate efficacy and safety of this novel CAR-engineered NK cell therapy in patients with pancreatic cancer, which is a promising expansion of our existing clinical programs that target PSCA in solid cancers using CAR-engineered T cell therapy.

Pancreatic cancer is the third leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States with a five-year survival rate of approximately 10%. The cancer is typically detected when it is at a late stage and incurable. Chemotherapy or other therapies provide modest benefit. Therefore, the development of new therapies for pancreatic cancer is crucial. The therapy can also be used for other PSCA+ cancers, such as stomach and prostate.

NK cell technology works by using natural killer cells from a patient or donor. NK cells are then engineered so they express a receptor a CAR that is specific for a protein expressed by cancerous cells, along with the secretion of IL-15, which sustains the survival of the NK cells.

Christina Coughlin, M.D., CEO of CytoImmune Therapeutics, said, "We are excited to share this data on our CAR NK candidate for pancreatic cancer. This foundational data supports robust anti-tumor activity with CYTO NK-203, making us confident our innovative and off-the-shelf NK cell therapy approach has the potential to deliver more accessible, safe and effective cell-based treatment options to cancer patients. We are encouraged by these findings and look forward to continuing our work with City of Hope in order to move this initiative to the clinic.

This immunotherapy is revolutionizing the treatment of some blood cancers; however, its use in the treatment of solid tumors has been limited, in part because most of the proteins currently used to target CAR cells to solid tumors are present in low levels on other normal tissues, leading to toxic side effects.

Based on research by Michael Caligiuri, M.D., president of City of Hope National Medical Center and the Deana and Steve Campbell Physician-in-Chief Distinguished Chair, and Jianhua Yu, Ph.D., professor and director of the Natural Killer Cell Biology Research Program, who have nearly 55 years of collective laboratory investigation of NK cells, CytoImmune is developing an NK cell platform designed to overcome the limitations and challenges of current technologies for engineering NK cells. The platform is designed to generate an abundant supply of CAR NK cells from a single umbilical cord donor, engineered with the CAR for effective recognition of tumor targets, and secreting IL-15 to improve the persistence of CAR NK cells for sustained activity in the body. The process enables scientists to freeze, transport and store engineered CAR NK cells for off-the-shelf use for the treatment of cancer.

The study titled Off-the-shelf PSCA-directed chimeric antigen receptor natural killer cell therapy to treat pancreatic cancer can be found here.

About City of Hope

City of Hope is an independent biomedical research and treatment center for cancer, diabetes and other life-threatening diseases. Founded in 1913, City of Hope is a leader in bone marrow transplantation and immunotherapy such as CAR T cell therapy. City of Hopes translational research and personalized treatment protocols advance care throughout the world. Human synthetic insulin, monoclonal antibodies and numerous breakthrough cancer drugs are based on technology developed at the institution. A National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center and a founding member of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, City of Hope is ranked among the nations Best Hospitals in cancer by U.S. News & World Report. Its main campus is located near Los Angeles, with additional locations throughout Southern California and in Arizona. Translational Genomics Research Institute (TGen) became a part of City of Hope in 2016. AccessHopeTM, a subsidiary launched in 2019, serves employers and their health care partners by providing access to NCI-designated cancer center expertise. For more information about City of Hope, follow us on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube or Instagram.

About CYTO NK 203

CYTO NK-203 is an off-the-shelf allogeneic CAR NK cell therapy derived from umbilical cord blood, expressing a CAR against prostate stem cell antigen and soluble IL-15 and engineered with proprietary features designed to improve the safety and efficacy of NK cells as a potential therapy.

About CytoImmune Therapeutics Inc.

Founded in 2017, CytoImmune Therapeutics is a clinical-stage biotechnology company, focused on developing an innovative and differentiated pipeline of NK cell therapies, using proprietary, robust and well characterized NK cell expansion and engineering technologies pioneered by Michael Caligiuri, M.D., and Jianhua Yu, Ph.D. The pipeline includes cytokine induced NK (CI-NK) for lung cancer, FLT3 CAR-NK for acute myeloid leukemia, PSCA CAR-NK cells for solid tumors and GPRC5D BiKE secreting BCMA CAR-NK cells for multiple myeloma. CytoImmunes lead product, CYTO-102 (CI-NK) cell therapy, aims to enter the clinic in combination with atezolizumab (anti-PD-L1 monoclonal antibody) for nonsmall cell lung cancer in 2022.

Here is the original post:
City of Hope and CytoImmune announce study demonstrating novel off-the-shelf chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) natural killer (NK) cell-based therapy...

Connect Biopharma Presents Data and Analyses from the Global Phase 2b Trial of CBP-201 at the Maui Derm Conference – StreetInsider.com

Get instant alerts when news breaks on your stocks. Claim your 1-week free trial to StreetInsider Premium here.

Data provides detailed results, with achievement of both primary and key secondary end points and demonstrating significant improvements in skin clearance, disease severity, and itch compared to placebo

Analyses demonstrate that the benefits of CBP-201 to patients continue to increase as baseline disease severity increases

Data and analyses support the potential for a highly competitive efficacy and safety profile for CBP-201 that includes a differentiated Q4W dosing schedule

SAN DIEGO, CA and TAICANG, China, Jan. 24, 2022 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Connect Biopharma Holdings Limited (Nasdaq: CNTB) ("Connect Biopharma" or the Company), a global clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company dedicated to improving the lives of patients with chronic inflammatory diseases through the development of therapies derived from T cell-driven research, today announced that data from the global Phase 2b clinical trial of CBP-201 administered subcutaneously (SC) to adult patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) (WW001) (NCT04444752), will be presented in two abstracts and posters at the Maui Derm Conference that begins today, January 24th, and ends January 28th, in Maui, Hawaii.

The abstracts and posters will expand on the topline results reported by the Company on January 5, 2022, which demonstrated that CBP-201 met the primary and key secondary efficacy endpoints of the trial, with favorable safety data reporting low incidences of injection site reactions, conjunctivitis and herpes infections.

The abstracts and posters will also provide detail of the analyses performed by the Company of patients within the trial with higher baseline disease severity that more closely approaches the disease severity in Phase 3 trials of the approved IL-4R agent. These analyses consistently demonstrate increased efficacy as baseline disease severity increases, indicating that CBP-201 has the potential for a highly competitive efficacy and safety profile that includes a differentiated Q4W dosing schedule.

Poster Presentation Details

Title: Efficacy and Safety of CBP-201 in Adults with Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis (AD): A Phase 2b, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Trial (CBP-201-WW001)

Presenter: Bruce Strober

Title: The Effect of Baseline Disease Characteristics on Efficacy Outcomes: Results from a Phase 2b, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Trial (CBP-201-WW001).

Presenter: Jonathan I. Silverberg

Both posters will be available on the Presentations and Publications section of the Connect Biopharma website Monday, January 24, 2022: https://www.connectbiopharm.com/our-science/presentations-and-publications/.About Atopic DermatitisAtopic dermatitis (AD), which has an estimated lifetime prevalence of up to 20% and is increasing globally, is the most commonly diagnosed chronic inflammatory skin disorder. It is characterized by skin barrier disruption and immune dysregulation. Estimates of prevalence of AD in China show an increase over time and recent longitudinal studies have reported a dermatologist-diagnosed prevalence of 7.8% in Chinese outpatients visiting tertiary hospitals. In the United States, it is estimated that 26.1 million people have AD, of which 6.6 million have moderate-to-severe disease. Further, over 58% of adults with moderate-to-severe AD have disease that physicians consider to be inadequately controlled by approved therapeutic modalities, including topical anti-inflammatory agents and systemic agents.

About CBP-201CBP-201, discovered internally using Connect Biopharma's proprietary Immune Modulation Technology Platform, is an antibody designed to target interleukin-4 receptor alpha (IL-4R), which is a validated target for the treatment of several inflammatory diseases, including atopic dermatitis (AD). CBP-201 was well tolerated and showed evidence of clinical activity in a Phase 2b clinical trial (NCT04444752) in adult patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis, suggesting a potential for a differentiated efficacy profile compared with data from clinical trials of the current biologic standard of care therapy. CBP-201 is also being evaluated in a China specific pivotal trial in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (NCT05017480); in a Phase 2b trial in adult patients with moderate-to-severe persistent asthma (NCT04773678); and in a Phase 2b trial in adult patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) (NCT04783389).

About Connect Biopharma Holdings LimitedConnect Biopharma Holdings Limited is a global clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company dedicated to improving the lives of patients living with chronic inflammatory diseases through the development of therapies derived from our T cell-driven research.

Our lead product candidate, CBP-201 an antibody designed to target interleukin-4 receptor alpha (IL-4R) has been in clinical trials for the treatment of AD, asthma, and CRSwNP. Our second lead product candidate, CBP-307 a modulator of a T cell receptor known as sphingosine 1-phosphate receptor 1 (S1P1) has been in clinical trials for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohns disease (CD). Furthermore, we have started the clinical development of an additional product candidate, CBP-174 a peripherally acting antagonist of histamine receptor 3 for the treatment of pruritus associated with AD.

With clinical development activities in the United States, China, Europe, and Australia, and operations in those geographies as well as Hong Kong, Connect Biopharma is building a rich global pipeline of internally designed, wholly owned small molecules and antibodies targeting several aspects of T cell biology. For additional information about Connect Biopharma, please visit our website at http://www.connectbiopharm.com

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTSConnect Biopharma cautions that statements included in this press release that are not a description of historical facts are forward-looking statements. Words such as "may," "could," "will," "would," "should," "expect," "plan," "anticipate," "believe," "estimate," "intend," "predict," "seek," "contemplate," "potential," "continue" or "project" or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology are intended to identify forward-looking statements. These statements include the Companys statements regarding the potential of CBP-201 to achieve a differentiated, competitive, or favorable benefit or profile including with respect to safety, efficacy and/or convenience, and the Company's plans to initiate a Phase 3 trial program to further evaluate CBP-201. The inclusion of forward-looking statements shall not be regarded as a representation by Connect Biopharma that any of its plans will be achieved. Actual results may differ from those set forth in this release due to the risks and uncertainties inherent in the Connect Biopharma business and other risks described in the Company's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Among other things, there can be no guarantee that planned or ongoing studies will be initiated or completed as planned, that future study results will be consistent with the results to date, that CBP-201 will receive regulatory approvals, or be commercially successful. Investors are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date hereof, and Connect Biopharma undertakes no obligation to revise or update this news release to reflect events or circumstances after the date hereof. Further information regarding these and other risks is included in Connect Biopharma's filings with the SEC which are available from the SECs website (www.sec.gov) and on Connect Biopharmas website (www.connectbiopharm.com) under the heading "Investors." All forward-looking statements are qualified in their entirety by this cautionary statement. This caution is made under the safe harbor provisions of Section 21E of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.

IR/PR Contacts:Lazar FINN PartnersDavid Carey(IR)T: +1-(212) 867-1768david.carey@finnpartners.comErich Sandoval (Media)T: +1-(917)-497-2867erich.sandoval@finnpartners.comCorporate Contacts:info@connectpharm.com

Excerpt from:
Connect Biopharma Presents Data and Analyses from the Global Phase 2b Trial of CBP-201 at the Maui Derm Conference - StreetInsider.com

Locations where Omicron has been found in Sri Lanka so far – NewsWire

According to the latest SARS-CoV-2 variant report issued by the Allergy Immunology and Cell Biology Unit of the Department of Immunology and Molecular Medicine of the University of Sri Jayewardenepura, 75 new cases of Omicron and 3 new cases of Delta were detected from 78 samples.

These 78 samples were sequenced from the 1st2ndand 3rdweeks of January from the community. said Dr. Chandima Jeewandara, Director of the Allergy, Immunology and Cell Biology Unit of the Faculty of Medicine.The 78 Omicron cases include a mix of the two main Omicron lineages BA.1 and BA.2.

Omicron sublineages were detected in the following locations. 56 cases of BA.1 were detected in Colombo, Avissawella, Borelesgamuwa, Homagama, Katugoda, Kosgama, Madapatha, Padukka, Parakudawa and Wellampitiya. 12 cases of BA.2 were detected in Avissawella, Badulla, Colombo, Galle, Konnawala, Mt Lavinia, Nugegoda, and from one passenger from India. 7 cases of B.1.1.529 were detected in Angoda, Colombo, Ruwanwella, Mt Lavinia, Nugegoda and Padukka.

Different Delta sublineages were detected in the following locations.1 case of AY.98 (Sri Lanka delta sub-lineage) was detected in Thalangama. 1 case of AY.104 (Sri Lanka delta sub-lineage) was detected in Kaduwela.1 case of B.1.617.2 was detected in Wellampitiya.

Currently, 8% of the sequences of Sri Lanka are BA.2, which was named as a variant of interest by the UK Health security agency.

Other variants identified within Sri Lanka are B.1.411: Sri Lankan variant,B.1.1.25,B.1.258,B.1.428,B.4, B.4.7,B.1.1.365,B.1.525,B.1, B.1.1.

Read more here:
Locations where Omicron has been found in Sri Lanka so far - NewsWire

Genetic Research Shows Rapid Immune Response in Children Protects Them From COVID-19 – SciTechDaily

Discovery of importance of interferon response in preventing serious infection will underpin new diagnostics and therapeutics.

Fundamental differences in the immune response of adults and children can help to explain why children are much less likely to become seriously ill from SARS-CoV-2, according to new research from the Wellcome Sanger Institute, University College London, and their collaborators.

The study, published in the journal Nature, is the most comprehensive single-cell study to compare SARS-CoV-2 infection in adults and children across multiple organs. Researchers found that a stronger innate immune response in the airways of children, characterized by the rapid deployment of interferons, helped to restrict viral replication early on. In adults, a less rapid immune response meant the virus was better able to invade other parts of the body where the infection was harder to control.

As part of the Human Cell Atlas1 initiative to map every cell type in the human body, the findings will be a valuable contribution to predict personal risk from SARS-CoV-2. A nasal swab to measure the immune response in newly infected adults could be used to identify those at higher risk who may be candidates for pre-emptive monoclonal antibody treatment. Recent research has also suggested inhalation of interferons could be a viable therapy2.

The immune system that we are born with is not the same as the one we have as adults. The innate immune system of children is better able to recognize dangerous viruses or bacteria automatically, triggering nave B and T cells that can adapt to the threat. Adults have a more adaptive immune system containing a huge repertoire of memory B and T cell types, which have been trained through past exposure to respond to a particular threat3. Though the adult immune system also has an innate response, it is more active in children.

One of the key mechanisms of both immune systems is a group of proteins called interferons, which are released in the presence of viral or bacterial threats and tell nearby cells to tighten their defenses. Interferons are proteins with strong anti-viral activity and their production will typically lead to the activation of B and T cells, which kill infected cells and prevent the pathogen from spreading further.

For this study, researchers at University College London (UCL) and affiliated hospitals4 collected and processed matched airway and blood samples from 19 pediatric and 18 adult COVID-19 patients with symptoms ranging from asymptomatic to severe, as well as control samples from 41 healthy children and adults.

Single-cell sequencing of the samples was done at the Wellcome Sanger Institute to generate a dataset of 659,217 individual cells. These cells were then analyzed, revealing 59 different cell types in airways and 34 cell types in blood, including some never previously described.

Analysis showed that interferons were more strongly expressed in healthy children compared to adults, with a more rapid immune response to infection in childrens airways. This would help to restrict viral replication early on and give children an immediate advantage in preventing the virus from infecting the blood and other organs.

Because SARS-CoV-2 is a new virus, it isnt something that the adaptive immune system of adults has learned to respond to. The innate immune system of children is more flexible and better able to respond to new threats. What we see at a molecular level are high levels of interferons and a very quick immune response in children that helps to explain why they are less severely affected by COVID-19 than adults.

Dr. Masahiro Yoshida, University College London

The study also detailed how the immune system of adults, with its high numbers of killer immune cells such as B and T cells, can work against the body once SARS-CoV-2 has spread to other parts of a patient.

Compared to children, adult blood has a greater number and variety of cytotoxic immune cells, which are designed to kill infected cells to prevent an infection spreading. But it is a fine line between helping and hindering. Once the virus has spread to several areas of the body, organ damage can be caused by the immune system trying and failing to control the infection. Our study shows that not only do children respond better initially, if the virus does enter the blood the cytotoxic response is less forceful.

Dr. Marko Nikolic, University College London

Knowing exactly how and why the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 can fail to control the infection or start to harm the body provides scientists with the means to start asking why certain individuals may be at greater risk of serious illness.

These data suggest that newly diagnosed adults could be tested to check interferon levels in the airway. Higher interferon levels, similar to those found in children, would suggest a lower risk of severe disease, whereas low interferon levels would suggest higher risk. Higher risk patients could then be considered for pre-emptive treatments such as monoclonal antibodies, which are expensive and can be in limited supply.

To put it simply, the innate immune response is better at fighting COVID-19 and children have stronger innate immunity, but immunity is also a complex ballet involving many types of cells. The timing and the types of cells that are triggered will influence how an infection develops, and this will vary between individuals for all sorts of reasons in addition to age. Some of the differences we observe between children and adults may help us to think about how we gauge personal risk for adults as a way of mitigating serious illness and death.

Dr. Kerstin Meyer, Wellcome Sanger Institute

In addition, there is growing evidence of the therapeutic benefits of inhaled interferon beta 1a. Based on the study results, this should be particularly the case for patients with weak or absent interferon activation.

The results are insightful not only for addressing COVID-19, but more broadly for understanding changes in the airway and blood throughout childhood. They demonstrate the power of single-cell resolution to reveal differences in the biology of children and adults, while pointing to very different considerations when thinking about how a specific disease arises and may be treated.

Jonah Cool, Chan-Zuckerberg Initiative

Reference: Local and systemic responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection in children and adults by Masahiro Yoshida, Kaylee B. Worlock, Ni Huang, Rik G. H. Lindeboom, Colin R. Butler, Natsuhiko Kumasaka, Cecilia Dominguez Conde, Lira Mamanova, Liam Bolt, Laura Richardson, Krzysztof Polanski, Elo Madissoon, Josephine L. Barnes, Jessica Allen-Hyttinen, Eliz Kilich, Brendan C. Jones, Angus de Wilton, Anna Wilbrey-Clark, Waradon Sungnak, J. Patrick Pett, Juliane Weller, Elena Prigmore, Henry Yung, Puja Mehta, Aarash Saleh, Anita Saigal, Vivian Chu, Jonathan M. Cohen, Clare Cane, Aikaterini Iordanidou, Soichi Shibuya, Ann-Kathrin Reuschl, Ivn T. Herczeg, A. Christine Argento, Richard G. Wunderink, Sean B. Smith, Taylor A. Poor, Catherine A. Gao, Jane E. Dematte, NU SCRIPT Study Investigators, Gary Reynolds, Muzlifah Haniffa, Georgina S. Bowyer, Matthew Coates, Menna R. Clatworthy, Fernando J. Calero-Nieto, Berthold Gttgens, Christopher OCallaghan, Neil J. Sebire, Clare Jolly, Paolo de Coppi, Claire M. Smith, Alexander V. Misharin, Sam M. Janes, Sarah A. Teichmann, Marko Z. Nikolic and Kerstin B. Meyer, 22 December 2021, Nature.DOI: 10.1038/s41586-021-04345-x

This research was funded by Wellcome, the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Rosetrees Trust, Action Medical Research, Medical Research Council and the European Unions Horizon 2020 program.

Visit link:
Genetic Research Shows Rapid Immune Response in Children Protects Them From COVID-19 - SciTechDaily

A tribute to Eddy Fischer (April 6, 1920August 27, 2021): Passionate biochemist and mentor – pnas.org

Edmond (Eddy) Fischer was one of the great biochemists of the 20th and 21st centuries. He was also a gifted pianist, an avid mountain climber, and a pilot, a true man of the world who lived on three continents and spoke many languages fluently. Having spent his childhood in China and Europe, Eddy was formally schooled in Switzerland and began his studies at the University of Geneva in 1939, just as Hitler was invading Poland. After receiving his doctorate in Chemistry at the University of Geneva, he went to the California Institute of Technology, but was then quickly recruited to the fledgling Department of Biochemistry at the University of Washington in 1953 by Hans Neurath, where the mountains as well as the biochemistry were a big attraction. Seattle remained his home for the rest of his life, but the world was his home and his impact radiated across many continents.

In Seattle he met Edwin Krebs, who had been recruited in 1948, and in the next few years these two young scientists changed the course of history for all of us. They laid the foundation for a community of scholars that extended across the world and Eddy, in particular, became a friend and mentor to all of us. His sphere of influence extended well beyond those who trained directly in his laboratory. In the 1950s, Ed and Eddy built quickly on the foundation that was laid at Washington University in St. Louis by Gerty and Carl Cori, two other earlier transplants from Europe, and made a discovery that changed the world of biology and won them the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1992 (1). They discovered that proteins in cells are dynamically regulated by the covalent addition of a phosphate moiety from ATP, and that two enzymes catalyze the reversible addition and removal of the phosphates: a kinase and a phosphatase. Specifically, they showed that the activity of glycogen phosphorylase, the enzyme that breaks down glycogen by releasing a glucose-1-P moiety at each step, was activated by the addition of a single phosphate by an enzyme they called phosphorylase kinase. This discovery nucleated a family of enzymes that includes over 500 protein kinases that control much of biology, and this family has become a major target for drug discovery.

The three of us represent a community of scholars who were not directly trained by Eddy, but whose lives and careers were profoundly influenced by this extraordinary man. Here, we explore Eddys world when he was 50 years old; this was 1971, the midpoint of his life. Fifteen years earlier he had made the discoveries that would earn him the Nobel Prize. In the following decade, he was busy raising his young family and traveling to Europe and Israel, but he was also training a group of young international postdoctoral fellows who would set the world stage for the next generations. This included Philip Cohen, Ludwig Heilmeyer, and Shmuel Shaltiel. So where were we in 1971, and what lay ahead for Eddy Fischer in the next 50 years?

At the time of the discovery of protein phosphorylation as a regulatory mechanism, many new scientific concepts were emerging around the world. The Department of Biochemistry at the University of Washington, in addition to being the birthplace of protein phosphorylation, was a mecca for protein chemistry and protein sequencing. Across the Atlantic, at the Laboratory of Molecular Biology (LMB) in Cambridge, England, in addition to discovering the DNA double helix, we were learning about the structure and function of the proteins that are encoded by the DNA, while the Biochemistry Department at Cambridge University was focused on protein synthesis. Two Nobel Prizes in 1962 went to LMB scientists: Jim Watson and Francis Crick received the Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine for their discovery of the double helix, while Max Perutz and John Kendrew received the Nobel Prize in Chemistry for their crystal structures of myoglobin and hemoglobin. In 1962 the LMB, which was laying the foundation for molecular biology, had just moved from the Department of Biochemistry in Cambridge University to their new home on Hills Road. At the same time, in Paris, the concepts of protein allostery were being born. And in the early 1960s a completely new university, the University of California at San Diego, as well as the Salk Institute for Biological Studies, were founded in La Jolla, California. By the end of the 1970s these worlds converged in a profound way that was woven together by Eddy Fischer and Ed Krebs, and this network would continue to grow over the ensuing decades. Protein phosphorylation emerged as a major field that regulates biological function in all cells, and Eddy and Ed, the founders, continued as the undeniable leaders. Eddys impact continued well into the 21st century, reaching far beyond those who trained directly in his laboratory.

In the spring of 1964, I (J.-P.C.) was finishing my doctoral thesis at the Pasteur Institute in the laboratory of Jacques Monod, who was then head of the Service de Biochimie Cellulaire. One day, Jacques opened the door of his office into the laboratory with a distinguished and cheerful gentleman, and said to me, May I introduce your neighbor in the lab for the next few months? This was my first encounter with Eddy and the beginning of a lifelong friendship. Indeed, Jacques had the idea to place Eddys desk in a sort of telephone booth from where Jean Pierre was carrying out his research on threonine deaminase (2). There were a few such cubicles in his laboratory, which were specifically designed for private scientific discussions. We took advantage of this opportunity to begin an endless debate about the chemical and molecular mechanisms of protein regulation, a debate that lasted many decades until Eddys death in 2021. At the time I knew, of course, Eddys work with Ed Krebs on the regulation of glycogen phosphorylase by phosphorylation/dephosphorylation, and his main motivation to visit our laboratory was, as he says, to understand how this enzyme was activated by AMP. A change in the conformation was needed to account for its indirect, allosteric, effect on the protein! But what was it? A change of the state of aggregation of the protein or something else? Possible examples supporting the aggregationdissociation scheme were the dimerization of phosphorylase b into phosphorylase a, already reported by Eddy himself and similar to the dissociation of glutamate dehydrogenase into subunits provoked by NADH, as reported earlier by both Carl Frieden and Gordon Tomkins (3).

Jacques initially was supporting, yet with caution, the associationdissociation scheme. I was firmly opposed to it. I had never noticed any change in sedimentation velocity of threonine deaminase in the presence of its feedback inhibitor isoleucine or any deaminase ligand (4). A conformational change had to be involved, but more subtle than a change of aggregation. But what was it? In the discussions with Eddy, it took time for me to suggest to him what I had in mind! I had observed that in the presence of urea, threonine deaminase reversibly split into subunits and that inhibitors like isoleucine protect against dissociation, while activators like valine or allothreonine did the opposite: they enhance the dissociation. Thus, the idea emerged that a change in conformation would take place between discrete states of a common oligomeric aggregate, yet with differences in the strength of interaction between the constitutive subunits (without change in aggregation) (4). A given ligand would then selectively stabilize one of the states thereby mediating signal transduction (5, 6).

Eddy wanted to know how general the suggested model was. How might it apply to the phosphorylase system not only to the addition of a ligand, but also to the covalent addition of a phosphate? He later wrote, we (with Ed Krebs) had to wait five or six years for the Pasteur group to come up with their allosteric model of enzyme regulation (2). I may say that I was very pleased by what happened later, and in particular to discover the picture of Eddy and Ed standing together with a poster illustrating the mechanism of action of protein phosphorylation on phosphorylase (Fig. 1), which shows some similarities with the original diagram of my thesis work. After all, these discussions in the Pasteur cubicles had been rather fruitful. Of course, this was not the end.

Allosteric transitions. (Left) A page from Jean-Pierre Changeuxs thesis. Image credit: Changeux family. (Right) Eddy Fischer and Ed Krebs, decades later, speculating on the conformational changes that are induced by adding a phosphate. Image credit: American Society of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.

Our friendship lasted decades. Both of us were for years on the Board of Scientific Governors of the Scripps Research Institute in La Jolla. This was a unique opportunity for us to meet regularly every year, to further discuss allostery, in particular in the brain, and to speak French together. Aware of the many difficulties the Pasteur Institute had to faceand still facesEddy was also systematically trying to find a manner, always elegant, to help us. Perhaps some kind of memorial of his 1964 visit? He remained a passionate and lifelong advocate for the Pasteur Institute.

Nothing was missing in our extraordinary friendship, which was a constant fight for good science, a deep free-thinking open humanism, and an eternal sense of FrenchSwiss humor. Unforgettable.

I (T.H.) first met Eddy Fischer in December 1979 at a meeting on protein phosphorylation and bio-regulation in Basel, where I had been invited to speak about our recent discovery of tyrosine phosphorylation, a new type of protein kinase activity associated with viral transforming proteins that can switch normal cells into cancer cells. In fact, in October that year, I had visited Seattle and spoken about tyrosine phosphorylation at a meeting between the groups at the Salk Institute and the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center working on mechanisms of tumor virus transformation, but no one from the University of Washington was present. Of course, prior to 1979 I was well aware of the seminal work that Krebs and Fischer had done some 20 years earlier, which had shown that phosphorylation of glycogen phosphorylase stimulates its catalytic activity. Indeed, as a graduate student in the Department of Biochemistry in Cambridge in the mid-1960s, I had taught this key regulatory principle to the biochemistry undergraduates I supervised. At the Basel meeting, Eddy spoke about his work identifying two phosphorylation sites in the catalytic (C) subunit of cAMP-dependent protein kinase (PKA) (7). This was just 2 years before he reported the complete sequence of the PKA C-subunit, assembled the old-fashioned way, by protein sequencing (8). This sequence was the Rosetta stone that unlocked the basic design of all protein kinases, and its sequence became the template that allowed sequence gazers, like me, to demonstrate that nearly all eukaryotic serine/threonine kinases and tyrosine kinases are closely related in their catalytic domains, possessing a series of key conserved motifs that are essential for phosphate transfer (9).

From 1980 on, following the discovery that tyrosine residues, as well as serine and threonine residues, could be phosphorylated by a protein kinase (10), our paths crossed on innumerable occasions at meetings on protein phosphorylation and dephosphorylation at venues around the world. At one particularly memorable meeting, held in 1988 in Titisee, Germany, Eddys postdoctoral fellow, Nick Tonks, talked for the first time about his biochemical purification and characterization of the first phosphotyrosine-specific protein phosphatase (PTP), which led on to the discovery of a huge family of related PTPs (11, 12). It was typical of Eddy to let his postdoctoral fellowpresent the work, rather than taking the credit himself for this breakthrough discovery. From then on, and even after he had to close his laboratory in 1991, Eddys research was focused on the exciting new field of PTPs, and altogether he published 49 PTP papers, a fitting bookend to an amazing career. Even after he finally retired, Eddy was a fixture at phosphorylation meetings, keeping up with latest developments in the field. When he was 90, I asked Eddy to write the Foreword for a multiauthored book on signal transduction that I was coediting, and back came a lucid and thought-provoking piece on the history of the signal transduction field, but, more importantly, the problems still left to be solved (13).

Eddy was indeed a remarkable scientist, who inspired a whole generation of biochemists and cell biologists to work on protein phosphorylation.

Embedded within the early studies of Gerty and Carl Cori in the 1940s were two enzymes, the converting enzyme, subsequently referred to as phosphorylase kinase, and the phosphate removing (PR) enzyme, which became the protein phosphatase, and the students and fellows who joined Eddy in the 1960s spawned both fields. This world of protein phosphorylation was about to charge onto the world stage, and 1971 was a critical year of migrations (Fig. 2). Philip Cohen moved to the University of Dundee in 1971, having spent 2 years as a postdoctoral fellow in Eddys laboratory. Tony Hunter, with his focus on protein synthesis, moved in 1971 from the Biochemistry Department in Cambridge to the newly formed Salk Institute. I (S.S.T.), with my focus on protein structure and function, came as a postdoctoral fellow from the LMB in Cambridge to Nate Kaplans laboratory at the University of California, San Diego. Jack Dixon, who later became a part of this network with his discovery that the virulence factor in Yersinia pestis was a tyrosine phosphatase (14), also joined Nate Kaplans laboratory as a postdoctoral fellow in 1971. Jacks discovery, along with Nick Tonks discovery of the PTPase (11), added an exciting new chapter to the last three decades of Eddys life, and Jack and Eddy also became close friends. Neither Tony nor I knew much about protein phosphorylation, but that would quickly change. My world, however, changed abruptly and became indelibly intertwined with Eddys and Eds in late 1971, when Nate put a PKA paper by Fritz Lipmann on my desk (15). By the end of the 1970s and early 1980s, an international network was in place that would educate many future generations, and Eddy and Ed not only nucleated this network but became our mentors and role models.

Laying the foundations for a network in 1971. From left to right: Jean-Pierre Changeux (Image credit: J.-P. Changeux, Emeritus professor Collge de France and Institut Pasteur, Paris, France), Tony Hunter (Image credit: Tony Hunter, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom), Susan Taylor (Image credit: MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology, Cambridge, United Kingdom), and Philip Cohen (Image courtesy of Philip Cohen, University of Dundee, Dundee, United Kingdom).

Eddy was first and foremost a biochemist with extraordinary vision who used chemistry to discover the secrets that were embedded in proteins (16). Initially his passion remained focused on these two enzymes, the kinase and the phosphatase, as well as the protein kinase inhibitor (17), although eventually the phosphatases would dominate his world. Like Eddy, my focus was on protein chemistry and structure. While I looked at sites of covalent modification of the PKA C-subunit using affinity labeling (18), Eddy was mapping its phosphorylation sites (7). Eddy also worked closely with Ken Walsh and Ko Titani and, using classic and laborious protein chemistry, they sequenced not only the PKA C-subunit in 1981 (8) but also in rapid succession glycogen phosphorylase (19) and phosphorylase kinase (20). Eddy and his collaborators thus defined the chemical signatures of these key proteins well before cDNA cloning and sequencing became routine procedures. It was a monumental task. Although Src tyrosine kinasehad been cloned 2 years earlier, until the PKA sequence was elucidated no one knew what a protein kinase looked like. It was Eddys sequence of the PKA C-subunit that unambiguously showed that cancer biology and glycogen metabolism were part of the same lineage (21). A decade later, in 1991, we published the first structure of a protein kinase (22). Eddy was always searching for clues about function, like the phosphorylation sites and the inhibitory function that was embedded in the sequence of the PKA inhibitor, PKI (23, 24).

In the 1970s and 1980s, the annual Federation Meeting, which included the American Society of Biological Chemists (later in 1987 to become the American Society of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology), was the place where biochemists gathered each year to share their data. In the 1970s and 1980s, I also came to know the people in the world of protein phosphorylation, including the international players, through the Cyclic Nucleotide Gordon Research Conferences (GRCs) and through many meetings in Europe. This is where I first encountered Eddys world. I first met Philip Cohen and Shmuel Shaltiel, for example, at GRCs. Through Shmuel, who was also passionate about unraveling the secrets of the PKA C-subunit, and in this regard was my scientific soul mate, I was indirectly linked to Eddy. Eddy first met Shmuel in 1963 when Eddy not only spent time in Paris but also traveled to the relatively new Weizmann Institute in Israel, where Shmuel, a graduate student, met him at the airport (25). Eddy actually began that sabbatical year of 1963 with a CIBA Foundation meeting in London on Control of Glycogen Metabolism organized by his good friend, Bill Whelan. While his children were in boarding school in Switzerland, Bev and Eddy traveled to both France and Israel, so this year set the stage for many future international meetings. At these early conferences, the protein kinases, protein phosphatases, and cAMP, along with the G proteins that were just being discovered, were intertwined; they were all part of the same story. Ludwig Heilmeyer, who overlapped with Philip in Eddys laboratory in Seattle, moved in 1970 to Germany, and he organized many NATO Summer Schools on protein phosphorylation in Europe, and Eddy attended many of these European meetings. Friederich Herberg, Ludwigs graduate student, came to University of California, San Diego as my postdoctoral fellow in 1990. He is my single direct link to Eddys academic tree.

So, from the very beginning, our community was truly international and spawned many close personal friendships. The Salk/Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center meetings also quickly became a regular feature of our community. These many meetings indelibly established from the very beginning in the 1960s an international protein phosphorylation network. American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology, International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Keystone Symposia, and the Biochemical Society as well as others, such as the 1993 Lorne Conference in Australia, would continue and solidify this tradition by sponsoring many symposia on protein phosphorylation, which continue to this day.

Eddy was a deep scholar whose love of science dominated the field. Interdisciplinary thinking was woven into all our minds from the beginning. Sharing of ideas and information was also an essential part of this community. Listening to students and fellows was always a deeply shared commitment. We all grew up with this philosophy and with Eddy as our role model. A joy of science and a joy of life in general always seemed to radiate from Eddy (Fig. 3), and we all acknowledged him as our unequivocal leader for over half a century. Evidence of this recognition and of our devotion for this remarkable man were the many birthday celebrations: the 65th in Pitlochry, Scotland, for Eddy and on Orchas Island for Ed; the Miami Winter Symposium in 1989 organized by his lifelong friend, Bill Whelan (26); many 80th birthday celebrations; and most special of all, the 100th birthday symposium in 2020, which unfortunately had to be virtual, where Eddy participated actively with his typical enthusiasm for all the talks and warm personal attributes. His tree of students and fellows exemplifies the breadth and diversity of his thinking, but he was mentor to so many more, and we will all miss him.

Dancing at the 100th American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Anniversary celebration in 2006. Eddy Fischer and Susan S. Taylor. Image credit: American Society of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.

Author contributions: S.S.T., T.H., and J.-P.C. wrote the paper.

The authors declare no competing interest.

The rest is here:
A tribute to Eddy Fischer (April 6, 1920August 27, 2021): Passionate biochemist and mentor - pnas.org

Nano-sized vesicles with ACE2 receptor could prevent, treat infection from current and future strains of SARS-CoV-2 – EurekAlert

image:Raghu Kalluri, M.D., Ph.D. view more

Credit: MD Anderson Cancer Center

HOUSTON and CHICAGO Scientists at The University of Texas MDAnderson Cancer Center and Northwestern Medicine have identified natural extracellular vesicles containing the ACE2 protein (evACE2) in the blood of COVID-19 patients that can block infection from broad strains of SARS-CoV-2 virus in preclinical studies. The study was published today in Nature Communications.

The evACE2 act as decoys in the body and can serve as a therapeutic to be developed for prevention and treatment for current and future strains of SARS-CoV-2 and subsequent coronaviruses, the scientists report. Once developed as a therapeutic product, evACE2 have the potential to benefit humans as a biological treatment with minimal toxicities.

The study is the first to show evACE2 are capable of fighting the new SARS-CoV-2 variants with an equal or better efficacy than blocking the original strain. The researchers found that evACE2 exist in human blood as a natural anti-viral response. The more severe, the higher the levels of evACE2 detected in the patients blood.

Whenever a new mutant strain of SARS-CoV-2 surges, the original vaccine and therapeutic antibodies may lose power against alpha, beta, delta and the most recent, omicron, said co-senior author Huiping Liu, M.D., Ph.D., associate professor of pharmacology and medicine at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine. However, the beauty of evACE2 is its superpower in blocking broad strains of coronaviruses, including current SARS-CoV-2 and even future SARS coronaviruses from infecting humans. Our mouse studies demonstrate the therapeutic potential of evACE2 in preventing or blocking SARS-CoV-2 infection when it is delivered to the airway via droplets.

The evACE2 are tiny lipid bubbles in nanoparticle size that express the ACE2 protein, like handles for the virus to grab. These vesicles act as decoys to lure the SARS-CoV-2 virus away from the ACE2 protein on cells, which is how the virus infects cells. The virus spike protein grabs evACE2 instead of cellular ACE2, preventing it from entering the cell. Once captured, the virus will either float harmlessly around or be cleared by a macrophage immune cell. It can no longer cause infection.

"The key takeaway from this study is the identification of naturally occurring extracellular vesicles in the body that express the ACE2 receptor on their surface and serve as part of the normal adaptive defense against COVID-19-causing viruses," said co-senior author Raghu Kalluri, M.D., Ph.D., chair of Cancer Biology at MD Anderson. "Building upon this, we've discovered a way to harness this natural defense as a new potential therapy against this devastating virus."

The COVID-19 pandemic has been extended and challenged by a constantly changing SARS-CoV-2 virus. One of the biggest challenges is the moving target of pathogenic coronavirus that constantly evolves into new virus strains (variants) with mutations. These new viral strains harbor various changes in the viral protein spike with high infection rates and increased breakthroughs due to vaccine inefficiencies and resistance to therapeutic monoclonal antibodies.

Our studies demonstrate that extracellular vesicles act to neutralize SARS-CoV-2 infection and highlight the potential for extracellular vesicles to play a broader role in defense against other types of infection which could be exploited therapeutically, said co-lead author Kathleen McAndrews, Ph.D., postdoctoral fellow in Cancer Biology at MD Anderson.

Northwestern and MD Anderson have a pending patent on evACE2. The goal is to collaborate with industry partners and develop evACE2 as a biological therapeutic product (nasal spray or injected therapeutics) for prevention and treatment of COVID-19. Liu and another co-senior author, Deyu Fang from pathology at Northwestern, have formed a startup company, Exomira, to take this patent and develop evACE2 as a therapeutic.

It remains urgent to identify novel therapeutics, Liu said. We think evACE2 can meet the challenges and fight against broad strains of SARS-CoV-2 and future emerging coronaviruses to protect the immunocompromised (at least 2.7% of U.S. adults), the unvaccinated (94% in low-income countries and more than 30% in the U.S.) and even the vaccinated from breakthrough infections.

The work was supported by the Chicago Biomedical Consortium Accelerator Award, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine Emerging and Re-emerging Pathogens Program, the National Cancer Institute (IF32CA257345-01, CA060553), the Blood Biobank fund and Lyda Hill Philanthropies (to MD Anderson). Northwesterns pharmacology and pathology departments, Northwestern University Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute and the Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University also supported the work.

A team of more than 30 authors collaborated on this work. They include four lead co-first authors Lamiaa El-Shennawy, Andrew Hoffmann and Nurmaa Dashzeveg, all from the Liu lab at Northwestern, and McAndrews from the Kalluri Lab of MDAnderson. A full list of collaborating authors and their disclosures can be found here.

The collaboration between Northwestern and MD Anderson was initiated and fostered by co-author Valerie LeBleu, now an MD/MBA student at Feinberg and Kellogg School of Management and formerly an assistant professor of Cancer Biology at MD Anderson.

- 30 -

Nature Communications

20-Jan-2022

Disclaimer: AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert system.

View original post here:
Nano-sized vesicles with ACE2 receptor could prevent, treat infection from current and future strains of SARS-CoV-2 - EurekAlert

Nettles receives award from Society for Neuroscience – The Source – Washington University in St. Louis – Washington University Record

Sabin Nettles, a graduate student in the Department of Neuroscience at the School of Medicine, received the Pre/Postdoctoral Next Generation Award from the Society for Neuroscience in recognition of her outreach work introducing neuroscience to young students through the Brain Discovery initiative.

Read more on the Department of Neuroscience website.

Excerpt from:
Nettles receives award from Society for Neuroscience - The Source - Washington University in St. Louis - Washington University Record

UCSF Aims To Re-Think Neuroscience Research With Its New Building – Forbes

The Joan and Sanford Weill Neurosciences Building at UCSF Mission Bay.

Modern day science tends to be highly interdisciplinary. It increasingly requires different technical topics, skills, and expertise to come together to solve complex and challenging problems and questions. The image of the isolated scientist working alone in their lab for periods on end, emerging only to share a great discovery with the world, is somewhat antiquated. To be sure, doing science even today still necessitates long periods of deep thinking, introspection, and figuratively (occasionally literally) banging your head against the wall. But the tangible output of ones efforts are almost always a piece that fits into a broader scientific context. Collaborators may be working on other parts of the same problem, with everyones work eventually converging into a coherent whole. Or a solution may only emerge as a byproduct of collective brainstorming or the sharing of ideas. All of this, is to say, requires much and very tangible human-human interactions.

The environments - the building, labs, and offices - on university campuses in which all of this research takes place more and more reflect the need to serve these requirements. Architecture, art, and science are progressively more intertwined. Science is, after all, a very social pursuit. The research and public spaces that make up modern universities can be spectacular.

This is the path the University of California San Francisco (UCSF) is attempting to take with the newly opened Joan and Sanford Weill Neurosciences Building. Located on their Mission Bay campus, at just under 283,000 square feet, the building brings together clinical and basic neuroscience treatment and research under one roof. The Departments of Neurology, Neurological Surgery, Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, and the Institute for Neurodegenerative Diseases, along with the Weill Institute for Neurosciences and the Neuroscience Graduate Program, will all be housed in this building.

To make this possible, Joan and Sanford Weill made a gift of $185 million to the university, the largest gift in UCSFs history and one of the largest such donations in the country intended to specifically support neuroscience.

Dr. Stephen Hauser, the Robert A. Fishman Distinguished Professor of Neurology and Director of the Weill Institute for Neurosciences, offered his thoughts on the vision for the building and what it will enable.

What was the intended vision for the building and what do you hope it will achieve? Both scientifically and societally.

S.H.: We envisioned the building as a place where patients with difficult brain diseases receive care, where scientists search for answers to these problems, where young people will be inspired to dedicate themselves to careers in research and care, and a building that will also be a magnet for the community to promote interest in neuroscience.

We also needed a building that radiates hope, that reflects the optimism that we feel for the future. More than 60,000 patients annually will be seen in the clinical center, and here a variety of decision support tools and displays for precision medicine have been developed to assist patients and clinicians in tracking individual disease trajectories, contextualizing an individuals function relative to others, and providing evidence-based decision support.

Another key theme was that by breaking down silos across disciplines - across scientific disciplines and even across institutions - we could accelerate research to find answers to terrible brain disorders that affect more than 1 billion people each year. As one example, the distinctions between neurologic and psychiatric disorders of the brain are largely accidents of history, and importantly the same research tools are increasingly used to understand these disorders.So we brought these together. Also, we needed to bring other scientific disciplines, such as engineering, data sciences and imaging sciences, into our neuroscience community to maximize the potential for discovery.

What is perhaps most central is that the research mission will focus on human neuroscience and real human disease.By bringing together outstanding clinician-researchers with basic scientists, ideas gained at the laboratory can rapidly be validated at the bedside, and vice versa. So, a facility that will stimulate this interaction is the secret sauce of the building.

Another goal for this building is to excite the wider community with the exhilarating progress in brain science.What could be more interesting or more important than thinking about how we think?The big ethical issues that are likely to face us in the coming years are by no means restricted to neuroscience, but its in neuroscience that many of these questions come into sharpest focus, whether it be questions of enhancing cognitive or motor skills, computer brain interfaces and the creation of machine-human chimeras, the privacy of our thoughts, or the appropriate use of neuroscience data by the legal system.The stuff of science fiction is soon to become real.

What makes this building, and the environment it will create, unique to do neuroscience research compared to other state of the art buildings at other institutions?

S.H.: I dont think that there is another facility anywhere in the world quite like this - anchored in a huge medical and neuroscience community, focused on the neuroscience of human beings and human disease, and that brings clinical care and clinical research on the real diseases under the same roof as the basic lab investigations.

What is unique about the building and the environment it will create that you anticipate will lead to work and results - e.g. discoveries, technologies - that could not be achieved outside that environment?

S.H.: One of the most exciting developments has been recognition from others who share this vision and have joined us in new partnerships. One superb example is the Weill Neurohub, a close partnership across the neurosciences between UCSF, the University of California Berkeley, and the University of Washington. Another is a large 10 year partnership recently launched with Genentech and Roche, the Alliance for Therapies in Neuroscience, to jointly work together on problems in brain science and development of therapeutics.

Mark Cavagnero, Founding Principal at Mark Cavagnero Associates, the architecture firm that designed the building, provided his perspective on what it took to physically design and build a space that fulfilled UCSFs vision.

MC: Dr. Hausers goals were numerous and complex, though interconnected. It is the interconnected nature of all these goals that gives the building its unique form and singular presence.

The first challenge was to plan and design a building that integrates both clinical care for patients and state of the art research labs for scientists. The ability for scientists to both see patients and participate in their research projects in the same building on the same day was pivotal. The building goals were to not just envision this new form of integrated clinical care and scientific research, but to create a new form of architectural expression which presents that sensibility to everyone who sees it. We needed to fully understand the goal of creating a destination building- a destination for patients, for scientists, for science itself. It was never considered a secure bunker for research, but always seen as a transparent center for ideas, ideas grounded in progress, care, and hope.

How did you balance the aesthetics of the building with its technical and scientific requirements?

M.C. In making a building that attracts young people to dedicate themselves to research and care careers and to be a magnet for the community in a way to promote neuroscience and to radiate hope- the building needed to be beautiful from every angle. I wanted the building to change its feel slightly depending on your vantage point, your angle of view. Beauty is timeless and its own source of wonderment and joy; so creating a building of beauty was a strong desire.

As we understood these goals more and more clearly, it became clear that the building needed to have a unique clarity to it. The building needed to express the rational permanence of science with the all-too- human dynamism of nature. Bringing science and nature, rational thought and human emotion into each space was our challenge. Bringing both sides of the brain into ones awareness of the environment seemed exciting to me, to simultaneously fulfill the needs for abstract thought and tactile perception and feeling.

The human nature of socialization, of impromptu meeting and spontaneous discussion was also discussed at length. Scientists of different background can meet over coffee, lunch, in a meeting room, in a lounge or on the roof terrace overlooking the campus. Excitement and research updates can be shared quickly and personally, with interaction made so easy. The human side of research, once again, is being given great priority. The screens temper the dry and wet labs only. The clinical care and social spaces where scientists mingle- all are clear and exposed to the community. The essential human quality of this endeavor is made manifest even if the research has a veil of protection over it.

The reception from the faculty occupying the new space has been positive. Dr. Riley Bove, Associate Professor of Neurology, expressed how this new environment will be transformational in allowing our work in digital and precision medicine to become a reality for patients seen in the neuropsychiatry clinics. Across our institution, there have been a number of pivotal studies validating the ability to digitally phenotype patients, remotely engage and monitor individuals, and apply complex algorithms to understand human behavior, imaging, and biosamples. To date, individuals including clinicians, engineers, psychologists, physicists, and geneticists have often worked in siloes, focusing on a specific tool, insight, or condition. The new Institute is an opportunity for researchers who have worked on siloed aspects of this research to come together and thread all the rich insights and data back into the clinic in simple, relevant formats, to impact clinical care.

For Dr. Mercedes Paredes, also an Associate Professor in the Department of Neurology, who studies perinatal brain development, a critical period immediately before and after birth that can impact neurodevelopmental disorders such as epilepsy or autism spectrum disorder, the buildingthat will bring diverse expertise in neuroscience includingleaders in cutting edge CRISPR technology, developmental bioinformatic gurus, and neuropathologists and neonatologists. She went on to explain how having this multidisciplinary perspective together will accelerate collaborationand discoveries across many fields. I also think it's special to have this adjacent to the clinical work, in the hopes that each side of the bench-clinic can inspireone another.

Dr. Edward Chang, Professor and Chair of the Department of Neurological Surgery said that the new building is an extraordinary environment for carrying out our researchonhuman brain neural computations. The generous natural light, high ceilings, and open space layout achieve a perfect balance.

Similar comments were made by the other departments who have faculty moving into the new building. Dr. MatthewW.State, Chair of the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences said the buildingplaces the basic science of psychiatry literally in the heart of the outstanding UCSF neuroscience community.It advances our shared missionat UCSF of breaking down the arbitrary barriers that have historically separated psychiatry from neurology, neurosurgery and other medical and scientific fields that focusonthe brain. And for S. Andrew Josephson, Chair of Neurology, the newbuilding's combinationof laboratories, clinical research facilities, and computational centers combined with patient-based clinical care including state-of-the-art imaging and neuroinfusionpositions us to quickly translate discoveries into therapies for a group of disorders that urgently need solutions.

It is evident that the new building was architecturally and aesthetically carefully designed to allow the interaction of clinical and basic neuroscience research and care to take place in a harmonious way under one impressive space. It feels like science and medicine taking place literally inside a work of art. Of course, only time will tell how the new building and the work that will take place within will differ from other similar efforts at universities across the world - which no doubt provides challenging competition. Yet, the new UCSF building seems almost purposefully designed to allow the imagination and creativity of its occupants to thrive. Which is after all what is necessary to truly understand and treat the brain.

View post:
UCSF Aims To Re-Think Neuroscience Research With Its New Building - Forbes

Researchers provide insight into how the brain multitasks while walking – URMC

New research turns the old idiom about not being able to walk and chew gum on its head. Scientists with the Del Monte Institute for Neuroscience at the University of Rochester have shown that the healthy brain is able to multitask while walking without sacrificing how either activity is accomplished.

David Richardson

This research shows us that the brain is flexible and can take on additional burdens, said David Richardson, an MD/PhD student in his fifth year in the Pathology & Cell Biology of Disease Program, and first author of the study recently published in the journal NeuroImage. Our findings showed that the walking patterns of the participants improved when they performed a cognitive task at the same time, suggesting they were actually more stable while walking and performing the task than when they were solely focused on walking.

During these experiments, researchers used a Mobile Brain/Body Imaging system, or MoBI, located in the Del Monte Institutes Frederick J. and Marion A. Schindler Cognitive Neurophysiology Lab. The platform combines virtual reality, brain monitoring, and motion capture technology. While participants walk on a treadmill or manipulate objects on a table, 16 high speed cameras record the position markers with millimeter precision, while simultaneously measuring their brain activity.

Example of image captured by MoBI.

The MoBI was used to record the brain activity of participants as they walked on a treadmill and were cued to switch tasks. Their brain activity was also recorded as they performed these same tasks while sitting. Brain changes were measured between the cued tasks and showed that during the more difficult the tasks the neurophysiological difference was greater between walking and sitting highlighting the flexibility of a healthy brain and how it prepares for and executes tasks based on difficulty level.

The MoBI allows us to better understand how the brain functions in everyday life, said Edward Freedman, Ph.D., lead author on the study. Looking at these findings to understand how a young healthy brain is able to switch tasks will give us better insight to whats going awry in a brain with a neurodegenerative disease like Alzheimers disease.

Edward Freedman, Ph.D.

Understanding how a young healthy brain can successfully walk and talk is an important start, but we also need to understand how these findings differ in the brains of healthy older adults, and adults with neurodegenerative diseases, said Richardson. The next stage is expanding this research to include a more diverse group of brains.

Additional authors include John Foxe, Ph.D., Kevin Mazurek, Ph.D., and Nicholas Abraham of the University of Rochester. This research was funded by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and the Del Monte Institute for Neuroscience Pilot Program.

See the article here:
Researchers provide insight into how the brain multitasks while walking - URMC