It's been a rough 12 months for Myriad Genetics (NASDAQ:MYGN) and Opko Health (NASDAQ:OPK). Myriad lost nearly half of its market cap during the period, while Opko stock is down around 20%.

Could better days be ahead for these two stocks? And which is the better pick for long-term investors? Here's how Myriad Genetics and Opko Health stack up against each other.

Image source: Getty Images.

There are three primary arguments in favor of buying Myriad Genetics stock. The company is a leader in the U.S. hereditary cancer screening market and is poised to expand its lead. Myriad is quickly growing its non-hereditary cancer business. The company also has significant opportunities in international markets.

How does Myriad plan to grow its U.S. hereditary cancer business? The greatest potential lies in expanding testing beyond breast cancer patients. A key to achieving this objective is with Myriad's myRisk, a single comprehensive DNA test that screens for breast cancer, ovarian cancer, colon cancer, uterine cancer, melanoma, pancreatic cancer, prostate cancer, and gastric cancer.

In Myriad Genetics' fiscal year 2013, only 1% of total testing volume stemmed from non-hereditary cancer screening. The company expects to report that figure is roughly 67% for fiscal year 2017. One primary product making this growth possible is GeneSight, a genomic test used to help physicians prescribe the correct psychiatric medications for patients. Myriad picked up GeneSight with its acquisition last year of Assurex Health.

As for international growth, Myriad is looking over the short term to expand primarily in the Canadian and major European markets. Over the longer term, though, the company plans to grow significantly in Japan, China, and Brazil.

Myriad's management team thinks the company can grow revenue at an average annual rate of more than 10% with an operating margin of at least 30%. The stock is up so far in 2017, thanks to a string of good news for the company -- including positive coverage decisions for Myriad's EndoPredict breast cancer test by multiple Blue Cross Blue Shield plans.

There are two key things to look at with Opko Health: the company's current products and services and its pipeline prospects. Opko currently gets over 80% of its revenue from services provided by Bio-Reference Labs, which it acquired in 2015. Bio-Reference generates solid cash flow and helps Opko market its 4Kscore prostate cancer DNA test.

Opko also has two drugs on the market. Varubi, which is used to treat chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (NINV), is licensed to Tesaro. Rayaldee won U.S. regulatory approval in June 2016 for thetreatment of secondary hyperparathyroidism (SHPT) in adults with stage 3 or 4 chronic kidney disease (CKD). Although it's still relatively early in the commercial launch of Rayaldee, the potential for the drug appears to be quite promising. CKD is the ninth leading cause of death, with most CKD patients dying from cardiovascular disease precipitated by SHPT. There aren't any great options for treating SHPT other than Rayaldee.

Opko has several pipeline candidates. The most eagerly anticipated product is human growth hormone hGH-CTP that Opko is developing in partnership withPfizer. Opko reported disappointing results from a late-stage study of hGH-CTP.However, the company saw some outliers in the clinical data that gave hope that the hormone could potentially still win regulatory approval. Opko and Pfizer are working to advance to a regulatory filing based on an additional statistical analysis of the data.

Unlike Myriad Genetics, Opko isn't turning a profit right now. The company reported a net loss in 2016 of $25 million. However, its bottom line has improved and should get a big boost if Rayaldee picks up steam.

Quite frankly, both of these stocks are risky. Myriad Genetics faces intense competition in the DNA screening business. It's also at the mercy of payers' reimbursement decisions. Opko Health could be derailed if its hGH-CTP doesn't win approval or if Rayaldee sales don't meet expectations.

Personally, my risk tolerance isn't enough for me to buy either of these stocks. However, I thinkOpko gets the nod as the better choice between the two. The basis of my decision was on the opportunity that Opko has if things go its way. Granted, that might not happen. But if the company enjoys some good luck, the stock could soar.

Keith Speights owns shares of Pfizer. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Read more from the original source:
Better Buy: Myriad Genetics, Inc. vs. Opko Health, Inc. - Motley Fool

The strain of bird flu that infected a chicken farm in Tennessee in recent days shares the same name as a form of the virus that has killed humans in China, but is genetically distinct from it, U.S. authorities said on Tuesday.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture identified the strain in Tennessee as H7N9, following a full genome sequencing of samples from the farm. It said all eight gene segments of the virus had North American wild bird lineage.

On Sunday, the USDA confirmed the farm in Tennessee was infected with highly pathogenic bird flu, making it the first case in a commercial U.S. operation in more than a year.

In China, at least 112 people have died from H7N9 bird flu this winter, Xinhua news agency said on Friday.

However, that virus has Eurasian lineage, U.S. flu experts said.

Even though the numbers and the letters are the same, if you look at the genetic fingerprint of that virus, it is different, said Dan Jernigan, director of the influenza division at the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases at U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Jernigan said the risk to humans from the virus found in Tennessee is low. Genome sequencing shows the H7N9 virus did not have genetic features present in the virus in China that make it easier for humans to become infected, he said.

The virus found in Tennessee likely mutated to become highly pathogenic from a less dangerous, low pathogenic form, he said.

Disease experts fear a deadly strain of bird flu could mutate into a form that could be passed easily between people and become a pandemic.

Multiple outbreaks of the virus have been reported in poultry farms and wild flocks across Europe, Africa and Asia in the past six months. Most involved strains that were low risks for human health, but the sheer number of different types, and their simultaneous presence in so many parts of the world, has increased the risk of viruses mixing and mutating - and possibly jumping to people, according to disease experts.

Chinas Center for Disease Control and Prevention has said the majority of people infected by H7N9 in China reported exposure to poultry, especially at live markets.

Identifying the viruses in Tennessee and China both as H7N9 is similar to having two cars from different states with the same license plate number, said Carol Cardona, avian flu expert at the University of Minnesota.

The strain in Tennessee is NOT the same as the China H7N9 virus that has impacted poultry and infected humans in Asia, the USDA emphasized in a statement.

While the subtype is the same as the China H7N9 lineage that emerged in 2013, this is a different virus and is genetically distinct from the China H7N9 lineage, the USDA added.

U.S. officials are working to determine how the Tennessee farm, which was a supplier to Tyson Foods Inc, became infected. All 73,500 birds there were killed by the disease or suffocated with foam to prevent its spread.

Tyson, the worlds biggest chicken company, is hopeful this is an isolated incident, spokesman Worth Sparkman said.

Authorities have not identified the name of the farm or the town in Lincoln County, Tennessee, where it is located.

(Editing by Matthew Lewis and Bernard Orr)

More:
Tennessee Bird Flu Shares Name, Not Genetics, Of Feared China Strain - Huffington Post

No one wants to talk about cancer. A disease that has taken the lives of so many, even the word itself has an ominous connotation. But as much as we dont want to talk about it, new genetic technology suggests that starting the conversation about your familys cancer history might be in everyones best interest.

In her new book, "A Cancer in the Family: Take Control of your Genetic Inheritance," Dr. Theodora Ross addresses how our familys medical history plays a role in our health. To shed some light on the genetics of cancer, as well as genetic counseling, Ross spoke with Take Care to explain the importance of knowing your family history. Ross, a cancer geneticist, is director of University of Texas Southwestern Medical Centers cancer genetics program.

First and foremost, Ross says that while you may feel theres nothing you can do about an impending cancer diagnosis, knowing is always better than not knowing. Ross herself was hesitant to find out about her own genetics, even though she's a cancer expert and has a family history of the disease, including a sister with breast cancer. But when she developed a melanoma in 2004, she decided it was time to talk to a geneticist and a genetic counselor.

Ross attributes her hesitation to truthiness, which occurs when we want something to be true. Often when it comes to health, we ignore or deny potential problems. We dont go to doctors when were healthy, we dont want to believe there could be a problem, and so we dont look.

But Ross says knowing the family history of a patient is an important step in prevention, and helps not only the patient, but researchers too. Genetic counselors can go to physicians and obtain medical records, which gives researchers more data to work with, and gives patients an accurate understanding of their family history.

According to Ross, the most common genetically inherited cancer syndrome is Lynch syndrome, which occurs when there is a mutation in mismatched repaired genes. This mutation will lead to a predisposition to colon, endometrial, ovarian, pancreatic, and other cancers. The kicker? Only 5 percent of people with this syndrome actually know they have it, and its common. About one in 300 have it, says Ross. And if they knew, they could carry out preventative measures such as frequent colonoscopies and check-ups.

Comprehensive genetic testing is becoming cheap enough, according to Ross, for people to seek out this information at a reasonable cost. Genetic counselors, she says, have an incredible ability to connect with their patients while providing them with the information they need to make the most of their genetic history. Talking about cancer in the family can be a scary conversation, but its crucial, says Ross, to aid in our efforts towards prevention.

Follow this link:
Genetics and cancer: why testing can aid prevention - WRVO Public Media

March 10, 2017 at 1:31 PM

Opitz C syndrome is a genetic disease that causes severe disabilities in patients and has been diagnosed in three people in the Iberian Peninsula, and sixty people in the world. A team led by the professors Daniel Grinberg and Susana Balcells, from the Group on Human Molecular Genetics of the University of Barcelona and the Biomedical Research Networking Center of Rare Diseases (CIBERER) has now identified a gene that causes the Opitz C syndrome in the only patient in Catalonia diagnosed with this severe congenital disease. This new scientific advance is a first step to discover the genetic bases of this syndrome which, so far, does not offer treatment possibilities, prenatal diagnosis or genetic counseling.

The new study, published in the journal Scientific Reports, has the participation of several researchers at the CRG, including members of the Genomic and Epigenomic Variation in Disease laboratory, the genomics unit, and the bioinformatics unit. It also had the participation of John M. Opitz (University of Utah, United States), Giovanni Neri (Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Italy) and experts at the Department of Clinical and Molecular Genetics of the University Hospital Vall d'Hebron (VHIR).

Opitz C syndrome: rare but not invisible

The genetic bases of this ultra-minority disease, described for the first time in 1969 by John M. Opitz, are still unknown. It is generally thought that its origin is caused by the apparition of dominant -maternally silenced- novo mutations. At the moment, the diagnose is clinical and it is based on the symptomatology presented on patients with different degrees (trigonocephaly, learning disability, psychomotor disability, etc.) and which, in lots of cases, coincides with similar minority pathologies such as the syndromes of Schaaf-Yang, Bohring-Opitz and Prader-Willi.

In the new study, the experts described for the first time, the existence of a novo mutation -p.Q638*- located in the gene MAGEL2 of the only diagnosed person with Opitz C syndrome in Catalonia. Identifying this mutation, found in the Prader-Willi Region on chromosome 15, widens the knowledge horizons on genetics and the possibilities for a diagnosis on these rare diseases.

"The p.Q638* mutation, identified in the gene MAGEL2, coincides with the one described concurrently and independently in a patient with Schaaf-Yang syndrome, a new minoritary disease affecting fifty people in the world. The first cases were described on a scientific bibliography in 2013 by the team of Professor Christian Schaaf, from the Baylor College of Medicine, Houston", says Professor Daniel Grinberg, member of the Institute of Biomedicine of the University of Barcelona (IBUB), the Research Institute of Sant Joan de Du (IRSJD) and CIBERER.

"Consequently, from a genetic diagnosis perspective -says DanieL Grinberg- this patient initially diagnosed with Opitz C in Catalonia would correspond to the group of patients with Schaaf-Yang syndrome"

Genetics will define the limits of rare diseases

Identifying the genes that cause a disease is a breakpoint to understand the pathology and set new future therapeutic approaches that improve the quality of life of the patients. In the new study, the teams of the UB and the CRG applied techniques of DNA massive sequencing (exome and genome), a powerful methodology that allows identifying altered genes in each patient.

According to Luis Serrano, director of CRG, "projects like this one show the important role of genomics in the future of medicine and the way on which we diagnose and treat diseases. To understand the diseases and offering not only a diagnosis but also approaches to possible treatments is very relevant in minority diseases. It is a satisfaction for the CRG to contribute with our knowledge and advanced technologies in a project that gives hope to a vulnerable collective" concluded the researcher.

Susana Balcells, tenured lecturer at the UB and also member of IBUB and CIBERER, added "what we can see from a clinical symptomatology view in these kinds of diseases which are so hard to study and diagnose, is far from the initial molecular defect that generates the disease".

"All these clinical doubts -continued Balcells- will be solved with genetics, which will define the limits of these rare diseases and will ease the scientific consensus on the diagnosis and genetic causes that create them".

Crowdfunding: when society supports scientific research

The members of the Group of Human Molecular Genetics of the University of Barcelona and the CRG are currently in contact with the team of Professor Schaaf and three families of patients diagnosed with Schaaf-Yang syndrome in the Iberian Peninsula.

In December 2026, the first author of the study published in Scientific Reports, Roser Urreitzi, researcher of CIBERER and lecturer at the UB, coordinated the meeting between the experts and the affected families. The meeting took place at the Faculty of Biology of the University of Barcelona and was a new encouragement for the collaboration of researchers and affected families in future projects with the participation of the UB, CRG and CIBERER Biobank, in Valencia. This cooperation has also allowed the three patients to be examined by the same clinical expert: the pediatrician Dr Anna M. Cueto, assistant doctor and clinical geneticist at the Department of Clinical and Molecular Genetics of the University Hospital Vall d'Hebron in Barcelona. This is clearly a new progress in the field of ultra-minority diseases.

Follow this link:
Researchers discover genetic bases of Opitz C syndrome - News-Medical.net

A bill that passed its first hurdle yesterday in Congress threatens to take away genetic privacy protections put in place with the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act(GINA) of 2008.H.R.1313, the Preserving Employee Wellness Programs Act, might instead be called the telling on relatives ruling.

GINA

According to GINA, employers cant use genetic information to hire, fire, or promote an employee, or require genetic testing, and health insurers cant require genetic tests nor use results to deny coverage. The law clearly defines genetic tests DNA, RNA, chromosomes, proteins, metabolites and genetic information genetic test results and family history of a genetic condition.

GINA refers to a case,Norman-Bloodsaw v. Lawrence Berkeley Labfrom 1998, that allowed clerical and administrative workers to sue their employer for requiring testing for highly private and sensitive medical genetic information such as syphilis, sickle cell trait, and pregnancy without their consent or knowledge during a general employee health exam. Im not sure how syphilis and pregnancy got lumped in with sickle cell trait (a carrier), but requiring any such test is considered an illegal search under the Fourth Amendment. The sickle cell request also violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act by singling out employees of African ancestry.

Yesterday the bill passed its first mark-up session, and will either head for the next markup with the Ways and Means Committee or become part of a package of health-care-related bills that goes to the House floor soon, according to Derek Scholes, PhD, the American Society of Human Genetics (ASHG) director of science policy, who attended the session.

Nancy J. Cox, PhD, ASHG president, in a letter to the U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce, provides a frightening overview:

If enacted, this legislation would undermine fundamentally the privacy provisions of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). It would allow employers to ask employees invasive questions about their and their families health, as well as genetic tests they and their families have undergone. It would further allow employers to impose stiff financial penalties on employees who choose to keep such information private, thus empowering employers to coerce their employees into providing their health and genetic information.

Single-gene diseases are unlike other health conditions or clinical findings, such as infections or high serum cholesterol readings, because a diagnosis in one person reveals risks to relatives in accordance with Mendels laws. A 24-year-old school bus driver in perfect health, for example, whose parent receives a diagnosis of Huntingtons disease, could under the new bill face queries from an employer or health insurer about the 50% risk.

ALL IS NOT WELL(NESS)

The bill isbuilt around an exception in GINA concerning genetic testing that is part of health or genetic services the employer offers, such as part of a wellness program. However, GINA stipulates that only the person and the health care provider or board certified genetic counselor can view the results. GINA also spells out that genetic testing as part of a wellness program must be entirely voluntary.

A May 16, 2016, ruling from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commissionlaid the groundwork for penalizing employees who refuse to answer questions about their or their spouses health. This could amount to thousands of dollars a year, according to a report from the Kaiser Family Foundation. H.R.1313 would make that even worse.

It would further permit workplace wellness programs to penalize much more severely employees who wish to keep their genetic and health information private, allowing penalties of up to 30 percent of the total cost of an employees health insurance, Dr. Cox writes. And the Public Health Service Act permits an increase to 50%. Penalties of this magnitude would compel Americans to choose between retaining the privacy of their health and genetic information and accessing affordable health insurance.

Is charging for the right to enjoy the genetic privacy that was once mandated by law a mechanism to underwrite the new health care plan?

REPERCUSSIONS

H.R.1313 would effectively repeal the fundamental genetic and health privacy protections in GINA and the ADA. It would allow workplace wellness programs to ask employees questions about genetic tests taken by themselves or their families, and to make inquiries about the medical history of employees, their spouses, their children, and other family members, Dr. Cox writes.

Other family members harkens back to GINA, bastardizing its protections, for the 2008 law casts a wide net for relatives, down to the fourth degree.

While first-degree relatives are a persons children, siblings, and parents, and second-degree are grandparents, grandchildren, uncles, aunts, nephews, nieces, and half-siblings, third-degree relatives extend to great-grandparents, great grandchildren, great uncles/aunts, and first cousins, and, ridiculously, fourth-degree relatives to great-great-grandparents, great-great-grandchildren, and first cousins once-removed. I remember my disappointment when I realized that the notifications of new fifth cousins pouring into my email after taking an ancestry test were pretty meaningless, since we each have more than 4,000 of them.

Also worrisome is that the new mandate reeks of genetic determinism, the idea that genotype dictates phenotype.

Genetic information alone does not a diagnosis make. Thats why a clinical diagnosis considers symptoms and results of other types of tests. And while the example of the young bus driver with a family history of HD lies at an extreme because people who inherit the mutation nearly always develop the disease, that situation of complete penetrance is unusual. Most inherited diseases are incompletely penetrant some people with a disease-associated genotype may never develop the condition due to protections from other genes (see Why do healthy people have harmful mutations?here). Another repercussion of H.R.1313 is that it might frighten people away from participating in clinical trials.

I also fear misunderstanding on the part of people charged with analyzing anyones genetic fitness, so to speak, on the basis of a list of mutations or other gene variants. Remember the sickle cell screen of the early 1970s? That was adisasterbecause many parents thought that a finding of children having sickle cell trait meant that they had or would develop the disease. I was even told off-the-record that at least one parental suicide resulted from the well-meant but widespread misinformation.

Will wellness coaches serve as the go-betweens for employees and employers, and if so, how much genetics do they know? Would a wellness coach know that the Huntingtons disease that is in the family of the active and healthy 24-year-old takes many years to develop, even after the first symptoms appear? I didnt see any hard science requirements in this job descriptionor a few others. (Im thinking of the Pilates instructors who have told me that I am lengthening my spine, but thats probably not the same thing.)

The letter from ASHG urges the committee not to support H.R.1313, and to encourage workplace wellness programs without sacrificing employees civil rights. All Americans should be free to participate in genetic research or benefit from genetics-based clinical advances without fear of genetic discrimination, Dr. Cox concludes.

As we gear up to encourage folks to participate in the Precision Medicine Initiativeby contributing their personal genome information, the direct to consumer genetic testing industryis not only alive and well but growing, and loading our genome sequences onto our smartphonesis no longer science fiction, H.R.1313 seems to be coming at a most inopportune time. Lets hope the 1313 is bad luck for its passage!

Read more here:
Saving GINA: Is Genetic Privacy Imperiled? - PLoS Blogs (blog)