Category Archives: Immunology

Second COVID Shot Packs the Big Punch – MedPage Today

February 14, 2021 medical

Like scores of other physicians and healthcare workers, T.J. Maltese, DO, a neurologist in private practice on Long Island in New York state, had no problem with his first dose of the Moderna coronavirus vaccine -- but he was knocked out by the second.

Maltese got his second shot at 4:30 p.m. on a Friday. Within 2 hours his arm was sore. He developed flu-like symptoms overnight, and had chills and body aches on Saturday. His low-grade fever (peaking at 101.4F) lingered all day. If he had to work, he could have pushed through, he said, but he rode out his symptoms on his couch with the help of the occasional Tylenol.

By 9 p.m. Saturday, Maltese started to feel better. He got a good night's sleep and was back to normal on Sunday.

"I know plenty of people with minimal symptoms after the second dose, so it's not definite you'll feel side effects," he wrote in a Facebook post. "But be prepared for the possibility."

The healthcare worker scuttlebutt is that the second dose of any COVID-19 vaccine packs a punch -- unless you've already had COVID, then the first dose can hit just as hard.

These perceptions are substantiated by immunology and by data from the vaccines' phase III trials, and some hospitals have even altered their healthcare worker scheduling in anticipation of second-dose side effects.

Priming the Immune System

Immunologists and infectious disease experts interviewed by MedPage Today said it's not unexpected that second-dose reactions are more intense than the first.

"The first time the immune system comes into contact with something, it's getting primed," said Purvi Parikh, MD, an immunologist at NYU Langone Health in New York City. "That goes for everything, from vaccines to allergies. It's rare on the first time to have a strong reaction. After that, the immune system recognizes it, so you have a much stronger reaction."

"We saw it in the trials, so it's really not surprising," Parikh added. "Now we're seeing it in real time as the vaccines are being rolled out."

In both Pfizer's and Moderna's phase III trial data, systemic adverse events were reported more frequently after dose 2 than dose 1. For the latter, rates were 54.9% versus 42.2% for placebo after the first dose and 79.4% versus 36.5% for placebo after the second dose. Fever, headache, fatigue, myalgia, arthralgia, and chills were far more common after the second dose compared with the first dose and with all placebo doses.

Stanley Weiss, MD, an infectious disease specialist and epidemiologist at Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, said since his institution served as a site for the Moderna trial, the primary investigator was able to give faculty and administrators an early update on what to expect following vaccination.

"They said there was a very high rate of fatigue after the second dose, so we encouraged administrators ... to figure that many healthcare workers getting the vaccine might not be well enough to work the day after the second dose," Weiss told MedPage Today.

Weiss added that administrators were also careful not to vaccinate staff from within the same unit -- an ICU team, for instance -- on the same day.

Fewer Problems for Older Patients?

Both Weiss and Parikh said they had a far stronger response to the second dose of the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines, respectively. Weiss had fatigue and a severe headache for 2 days. Parikh's chills, fatigue, and headache resolved within 24 to 36 hours.

Zubin Damania, MD, a.k.a. ZDoggMD, said the second dose of his Moderna vaccine knocked him out: "I couldn't sleep, I had a fever, rigors, body aches, a headache -- full-on man-flu," he joked on a recent episode of his show.

His guest for that show was vaccine expert Paul Offit, MD, who also had fever and fatigue for about 48 hours after the second dose of the Pfizer vaccine.

"That reaction is less common in people over 65, and I'm over 65, so I'm thinking I'm not going to suffer that, but I did," Offit said.

Indeed, older patients are thought to have less of a reaction due to typical weakening of the immune system as people age, Parikh said: "The idea is that their immune system is not as robust as a young person's."

Dose 1 Rougher for Those with Previous COVID

Parikh said the same immunological concept behind a stronger response to the second dose also applies to first-dose effects for those who've had COVID-19 before.

"It's the same reason why some people who've had COVID and recovered get these effects with the first shot sometimes. The immune system has seen it before," she said.

Victoria Arthur, MD, of Lexington Pediatrics in Massachusetts, suspects she had COVID in March 2020, but wasn't able to confirm her diagnosis. Still, while all of the other physicians and healthcare staff in her office felt fine after the first dose of the Moderna vaccine, she did not.

"How I felt was how everyone else was describing their second vaccine," Arthur told MedPage Today.

Within three hours of her first dose, she had a headache, neck pain, and cognitive fog. She woke up at 3 a.m. with bad nausea and stomach cramps, and spent the entire next day in bed. By Monday, though, her only lingering symptom was a sore arm.

Her reaction to her second dose was similar, she said. Nonetheless, she was glad for it.

"I'm always grateful when I have a reaction, that means the body is doing its thing," she said. "I'm very fortunate to have been given the vaccine, so any side effect is worth it."

Being appreciative of having been vaccinated, despite the side effects, was a common sentiment among these healthcare professionals.

Weiss said second-dose side effects shouldn't deter anyone from getting vaccinated: "The benefits greatly overwhelm the risk of side effects. It's not a reason to delay."

"I'll take 30 hours of some mild misery," Maltese said, "over days to weeks of much worse -- and more unpredictable -- misery."

Kristina Fiore leads MedPages enterprise & investigative reporting team. Shes been a medical journalist for more than a decade and her work has been recognized by Barlett & Steele, AHCJ, SABEW, and others. Send story tips to k.fiore@medpagetoday.com. Follow

Go here to see the original:
Second COVID Shot Packs the Big Punch - MedPage Today

Immunology

STING activation may be a new approach to reduce graft-versus-host disease – News-Medical.net

February 14, 2021 medical

MUSC Hollings Cancer Center researcher Yongxia Wu, Ph.D., identified a new target molecule in the fight against graft-versus-host disease (GVHD). Bone marrow transplant, a treatment for certain blood cancers, is accompanied by potentially life-threatening GVHD in nearly 50% of patients. A January 2021 paper published in Cellular and Molecular Immunology revealed that activating a molecule called STING may be a new approach to reduce GVHD.

Xue-Zhong Yu, M.D., professor in the Department of Microbiology and Immunology, focuses on understanding the intricate immune mechanisms that regulate GVHD development and anti-tumor activity.

Recently, STING (stimulator of interferon genes) has been highly studied in the context of cancer. Data from other groups has shown that STING activation in T cells helps the immune cells fight cancer. Cancer cells are essentially a "bad" version of the body's own cells and an appropriate target for its immune system. In contrast, in the case of GVHD, T cells fight the body's own "good" cells - in essence, the body attacks itself. Based on the previous data, it seemed logical that high STING activation, though good when it comes to cancer, would be bad in the context of GVHD.

Yu's findings in a mouse model of GVHD confirmed this hypothesis. In the mouse model, which was obtained from collaborator Chih-Chi Andrew Hu, Ph.D., a Wistar Institute professor of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, GVHD was induced by bone marrow transplant, which closely models the disease development in humans.

To understand how GVHD develops after bone marrow transplantation, one must consider two immune systems: the donor's and the recipient's. The key immune cells are the antigen-presenting cells and the T cells. The immune system knows what to attack based on specific "tags," called antigens, that are shown to the T cells by the specialized antigen-presenting cells. Dendritic cells are the most effective antigen-presenting cells, and they play a critical role in GVHD.

Work from other research groups in cancer has demonstrated that STING signaling can regulate antigen- presenting cell function. STING is an important molecule in a DNA-sensing pathway that results in the production of inflammatory cytokines. But it is not known how STING regulates these cells in the context of GVHD.

The researchers used the mouse models to determine whether GVHD improved or worsened when STING was 1) absent in the donor immune cells, 2) absent in the recipient immune cells and 3) overexpressed in the recipient immune cells. GVHD severity was not changed when STING was absent from the donor immune cells. However, GVHD was more severe and mortality rates were higher when STING was missing from the recipient immune cells.

Yu and collaborators then looked at different cell subsets to try and understand which cells were most impacted by the loss of STING. Surprisingly, STING expression in the recipient mouse's antigen-presenting cells (dendritic cells) reduced donor T cell expansion and migratory ability after bone marrow transplant. In other words, it made it less likely that the T cells of the recipient mouse would attack its "good" cells and lead to GVHD. This finding was confirmed using a pharmacological drug that turned on the STING molecule. Activating STING in the host before transplantation reduced GVHD severity.

The finding in a mouse model that activating STING with a pharmacological drug reduced GVHD could be clinically relevant in that it suggests the possibility that a STING-activating drug might protect bone marrow transplant recipients from GVHD. Much more basic and clinical research will be required to assess that possibility, but Yu's findings suggest that such research is warranted.

To understand why the research team observed what they did, they will continue to unravel the biological functions of the STING molecule. Unanswered questions include what makes STING function differently in different immune cell subsets.

Tools such as the mice from our collaborator allow us to study this more thoroughly. Total-body deletion of a protein does not allow for specific study in cell subsets, and we think that STING must have different roles in different cells."

Xue-Zhong Yu, M.D., Professor, Department of Microbiology and Immunology, MUSC Hollings Cancer Center

Source:

Journal reference:

Wu, Y., et al. (2021) STING negatively regulates allogeneic T-cell responses by constraining antigen-presenting cell function. Cellular & Molecular Immunology. doi.org/10.1038/s41423-020-00611-6.

Immunology

Jounce Therapeutics Appoints Luisa Salter-Cid, Ph.D., to its Board of Directors – GlobeNewswire

February 14, 2021 medical

CAMBRIDGE, Mass., Feb. 12, 2021 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Jounce Therapeutics, Inc. (NASDAQ: JNCE), a clinical-stage company focused on the discovery and development of novel cancer immunotherapies and predictive biomarkers, today announced the appointment of Luisa Salter-Cid, Ph.D., to its board of directors.

We are thrilled to welcome Luisa to our board of directors, said Perry Karsen, chairman of the board of Jounce Therapeutics. Luisa brings over 20 years of experience in the healthcare industry, specifically in immunology and immuno-oncology, and we look forward to the unique and valuable perspective that her strategic leadership will bring to Jounce.

Dr. Salter-Cid currently serves as the chief scientific officer of Gossamer Bio, Inc., which she joined in 2018, and has helped to build their portfolio of clinical and new discovery programs. Previously, she held several roles of increasing responsibility over the prior 13 years at Bristol Myers Squibb, leading teams that advanced over 20 compounds into clinical development and chairing the immunoscience target science team. She holds a Ph.D. in Immunology from the University of Miami School of Medicine, an M.S. in Biology from Florida International University and a B.S. in Biology from the University of Lisbon, Portugal.

Luisas addition comes at an important time for Jounce, said Richard Murray, Ph.D., chief executive officer and president of Jounce Therapeutics. She will provide invaluable insight as we continue to advance our clinical programs and implement our Translational Science Platform approach to bring new first-in-class discovery programs into the clinic and utilize translational and predictive biomarker analyses of programs during clinical development.

I am very excited to join the Jounce board of directors and to work alongside this impressive leadership team, particularly at this important time for the development of JTX-8064. Jounce has established a track record of innovative science and the ability to bring multiple new and competitive programs to the clinic, said Dr. Salter-Cid, Ph.D. Their differentiated approach to immuno-oncology defines Jounce as a true pioneer within the cancer immunotherapy treatment landscape, and I look forward to contributing to the advancement of Jounces science to patients.

About Jounce TherapeuticsJounce Therapeutics, Inc. is a clinical-stage immunotherapy company dedicated to transforming the treatment of cancer by developing therapies that enable the immune system to attack tumors and provide long-lasting benefits to patients through a biomarker-driven approach. Jounce currently has multiple development stage programs ongoing while simultaneously advancing additional early-stage assets from its robust discovery engine based on its Translational Science Platform. Jounces lead macrophage program, JTX-8064, is a LILRB2 (ILT4) receptor antagonist shown to reprogram immune-suppressive tumor associated macrophages to an anti-tumor state in preclinical studies. A Phase 1 clinical trial, named INNATE, for JTX-8064 as a monotherapy and in combination with JTX-4014, Jounces internal PD-1 inhibitor, or pembrolizumab is currently enrolling patients with advanced solid tumors. Jounces most advanced product candidate, vopratelimab, is a monoclonal antibody that binds to and activates ICOS, and is currently being studied in the SELECT Phase 2 trial. JTX-4014 is a PD-1 inhibitor intended for combination use in the INNATE and SELECT trials and with Jounces broader pipeline. Additionally, Jounce exclusively licensed worldwide rights to JTX-1811, a monoclonal antibody targeting CCR8 and designed to selectively deplete T regulatory cells in the tumor microenvironment, to Gilead Sciences, Inc. For more information, please visit http://www.jouncetx.com.

Investor and Media Contacts:Malin DeonJounce Therapeutics, Inc.+1-857-259-3843mdeon@jouncetx.com

Mark YoreJounce Therapeutics, Inc.+1-857-200-1255 myore@jouncetx.com

Immunology

Sri Lanka : Sri Lanka Ministry of Health says attention on the new COVID variant, public will be made aware of the next steps – Colombo Page

February 14, 2021 medical

* Sri Lanka Ministry of Health says attention on the new COVID variant, public will be made aware of the next steps Fri, Feb 12, 2021, 10:50 pm SL Time, ColomboPage News Desk, Sri Lanka.

Feb 12, Colombo: The highly transmissible new variant of the COVID-19 coronavirus found in the UK has been detected in Sri Lanka from whole genome sequencing, Dr. Chandima Jeewandara, the Director of the Department of Immunology and Molecular Medicine of the University of Sri Jayewardenepura said.

Scientists at the Department of Immunology and Molecular Medicine and Allergy, Immunology and Cell Biology Unit, University of the Sri Jayewardenepura have launched studies to detect the new COVID-19 Variant B.1.1.7 that is spreading fast in several countries.

Accordingly, the new variant has been found in samples obtained from infected in Colombo, Avissawella, Vavuniya and Biyagama, said.

Two new strains of the corona virus are currently spreading around the world. The variant, B.1.1.7, was identified from England and the other from South Africa. Virologists estimate that the new variant spreads by about 50 percent faster than other Covid-19 strains.

In January 2021, Sri Lanka reported that a new variant of the coronavirus found in the UK had entered Sri Lanka and a person, who had arrived from the UK confirmed to have been infected with this new variant.

Meanwhile, the Deputy Director General of Health Services of the Ministry of Health, Dr. Hemantha Herath stated that the Director General of Health Services has already taken the necessary steps to take action regarding the reporting of a new strain of the virus in Sri Lanka.

Accordingly, the Director General of Health Services has instructed the heads of epidemiology units to inform about the action to be taken regarding the new strain of the virus reported in several parts of the island.

He also said that steps will be taken to make the public aware of the advice as soon as it is received.

The Deputy Director General of Health Services said that until these instructions are issued, the public will be advised to follow health guidelines and stay away from public places as much as possible.

Immunology

ACAAI Annual Scientific Meeting 2020

February 11, 2021 medical

After closely monitoring the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and its continuing impact on our patients, practices and country, the American College of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology has made the decision to deliver the ACAAI 2020 Annual Scientific Meeting as a 3-day, fully-virtual event, instead of meeting face-to-face in Phoenix this November.

The health and well-being of our conference attendees and faculty members is our top priority, and moving to a virtual platform ensures that we can offer an uncompromised program that is safe and filled with the outstanding content you have come to expect from the College.

See the article here:
ACAAI Annual Scientific Meeting 2020

Immunology

Immunology: The neccesary requirements to practice – Study International News

February 11, 2021 medical

Immunology is an exciting area of biomedical sciences.Over two centuries ago, Edward Jenner, the father of immunology, purposefully infected an eight year-old-boy with a disease that killed almost 10% of Englands population. Many people questioned his actions, but Jenner remained confident in his method. The young boy, James Phipps, did not die. In fact, he exhibited no signs of smallpox whatsoever.The result of this experiment? The worlds very first vaccine.

This life-saving medicine was the product of immunology. In light of the COVID-19 pandemic, we have learned that there will never be such a thing as too many life-saving professionals who specialise in creating these preventive substances.

Immunology, by definition, is the study of the human immune system. It is not just an important branch of biomedical sciences, it is also one of the most complex. These professionals work as scientists or clinicians across different areas of research in diverse clinical specialities, ranging from allergy to cancer. Some might deal with human illnesses, while some also work within veterinary sciences.

Maria Ferreira, 74, is vaccinated by a health worker. Source: Michael Dantas / AFP

Depending on an individuals interest area or the organisation they work for, they often take on various kinds of work. Many teach and conduct research at universities. Others work in laboratories for government health agencies. Some are employed by pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, developing new medical products and treatments. Many also work in medical offices, treating patients with autoimmune diseases.

Aspiring immunologists will need the right education and extensive training and an undergraduate degree is only the first step.Clinical positions that involve work with patients requires a medical school background and a doctor of medicine qualification.

Many schools offer pre-med programmes leading up to a bachelor of science. A major in biology is another pathway.Regardless of the path you choose, courses in biology, chemistry, organic chemistry, physics, statistics, and mathematics are extremely crucial in designing your path.

The next step will include passing the Medical College Admissions Test, otherwise known as the MCAT. Once participants obtain a good score, medical school is the next destination.During this time, students spend the first two years in classrooms and laboratories, learning every aspect of human body systems, disease, pharmacology, medical ethics, and skills such as how to properly conduct examinations on patients.

The following two years are spent completing clinical rotations. Here, students apply their knowledge, diagnosing and treating patients under the supervision of a licensed physician. Upon completion, medical school graduates are required to complete a residency, oftentimes conducting extensive lab work to gain experience with immunological testing methods.

A fellowship will usually last three years. Once training and studies are completed, aspiring immunologists will be able to obtain a license from their states health board or a similar governing body.In the US, immunologists must be certified by the American Board of Paediatrics (ABP) or the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) as a prerequisite for being certified by the American Board of Allergy and Immunology (ABAI).

Once all the educational steps are complete, graduates will finally be able to begin their careers. With immunologists being highly trained and respected, these professionals reap rewards that go beyond saving lives.

As of 2019, the US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported that allergists and immunologists earned a median annual salary of US$206,500. The BLS also indicates that these physicians would see a job growth rate of 3 to 4% or higher from 2019 to 2029, faster than the average for all occupations.

Apart from the demand and the benefits that come with it, there are many reasons why immunology can offer long-term job stability. Overall, it is an excellent career path for anyone passionate about utilising science to solve global challenges.

Immunology

Home | CIML

February 11, 2021 medical

Eric VIVIER and Bernard MALISSEN, team leaders at the Marseille-Luminy Immunology Center, are on the 2020 list of the most cited researchers in the world for the fourth time, as in previous editions 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019.Published annually by the prestigious Clarivate Analytics Company, previously Thomson Reuters, this ranking recognizes authors of the most frequently cited publications in the scientific community.A recognition mark that rewards the value of their discoveries and the exceptional research influence in their scientific field.

See the list

Initial translational analysis, EXPLORE, showed overexpression of C5a/C5aR pathway in patients with severe COVID-19The primary objective of this investigator-sponsored trial, named FORCE, is to improve the proportion of COVID-19 patients with severe pneumonia who no longer need to be hospitalized, and to reduce the need for and duration of mechanical ventilation in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia complicated by acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).

Through the translational data analysis in COVID-19 patients, we observed high levels of circulating C5a and over-activation of the C5a-dependent myeloid cell pathway, which is believed to contribute to inflammation in the lungs. Avdoralimab is a monoclonal antibody that blocks C5aR and has the potential to reduce the inflammatory response in the lungs, said Pr. Eric Vivier, PhD, Chief Scientific Officer at Innate Pharma and Professor at AP-HM (Marseille Public University Hospitals), Aix-Marseille University and Centre dImmunologie de Marseille-Luminy, CNRS, Inserm and AMU.More information

A Franco-German research team led by Prof. Michael Sieweke, from the Center for Regenerative Therapies TU Dresden (CRTD) and the Center of Immunology of Marseille Luminy (CNRS, INSERM, Aix-Marseille University), today uncovered a surprising property of blood stem cells: not only do they ensure the continuous renewal of blood cells and contribute to the immune response triggered by an infection, but they can also remember previous infectious encounters to drive a more rapid and more efficient immune response in the future. These findings should have a significant impact on future vaccination strategies and pave the way for new treatments of an underperforming or over-reacting immune system. The results of this research are published in Cell Stem Cell on March 12, 2020. More information

C/EBP-Dependent Epigenetic Memory Induces Trained Immunity in Hematopoietic Stem Cellsde Laval B., Maurizio J., Kandalla P K., Brisou G., Simonnet L., Huber C., Gimenez G., Matcovitch-Natan O., Reinhardt S., David E., Mildner A., Leutz A., Nadel B., Bordi C., Amit I., Sarrazin S.*,., Sieweke M H.*,. Cell Stem Cell, 2020 , pii: S1934-5909(20)30017-5, PMID: 32169166

See the original post:
Home | CIML

Immunology

Does Prior Exposure to Coronaviruses Protect You? | In the Pipeline – Science Magazine

February 11, 2021 medical

Theres a new paper out that clears up some of our thinking about the current pandemic and what protection people might have had before the latest coronavirus showed up. As so many people know by now, there are a lot of coronaviruses running around out there, and they are responsible for a small-but-real fraction of common cold type illnesses every year. Heres the CDC page on that topic, and here (from Wikipedia) is the phylogenetic tree of coronaviruses in general.

A lot of people have had one or more of the coronaviruses that are listed on the CDC page (229E, NL63, OC43, HKU1). But none of these are in the exact same family as the current beast the first two are alpha-coronaviruses and are fairly closely related to each other. The second two are in another genus, beta-coronaviruses, and are also pretty closely related to each other, but theyre off in a different lineage inside the beta-coronaviridae compared to the SARS-type coronaviruses like the current one. All of these things have spike proteins decorating them, but the spikes themselves vary in sequence, enough so that some of them have found completely different surface proteins to use for viral entry, as opposed to the SARS ones going for the ACE2 protein.

Still, immunology being what it is, the question has been open whether the B-cell and T-cell memory of past infections with these other coronviruses might give a person some protection against the current one. Ive wondered about that here on the blog myself. Its not at all a crazy idea, because what we have seen is that there are people out there who with cross-reactive antibodies that can bind to the pandemic coronavirus, some of these in blood samples from well before the current one started going through the human population. but (until now) weve lacked enough hard data to say.

Heres the MedrXiv version of the paper under discussion, and heres the version coming out now in Cell. The authors looked at 431 pre-pandemic blood samples, and compared them to 251 samples from people who have been infected in the current outbreak and recovered, as well as analyzing antibody profiles in people who are currently hospitalized. What theyve found is first, that most people have indeed been infected with one or more of the garden-variety coronaviruses. The pre-pandemic samples show plenty of antibody responses to these. Second, about 20% of these patients raised antibodies that do cross-reaction with the Spike or nucleocapsid proteins of the current pandemic coronavirus. And whats more, levels of such antibodies are elevated when a person in this group gets infected with SARS-Cov2: the immune system memory (as present in these patients B cells) responds by increasing production of the antibodies to the previous coronaviruses.

But heres the key part: cross-react does not mean neutralize and it does not mean provide protection from. These antibodies may or may not have been neutralizing against the other coronaviruses, but they dont seem to have any such effect on the current one. And in keeping with that, having such cross-reactive antibodies seems to provide no protection against catching SARS-Cov2 or against being hospitalized with it if you do. Theres no difference in the infection/hospitalization rates of the people who had cross-reactive coronavirus serum antibodies ready to go versus those who didnt. Theyre basically useless.

Now, you can still make an argument that the T cell component of immunity might provide some protection after a previous coronavirus infection. The current study didnt address this directly, but after these results, its at least less likely that thats happening. The authors make a note of this, and also note that pre-existing mucosal antibodies might exert a protective effect (which this study didnt examine, either). But prior circulating human coronavirus antibodies, even ones that can bind to the current one those it looks like we can rule out. Which is too bad.

Immunology

Eurofins’ US Transplant Diagnostics and Cleveland Clinic Sign a Licensing Agreement to Expand Access to an Innovative, Novel Biomarker for Detecting…

February 11, 2021 medical

LEE'S SUMMIT, Mo., Feb. 8, 2021 /PRNewswire/ --Eurofins Viracor, a leading infectious disease, immunology, and allergy diagnostics company focused on advancing diagnostic tests for transplant patients, announced today that it has entered into a license agreement with Cleveland Clinic for exclusive rights to an innovative urine biomarker test for detecting rejection in kidney transplant patients.

Detecting transplant rejection before damage to the transplanted kidney occurs remains a major unmet need. Additionally, diagnosing clinical acute rejection (cAR) without a biopsy and distinguishing cAR from other non-rejection causes of dysfunction remains a challenge for the transplant community.

The number of kidney transplants steadily rises each year in the United States1 with nearly 20 percent of transplants failing within three years2. This highlights the critical need for solutions that will address patient impact and the growing cost of medical treatment associated with kidney transplant complications.

Through years of basic and clinical research, Robert Fairchild, Ph.D., Cleveland Clinic in collaboration with Roslyn Mannon, MD, University of Alabama, have identified a number of RNA molecules in urine that are highly accurate for the diagnosis of rejection and elevated risk of rejection in kidney transplant patients. As a specimen type, urine is a readily available, non-invasive, and convenient sample for patients.

Eurofins Viracor laboratory and Dr. Fairchild will work collaboratively to begin the critical process of sharing expertise and methods developed at Cleveland Clinic with the long-term goal of validating the novel, innovative diagnostic assay for use in patient testing.

With the combined transplant diagnosticsportfolio of Eurofins Viracorlaboratory and Transplant Genomics, Inc.innovative, non-invasive testing for subclinical rejection,this strategic collaboration marks another critical step in Eurofins' US Transplant Diagnostics' mission in improving graft and transplant outcomes, prolonging the life of a kidney, and addressing additional unmet needs across the continuum of transplant patient care.

About Viracor

With over 30 years of specialised expertise in infectious disease, immunology and allergy testing for immunocompromised and critical patients, Viracor Eurofins is committed to delivering results to medical professionals, transplant teams, reference laboratories and biopharmaceutical companies faster, when it matters most. Eurofins Viracor is passionate about delivering value to its clients by providing timely, actionable information, never losing sight of the connection between the testing it performs and the patients it ultimately serves.

Eurofins Viracor is a subsidiary of Eurofins Scientific (EUFI.PA), a global leader in bio-analytical testing, and one of the world leaders in genomic services. For more information, please visit https://www.eurofins.com/ and https://www.viracor-eurofins.com/ .

About Eurofins the global leader in bio-analysis

Eurofins is Testing for Life. Eurofins is a global leader in food, environment, pharmaceutical and cosmetic product testing and in agroscience Contract Research Organisation services. Eurofins is one of the market leaders in certain testing and laboratory services for genomics, discovery pharmacology, forensics, advanced material sciences and in the support of clinical studies, as well as having an emerging global presence in Contract Development and Manufacturing Organisations. The Group also has a rapidly developing presence in highly specialised and molecular clinical diagnostic testing and in-vitro diagnostic products.

With over 50,000 staff across a decentralised and entrepreneurial network of more than 800 laboratories in over 50 countries, Eurofins offers a portfolio of over 200,000 analytical methods to evaluate the safety, identity, composition, authenticity, origin, traceability and purity of a wide range of products, as well as providing innovative clinical diagnostic testing services and in-vitro diagnostic products.

The Group's objective is to provide its customers with high-quality services, innovative solutions and accurate results on time. Eurofins is ideally positioned to support its clients' increasingly stringent quality and safety standards and the increasing demands of regulatory authorities as well as the requirements of healthcare practitioners around the world.

In 2020, Eurofins reacted quickly to meet the global challenge of COVID-19, by creating the capacity for over 10 million patient tests per month to support efforts to identify and suppress the virus. The Group has established widespread PCR testing capabilities and has carried out over 10 million tests in its own laboratories, is supporting the development of a number of vaccines and has established its SAFER@WORK testing, monitoring and consulting programmes to help ensure safer environments during COVID-19.

Eurofins has grown very strongly since its inception and its strategy is to continue expanding its technology portfolio and its geographic reach. Through R&D and acquisitions, the Group draws on the latest developments in the field of biotechnology and analytical chemistry to offer its clients unique analytical solutions.

Shares in Eurofins Scientific are listed on the Euronext Paris Stock Exchange (ISIN FR0014000MR3, Reuters EUFI.PA, Bloomberg ERF FP).

View original content:http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/eurofins-us-transplant-diagnostics-and-cleveland-clinic-sign-a-licensing-agreement-to-expand-access-to-an-innovative-novel-biomarker-for-detecting-rejection-in-kidney-transplant-patients-301224012.html

SOURCE Eurofins Viracor, Inc.

Immunology

Military Metaphors in Health Care Are Harmful — Especially During the… – Truthout

February 6, 2021 medical

As the COVID-19 outbreak continues to sweep through the U.S., many have noticed the coupling of military and health. Theres been an ongoing conversation amongst oncologists for years about the use of war metaphors in cancer research and treatment. In fact, many public health concerns are framed in these terms war on drugs or war on poverty, for example. Its argued the use of these metaphors help make it easier for our society to better understand health. But herein lies a follow-up question: why?

These metaphors are not as unconscious as wed think. Anthropologists have studied the ways immunological functioning is encased in war imagery. Emily Martin powerfully illustrates how our categorical and systemic understanding of immunology represents a police state. Invasions of foreign bodies and immunological cells coming to the defense mimic the kind of warfare we might see on TV. Here, scientific empiricism becomes a mere farce, and it is apparent many concepts are actually influenced by the larger socio-political sphere. Thus, the endless metaphorical wars begin to make more sense.

In a post-colonial world, militaries help secure borders and the interests of the global ruling class. Although always present, after September 11, there was a noted increase in the militarization of U.S. society as we moved to normalize the further militarization of police forces, the creation of new war technology and surveillance structures, justified under the guise of national security. The ongoing normalization of these frameworks has seeped into many facets of society, including health care. This past year, the co-option of military jargon to name health care workers as frontline soldiers thrusted them on a pedestal of heroism and honor. Moreover, National Guard soldiers were also deployed to assist with COVID-19 testing in predominantly working-class communities across several states when infection rates reached new heights in 2020.

Never miss the news and analysis you care about.

While this conflation appears benign, its contradictions are relentless. For one, it functions to obfuscate a dire reality, presenting a facade of order and control. Where language tells us health care workers were frontline soldiers, reality tells us individuals were scapegoated and thrust into battles with little help or support from the ones handing out proverbial medals. Where language tells us vaccine rollouts combatively coined Operation Warp Speed will bring an end to our viral misery, reality also illustrates a patchy distribution scheme and a lack of political will displayed by our state to enact the structural change we actually need to remedy the larger socio-political issues that led to the spread of COVID-19.

The marriage of health and military is also an ironic endeavor. While the National Guard was deployed to help with COVID-19 testing across the nation, it was simultaneously deployed on behalf of the state to support local police forces in quelling Black Lives Matter protests. National Guard members stood protecting government property, intimidating members of the public with large guns in their hands, while local police tear-gassed the protesting crowds. Its important to note many experts, including the American Thoracic Society, denounced the use of tear gas, specifically because of the increased ability for COVID-19 transmission with its use.

Furthermore, consider the countless images and videos circulated this past year of law enforcement gathering and handling crowds sans face masks, functioning in direct contradiction to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines and local state mandates. In addition, the rampant spread of COVID-19 in jails and prisons across the country was also linked to local authorities intransigence on offering prisoners proper protections and the inherent racism of our carceral system. Even budding concerns around safety protocols for those detained at Guantnamo Bay were inadvertently silenced by the state.

We must also consider the militarys hand in the surveillance of communities of color. From policies like Countering Violent Extremism programs, the Patriot Act and the monitoring of undocumented people by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the consequences of these programs remain dire for communities of color across the country. We cannot ignore the harm potentially authorized by placing the responsibility of health care in the same institutions that rely on these dehumanizing structures.

Why are we so apt to allow the same institutions that harm and police our communities the room to conduct work that might serve to heal them? While the situation maintains complexity, there is no denying our compliance with this framework stems from societys inability to imagine a world without violence, even in terms of health and healing. From the staunch hierarchies fostered by these frameworks that warrant health care workers and generationally marginalized members of our society disposable for the supposed greater good, to the larger contradictions present on a global scale, its evident the normalization of this framework confirms our desensitization to the cost of human life.

If we are to begin reimagining a new world, it must include the undoing of these frameworks. At a time where we need deep healing, it becomes evident the marriage of military and health serves more to protect the interests of the state and less of our communities. We must begin critically engaging with how we teach about health and illness and who we are deeming as the authority on these initiatives. The collision of warfare and health blurs the lines between humanity and violence; it dehumanizes and distorts. An institution designed to police and destroy will never be our salve. We must reimagine new systems of health and healing for ourselves and our future generations ones that steer the structural change we need and dont require endless human sacrifice nor offer our oppressors the title of humanitarian.

More:
Military Metaphors in Health Care Are Harmful -- Especially During the... - Truthout