The Anatomical Regions of the Body – dummies

By Maggie Norris, Donna Rae Siegfried

The anatomical regions (shown) compartmentalize the human body. Just like on a map, a region refers to a certain area. The body is divided into two major portions: axial and appendicular.

The axial body runs right down the center (axis) and consists of everything except the limbs, meaning the head, neck, thorax (chest and back), abdomen, and pelvis. The appendicular body consists of appendages, otherwise known as upper and lower extremities (which you call arms and legs).

Heres a list of the axial bodys main regions:

Heres a list of the appendicular bodys main regions:

Erin Odya is an anatomy and physiology teacher at Carmel High School in Carmel, Indiana, one of Indiana's top schools. Maggie Norris is a freelance science writer living in the San Francisco Bay Area.

The rest is here:
The Anatomical Regions of the Body - dummies

The Anatomy of the Clinical Trials: How Researchers are Testing COVID-19 Treatments – Cornell University The Cornell Daily Sun

As COVID-19 cases continue to soar across New York and around the globe, the race to find coronavirus treatments has led to a surge of clinical trials seeking to test the efficacy of different treatments against the virus.

Experts such as Dr. Anthony Fauci M.D. 66 have emphasized the importance of using controlled clinical trials to scientifically prove whether experimental drugs actually work against COVID-19.

But what are clinical trials, and how do they work?

Weill Cornell physician-scientist Dr. Marshall Glesby, who works for the Clinical and Translational Science Center, explained that clinical trials are research studies that test how well new medical interventions or approaches work in people.

An intervention commonly takes the form of an investigational drug, although it could also be a medical procedure or a change to a participants behavior.

According to Glesby, before a clinical trial for a drug treatment can even begin, researchers must thoroughly study a proposed biological mechanism for the drug, acquire promising data from laboratory studies, and advance the study to an animal model to test for preliminary efficacy and any signs of toxicity.

Before youd actually [administer a drug] thats never been given to a person, youd want to have some compelling reasons to do it and some safety data, usually [from] animals, Glesby said.

After these initial stages, the drug still has a long way to go before being tested in humans.

For researchers, a clinical trial begins months in advance of actually testing on patients by first designing a protocol a guidebook that details how the study will be implemented, as well as criteria and assessments to determine participants eligibility, Glesby explained.

Within the design of a protocol, there are many measures incorporated to ensure that the results of the experiment are statistically and scientifically valid.

For example, studies must have control groups to provide researchers with a comparison so they can determine whether a new treatment actually worked. Glesby explained that in clinical trials, controls can be the existing standard of treatment, a different combination of drugs, or a placebo, depending on the medical condition being treated.

Participants are then typically randomly assigned to one treatment group or another, which serves to ensure that each patient has an equal possibility of receiving any treatment under the study.

According to Glesby, trials can also be double-blinded, in which neither the participants nor the researchers have prior knowledge of which treatment the participant received, a precaution designed to eliminate any further bias.

Glesby added that the protocol would then have to be reviewed by the Institutional Review Board, and for drug interventions, the protocol would also have to be approved by the Food and Drug Administration to further protect participants from the risks of clinical trials.

Only after this often months-long approval process can participants finally be recruited and enrolled into the study.

After participants have been recruited and undergone initial screening, participants are regularly assessed throughout the trial to evaluate any possible adverse effects that could result from the drug treatment, Glesby explained.

[At the end of the study] the data are compiled to determine whether the intervention is safe and efficacious, Glesby said.

According to Glesby, the clinical trial process start-to-finish usually take years to complete, as trials gradually expand to include more and more participants. However, in extreme cases, there are ways the process can be accelerated to quickly get clinical trials started something that has become the norm as the severity of the pandemic rapidly mounts.

With what were living through now with COVID-19, undoubtedly there will be expedited paths for drugs to be developed and approved, Glesby said. If there is no available treatment for something, then those [drugs] can be reviewed in a more timely fashion.

Even though the FDA has been expediting trials and waiving many typical requirements, Glesby still expressed awe at how fast the testing of COVID-19 treatments has been implemented.

Whats been amazing to me is that in the context of this COVID-19 pandemic, my colleagues and I have been able to implement studies over a handful of days, as opposed to months, Glesby said. And thats in large part because everyone has ralliedand recognized that this is a real priority because we dont have [any proven treatment] to offer people other than supportive measures.

Although the potential of a number of treatments have been heralded by some President Donald Trump, for example, has repeatedly championed the use of anti-malarial drug chloroquine Glesby noted that anecdotal evidence is not valid in proving the efficacy of certain treatments.

There are a lot of things that are being studied that we dont know if theyre going to be harmful or helpful, and the only way to know is to do a controlled experiment, which is why we do randomized, controlled trials, Glesby said.

As it stands, several different treatments for COVID-19, such as antiviral drugs, like Remdesivir, and immunomodulatory therapy, have rapidly entered clinical trials.

A vaccine developed by Washington-based biotech firm Moderna has already begun human-testing a turnaround time that, according to Fauci, launched in record speed,

But even though these clinical trials are being fast-tracked at an unprecedented speed, Glesby stressed that definitive results are still well over months away.

If something is successful, then maybe its possible it could become available in the 9 to 12 month rangeits hard to know, he said.

Originally posted here:
The Anatomy of the Clinical Trials: How Researchers are Testing COVID-19 Treatments - Cornell University The Cornell Daily Sun

The Anatomy of the $2 Trillion COVID-19 Stimulus Bill – Visual Capitalist

How far can interest rates fall?

Currently, many sovereign rates sit in negative territory, and there is an unprecedented $10 trillion in negative-yielding debt. This new interest rate climate has many observers wondering where the bottom truly lies.

Todays graphic from Paul Schmelzing, visiting scholar at the Bank of England (BOE), shows how global real interest rates have experienced an average annual decline of -0.0196% (-1.96 basis points) throughout the past eight centuries.

Collecting data from across 78% of total advanced economy GDP over the time frame, Schmelzing shows that real rates* have witnessed a negative historical slope spanning back to the 1300s.

Displayed across the graph is a series of personal nominal loans made to sovereign establishments, along with their nominal loan rates. Some from the 14th century, for example, had nominal rates of 35%. By contrast, key nominal loan rates had fallen to 6% by the mid 1800s.

Centennial Averages of Real Long-Term Safe-Asset Rates From 1311-2018

*Real rates take inflation into account, and are calculated as follows: nominal rate inflation = real rate.Safe assets are issued from global financial powers

Starting in 1311, data from the report shows how average real rates moved from 5.1% in the 1300s down to an average of 2% in the 1900s.

The average real rate between 2000-2018 stands at 1.3%.

Why have interest rates been trending downward for so long?

Here are the three prevailing theories as to why theyre dropping:

Since 1970, productivity growth has slowed. A nations productive capacity is determined by a number of factors, including labor force participation and economic output.

If total economic output shrinks, real rates will decline too, theory suggests. Lower productivity growth leads to lower wage growth expectations.

In addition, lower productivity growth means less business investment, therefore a lower demand for capital. This in turn causes the lower interest rates.

Demographics impact interest rates on a number of levels. The aging populationpaired with declining fertility levelsresult in higher savings rates, longer life expectancies, and lower labor force participation rates.

In the U.S., baby boomers are retiring at a pace of 10,000 people per day, and other advanced economies are also seeing comparable growth in retirees. Theory suggests that this creates downward pressure on real interest rates, as the number of people in the workforce declines.

Dampened economic growth can also have a negative impact on future earnings, pushing down the real interest rate in the process. Since 1961, GDP growth among OECD countries has dropped from 4.3% to 3% in 2018.

Larry Summers referred to this sloping trend since the 1970s as secular stagnation during an International Monetary Fund conference in 2013.

Secular stagnation occurs when the economy is faced with persistently lagging economic health. One possible way to address a declining interest rate conundrum, Summers has suggested, is through expansionary government spending.

According to the report, another trend has coincided with falling interest rates: declining bond yields.

Since the 1300s, global nominal bonds yields have dropped from over 14% to around 2%.

The graph illustrates how real interest rates and bond yields appear to slope across a similar trend line. While it may seem remarkable that interest rates keep falling, this phenomenon shows that a broader trend may be occurringacross centuries, asset classes, and fiscal regimes.

In fact, the historical record would imply that we will see ever new record lows in real rates in future business cycles in the 2020s/30s

-Paul Schmelzing

Although this may be fortunate for debt-seekers, it can create challenges for fixed income investorswho may seek alternatives strategies with higher yield potential instead.

Thank you!

Given email address is already subscribed, thank you!

Please provide a valid email address.

Please complete the CAPTCHA.

Oops. Something went wrong. Please try again later.

Follow this link:
The Anatomy of the $2 Trillion COVID-19 Stimulus Bill - Visual Capitalist

RuPauls Drag Race celebrates the charms and excesses of Gays Anatomy – The A.V. Club

TV ReviewsAll of our TV reviews in one convenient place.

Acting challenges have been a staple of Drag Race since early in its run and over time, the shows priorities have become clear. The task is not to execute a strong script, but to take an underwritten, uninspired role and elevate it into something interesting. Drag Race chooses its parody subjects with love and a wink, but its rare for these re-imaginings to connect to their source material beyond the broad strokes. Not so with Gays Anatomy. Each scene draws from memorable installments of Greys Anatomys 15-season run, and because of the heightened, frankly ridiculous nature of the medical drama, the material doesnt need much of a twist to go from primetime to parody. Fans of Greys Anatomy will appreciate the specificity and shout-outs and having more concrete resolutions to draw from makes for a more satisfying script. Throw in arguably the deepest bench Drag Race has ever had for an acting challenge11 strong queensand its a match made in TV parody heaven.

It may not be the laugh riot that season 11s Church of Britney sketch was, but Gays Anatomy doesnt step a toe out of line, and oddly enough, that consistency winds up as the biggest mark against the episode. The top 11 queens all do a good job. There are a few standouts but no lowlights, and that makes for frustrating judging. Most of the critiques are vague and as in most acting challenges, the queens stuck with the smallest roles find themselves at the bottom, while those given the juiciest parts are at the top. When the bottom two feels more determined by the whims of casting than the queens performances, its hard to engage with the show. If the season 12 queens continue to deliver at this level, the judges will need to step up their game.

The episode begins as always with the queens post-elimination debrief. Several of the seasons threads are center stage. Brita has joined the grand tradition of established, popular queens struggling on Drag Race. Nicky is still insecure, despite her positive critiques, and that insecurity will come back to bite her if shes not careful. Aiden remains defensive, closed off to Jaidas clear-eyed advice. All three queens are falling into the same trap: Theyre making excuses when they should be reassessing their work and seeing what more they have to give.

G/O Media may get a commission

Its a new day in the workroom, and it would appear the doctor is in. After a RuMail filled with medical puns, Ru enters the workroom in a lab coat to announce the next maxi challenge. No mini challenge this episode. The queens will be over-acting in Gays Anatomy, a send-up of the long-running medical soap. Its an excellent choice and one of the few shows that caters to as big a cast as this one. Ru summons the Pit Crew to help randomize who will get to cast the parts, and much silliness ensues. Keeping with the medical theme, Gigi and Nicky wind up with pink pills, instead of silver placebos, giving them the power to assign the roles. The queens head over to the couch and read through the script, chiming in with their preferred characters before Gigi and Nicky retire to finalize their casting. Widow and Aiden are a bit salty about their partsneither got their desired rolebut the queens mostly seem happy with Nicky and Gigis choices.

Jaida is concerned heading into rehearsal, and after the palpable tension between Widow and Nicky and Aidens not-great Mae West impression, she may be right to worry. Ru comes back for a walk-through and surprisingly, focuses less on stirring the pot and more on lighting a fire under Brita, Aiden, and a couple others. The episode is surprisingly streamlined so far; most of the queens arent getting much screen time. Showing so little rehearsal is either a good sign or a bad one. Either filming is about to go swimmingly, and the editors dont want to give away the jokes, or the few queens weve spent time with are about to crash and burn.

When the queens arrive on set, Carson is there to greet them. Hell be directing their scenes, pushing them to go bigger as needed, or in Jaidas case, to make a rare Drag Race call for subtlety. There are a few hiccups here and there, but compared to previous acting challenges, the season 12 queens are in fine form. Sherry and Widow are clear standouts and will likely vie for the win, and both Nicky and Brita are in trouble. Nicky looks great as a drag baby, but her nerves are evident every time she gets direction from Carson. As for Brita, her delivery is solid when she needs to go broad, but she struggles when Carson asks her to pair that tone with a few more clinical line readings.

The next day, the workroom is positively buzzing with anticipation as the queens get ready for the runway. Jaida is a little nervous, but most of the queens are excited and confident. Things take a quick turn when the topic of mothers comes up. Its clearly a difficult conversation for some of the queens. Jackie opens up about her strained relationship with her mom, who doesnt know she does drag. After a little prompting, Widow shares that her mother died when she was a teen. She never had a chance to come out to her mom, and the two fought during their last interaction. This weighs heavily on her, and several of the queens come over to console her. Season 12 has had some thoughtful and emotional moments in the workroom, but this is the most fraught yet. Eventually Jaida breaks the tension, and the queens hurry to finish their prep.

Its time for the runway. Ru walks out in a fabulous green gown and welcomes guest judge Normani. Category is: Planet of the Capes. Jaida is first, with a striking pink look featuring dramatic, tall shoulders. Brita has a Little Red Riding Hood-inspired ensemble thats cute, but could use a more substantive cape to better fit the brief. Jackie goes slinky as a belly dancer, complete with headpiece and golden cape. Jans look is solid, a black and silver take on a skydiver, but her cape could use more volume, especially to better invoke a parachute. Gigis look is much more tailored, a Troop Beverly Hills Wilderness Girls-inspired outfit, while Sherry goes full Elvis and Heidi sports a black body suit and multicolored cape. Crystals yellow and purple look is strong, with the volume one expects in a cape category, and Aiden goes spooky with a black Silence Of The Lambs-inspired cape and a moth across her mouth. In contrast, Widows watermelon look is underwhelming, at least until she goes full Janet Jackson and pops off her bra cups to reveal pasties. Last out is Nicky, who looks great in her Joan of Arc armor, but misses the brief a bit by casting aside her massive white cloak early in her walk.

The moment has arrived. Gays Anatomy is screened in its entirety, and as mentioned above, its really fun. There are a couple strange choiceswhy put the Christina stand-in in the Denny storyline, instead of Izzy?but most of the references are on point, from the ghost sex to the bomb to the two patients skewered on a pole. There arent any weak links, and Ru agrees. She compliments the entire cast, singling out Jan, Widow, Jackie, Sherry, Gigi, and Aiden out as the top queens before giving the win to Sherry. That leaves Jaida, Brita, Heidi, Crystal, and Nicky in the bottom.

The judges make sure to specify that all of the queens did well in the challenge. What has put these five in danger of elimination is a sense that they could have made more of their smaller rolesBrita is the only queen in danger whose character has more than two scenes. In theory to help with the decision, and in actuality to stir up drama, Ru asks the queens who they think should be eliminated. Everyone except Jaida says Nicky. Even Nicky says Nicky. Jaida goes with Heidi, based purely on her runway, and is seconded by Nicky, when Ru pushes her to choose someone besides herself. From here on out, the elimination is a foregone conclusion. Nicky has given up, and its sad to see.

After deliberations, Ru concurs with the queens. Heidi and Nicky will Lip-sync For Their Lives to Heart To Break by Kim Petras. Both queens serve drama and face, but Heidi takes command of the stage, forcing Nicky to make way. Shes fighting harder; she wants it more. Thats all Ru needs to see. Heidi is safe, and Nicky is eliminated. Nicky Doll has been a strong competitor, and in a different season, she would have gone much further. Even in this season she would have gone further had the more language-based challenges come later in the season. Ultimately what held her back was not her difficulty with English, but her lack of confidence in herself, her fear of tripping over her tongue. Drag Race demands a lot, but more than anything, it requires supreme self-confidence. Hopefully Nicky will be back with buckets to spare for her eventual All Stars return, and fans will get to see what she can really do. Weve only gotten a glimpse in season 12.

Continue reading here:
RuPauls Drag Race celebrates the charms and excesses of Gays Anatomy - The A.V. Club

Former ‘Grey’s Anatomy’ Star Jessica Capshaw Was Turned Down For Two Roles Before Landing the Part of Arizona Robbins – Showbiz Cheat Sheet

Fans of Greys Anatomy were saddened to learn that Jessica Capshaw, who portrayed pediatric surgeon Dr. Arizona Robbins, was being written out of the show at the conclusion of Season 14. Few may realize that while Capshaw nailed the role of Dr. Robbins, she had previously auditioned for two parts on the show but was passed over.

Shortly after welcoming her first child in 2007 with husband Christopher Gavigan, Capshaw learned of an available role on the popular medical drama.

I auditioned for this show two weeks after I had my son Luke, and I was not interested in auditioning for anything because I was interested in being a mother, Capshaw recalled, according to TV Guide. But my agent called me and said, I wouldnt call you for any other reason other than Greys Anatomy, because I know thats your favorite show.'

The actress tried out for the part of Nurse Rose, the romantic interest of none other than Dr. Derek McDreamy Shepherd (portrayed by Patrick Dempsey) when he was on the outs with longtime love Dr. Meredith Grey. Capshaw had hoped she had an advantage due to previously working with Demspey.

So two weeks after I had the baby, I auditioned for Nurse Rose. I knew Patrick because I had worked with him two years prior, so he and I got along real well, Capshaw shared. But they picked the other girl and I was like, Man!'

Actress Lauren Stamile was given the part of Nurse Rose, though the characters relationship with Derek was short-lived.

In 2008, Capshaw tried putting her acting skills to the test again when she auditioned for the role of Sadie Harris, a freewheeling intern and former college friend of Meredith. Yet again she wasnt chosen for the part.

I went in for a part that hadnt been named yet, but she was this sexually promiscuous, adventurous part, and I didnt get the role again, Capshaw remembered. That was Melissa Georges part, Sadie.

Capshaw began to get a bit frustrated with producers raving about her performance yet not signing her up for the show. They kept saying they really love me and I was like, If they really love me, I would have a part in the show,' the former Greys star revealed, adding that her persistence did the trick. A month later, I got a three-episode offer to play Arizona Robbins.

Leaving the hit ABC series in 2018 after nine years on the show, Capshaw was began pursuing other projects including a role in the Netflix film Holidate with Kristen Chenoweth and Emma Roberts. Even though the mom of four was continuing a hectic schedule, she made time to give a shout out to her former gig when Greys Anatomy hit a major milestone.

Ok, sooootonight is a BIG night for@greysabc, Capshaw wrote on Instagram in February 2019. The airing of tonights episode makes it the longest running prime time medical drama EVER.

Capshaw even donned her characters lab coat to celebrate the occasion, posting a selfie along with her well-wishes. Soooo in honor of this exceptional distinctionI pulled out Dr. Arizona Robbins trusty lab coat, dusted it off, brought it out into the sunshine and I took it for a spin, she wrote, while giving props to her former colleagues. @shondarhimes and @beersbetsy THANK YOU for bringing this show to our television screens (and computers and phones).

The Greys alum expressed her gratitude for being a part of such a successful series. This show is a total dreamboat and I am so fortunate to have taken a cruise on itgrateful times a millionxoxo Congratulations!!! she wrote.

Fans are hoping that Dr. Robbins makes an appearance back at Grey Sloan Memorial before the series ends for good!

Read this article:
Former 'Grey's Anatomy' Star Jessica Capshaw Was Turned Down For Two Roles Before Landing the Part of Arizona Robbins - Showbiz Cheat Sheet

Carolina Sandoval shows off her entire anatomy in a yellow swimsuit – Explica

The host of Suelta La Sopa appears in a photograph enjoying the sand and the sun

Carolina Sandoval, The famous host of Suelta La Sopa appeared on Instagram wearing a yellow swimsuit. In the image it shows all its sexy anatomy while enjoying the sun, sand and sea.

The stamp corresponds to a photograph of the memory. And it is that Sandoval, star of Telemundo, like many other famous ones, enjoys the beach but in these days of pandemic with the coronavirus it returns to the sea through memory.

View this post on Instagram

Aha, by the way, this was the bathing suit I was wearing that can also be used as a bodysuit with pants #ideas #styleoftheday by me #lareinadelafaja #trabajodesdecasa #throwbacktuesday

A post shared by Carolina Sandoval (@venenosandoval) on Mar 31, 2020 at 3:20 pm PDT

Along with the photograph, the driver highlights a fact of fashion with this swimsuit: Aha by the way this was the swimsuit @ I was wearing that can also be used as a bodysuit with pants #ideas #styleoftheday by me #lareinadelafaja #trabajodesdecasa #throwbacktuesday, wrote Sandoval .

Adamari Lpez breaks down in tears with Toni CostaKimberly Dos Ramos, the famous Maribel in Rub, forgot the bra on InstagramAracely Armbula shows off her entire anatomy with a hot selfie

.

Originally posted here:
Carolina Sandoval shows off her entire anatomy in a yellow swimsuit - Explica

Greys Anatomy is ending its season early due to coronavirusheres when to watch – Yahoo Lifestyle

This post is being continually updated as more cancelations and postponements are announced.

As we all do our part to quell the spread of coronavirus (COVID-19) by social distancing, government officials, community leaders, and event organizers are making tough decisions with the hope of keeping people safe. Coachella, Stagecoach, and Glastonbury have all been postponed or canceled outright. Sports seasons are suspended. The Summer Olympics in Tokyo are postponed until 2021. And Hollywood is being affected in loads of different ways. Things are changing every day, and the latest news is that Greys Anatomy will cut its current season short.

After previously announcing that it had postponed production, Greys Anatomy has now decided to permanently cease filming episodes for Season 16. According to Deadline, the medical drama had already wrapped production on episode 21 of the 25-episode season. The now-season finale, formerly episode 21, will air on April 9th. Its titled Put on a Happy Face.

The coronavirus has sent ripple effects through the entire entertainment industry and beyond. Large concerts from stars like Miley Cyrus and Madonna have been canceled, and Clare Crawleys season of The Bachelorette is postponed. Even the Met Gala has had to change its plans. Find out more about the events, concerts, and production affected by the coronavirus below.

Well continue to update as more announcements about coronavirus-related cancelations and postponements come out.

As information about the coronavirus pandemic rapidly changes, HelloGiggles is committed to providing accurate and helpful coverage to our readers. As such, some of the information in this story may have changed after publication. For the latest on COVID-19, we encourage you to use online resources from CDC, WHO, and local public health departments, and visit our coronavirus hub.

Read this article:
Greys Anatomy is ending its season early due to coronavirusheres when to watch - Yahoo Lifestyle

Bill Of The Month: Pricey Genetic Test For Essential Thrombocythemia : Shots – Health News – NPR

Michelle Kuppersmith's doctor recommended a bone marrow biopsy after suspecting she had a rare blood disorder. Though the biopsy was done by an in-network provider at an in-network hospital, Kuppersmith learned she was on the hook for $2,400 for out-of-network genetic profiling. Shelby Knowles for KHN hide caption

Michelle Kuppersmith's doctor recommended a bone marrow biopsy after suspecting she had a rare blood disorder. Though the biopsy was done by an in-network provider at an in-network hospital, Kuppersmith learned she was on the hook for $2,400 for out-of-network genetic profiling.

Michelle Kuppersmith feels great, works full time and exercises three to four times a week. So she was surprised when a routine blood test found that her body was making too many platelets, which help control bleeding.

Kuppersmith's doctor suspected the 32-year-old Manhattanite had a rare blood disorder called essential thrombocythemia, which can lead to blood clots, strokes and, in rare cases, leukemia.

Her doctor suggested a bone marrow biopsy, in which a large needle is used to suck out a sample of the spongy tissue at the center of the patient's hip bone.

Doctors examine the bone marrow under a microscope and analyze the DNA. The procedure allows doctors to judge a patient's prognosis and select treatment, if needed. Kuppersmith had heard the procedure can be intensely painful, so she put it off for months.

The biopsy performed by a provider in her insurance network, at a hospital in her network lasted only a few minutes, and Kuppersmith received relatively good news.

While a genetic analysis of her bone marrow confirmed her doctor's suspicions, it showed that the only treatment she needs, for now, is a daily, low-dose aspirin. She will check in with her doctor every three to four months to make sure the disease isn't getting worse.

All in all, Kuppersmith felt relieved.

Then she got a notice saying her insurer refused to pay for the genetic analysis, leaving her responsible for a $2,400 payment.

The patient: New York resident Michelle Kuppersmith, 32, who is insured by Maryland-based CareFirst Blue Cross Blue Shield. She works as director of special projects at a Washington-based watchdog group. Because she was treated in New York, Empire Blue Cross Blue Shield which covers that region handled part of her claim.

Total amount owed: $2,400 for out-of-network genetic profiling

The providers: Kuppersmith had her bone marrow removed at the Mount Sinai Ruttenberg Treatment Center in New York City, which sent her biopsy sample to a California lab, Genoptix, for testing.

Medical services: Bone marrow biopsy and molecular profiling, which involves looking for genetic mutations

What gives: The field of molecular diagnostics, which includes a variety of gene-based testing, is undergoing explosive growth, said Gillian Hooker, president of the National Society of Genetic Counselors and vice president of clinical development for Concert Genetics, a health IT company in Nashville, Tennessee.

A report from Concert Genetics, a company that helps clients manage genetic testing, found there are more than 140,000 molecular diagnostic products on the market, with 10 to 15 added each day.

The field is growing so quickly that even doctors are struggling to develop a common vocabulary, Hooker said.

Kuppersmith underwent a type of testing known as molecular profiling, which looks for DNA biomarkers to predict whether patients will benefit from new, targeted therapies. These mutations aren't inherited; they develop over the course of a patient's life, Hooker said.

Medicare spending on molecular diagnostics more than doubled from 2016 to 2018, increasing from $493 million to $1.1 billion, according to Laboratory Economics, a lab industry newsletter.

Charges range from hundreds to thousands of dollars, depending on how many genes are involved and which billing codes insurers use, Hooker said.

Based on Medicare data, at least 1,500 independent labs perform molecular testing, along with more than 500 hospital-based labs, said Jondavid Klipp, the newsletter's publisher.

In a fast-evolving field with lots of money at stake, tests that a doctor or lab may regard as state-of-the-art an insurer might view as experimental.

Worse still, many of the commercial labs that perform the novel tests are out-of-network, as was Genoptix.

Stephanie Bywater, chief compliance officer at NeoGenomics Laboratories, which owns Genoptix, said that insurance policies governing approval have not kept up with the rapid pace of scientific advances. Kuppersmith's doctor ordered a test that has been available since 2014 and was updated in 2017, Bywater said.

Although experts agree that molecular diagnostics is an essential part of care for patients like Kuppersmith, doctors and insurance companies may not agree on which specific test is best, said Dr. Gwen Nichols, chief medical officer of the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society.

Tests "can be performed a number of different ways by a number of different laboratories who charge different amounts," Nichols said.

Insurance plans are much more likely to refuse to pay for molecular diagnostics than other lab tests. Laboratory Economics found Medicare contractors denied almost half of all molecular diagnostics claims over the past five years, compared with 5-10% of routine lab tests.

With so many insurance plans, so many new tests and so many new companies, it is difficult for a doctor to know which labs are in a patient's network and which specific tests are covered, Nichols said.

"Different providers have contracts with different diagnostic companies," which can affect a patient's out-of-pocket costs, Nichols said. "It is incredibly complex and really difficult to determine the best, least expensive path."

Kuppersmith said she has always been careful to check that her doctors accept her insurance. She made sure Mount Sinai was in her insurance network, too. But it never occurred to her that the biopsy would be sent to an outside lab or that it would undergo genetic analysis.

She added: "The looming threat of a $2,400 bill has caused me, in many ways, more anxiety than the illness ever has."

The resolution: Despite making dozens of phone calls, Kuppersmith got nothing but confusing and contradictory answers when she tried to sort out the unexpected charge.

An agent for her insurer told her that her doctor hadn't gotten preauthorization for the testing. But in an email to Kuppersmith, a Genoptix employee told her the insurance company had denied the claim because molecular profiling was viewed as experimental.

A spokesperson for New York-based Empire Blue Cross Blue Shield, which handled part of Kuppersmith's claim, said her health plan "covers medically necessary genetic testing."

New York, one of 28 states with laws against surprise billing, requires hospitals to inform patients in writing if their care may include out-of-network providers, said attorney Elisabeth Benjamin, vice president of health initiatives at the Community Service Society, which provides free help with insurance problems.

A spokesperson for Mount Sinai said the hospital complies with that law, noting that Kuppersmith was given such a document in 2018 nearly one year before her bone marrow biopsy and signed it.

Benjamin said that's not OK, explaining: "I think a one-year-old, vague form like the one she signed would not comply with the state law and certainly not the spirit of it."

Instead of sending Kuppersmith a bill, Genoptix offered to help her appeal the denied coverage to CareFirst. At first, Genoptix asked Kuppersmith to designate the company as her personal health care representative. She was uncomfortable signing over what sounded like sweeping legal rights to strangers. Instead, she wrote an email granting the company permission to negotiate on her behalf. It was sufficient.

A few days after being contacted by KHN, Kuppersmith's insurer said it would pay Genoptix at the in-network rate, covering $1,200 of the $2,400 charge. Genoptix said it has no plans to bill Kuppersmith for the other half of the charge.

The takeaway: Kuppersmith is relieved her insurer changed its mind about her bill. But, she said: "I'm a relatively young, savvy person with a college degree. There are a lot of people who don't have the time or wherewithal to do this kind of fighting."

Patients should ask their health care providers if any outside contractors will be involved in their care, including pathologists, anesthesiologists, clinical labs or radiologists, experts said. And check if those involved are in-network.

"Try your best to ask in advance," said Jack Hoadley, a research professor emeritus at Georgetown University. "Ask, 'Do I have a choice about where [a blood or tissue sample] is sent?'"

Ask, too, if the sample will undergo molecular diagnostics. Since the testing is still relatively new and expensive most insurers require patients to obtain "prior authorization," or special permission, said Dr. Debra Regier, a medical geneticist at Children's National Hospital in Washington and an associate with NORD, the National Organization of Rare Diseases. Getting this permission in advance can prevent many headaches.

Finally, be wary of signing blanket consent forms telling you that some components of your care may be out-of-network. Tell your provider that you want to be informed on a case-by-case basis when an out-of-network provider is involved and to consent to their participation.

Bill of the Month is a crowdsourced investigation by Kaiser Health News and NPR that dissects and explains medical bills. Do you have a perplexing medical bill you want to share with us? Tell us about it here.

Read the rest here:
Bill Of The Month: Pricey Genetic Test For Essential Thrombocythemia : Shots - Health News - NPR

Science to the rescue? How modern genetics could help save the world from coronavirus – Alliance for Science – Alliance for Science

Humanity really has only two options to confront the coronavirus pandemic currently sweeping the planet. The first is to mount a rolling program of lockdowns and other drastic social distancing strategies to restrain the pace of the virus epidemic, with a view to gradually building up natural herd immunity among the human population.

That strategy, especially if combined with successful anti-viral drug treatments and a massively upscaled testing effort, should give some relief. But it would come at the likely cost of many millions of deaths and incalculable worldwide economic damage, hitting especially hard in countries with little resilience and limited healthcare infrastructure.

The second approach is to develop a vaccine, and to do so as rapidly as possible. A fully effective vaccine would not just tame COVID-19 but possibly eradicate it altogether as the world successfully did with smallpox and is on the verge of doing with polio (both also viral diseases).

These two approaches will most likely be concurrent: the first will buy us time, while the second provides an exit strategy from a constant pattern of repeating lockdowns and travel restrictions that could otherwise go on for years.

With the current total of confirmed cases rapidly closing in on one million worldwide, the true picture is most likely that many tens of millions of people have already caught COVID-19. Humanitys most desperate challenge, therefore, is to find an effective vaccine.

Fortunately, science is already stepping up. History was made on March 16, when the first clinical trial volunteer was injected with an investigational vaccine for coronavirus at the Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute in Seattle.

The volunteer was mother-of-two Jennifer Haller, a 43-year-old Seattle resident who told National Public Radio that she wanted to do something because theres so many Americans that dont have the same privileges that Ive been given.

The vaccination was produced by Moderna, with the first batch being delivered to the US National Institutes of Health a remarkable 42 days after the viral genome was first sequenced in China.

This Phase 1 trial does not yet test the efficacy of the vaccine against COVID-19. Carried out over six weeks among a group of 45 healthy adult volunteers aged between 18 and 55, it will test the basic safety of the proposed vaccine and its ability to stimulate an immune response in the human body.

Although the Phase 1 trial will continue with the Seattle-area recruits being monitored for a whole year, the urgency of the global situation means that the collaborators will likely rush to Phase 2 at the same time, testing the ability of the vaccine to prevent infection by the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 that causes COVID-19.

The Moderna vaccine trial is a world first not just for the particular disease target but because it is one of a whole new potential class of vaccines that employ messenger RNA (mRNA) to program human cells to produce the viral proteins that trigger an immune response, rather than injecting proteins or viral particles directly, as have most previous vaccines.

This natural role of mRNA is why Modernas approach is so quick. Normal vaccines have to be produced from actual viruses, which are grown within chicken eggs and then refined into sufficient quantities to be directly injected once weakened or killed into the human body. This takes months, at a minimum, and is difficult to scale quickly.

For the mRNA approach, all that was needed was the correct viral genetic sequence, which in the case of SARS-CoV-2 encodes for the spike proteins that enable the virus to gain entry into human respiratory cells. This genetic sequence for the viral protein can then be encoded into mRNA synthetically generated in a lab a rapid process that is easy to scale.

Thats the good news. The bad news is that the mRNA approach, while undoubtedly quick and versatile, is so new that it has yet to be fully proven in any vaccine in either humans or animals. Some tests have shown efficacy against rabies, for example, but others have shown little lasting immune response.

The mRNA approach is therefore a moon-shot rather than a marathon. Even so, Moderna is optimistic enough to already be making plans to produce millions of doses intended for health workers initially as early as this fall.

Other companies and partnerships are also racing to develop a vaccine using the same mRNA approach. One of these, the German firm CureVac, generated so much interest that President Trump reportedly tried to acquire it in order to ensure any potential vaccine would be available to Americans first.

Like Moderna, CureVacs efforts are supported financially by CEPI the international Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, which has raised over $700 million from governments around the world and philanthropic foundations like the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (which also supports the Cornell Alliance for Science) and Wellcome.

While Moderna has been able to restart vaccine projects originally intended for MERS and SARS, CureVac has already achieved some success with an mRNA vaccine against rabies virus in humans. In a Phase 1 trial doses as low as a millionth of a gram of mRNA vaccine were sufficient to fully protect humans against rabies, it reported in January.

Such small doses offer major promise for immunizing huge numbers of people if CureVac is able to achieve the same success with SARS-CoV-2 as it has with rabies and move rapidly into Phase 2 trials to further demonstrate real efficacy.

Also in Germany, BioNTech and Pfizer are racing to shift their mRNA vaccine work from influenza to SARS-CoV-2, and are aiming to start clinical trials as soon as April. As part of a broader collaboration, BioNTech has already demonstrated that an mRNA vaccine protected mice and non-human primates against Zika virus, raising hopes for similar effectiveness against COVID-19.

RNAs double-stranded cousin, DNA, is also being deployed in a novel but equally promising vaccine system against the coronavirus. The approach is related, but rather than injecting mRNA directly into cells so that it can produce viral proteins, DNA is inserted, which in turn produces mRNA inside cells to do the same job.

This DNA is not intended to integrate into the genome of the target cell in humans indeed if this happens, damaging mutations might occur. Instead, DNA is formed into circular plasmids which operate separately to the integral genetic material inside a cells nucleus. Like genomic DNA however, these plasmids are read and transcribed via mRNA into viral proteins which can then prime the bodys immune system against a later invasion by the real virus.

The US-based Inovio Pharmaceuticals announced on 12 March that it had received a grant of $5 million from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to accelerate the testing of a DNA vaccine for COVID-19, with a view to starting Phase 1 clinical trials in April.

Inovio has another advantage: its DNA vaccine INO-4700 was the only vaccine candidate against MERS to progress to Phase 2 trials demonstrating, at least initially, the potential feasibility of the DNA approach. The US Department of Defense with an eye to protecting its military personnel all over the world against COVID-19 has pumped another $11.9 million into INO-4800. The company has also demonstrated protection in early trials using its DNA vaccine against Chikungunya, Zika and influenza viruses.

CEPI is not putting all its eggs in one basket, however. As well as DNA and RNA systems, another promising approach for a COVID-19 vaccine is to use a genetically engineered measles vaccine a strategy supported by a $5 million CEPI grant split between collaborating institutions Themis in Vienna, Institut Pasteur in France and the University of Pittsburghs Center for Vaccine Research.

This takes the live attenuated measles virus vaccine a vaccine with a long history of safe use, having been used to immunize billions of children over the last 40 years and uses reverse genetics technology to insert new genes coding for proteins expressed by other viruses. These then induce an immune response against the new virus whose genetic material has been introduced.

The research team aims to have a COVID-19 candidate vaccine ready for animal testing as soon as April, with wider tests in human volunteers by the end of the year.

Measles virus is not the only candidate for the vector approach. Chinese scientists have reported that they are about to proceed to Phase I human trials with a vaccine candidate starting at the pandemics epicenter in Wuhan. The scientists have genetically engineered a replication-defective adenovirus type 5 (Ad5) as a vector to express the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, with the resulting vaccine candidate named Ad5-nCoV.

This is perhaps the easiest approach, as all that has to happen is for the engineered harmless adenovirus to infect patients in order to trigger the production of antibodies which should be effective against invading novel coronavirus too. The Chinese company CanSion Biologics has successfully demonstrated this approach with another fully completed vaccine against Ebola, Ad5-EBOV, which is already on the market in China.

A more tried-and-tested approach already widely used to produce flu vaccines is to grow viral proteins directly: these are then injected as a vaccine into human patients so that the immune system is already primed against the real pathogen when it attempts to infect the body. Usually chicken eggs are used, but to speed things up insect cell lines are becoming the preferred option for the coronavirus pandemic.

Here genetics is again an important component: the company Novavax uses a baculovirus vector to genetically engineer an insect cell line originally isolated decades ago from the ovaries of the fall armyworm. The baculovirus transports genes into the insect cells, which program them to manufacture viral proteins that are correctly folded and biologically active, more reliably enabling the human immune system to produce antibodies against them.

According to Novavax, its resulting recombinant protein nanoparticles then self-assemble into a structure that approximates the actual virus, helping enhance the immune response. It claims to have already tested this system in RSV virus, a recalcitrant pathogen that has so far resisted attempts at a vaccine. This approach looks promising enough that CEPI has pumped $4 million in so far with a view to launching Phase I trials by late spring 2020.

In a similar way, the company Sanofi is taking a snippet of genetic code from SARS-CoV-2 and splicing it also via baculovirus into insect cell lines. Its advantage, made in a pitch to the US government that resulted in a big cash injection, is that it already has an FDA-approved facility that could make 600 million doses a year of any resulting vaccine.

Plants can also be engineered to produce viral proteins. The company Medicago is working with genetically modified tobacco plants with this aim in mind. To speed things up, instead of adding new genes to the nucleus of cells and regenerating entire plants from these single cells (as happens with conventional plant genetic engineering), it uses the Agrobacterium vector in a vacuum to transfer recombinant DNA directly into the nucleus of fully-grown leaf cells. This DNA enables the production of the desired viral proteins without ever being integrated into the genome, enabling proteins to be harvested from transformed leaves within a matter of days.

Using this system, Medicago claims to have produced a virus-like particle of the coronavirus within just 20 daysof the SARS-CoV-2 genetic sequence becoming available. The government of Canada quickly put millions of dollars behind the effort as a result.

Astonishingly, given that the coronavirus pandemic is now threatening to devastate societies and economies around the planet on a scale second only to a world war, this effort is still short of cash. CEPI has issued an urgent call for funding, seeking to raise $2 billion: it says just $375 billion by the end of March would enable four-to-six vaccine candidates to move rapidly towards phase 2/3 trials.

Scientists are also hoping desperately that SARS-CoV-2 does not rapidly mutate as influenza viruses tend to do, which would likely reduce the effectiveness of any single vaccine. So far, according to researchers studying 1,000 samples of the virus from around the world, this seems not to be the case.

This means that the race to find a vaccine, and to do so in sufficient time to salvage the situation before the world tips into an economic depression and millions of people die, has a decent chance of success and that any successful vaccine would likely confer lasting immunity.

Meanwhile, all of humanity is waiting. And if the scientists do succeed in this urgent challenge, it will very likely be due to modern genetics. Though genetic engineering was once a dirty word, it now could literally help save the world.

View post:
Science to the rescue? How modern genetics could help save the world from coronavirus - Alliance for Science - Alliance for Science