Physiology

Governor Abbott Announces $1.7 Million TWC Job Training Grant To Workforce Solutions Cameron – Office of the Texas Governor

September 28, 2022 | Austin, Texas | Press Release

Governor Greg Abbott today announced a $1.7 million Skills Development Fund grant from the Texas Workforce Commission (TWC) to Workforce Solutions Cameron, in partnership with DHR Health. The job training grant will benefit more than 5,000 new and current health care workers in theWorkforce Solutions Cameron area by providing skills training, ensuring retention, and promoting career advancement opportunities for nurses.

"Texas' medical workforce is essential to the health and well-being of communities across our state," said Governor Abbott. "The State of Texas continues creating opportunities to bolster our health care workforce and support the dedicated nurses and medical professionals who provide crucial patient care. I thank the Texas Workforce Commission for ensuring health care workers at DHR Health in Cameron County have the training and tools needed to advance in their careers and help keep their fellow Texans healthy."

This grant allows DHR Health the opportunity to upskill its existing workforce and support the Nurse Career Ladder pathway, said TWC Chairman Bryan Daniel. Texas Skills Development Fund Grant Program is an important tool hospitals have to retain and advance the careers of medical professionals in their local communities.

The grant will provide technical training in high-demand skills for occupations in medical and health services. Trainings will include anatomy and physiology courses, case management skills, stroke and tomography education, radiology, pediatric, psychiatric, and trauma nursing skills.

TWC's Commissioner Representing Labor Julian Alvarez presented the grant at a ceremony today at DHR Health.

The Skills Development Fund grant program has provided training opportunities in partnership with more than 4,700 employers to upgrade or support the creation of more than 410,000 jobs throughout Texas since the programs inception in 1996.

See the article here:
Governor Abbott Announces $1.7 Million TWC Job Training Grant To Workforce Solutions Cameron - Office of the Texas Governor

Physiology

Post-Acute Effect of SARS-CoV-2 Infection on the Cardiac Autonomic Fun | IJGM – Dove Medical Press

Introduction

SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) infection was first reported in China in late December 2019. It has quickly escalated to become a global pandemic causing a catastrophic effect on the world. Cases are increasing all around the world, and the number of people infected reached hundreds of millions, with about 6 million deaths in the first quarter of 2022 worldwide.1,2

Recently, many reports showed a long-term effect of COVID infection that could extend beyond the active disease and the respiratory system. Disturbance in sleep, concentration impairment, fatigue, and palpitations are part of the long-lasting effect of COVID-19 (also known as LONG COVID).3 Post-COVID-19 syndrome is a group of symptoms that affect various body systems after being acutely infected by COVID-19. The symptoms can last longer than 12 weeks after COVID-19 infection, which cannot otherwise be explained alternatively.4 The development of post-COVID-19 syndrome is higher following severe acute illness, but it may develop after mild and moderate acute COVID-19.5,6

A wide spectrum of body dysfunctions has been linked to the chronic effect of COVID-19 infection, including disturbed lung function, endothelitis, thromboembolism, kidney failure, gastrointestinal impairment, mood changes, cognitive disturbances, and hyperglycemia without diabetes mellitus.7 Cardiovascular complication such as myocardial ischemia, infarction, myocarditis, and cardiac arrhythmias are noticeable sequelae of COVID-19 infection, with different suggested pathophysiological mechanisms involving direct damage to the circulatory system due to binding of viruses to angiotensin-converting-enzyme 2 receptors (ACE2), and systemic inflammation.8 However, the consequence of COVID-19 infection on the autonomic regulation of the heart remains unclear.

The autonomic nervous system (ANS) plays a key role in the regulation of the cardiac rhythm.9 Heart rate variability (HRV), cardiovascular autonomic reflex test (CART), andbaroreceptor sensitivity (BRS) are non-invasive assessment tools for the autonomic nervous system functions.10,11 Specifically, HRV aids in the evaluation of the sympathetic and parasympathetic functions on the cardiovascular system. Therefore, reflecting dysautonomia and sympathovagal balance.12

Dysautonomia is commonly recognized as a failure in the functions of the autonomic nervous system that can include various symptoms and signs such as fatigue, postural hypotension, changes in blood pressure, arrhythmias, and bladder and bowel function impairment.13 Dysautonomia following viral infections is not uncommon; many viral infections could cause dysautonomia including HIV, mumps, EBV, HBV as well as Coxsackie B virus.14 Recent reports link dysautonomia with COVID-19 infection.15 Involvement of the nervous system occurs probably by direct viral invasion, synaptic spread, or through the blood. Additionally, immunological damage, vascular damage, and hypoxia due to COVID-19 pneumonia, are proposed pathogenic mechanisms for COVID-19 neurological manifestations.16

Orthostatic hypotension (OH) and postural tachycardia syndrome (POTS) have been reported in the post-acute phase of COVID-19 infection.17 Another recent questionnaire-based cross-sectional study found that post-COVID autonomic disturbances are mostly manifested as orthostatic hypotension, gastrointestinal disturbances, and secretomotor abnormalities.18 Additionally, Adler et al reported a reduction in the HRV among post-COVID patients 3 and 6 months after recovery, which may increase the cardiovascular risk among post-COVID survivors.19 In contrast, parasympathetic overactivity with increased HRV was found after 12 weeks from the acute COVID-19 infection.20 Cardiovascular dysautonomia was also detected in about 15% of recently recovered COVID-19 patients (within 3045 days), with a significantly lower HRV compared to healthy controls.21 Autonomic nervous system dysfunction has also been revealed during the early phase of SARS-CoV-2 infection, with a significant reduction in HRV, BRS, and high incidence of orthostatic hypotension, indicating significant cardiovascular risk.22

However, there is a paucity of research on the chronic sequelae of COVID-19 infection on cardiac ANS functions. Thus the current study aimed to evaluate the post-acute impact of COVID-19 infection on cardiac autonomic nervous system functions, using cardiovascular reflex tests (CARTs), heart rate variability (HRV), and cardiac baroreceptor sensitivity (cBRS).

This was a comparative cross-sectional observational study carried out in the physiology departments laboratories at Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University (IAU), College of Medicine, Saudi Arabia, in the period between November 7, 2021, and March 14, 2022. The study population was divided into two groups: controls (n=31) who neither tested positive nor had a history of COVID-19 before, and post-COVID patients (n=28) who tested positive PCR for COVID-19 at least 3 months before recruitment. We determined the sample size based on previous studies with comparable outcomes, where the sample size ranged from 2519 to 15222 participants.

Confirmation of COVID infection is based on positive testing of SARS-CoV-2 unique viral sequencing by using real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR).23

Subjects were excluded if they had: severe acute illness needing hospitalization, nervous system disorders (eg, multiple sclerosis, Parkinsonism, polyneuropathy, and Guillain-Barr syndrome), heart disease (eg, valvular heart disease, cardiomyopathy, arrhythmia, ischemic or congestive diseases), alcoholism, liver disease, malignancies, inflammatory diseases, renal diseases, or taking anti-hypertensive treatments.

Over the recruitment period, the medical records of COVID-19 patients in King Fahad University Hospital (KFUH) were reviewed and those fulfilling the inclusion criteria were contacted to do the autonomic function tests in our physiology laboratory.

The study followed the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki,24 and was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University (IRB-UGS-2021-01-391). Informed written consent was obtained from every participant.

Experimental data was obtained by measuring (1) the baseline cardiovascular autonomic activity through heart rate variability (HRV), (2) cardiovascular reactivity through cardiovascular reflex tests (CARTs), and (3) cardiac baroreceptor reflex sensitivity through determination of baroreceptor sensitivity (cBRS).

After an initial rest of 5 minutes in a supine position on a tilt table, resting HR and BP were measured with SPOT vital sign monitor (NY 13153). The subjects were properly strapped to the tilt table and hooked up to an 8 channel Powerlab 8/35 system (ADInstrumennts, Australia) for continuous recording of ECG, respiratory rate and finger arterial blood pressure. Single lead ECG was recorded by attaching two ECG electrodes on both shoulders through ECG box and bio-amplifier (ADInstruments, Australia). Respiratory rate was monitored through the respiratory belt (ADInstruments, Australia). Continuous finger arterial BP waveform was recorded through Finometer Pro (FMS, Amsterdam, Netherlands) that was adjusted against the brachial cuff BP. The pressure signal was fed to the PowerLab for recording. After a stabilization rest period of 5 minutes, baseline recording was done for 5 minutes.

Analysis of HRV was done through the software LabChart Pro (V. 8.1.13) and HRV module. The following HRV parameters were analyzed in time-domain: SDRR (standard deviation RR intervals) reflecting overall HRV, RMSSD (root mean square of successive differences of RR intervals), and pRR50 (percentage of successive RR intervals that are different by at least 50 msec). Both RMSSD and pRR50 provide information about parasympathetic function. The frequency domain parameters that were analyzed included total power (TP), which represents the overall total HRV, low-frequency (LF) and very low-frequency (VLF) bands indicating the sympathetic activity, high-frequency band (HF) to reflect parasympathetic activity, and LF/HF ratio to demonstrate the sympathetic-parasympathetic balance.12 Frequency domain HRV parameters LF and HF were computed both as absolute values (ms2) and in normalized units. To control for the possible confounding effect of respiration on HRV parameters, respiratory rate was measured via a respiratory belt.22

Heart rate response to deep breathing, Valsalva maneuver and head-up tilt (HUT) were used to assess the parasympathetic function. Diastolic blood pressure responses to HUT and sustained isometric handgrip (IHG) were used to assess the sympathetic function.

Participants were asked to complete six respirations in one minute under guidance of the examiner, whereby they had to inhale deeply for 5 seconds and exhale fully for 5 seconds in a smooth and continuous manner completing one respiratory cycle in 10 seconds. The differences between the highest and lowest HR during deep breathing was calculated. In addition, the ratio of maximum RR interval during expiration to minimum RR interval during inspiration (E:I ratio) was also calculated.10,11

The participants were instructed to exhale into a large dial aneroid sphygmomanometer, and were coached to keep the pressure at 40 mmHg for 15 seconds. The maneuver was performed thrice by every participant, with an intervening rest period of 2 minutes. The longest RR interval in the Phase IV and the shortest RR interval during the late Phase II of VM were identified from the ECG recording to calculate the Valsalva ratio.10,11

After a resting period of lying down in supine position for 5 minutes, the table was tilted to 70 degrees and maintained for 5 minutes in this position. The table was tilted back and remained in supine position for another 5 minutes (Figure 1). The change in the heart rate was expressed as a ratio of the fastest heart rate (shortest RR interval) around the 15th beat to the slowest HR (longest RR interval) around the 30th beat after the head-up tilt.10,11

Figure 1 Heart rate response and blood pressure changes during head-up tilt procedure in post-acute COVID-19 patient; 20-year-old male, complained of headache, general fatigue, and subjective postural hypotension.

Systolic and diastolic blood pressures were noted in the supine position as baseline measurements. Readings were taken again after 12 minutes after the tilt at 70 degrees (Figure 1).25,26

After determining the maximum voluntary contraction with isometric force transducer, the participants were instructed to maintain the isometric handgrip for 3 minutes, during which the blood pressure was continuously recorded.10,11

An HR variation equal to or greater than 15 bpm or an expiratory/inspiratory ratio (E:I) of greater than or equal to 1.21 during DB were taken as normal. Similarly, a Valsalva ratio (VR) of equal to or greater than 1.21 was taken as normal. An HR response in the form of 30:15 R-R ratio of equal to or greater than 1.04 to HUT was taken as normal. An increase of DBP equal to or greater than 10 mmHg in response to sustained IHG was considered normal. Either no drop or a drop of less than 20 mmHg in SBP and/or a drop of less than 10 mmHg in DBP in response to HUT at 70 degrees tilt within 2 minutes were taken as normal. Any fall in SBP or DBP in response to HUT greater than the above-mentioned values were taken as postural or orthostatic hypotension (OH).27,28 Postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS) was diagnosed if patients had an HR increase of 30 beats per minute (bpm) or HR above 120 bpm following the HUT in the absence of orthostatic hypotension.29 Results of CART were labeled as normal if no abnormal findings were detected, with parasympathetic dysfunction if 2 out of the 3 tests of the parasympathetic component were abnormal, with sympathetic dysfunction when 1 of the 2 tests of the sympathetic component test was abnormal, and with combined dysfunction when there is 1 abnormal test from each domain.30,31

Cardiac baroreflex sensitivity (cBRS) is used as an index to evaluate the autonomic nervous system function. A reduction in the cBRS indicates cardiac autonomic dysfunction.32,33 Cardiac BRS was calculated offline by noting the instantaneous changes in heart rate in response to spontaneous changes in arterial BP with software PRVBRS provided by FMS (The Netherlands) using cross-correlation method.34 The correlation between beat to beat systolic BP and inter-beat interval was measured in a sliding 10-s window, with delays of 0 to 5 s for interval. The program selects the delay with the greatest significant positive correlation and the slope and the delay are recorded as one BRS value. BRS readings were averaged over at least 25 min except in deep breathing, where the maneuver itself was for 1 min only.34,35 The BRS data was displayed and analyzed with dedicated Beatscope software version 1.1a. The inbuilt return-to-flow and height correction features enhanced the reliability and accuracy of Finometer recordings.36

Data were presented as mean standard deviation (SD), median with interquartile range (IQ), or number (percent) where appropriate.Distribution of the data was tested using ShapiroWilk test of normality.Comparisons between groups were done using unpaired t-test and MannWhitney U-test for normal and non-normal distributed variables, respectively. Proportions were compared using the chi-square test. Comparison of the percent changes of different study variables between groups was done using ANCOVA with the baseline value as a covariate. Data was analyzed using SPSS 28.0 software; a P-value of <0.05 was considered significant.

Fifty-nine subjects participated in this study. Both groups were matched in age (p=0.88), gender (p=0.99), and BMI (p=0.14). There were non-significant differences in the baseline heart rate (p=0.28), respiratory rate (p= 0.74), SBP (p=0.93), and DBP (p=0.66) between control and post-COVID groups. The median follow-up time of post-COVID subjects was 24 weeks (range 38 months). All subjects in both groups were vaccinated and without any comorbidities. The severity of illness among post-COVID group revealed 19 (68%) with mild and 9 (32%) with moderate acute illness based on the National Institute of Health (NIH) classification.37 (Table 1).

Table 1 Demographic and Baseline Characteristics of Study Population

Heart rate variability measurements (TP, LF, HF, LF/HF, LFnu, SDRR, RMSSD, and pRR50) were low in the post-COVID group, although statistically non-significant. Similarly, the cBRS measurements showed lower values in the post-COVID group, but did not reach a level of significance (Table 2).

Table 2 Comparison of HRV Measurements and cBRS Between Groups

Orthostatic hypotension (OH) was demonstrated in 39.3% of post-COVID-19 participants in comparison to 3.2% of the control subjects, (p<0.001). Similarly, significant abnormal blood pressure response to the handgrip test was observed in the post-COVID group compared to the controls (73.1% vs 16.1%, respectively, p <0.001). Additionally, abnormal heart-rate response to HUT was higher in the post-COVID group (35.7%) compared to 12.9% in the controls (p=0.04) (Table 3). However, none of our subjects fulfilled the postural tachycardia syndrome (POTS) diagnosis criteria.

Table 3 Comparison of Abnormal CART Results in Post-COVID Patients Compared to Control Group

Isolated sympathetic dysfunction was reported in most post-COVID participants (71.4%) compared to controls (16.1%), (p <0.001); no isolated parasympathetic dysfunction was demonstrated in either group. However, a combined autonomic dysfunction was reported in 7.1% of post-COVID patients (Table 4). Cumulatively, about 85.7% of the post-COVID patients had at least one abnormal CART test in comparison with 35.5% within the control group (p <0.001) (data not shown).

Table 4 Distribution of Sympathetic, Parasympathetic, and Combined Autonomic Dysfunction Between Groups

Both systolic and diastolic blood pressure showed a significant decrease from the baseline value after the HUT compared to the corresponding increase observed in the control group (p <0.001). Heart rate showed an increase during HUT in both groups, without significant difference (p=0.06) (Table 5).

Table 5 Comparison of % Change in Systolic Blood Pressure, Diastolic Blood Pressure, and Heart Rate During Head-Up Tilting (HUT)

In the present study, the post-COVID group showed evidence of dysautonomia indicated by sympathetic dysfunction in response to cardiovascular challenges, thus suggesting changes in the autonomic control of cardiac function. Although the baseline HRV parameters and cardiac BRS were numerically lower in post-COVID group, this did not reach statistical significance. The CARTs demonstrated altered autonomic reactivity in some tests. There was a higher incidence of orthostatic hypotension in post-COVID patients compared to controls, and there was a significantly reduced diastolic blood pressure response to isometric handgrip test. Although the post-COVID group showed significantly abnormal heart rate response to head-up tilt, none of them fulfilled the postural tachycardia syndrome (POTS) diagnosis criteria.

Autonomic dysfunction has been described following several viral infections.14 HIV infection is associated with a reduction in the heart rate variability, and several autonomic manifestations including urinary system, gastrointestinal, secretomotor, pupillomotor, sleep, and male sexual function.38 Orthostatic hypotension and urinary dysfunction have been also described in mumps.39 Varicella zoster reactivation from autonomic ganglia could cause intestinal pseudo-obstruction. Rabies could also cause excessive salivation, piloerection, and photophobia. Furthermore, autonomic dysfunction may happen in acute viral encephalitis, herpes simplex, infectious mononucleosis, rubella, and coxsackie B virus.14

Both acute and delayed neurologic manifestations have been reported after SARS-CoV-2 infection. The receptors of SARS-CoV-2 are expressed in the central nervous system. The virus could spread directly through the cribriform plate and olfactory bulb, or through trans-synaptic invasion. Encephalitis, demyelination, neuropathy, and stroke are known complications of COVID-19.40 Additionally, autonomic dysfunction has emerged as a complication of COVID-19 infection; several case reports and observational studies revealed dysautonomia in association with SARS-CoV-2 infection.15,41 Dysautonomia in COVID-19 patients may manifest as labile blood pressure, postural hypotension, bladder dysfunction, gastrointestinal dysfunction, and impotence.42 The mechanisms of COVID-19-related dysautonomia are complex. SARS-CoV-2 can cause direct autonomic tissue damage, exaggerated immune response (innate and adaptive), and inflammation.43 During the cytokine storm, sympathetic stimulation induces the release of pro-inflammatory mediators, while parasympathetic activation elicits an anti-inflammatory response. Furthermore, an association between dysautonomia and the neurotropism of SARS-CoV-2 has been reported.44

Assessment of cardiac autonomic function can be carried out by specific tests and maneuvers on the cardiac sympathovagal system. Cardiovascular reflex tests (CART) involve a group of maneuvers that test both components of ANS (sympathetic and parasympathetic) separately.10 The current study reported postural hypotension in 39.3% of the post-COVID group during the blood pressure response to head-up tilt maneuver. Additionally, abnormal blood pressure response to the handgrip test was observed in about 73.1% of post-COVID patients. These two CART components reflected an impairment of the cardiac sympathetic function. Parasympathetic cardiac activity was also affected, as 35.7% of post-COVID patients showed abnormal heart rate response to the head-up tilt procedure. However, no postural tachycardia syndrome (POTS) was found in our cohort. Similar findings were reported by a recent study that included 180 post-COVID patients. Subjects were evaluated by active stand test between 4weeks and 9months from COVID-19 onset and orthostatic hypotension (OH) was diagnosed in 13.8% of the patients; none showed postural tachycardia syndrome (POTS).17 Another recent study in young adult post-COVID patients showed sympathetic over-activity and lower values of parasympathetic activity as evaluated by HRV measurement; these changes were modulated by body mass index (BMI).45 Furthermore, a study by Marques et al revealed a reduction in HRV with increased sympathetic modulation, and a decrease in parasympathetic modulation in long COVID.46 Cardiac autonomic dysfunction has also been reported during the early stage of COVID-19 diseases. Milovanovic et al showed sympathetic dysfunction with orthostatic hypotension in about 46.3%, and abnormal handgrip tests in about 94.4% of post-COVID patients. In addition, parasympathetic dysfunction was illustrated by abnormal heart rate response to the Valsalva maneuver and deep breathing.22

HRV is a tool that is commonly used to assess sympathetic and parasympathetic modulation of the autonomic nervous system, and it is a significant marker of dysautonomia.47 HRV is composed of a low-frequency band (LF), high-frequency band (HF), and very low-frequency band (VLF). The sympathetic and parasympathetic activity of the heart is reflected by LF, and considered an indicator of sympathovagal balance. HF assesses the parasympathetic activity of the heart, reflecting the vagal-mediated modulation.12 In our study, we found a non-significant reduction in TP, LF, HF, LF/HF, LFnu, SDRR, RMSSD, and pRR50 in the COVID-19 group. In contrast, a recent study involved 50 post-acute COVID subjects 20 weeks after recovery and found a decrease in the time domain measurements (SDNN, SDANN, SDNNi, RMSSD, pNN50) and frequency domain measurements (TP, VLF, LF, HF, and HFnu) in the post-acute COVID group compared to control subjects.48 Additionally, Milovanovic et al found significantly lower results in HF, and LF in COVID-19 patients during the early phase of COVID-19 infection.22 Furthermore, another study showed orthostatic hypotension in 13.04%, and POTS in 2.17%; heart rate variability (RMSSD) was significantly lower in post-COVID-19 patients compared to healthy controls (p=0.01).21

Body mass and level of physical activity were found to affect the autonomic function of post-COVID-19 patients; higher BMI post-COVID subjects demonstrated more dysautonomia in comparison with normal BMI controls. In addition, physically inactive post-COVID participants revealed more autonomic dysfunction compared to active controls.45 These results showed that dysautonomia associated with COVID-19 is potentially influenced by level of physical activity and BMI. Since post-COVID patients in the current study had almost normal BMI, this might explain why the observed reduction in HRV was not significant.

Baroreceptor sensitivity is crucial in assessing cardiac autonomic nervous function. It is measured by analyzing the spontaneous beat-to-beat changes of arterial blood pressure and heart rate; a reduction in BRS indicates dysautonomia.32,33 In our study, we showed a non-significant decrease of baroreceptor sensitivity in the post-COVID-19 group. In contrast, another study reported a significant reduction in mean baroreceptor sensitivity during the early phase of post-COVID-19 infection.22 This difference could be attributed to the difference in the time of autonomic function evaluation of post-COVID patients; the current study evaluated the post-acute effect post-COVID infection, while Milovanovic et al studied a group of active COVID-19 infections. This is in line with the finding that dysautonomia is more obvious following the acute stage of the viral illness,39,41 and could improve in time, either spontaneously or with treatment.49 In a recent study, heart rate recovery (HRR) following exercise cessation improved significantly 6 months after COVID infection.50 In addition, many factors could affect the development of dysautonomia following COVID-19 infection, including BMI, level of physical activity,45 and degree of inflammatory response.43

Due to the cross-sectional design, it was difficult to conclude that a causal relationship exists between COVID-19 and dysautonomia. Additionally, the local restrictions of the COVID-19 pandemic made it difficult to recruit more subjects, which resulted in a relatively small sample size and may explain the non-statistically significant null findings of HRV and cBRS reported by this study. However, our results provide additional insights into the extent of cardiac autonomic dysfunction post-COVID-19 in a relatively young population.

The results of the present study are suggestive of altered cardiovascular reactivity as a post-acute sequela of COVID-19 infection, with a pronounced incidence of postural hypotension. However, this finding still needs future experimental studies with a larger sample size investigating the mechanism of ANS involvement during the active infection as well as after COVID-19 recovery.

LFnu, low frequency normalized unit; HFnu, high frequency normalized unit; TP, total power; LF, low frequency; HF, high frequency; LF/HF, low frequency/high frequency ratio; SDRR, standard deviation of RR intervals; RMSSD, root mean square of successive RR interval differences; pRR50, percentage of successive RR intervals that differ by more than 50ms; cBRS, cardiac baroreceptor sensitivity; CART, cardiovascular reflex test.

There is no funding to report.

The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

1. Zhu N, Zhang D, Wang W., et al. A Novel Coronavirus from Patients with Pneumonia in China, 2019. N Eng J Med. 2020;382(8):727733. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2001017

2. Dashboard WCC. WHO Coronavirus (COVID-19) Dashboard With Vaccination Data [Internet]. 2022.

3. Michelen M, Manoharan L, Elkheir N, et al. Characterising long COVID: a living systematic review. BMJ Global Health. 2021;6(9):e005427. doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2021-005427

4. Zimmermann P, Pittet LF, Curtis N. The Challenge of Studying Long COVID: an Updated Review. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2022;41(5):424426. doi:10.1097/INF.0000000000003502

5. Deer RR, Rock MA, Vasilevsky N, et al. Characterizing Long COVID: deep Phenotype of a Complex Condition. eBioMedicine. 2021;1:74.

6. Raman B, Bluemke DA, Lscher TF, Neubauer S. Long COVID: post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 with a cardiovascular focus. Eur Heart J. 2022;43(11):11571172. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehac031

7. Yan Z, Yang M, Lai CL. Long COVID-19 Syndrome: a Comprehensive Review of Its Effect on Various Organ Systems and Recommendation on Rehabilitation Plans. Biomedicines. 2021;9(8):966. doi:10.3390/biomedicines9080966

8. Long B, Brady WJ, Koyfman A, Gottlieb M. Cardiovascular complications in COVID-19. Am J Emerg Med. 2020;38(7):15041507. doi:10.1016/j.ajem.2020.04.048

9. Manolis AA, Manolis TA, Apostolopoulos EJ, Apostolaki NE, Melita H, Manolis AS. The role of the autonomic nervous system in cardiac arrhythmias: the neuro-cardiac axis, more foe than friend? Trends Cardiovasc Med. 2021;31(5):290302. doi:10.1016/j.tcm.2020.04.011

10. Freeman R, Chapleau MW. Testing the autonomic nervous system. Handb Clin Neurol. 2013;115:115136.

11. Zygmunt A, Stanczyk J. Methods of evaluation of autonomic nervous system function. Arch Med Sci. 2010;6(1):1118. doi:10.5114/aoms.2010.13500

12. Camm AJ, Malik M, Bigger JT. Heart rate variability: standards of measurement, physiological interpretation and clinical use. Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology and the North American Society of Pacing and Electrophysiology. Circulation. 1996;93(5):10431065. doi:10.1161/01.CIR.93.5.1043

13. Goldberger JJ, Arora R, Buckley U, Shivkumar K. Autonomic Nervous System Dysfunction: JACC Focus Seminar. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;73(10):11891206. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2018.12.064

14. Carod-Artal FJ. Infectious diseases causing autonomic dysfunction. Clin Auton Res. 2018;28(1):6781. doi:10.1007/s10286-017-0452-4

15. Dani M, Dirksen A, Taraborrelli P, et al. Autonomic dysfunction in long COVID: rationale, physiology and management strategies. Clin Med. 2021;21(1):e63e7. doi:10.7861/clinmed.2020-0896

16. Zirpe KG, Dixit S, Kulkarni AP, et al. Pathophysiological Mechanisms and Neurological Manifestations in COVID-19. Indian J Crit Care Med. 2020;24(10):975980. doi:10.5005/jp-journals-10071-23592

17. Buoite Stella A, Furlanis G, Frezza NA, Valentinotti R, Ajcevic M, Manganotti P. Autonomic dysfunction in post-COVID patients with and without neurological symptoms: a prospective multidomain observational study. J Neurol. 2022;269(2):587596. doi:10.1007/s00415-021-10735-y

18. Eldokla AM, Mohamed-Hussein AA, Fouad AM, et al. Prevalence and patterns of symptoms of dysautonomia in patients with long-COVID syndrome: a cross-sectional study. Ann Clin Translational Neurol. 2022;9(6):778785. doi:10.1002/acn3.51557

19. Adler TE, Norcliffe-Kaufmann L, Condos R, et al. Heart Rate Variability Is Reduced 3- and 6-Months after Hospitalization for Covid-19 Infection. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2021;77(18):3062. doi:10.1016/S0735-1097(21)04417-X

20. Asarcikli LD, Hayiroglu M, Osken A, Keskin K, Kolak Z, Aksu T. Heart rate variability and cardiac autonomic functions in post-COVID period. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2022;63(3):715721. doi:10.1007/s10840-022-01138-8

21. Shah B, Kunal S, Bansal A, et al. Heart rate variability as a marker of cardiovascular dysautonomia in post-COVID-19 syndrome using artificial intelligence. Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J. 2022;22(2):7076. doi:10.1016/j.ipej.2022.01.004

22. Milovanovic B, Djajic V, Bajic D, et al. Assessment of Autonomic Nervous System Dysfunction in the Early Phase of Infection With SARS-CoV-2 Virus. Front Neurosci. 2021;2:15.

23. Hanson KE, Caliendo AM, Arias CA, et al. The Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidelines on the Diagnosis of COVID-19: molecular Diagnostic Testing. Clin Infect Dis. 2021;22:10.

24. Association WM. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. JAMA. 2013;310(20):21912194. doi:10.1001/jama.2013.281053

25. Khemani P, Mehdirad AA. Cardiovascular Disorders Mediated by Autonomic Nervous System Dysfunction. Cardiol Rev. 2020;28(2):6572. doi:10.1097/CRD.0000000000000280

26. Lahrmann H, Cortelli P, Hilz M, Mathias CJ, Struhal W, Tassinari M. EFNS guidelines on the diagnosis and management of orthostatic hypotension. Eur J Neurol. 2006;13(9):930936. doi:10.1111/j.1468-1331.2006.01512.x

27. Novak P. Quantitative autonomic testing. J Vis Exp. 2011;19:53.

28. Hilz MJ, Dtsch M. Quantitative studies of autonomic function. Muscle Nerve. 2006;33(1):620. doi:10.1002/mus.20365

29. Raj SR, Guzman JC, Harvey P, et al. Canadian Cardiovascular Society Position Statement on Postural Orthostatic Tachycardia Syndrome (POTS) and Related Disorders of Chronic Orthostatic Intolerance. Can J Cardiol. 2020;36(3):357372. doi:10.1016/j.cjca.2019.12.024

30. Jyotsna VP, Sahoo A, Sreenivas V, Deepak KK. Prevalence and pattern of cardiac autonomic dysfunction in newly detected type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2009;83(1):8388. doi:10.1016/j.diabres.2008.09.054

31. Ewing DJ, Clarke BF. Diagnosis and management of diabetic autonomic neuropathy. Br Med J. 1982;285(6346):916918. doi:10.1136/bmj.285.6346.916

32. Swenne CA. Baroreflex sensitivity: mechanisms and measurement. Neth Heart J. 2013;21(2):5860. doi:10.1007/s12471-012-0346-y

33. Pinna GD, Maestri R, La Rovere MT. Assessment of baroreflex sensitivity from spontaneous oscillations of blood pressure and heart rate: proven clinical value? Physiol Meas. 2015;36(4):741753. doi:10.1088/0967-3334/36/4/741

34. Westerhof BE, Gisolf J, Stok WJ, Wesseling KH, Karemaker JM. Time-domain cross-correlation baroreflex sensitivity: performance on the EUROBAVAR data set. J Hypertens. 2004;22(7):13711380. doi:10.1097/01.hjh.0000125439.28861.ed

35. Wesseling KH, Karemaker JM, Castiglioni P, et al. Validity and variability of xBRS: instantaneous cardiac baroreflex sensitivity. Physiol Rep. 2017;5(22):13509. doi:10.14814/phy2.13509

36. Guelen I, Westerhof BE, van der Sar GL, et al. Validation of brachial artery pressure reconstruction from finger arterial pressure. J Hypertens. 2008;26(7):13211327. doi:10.1097/HJH.0b013e3282fe1d28

37. COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel. Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Treatment Guidelines. National Institutes of Health. Available from: https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/. Accessed September 21, 2022.

38. Chow D, Nakamoto BK, Sullivan K, et al. Symptoms of Autonomic Dysfunction in Human Immunodeficiency Virus. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2015;2(3):3. doi:10.1093/ofid/ofv103

39. Mathuranath PS, Duralpandian J, Kishore A. Acute dysautonomia following mumps. Neurol India. 1999;47(2):130132.

40. Montalvan V, Lee J, Bueso T, De toledo J, Rivas K. Neurological manifestations of COVID-19 and other coronavirus infections: a systematic review. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2020;194(105921):15. doi:10.1016/j.clineuro.2020.105921

41. Bosco J, Titano R. Severe Post-COVID-19 dysautonomia: a case report. BMC Infect Dis. 2022;22(1):214. doi:10.1186/s12879-022-07181-0

42. Almqvist J, Granberg T, Tzortzakakis A, et al. Neurological manifestations of coronavirus infections - a systematic review. Ann Clin Transl Neurol. 2020;7(10):20572071. doi:10.1002/acn3.51166

43. Larsen NW, Stiles LE, Miglis MG. Preparing for the long-haul: autonomic complications of COVID-19. Auton Neurosci. 2021;235(102841):3. doi:10.1016/j.autneu.2021.102841

44. Becker RC. Autonomic dysfunction in SARS-COV-2 infection acute and long-term implications COVID-19 editors page series. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2021;52(3):692707. doi:10.1007/s11239-021-02549-6

45. Freire APCF, Lira FS, Morano A, et al. Role of Body Mass and Physical Activity in Autonomic Function Modulation on Post-COVID-19 Condition: an Observational Subanalysis of Fit-COVID Study. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(4):2457. doi:10.3390/ijerph19042457

46. Marques KC, Silva CC, Trindade SDS, et al. Reduction of Cardiac Autonomic Modulation and Increased Sympathetic Activity by Heart Rate Variability in Patients With Long COVID. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022;9:862001. doi:10.3389/fcvm.2022.862001

47. Electrophysiology TFotESoCtNASoP. Heart Rate Variability. Circulation. 1996;93(5):10431065.

48. Kurtolu E, Afsin A, Akta , Aktrk E, Kutlusoy E, aaar . Altered cardiac autonomic function after recovery from COVID-19. Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol. 2022;27(1):24. doi:10.1111/anec.12916

49. Blitshteyn S, Whitelaw S. Postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS) and other autonomic disorders after COVID-19 infection: a case series of 20 patients. Immunol Res. 2021;69(2):205211. doi:10.1007/s12026-021-09185-5

50. Cassar MP, Tunnicliffe EM, Petousi N, et al. Symptom Persistence Despite Improvement in Cardiopulmonary Health - Insights from longitudinal CMR, CPET and lung function testing post-COVID-19. E Clin Med. 2021;41(101159):20. doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.101159

Original post:
Post-Acute Effect of SARS-CoV-2 Infection on the Cardiac Autonomic Fun | IJGM - Dove Medical Press

Physiology

IARI-ICAR Recruitment 2022: Check Post, Qualification and Other Details Here – StudyCafe

IARI-ICAR Recruitment 2022: Check Post, Qualification and Other Details Here

IARI-ICAR Recruitment 2022: Indian Agricultural Research Institute (ICAR) is inviting eligible candidates to attend the Online Interview for Unreserved Temporary Posts of Six SRFs under the ongoing project funded by the National Agriculture Science Fund, Indian Council of Agricultural Research, Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, Government of India. Interested candidates should review the job description and apply using the link provided in the official notification. The applicant should have a Masters degree in relevant subjects (Plant Biotechnology/ Plant Physiology/ Plant Biochemistry/Life sciences/ Microbiology) with 4 years/ 5 years of Bachelors degree will be given preference. The last date for receipt of the Biodata is 20th October 2022.

Candidates are requested to apply for the job post before the deadline. No application shall be entertained after the stipulated time/ date. Incomplete applications and applications received after the specified time/ date shall be REJECTED. All the details regarding this job post are given in this article such as IARI-ICAR Recruitment 2022 official Notification, Age Limit, Eligibility Criteria, Pay Salary & much more.

1. The applicant should have a Masters degree in relevant subjects (Plant Biotechnology/ Plant Physiology/ Plant Biochemistry/Life sciences/ Microbiology) with 4 years/ 5 years of Bachelors degree will be given preference.

2. Desirable qualifications: Agrobacterium mediated genetic transformation of rice/soybean/mustard, genome editing of plants, molecular cloning, Molecular analysis of transgenic plants and other basic molecular techniques

Selected Candidates will be getting the salary amount of Rs.31000 + HRA per month for 1st and 2nd years and Rs.35000 + HRA per month for 3rd year.

Maximum 35 years for men for SRF positions. For women/SC/ST/OBC, age relaxation of 5 years will be given as per Govt. of India/ICAR rules.

Step 1: Go to the IARI-ICAR official website.

Step 2: Search for the IARI-ICAR Recruitment 2022 Notification here.

Step 3: Read all of the information in the notification.

Step 4: Apply and submit the application form in accordance with the mode of application specified in the official notification.

NOTE: Candidates may send their biodata with self-attested scanned copies of degree certificates, and mark sheets of 10, 12, UG and PG to [emailprotected] The last date for receipt of the Biodata is 20th October 2022.

To Read Official Notification Click Here

Disclaimer: The Recruitment Information provided above is for informational purposes only. The above Recruitment Information has been taken from the official site of the Organisation. We do not provide any Recruitment guarantee. Recruitment is to be done as per the official recruitment process of the company or organization posted the recruitment Vacancy. We dont charge any fee for providing this Job Information. Neither the Author nor Studycafe and its Affiliates accepts any liabilities for any loss or damage of any kind arising out of any information in this article nor for any actions taken in reliance thereon.

Follow this link:
IARI-ICAR Recruitment 2022: Check Post, Qualification and Other Details Here - StudyCafe

Physiology

Sex differences in sprint running performance may be relatively small – News-Medical.Net

Conventional wisdom holds that men run 10-12 percent faster than women regardless of the distance raced. But new research suggests that the between-sex performance gap is much narrower at shorter sprint distances.

It has long been established that men outpace women by relatively large margins in mid- and longer-distance events. But speed over short distances is determined by different factors specifically, the magnitude of the ground forces athletes can apply in relation to their body mass. Women tend to be smaller than men and, all things being equal, muscular force to body mass ratios are greater in smaller individuals.

Ph.D. candidate Emily McClelland, working with Peter Weyand, the Director of SMU's Locomotor Performance Lab, quantified sex performance differences using data from sanctioned international athletic competitions such as the Olympics and World Championships. They hypothesized that these data would reveal smaller male-female performance differences at shorter distances.

An accomplished athlete and former assistant director of strength and conditioning at Bowling Green State University, McClelland has always had a natural interest in the scientific basis of human performance.

More broadly, the understanding of comparative strength, speed and endurance capabilities of male and female athletes has been a highly challenging issue for modern sport. Yet, prior to the new SMU study, quantitative understanding of sex performance differences for short sprint events had received little attention. McClelland's background, male-female differences in force/mass capabilities, and existing data trends led her to hypothesize that sex differences in sprint running performance might be relatively small and increase with distance.

Her analysis of race data from sanctioned international competitions between 2003 and 2018 supported her initial hypothesis. These data revealed that the difference between male and female performance time increased with event distance from 8.6 percent to 11 percent from shortest to longest sprint events (60 to 400 meters). Additionally, within-race analysis of each 10-meter segment of the 100-meter event revealed a more pronounced pattern across distance - sex differences increased from a low of 5.6 percent for the first segment to a high of 14.2 percent in the last segment.

Why then are women potentially less disadvantaged versus men at shorter sprint distances?

In contrast to other running species like horses and dogs, there is significant variation in body size between human males and females. If all other factors are held equal, body size differences result in muscular force to body mass ratios that are greater in relatively smaller individuals. Since sprinting velocities are directly dependent on the mass-specific forces runners can apply during the foot-to-ground contact phase of the stride, greater force/mass ratios of smaller individuals provide a theoretical relative advantage. Additionally, the shorter legs of a female runner may confer the advantage of more steps and pushing cycles per unit time during the acceleration phase of a race. These factors offset the advantages of males (longer legs and greater muscularity) that become more influential over longer distances.

Consider the example of Shelly-Ann Fraser Pryce, a Jamaican track and field star who is 5'0" tall, 115 pounds, and who holds two Olympic and five World Championship gold medals in her signature 100-meter event. Her time at the 40-yard mark of a 100-meter race has been estimated to be as brief as 4.51 seconds-;a time faster than nearly half of all the wide receivers and running backs that tested in the National Football League's Scouting Combine in 2022. In contrast to Shelly-Ann Fraser-Pryce, most of these aspiring NFL football players are over 6' tall and 200 pounds.

The research study "Sex differences in human running performance: Smaller gaps at shorter distances?," was conducted by McClelland and Weyand and has been published in the Journal of Applied Physiology.

Source:

Journal reference:

McClelland, E.L., et al. (2022) Sex differences in human running performance: smaller gaps at shorter distances?. Journal of Applied Physiology. doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.00359.2022.

Here is the original post:
Sex differences in sprint running performance may be relatively small - News-Medical.Net

Physiology

We are validating old knowledge with new technology to enhance mental performance:Nimrod Mon Brokman, Behavi.. – ETHealthWorld

Shahid Akhter, editor, ETHealthworld, spoke to Nimrod Mon Brokman, Co-Founder, Behavioural Foresight, Partner at PHD (Potential Health Development) and Consultant for Indo-Israel Commerce, to find out about their approach to improving mental health by using innovative techniques.

Your views on 'Mental Health' in India I arrived in India in 2016 and started familiarizing myself with the mental health sector in Bangalore. In India, every region, and every place, is different, and there is a taboo around mental health issues. When we approached clients, they would often feel awkward and uncomfortable. Their reactions ranged from, What are you saying? Why are you speaking like that? Why are you classifying me like that?.

It took us around 2 years to build a relationship of trust with our clients regarding mental health, to make them understand that it's not a disorder that we are talking about, but rather a performance issue. When I say performance, it can be athletic, it can be at an executive level or even in our day-to-day lives how you live your life, how you conduct yourself from morning to evening - such things are by themselves contributing to your performance.

What are the risks with long term stress? Stress is a big factor in todays world. You can look at the statistics, although it often reflects as heart issue, since it's actually stress that affects the heart, causing many problems. In diabetes too, the main factor is stress or unregulated emotions. As part of the ecosystem of Connect Ventures, we decided to incorporate mental health with physical health and nutrition, to bring about a holistic solution.

We are working with different corporations on extremely innovative programs to support their employees and leaders, by bringing together Israeli technology with innovative protocols. These programs do not stop them from following their individual routines but enable them to continue with their lifestyle while improving on it. Our experience across different sectors over the years finally led to the development of EZUN - an experiential mind-simulated training, combining Israeli tech, gamification and science. Our mission is to power for excellence, by utilising minimum mental capacity for maximum mental performance through impactful gamification and fun protocols.

We are also working with the Indian military to give them the x-factor to perform and operate in the most challenging environments, in the most efficient manner.

Can gaming be beneficial and healthy for better mental capacity? After almost 4 years in India, we had gathered significant learnings from the Indian market and applied it to the way we functioned. We wanted to enable more people to enjoy our process through a lighter approach. Thats when we realised that it was important to gamify the whole process. The moment you play, you enjoy and have fun. Automatically there is less judgement, less restriction, less resistance, and thereby, way more neuroplasticity (mental adaptation). At the same time, we wanted to make it more scientific, and related to data so we had evidence that our methods were providing value to our clients.

This is how we came up with our simulation room, Ezun. Ezun in Hebrew means fundamental balance, where we train one to be able to stay constantly in balance. Balance is not stagnancy. It keeps on changing and one should be able to re-balance themselves and maintain this balance constantly during the day. This is what we have developed with EZUN. Each experiential training protocol has been designed to fit perfectly to EZUN state-of-the-art simulation training by our experts. We aim to enhance a sustainable learning experience of down and up regulation of somatic sensations and behaviours, to master the highest levels of economy over ones personal mental currency.

We have Israeli technology that allows one to assess how their physiology reacts to different stressors. Along with this stress profiling, we also use respiratory assessment to understand how the breathing functions. This is a very critical tool to change ones state of mind, as well as to observe and evaluate someone. We are also using a test to measure cortisol levels. These 3 parameters give us a stress profile to understand how someone is functioning physiologically in the day to day, and how they react naturally. With this baseline, we curate different programs. With all the programs, the person just plays computer and action games, while the data gets accumulated constantly from their physiology. Connecting these two, we can see how one functions, with the goal being, how efficiently can one function. Again, what is the economics of their behaviour, can they be efficient and spend very little to gain a lot, or are they wasting and spending a lot to gain very little.

Your vision to democratize Behavioural Foresight innovations? We are collaborating with our food division to understand how everyone can gain from the right gut and brain function. We are extending our services to educational institutes, as well as corporates and their workforce to enjoy EZUN training and our food at their facilities on the go. They can do this without changing their lifestyles, and without having to ignore their work to focus on their health. With just small changes and micro adjustments, we can create a huge impact on their day to day living.

See the rest here:
We are validating old knowledge with new technology to enhance mental performance:Nimrod Mon Brokman, Behavi.. - ETHealthWorld

Cell Biology

Molecular and Cell Biology

The teaching and research activities of the Department of Molecular and Cell Biology (MCB) concern the molecular structures and processes of cellular life and their roles in the function, reproduction, and development of living organisms. The types of living organisms from which the departmental faculty draws its working materials range from viruses and microbes through plants, roundworms, annelids, arthropods, and mollusks to fish, amphibia, and mammals.

Read the rest here:
Molecular and Cell Biology

Cell Biology

The global live cell imaging market is expected to grow at a CAGR of 8.44% during 2022-2027 – GlobeNewswire

New York, Sept. 28, 2022 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Reportlinker.com announces the release of the report "Live Cell Imaging Market - Global Outlook & Forecast Market 2022-2027" - https://www.reportlinker.com/p06323431/?utm_source=GNW In 2021, North America accounted for the highest share of the global live cell imaging market.

Live cell imaging has revolutionized studying cells, processes, and molecular interactions. Imaging techniques for living cells allow scientists to study cell structures and processes in real-time and over time. Such factors have significantly impacted the growth of the market. A few of the most widespread applications include examining the structural components of a cell, the dynamic studying processes, and the localization of molecules.

MARKET TRENDS & DRIVERS

Rising Target Patient Population

Live cell imaging is a vital tool in the study of cancer biology. Although high-resolution imaging is indispensable for studying genetic and cell signaling changes in underlying cancer, live cell imaging is essential for a deeper understanding of the function and disease mechanisms. Around 400,000 children develop cancer every year. Developed and emerging countries are facing the burden of communicable diseases. Most developing countries get exposed due to several factors that include demographic, socio-economic, and geographic conditions. Hence, the growing number of deaths and chronic conditions drive the live cell imaging market.

Deep Learning & Artificial Intelligence

The role of Artificial intelligence (AI) in life science is rapidly expanding and holds great potential for microscopy. In the past, the power of microscopy for supporting or disproving scientific hypotheses got limited by scale, and the time associated with quantifying, capturing, and analyzing large numbers of images was often prohibitive. Recently, AI has made fast inroads into many scientific fields and the world of microscopy. AI-based self-learning microscopy shows the potential to produce high throughput image analysis that is more effortless and less time-consuming. Newer AI technology allows better visualization of unlabeled live cells over a prolonged period.

Increase in Funding for Cell & Gene Therapy

The demand for regenerative medicine has increased across developed countries, and investments in cell & gene therapy have grown drastically in recent years. The public and private sectors are at the forefront of funding cell and gene therapy developers. Recently, many government organizations and private firms have started funding many biotech start-ups and research institutes that invest in the R&D of cell and gene therapy products. According to the Alliance for Regenerative Medicines, there was a 164% jump in funding for cell & gene therapy in 2019 compared to 2017.

Advancements & Newer Imaging Techniques

Live cell imaging arises from scientific interest coupled with imaging and labeling technology improvements. Putting together various technological advancements with biological interests gives scientists many more ways to use live cell imaging. In particular, exciting progress in probe development has enabled a broad array of nucleic acids, proteins, glycans, lipids, ions, metabolites, and other targets to be labeled. Many recent advancements in microscopic technologies use software that enables a better quantitative image analysis of label-free images.

Also, current microscopy techniques limit the quantity and quality of information available to researchers and clinicians and harm the living cells during long-term studies. Hence new imaging technologies are being developed to overcome various limitations. These advancements will help towards future market growth. For instance, the progress of combining 3D fluorescence imaging and holotomography microscopy has overcome some limitations.

Growing Research-based Activities

In the past two decades, the spending on R&D and the introduction of newer drugs have increased rapidly. In 2019, the pharma industry spent around $83 billion on R&D. From 2010 to 2019, the number of novel drugs were approved, whose sales increased by 60% compared with the previous decade, with a peak of 59 new drugs approved in 2018. The rising amount of R&D expenditure and the number of R&D activities in the pharmaceutical sector has led to the significant growth of the market.

SEGMENTATION ANALYSIS

The global live cell imaging market by product includes sub-segments by equipment, consumables, and software. In 2021, the equipment sector accounted for the highest share in the global live cell imaging market.Under the equipment sector, live-cell imaging microscopes are opening novel and exciting avenues for studying cellular health, viability, colony formation, migration, and cellular responses to external stimuli. The demand for microscopes is at a larger scale, majorly due to the technological advancements in microscopes and increasing studies into cell behavior. Fluorescence microscopy, confocal microscopy, transmitted light microscopy, and other techniques are included in the global live cell imaging market by technique. Fluorescence microscopy held the largest share of 53.68% in the global live cell imaging market in 2021. Live-cell imaging techniques are involved in a wide spectrum of imaging modalities, including widefield fluorescence, confocal, multiphoton, total internal reflection, FRET, lifetime imaging, super-resolution, and transmitted light microscopy. An increasing number of investigations are using live-cell imaging techniques. Owing to these advances, live-cell imaging has become a requisite analytical tool in most cell biology laboratories. Cell biology, drug discovery, developmental biology, and stem cell are the applications primary segments of the live cell imaging market. In 2021, cell biology accounted for the highest share of 38.72% in the global live cell imaging market. The end-user market includes segments by pharma & biotech companies, academic & research institutes, and others. Academic and research institutions identify promising discoveries and seek to initiate their development and commercialization. Most new insights into biology, disease, and new technologies arise in academia, funded by public grants, foundations, and institutional funds. The discovery and development of new therapies have and will likely continue to require contributions from academic institutions and the biopharmaceutical industry.

Segmentation by Product Type Equipment Consumables Software

Segmentation by Technique Fluorescence microscopy Confocal microscopy Transmitted light microscopy Others

Segmentation by Application Cell Biology Drug Discovery Developmental Biology Stem Cells

Segmentation by End-Users Pharma & Biotech Companies Academic & research centers Others

GEOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS

By geography, the report includes North America, Europe, APAC, Latin America, and the Middle East & Africa. In 2021, North America accounted for the highest share of the global live cell imaging market.

Live cell imaging systems are used for diagnostics purposes, drug discovery & development, and precision medicine. The increase in healthcare expenditures and funding for R&D activities for live cells-driven drug discovery, development, and personalized medicine is one of the major driving factors for leading the North American region. Europe holds the second-largest share of the global market, owing to a growing patient population in need of new treatments such as stem cell therapy and gene therapy, an increasing number of drug approvals for precision medicine, government funding for research-based activities, rapid advancements in live cell imaging, and a variety of other factors.

The APAC region will likely witness the fastest growth in the global live cell imaging market. The significant factors behind this growth can be due to the constant rise in cancers and infectious diseases, growing demand for stem cell research studies, rising R&D expenditures, the increased utility of biomarkers for diagnostic purposes, rising awareness for cell & gene therapies, need for precision medicine, and advances in drug discovery & cell and biology development. However, Latin America and Middle East & Africa accounted for minimal shares in the global market.

Segmentation by Geography

North Americao THE USo Canada Europeo Germanyo Franceo UKo Italyo Spain APACo Japano Chinao Indiao South Koreao Australia Latin Americao Brazilo Mexicoo Argentina Middle East & Africao Turkeyo Saudi Arabiao South Africao UAE

COMPETITIVE LANDSCAPE

The leading players in the market are implementing various strategies such as marketing and promotional activities, mergers & acquisitions, product launches, and approvals. Also, high R&D investments and boosting distribution networks have helped companies enhance their market share and presence.

The global live cell imaging market includes global and regional players. Major players contributing to the markets significant shares include Agilent, Bruker, Carl Zeiss AG, Danaher, Merck KGaA, PerkinElmer, and Thermo Fisher Scientific. Other prominent players in the market include Axion (CytoSMART Technologies), Bio-Rad Laboratories, blue-ray biotech, Etaluma, Grace Bio Labs, ibidi GmbH, KEYENCE, NanoEnTek, Nanolive SA, Nikon, Olympus, and others.

Recent Developments in the Global Market

In 2021, CytoSMART launched CytoSMART Lux3 BR, a new type of bright-field microscope, i.e., a live-cell imaging microscope equipped with a high-quality CMOS camera to assist label-free cell imaging procedures. In 2021, the Zeiss group announced that they would launch Zeiss Visioner 1, a Zeiss live cell imaging system, an innovative digital microscope that facilitates real-time all-in-one focus via a micro-mirror array system. In 2020, CytoSMART Technologies launched CytoSMART Multi Lux, a remote live cell imaging system.

Key Vendors Danaher Agilent Technologies PerkinElmer Merck KGaA ZEISS Thermo Fisher Scientific

Other Prominent Vendors Axion BioSystems BD Bio-Rad Laboratories Blue-Ray Biotech Bruker Eppendorf Etaluma Grace Bio-Labs ibidi GmbH Intelligent Imaging Innovations KEYENCE Logos Biosystems NanoEntek Nanolive SA Nikon Evident ONI Oxford Instruments Phase Focus Phase Holographic Imaging PHI AB Proteintech Group Sartorius AG Sony Biotechnology Tomocube

KEY QUESTIONS ANSWERED1. What is the expected live cell imaging market size by 2027?2. What is the live cell imaging market growth?3. What are the latest trends in the live cell imaging market?4. Who are the market leaders in the global live cell imaging market?5. Which region has the largest live cell imaging market share?Read the full report: https://www.reportlinker.com/p06323431/?utm_source=GNW

About ReportlinkerReportLinker is an award-winning market research solution. Reportlinker finds and organizes the latest industry data so you get all the market research you need - instantly, in one place.

__________________________

Originally posted here:
The global live cell imaging market is expected to grow at a CAGR of 8.44% during 2022-2027 - GlobeNewswire

Cell Biology

Scientists Discover That Chromosomes Are Fluid – SciTechDaily

The study found that chromosomes are fluid, almost liquid, outside of their division phases.

Researchers from CNRS, theCurie Institute, and Sorbonne University have successfully physically acted onchromosomes in live cells for the first time. They found that, outside of cell division phases, chromosomes are actually very fluidalmost liquidby subjecting to different forces using magnets. The study was recently published in the prestigious journal Science.

When they are not in their division phases, chromosomes are fluid, though not quite liquid. This discovery was made possible by the first-ever direct mechanical manipulation of chromosomes in the nucleus of live cells.

Previously, chromosomes, which are extraordinarily long DNA molecules, were represented as entangled like loose balls of yarn and creating a sort of gel. This new publications findings present a completely different picture. Chromosomes are fluid and free to move, unrestricted by the other parts that make up the nucleus and can reorganize themselves.

To reach these conclusions published in Science, scientists from CNRS, theCurie Institute, and Sorbonne University, working in the Nuclear Dynamics, Physical Chemistry and Cell Biology, and Cancer laboratories, in collaboration with scientists from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, attached magnetic nanoparticles to a small portion of a chromosome in a living cell. Then, they stretched the chromosome, exerting different degrees of force, thanks to a micro-magnet outside the cell. Using this approach, the teams managed to measure the response of a chromosome to external forces, for the very first time in a living cell.

Through these experiments, the scientists were able to see that the range of forces exerted naturally in the nucleus for example by enzymes replicating DNA is sufficient to substantially alter the conformation of a chromosome. This major discovery, at the interface between physics and biology, changes the hitherto established representation of chromosomes. It also adds new elements to our understanding of biological processes, the biophysics of chromosomes, and the organization of the genome.

Reference: Live-cell micromanipulation of a genomic locus reveals interphase chromatin mechanics by Veer I. P. Keizer, Simon Grosse-Holz, Maxime Woringer, Laura Zambon, Koceila Aizel, Maud Bongaerts, Fanny Delille, Lorena Kolar-Znika, Vittore F. Scolari, Sebastian Hoffmann, Edward J. Banigan, Leonid A. Mirny, Maxime Dahan, Daniele Fachinetti and Antoine Coulon, 28 July 2022, Science.DOI: 10.1126/science.abi9810

See more here:
Scientists Discover That Chromosomes Are Fluid - SciTechDaily

Cell Biology

Can plants think? The burgeoning field of plant neurobiology has a lot to say on the matter – Salon

Americans like to mow their lawns, but blades of grass aren't supposed to all have the same length. Left un-sheared, an all-natural lawn contains grasses of wildly varying heights, more akin to an unruly, uncombed head of hair right after a long night's sleep. A lawn is not a single organism, but a large community of plants that have individual heights; being mowed is not the natural state for a blade of grass.

This raises a disturbing question: When a human mows a lawn, is that the equivalent of mass torture to the grass assuming the grass can "feel" or "think" the way we can? The proposition is not as outlandish as it might seem. Recent research suggests that plants are far from the stationary automatons that most of us think of them as. And though they don't have brains in the same way most animals do, plants seem to possess a different set of evolutionary tools that suggest they may experience consciousness, albeit in a radically different way from us.

"There are numerous definitions but the most simple and relevant is this: Consciousness is a feature of living systems allowing them awareness of their external and internal conditions."

One such theory of how this might work is known as the "Cellular Basis of Consciousness" theory. This posits that all life, from the smallest single-celled organism and on upwards to the largest animals on Earth, possesses something akin to consciousness.

"In our Cellular Basis of Consciousness (CBC) Theory, consciousness evolved with the very first cells and all cellular life is endowed with consciousness which is essential for their agency, survival and evolution," explainedDr. Frantisek Baluska, a scientist at the University of Bonn'sDepartment of Plant Cell Biology, in an email interview with Salon. Baluska has published articles in scholarly journals from BioEssaysto Philosophical Transactions Bon the subject of plant consciousness. According to CBC Theory, every cell that exists possesses the innate qualities necessary to possess a level of self-awareness. It points out that individual cells are able to interact with their surroundings in a manner that clearly displays a sense of agency. Baluska and other scholars like psychologist Dr. Arthur S. Reber and neurobiologist Dr. Stefano Mancuso have argued that there are structures in all cells that endow each organism with a certain amount of consciousness.

"There are numerous definitions but the most simple and relevant is this: Consciousness is a feature of living systems allowing them awareness of their external and internal conditions," Baluska wrote to Salon when asked to define consciousness in the sense used to understand the inner lives of plants.

Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe toSalon's weekly newsletter The Vulgar Scientist.

Dr. Paco Calvo has an upcoming book, co-authored with Natalie Lawrence, called "Planta Sapiens: Unmasking Plant Intelligence." Calvo works at the MINT Lab (Minimal Intelligence Lab) at the University of Murcia in Spain, and provided Salon with his own definition of consciousness.

"There is no one single, agreed-upon definition of what 'consciousness' is," Calvo told Salon by email. To the extent that a coherent definition can be deduced based on what scientists know for sure about biology, however, Calvo speculated that "consciousness relates to the presence of 'feelings, subjective states, a primitive awareness of events, including awareness of internal states.'" Within that context, Calvo pointed out that scientists have already demonstrated that a number of non-human animals possess sentience, from cephalopods (like octopuses) to insects (like ants). As the list continues to grow, it is reasonable to at least wonder if plants as well as neurologically-wired organisms will be found to have self-awareness.

"Sentience, we may say, makes sense for life, as an essential underpinning to the business of living," Calvo explained. "And it is very unlikely that plants are not far more aware than we intuitively assume." To the "skeptics" who insist that consciousness must be tied to a central nervous system, and that plants would not need to evolve consciousness in the first place, "even if 'consciousness', as understood in vertebrates, is generated by complex neuronal systems, there is no objective way of knowing that subjective experience has not evolved with entirely different kinds of hardware in other organisms," Calvo argued. "We have no evidence to conclude that no brain means no awareness. It is certainly true that we cannot yet know if plants are conscious. But we also cannot assume that they are not."

Calvo added, "Plants, not unlike, say, locked-in patients, might well have significant conscious experience, although there is no way for us to intuit it nor for them to communicate it to us."

"Sentience, we may say, makes sense for life, as an essential underpinning to the business of living," Calvo explained. "And it is very unlikely that plants are not far more aware than we intuitively assume."

Not everyone is convinced by the various theories that exist for plant consciousness.Dr. David G. Robinson of the University of Heidelberg's Centre for Organismal Studies co-authored a 2021 articlefrom the scholarly journalBiochemical and Biophysical Research Communications which addressed another theory that pro-plant consciousness proponents claims backs up their belief. On that occasion, Robinson discussedIntegrated Information Theory, which attempts to identify the fundamental properties of consciousness and then ascertain the physical bodies that correspond with them. More broadly, Robinson was dismissive of those scholars who say that plants can be conscious beings.

"I can only refer you to the article of Mallatt et al. (2020), where the 'debunking of myths' was painstakingly carried out," Robinson wrote to Salon. "Since plants don't have a brain, Mancuso in his 2015 book talks about 'distributed intelligence' to explain the fact that many animal-like properties (hearing, seeing, chemical signaling, etc) are shown by epidermal cells. He equates this with consciousness, but in all these cases these are genetically programmed responses which are not centrally coordinated and there is no indication of feedback. This is not consciousness."

Robinson added, "There is a huge popular following for books (e.g. from [Dr. Monica] Gagliano) humanizing plants, telling us that plants can communicate with us. This is shamanism, pure humbug it's fool's gold. We learn nothing about plants by reading this literature."

While it is likely an exaggeration to dismiss the ideas about plant consciousness as "pure humbug," it is fair to say that they remain unproved. Indeed, if they were validated, they would have remarkable implications in terms of the ethics of how humans interact with plants.

"We should acknowledge that plants are complex living systems which deserve dignity, as it is stated in the Swiss Constitution through amendment from 2008," Baluska argued. "As animals, humans and plants are in close co-evolution and have the same biological origins, we should treat them as living organisms deserving dignity."

Calvo noted that, even if humans only acknowledge that plants have a very primitive form of consciousness, that should still make us feel "uneasy" at the realization that "plants are agents, and not mere objects or resources to be exploited more or less wisely."

"Most people would dismiss the very possibility that plants are sentient at the outset, negating the need for an ethical standpoint, and arguing that it would lead to absurd implications," Calvo pointed out. "And I must confess that for many years, the ethical implications of the proposition that sentience might extend well beyond the animal world hadn't troubled me. But the parallels that are emerging between the ways that plants sense, understand and respond to their environments and the ways that animals do, are making it increasingly difficult to avoid these questions. In fact, our success at tackling the ecological crisis may depend upon facing these issues head-on."

More here:
Can plants think? The burgeoning field of plant neurobiology has a lot to say on the matter - Salon

Cell Biology

Who will get the call from Stockholm? It’s time for STAT’s 2022 Nobel Prize predictions – STAT

We live in a time where the rate of medical and superlative scientific advances is accelerating by more than 1,300% since 1985, according to one recent estimate. With so many unprecedented, transformative breakthroughs happening, forecasting which one will be awarded top research honors isnt getting any easier. But with the naming of this years Nobels fast approaching the medicine award will be announced on Oct. 3, physics on Oct. 4, chemistry on Oct. 5 prize prognosticating for the World Series of Science is once again in full swing.

Public polls, tallies of other elite awards, and journal citations have helped betting-minded people collect the names of whos most likely in the running. The shortlist includes researchers who elucidated how cells make energy, those who discovered the chemical chatter of bacteria, many of the brilliant minds who shepherded us into the era of the genome, and most prominently, the pioneers behind the mRNA Covid vaccines.

How Nobels are decided is a matter of grave secrecy records of who nominated and voted for whom are sealed for 50 years making forecasting new winners even more of a challenge. Still, some experts have developed systems that do a decent job.

advertisement

David Pendlebury of Clarivate looks at how often a scientists key papers are cited by peers and awarded so-called predictive prizes like the Lasker or Gairdner awards. Each year he comes up with a group of Citation Laureates, and since 2002, 64 of his picks have gone on to receive a Nobel Prize.

Using that strategy, Pendlebury thinks the medicine Nobel could go to the researchers who discovered that different kinds of malformed protein aggregates, in different cell types, underlie a number of neurological diseases including Parkinsons, ALS, and frontotemporal dementia. Virginia Man-Yee Lee of the University of Pennsylvania published a seminal Science paper in 2006, which has now been cited more than 4,000 times. When Pendlebury dug into those citations, he noticed that researchers almost always mentioned that paper in tandem with a very similar but much lower-profile study published a few months later by Masato Hasegawa of the Tokyo Metropolitan Institute of Medical Science.

advertisement

This phenomenon of simultaneous independent discovery is very common in science, more than I think people understand, Pendlebury told STAT. So the citations tend to go to the first mover, but they are really a pair. And since their papers, the field has blossomed in many directions, because it was a big step forward for trying to find therapies for these kinds of diseases.

For similar reasons, Pendlebury also has his eyes on two scientists who made groundbreaking discoveries about the genetic basis of disease: Mary-Claire King of the University of Washington for uncovering the role of mutations in the BRCA genes in breast and ovarian cancers, which revolutionized cancer screening, and Stuart Orkin of Harvard Medical School for identifying the genetic changes behind the various types of thalassemia leading to promising new gene-based therapies for inherited blood disorders.

Another thing that Pendlebury takes into account in his predictions is periodicity. The committees tend to take turns rewarding different disciplines; neuroscience, cancer, or infectious-disease discoveries win every decade or so. For the medicine prize, periodicity also shows up between discoveries of basic molecular biology and ones that lead to people actually being treated or cured of the things that ail them.

In the past decade, the medicine prize has more times than not gone back to basics. In 2013, it went to intra-cell transportation, in 2016 to the process of cellular self-destruction, in 2017 to the genetic clocks that control circadian rhythms, in 2019 to how cells sense and adapt to oxygen availability, and last year to how cells sense temperature and touch. Prizes with a more clinical focus have been awarded in 2015, (roundworm and malaria therapy), 2018 (immuno-oncolgy), and 2020 (hepatitis C).

Thats just one reason why cancer biologist Jason Sheltzer of the Yale School of Medicine is so bullish on this years medicine prize going to Katalin Karik of BioNTech and Drew Weissman of Penn Medicine for taking messenger RNA, or mRNA, on a 40-year journey from an obscure corner of cell biology to a pandemic-halting vaccine technology. Its such a radical change in vaccine technology, at this point billions of doses have been given, and it has incontrovertibly saved millions of people from dying of Covid, Sheltzer said. To me, its just a slam dunk.Sheltzer has been making Nobel predictions on Twitter since 2016 and correctly chose immuno-oncology pioneer James Allison for the 2018 medicine prize. His methodology is a bit more straightforward; he tracks winners of seven major science prizes the Horwitz, Wolf, Albany, Shaw, and Breakthrough Prize, in addition to the Lasker and Gairdner because the data show that theres only so long the Nobel Committee can ignore people whove won at least two. Karik and Weissman have won five of the six. Its not a question of if it will happen, its just a question of when, he said.

Hes less certain about the chemistry prize. Might David Allis of Rockefeller and Michael Grunstein of UCLA finally get the call to Stockholm? They discovered one way genes are activated through proteins called histones for which they shared a 2018 Lasker and a 2016 Gruber Prize in genetics. The control of gene expression, otherwise known as epigenetics, is a fundamental process in cell biology that researchers and industry are just beginning to harness to treat human disease. But the last time epigenetics got the Nobel nod was in 2006, with Roger Kornbergs win in chemistry for his work unlocking the molecular mystery of how RNA transcripts are assembled.

Its been nearly 20 years since that field has been recognized with a prize, so you could make the case that its very much due this year, said Sheltzer.

Thats even more true for DNA sequencing, which was last awarded a Nobel in 1980 to Wally Gilbert and Frederick Sanger for their work developing the first (eponymously named) method for determining the order of base pairs in nucleic acids. But so much has happened in the field since then, that the slate of worthy sequencing successors is practically overflowing.

Should it go to the scientists who gave us the first-ever draft of the human genome, and if so, which ones? Hundreds of researchers all over the world aided in the effort, which was a feat of engineering and mass production as much as scientific innovation. If the chemistry or medicine Nobel committees takes a cue from their physics counterpart, who in 2017 honored the organizers of the international project that discovered gravitational waves, then the top contenders would likely be the Human Genome Projects cat-herder-in-chief and recently departed director of the National Institutes of Health, Francis Collins, and Eric Lander, whose lab at the Broad Institute churned out much of the draft sequence. A third might be Craig Venter, whose competing private sequencing push at Celera raced the public effort to a hotly contested draw.

Perhaps a more deserving trio would be Marvin Caruthers of the University of Colorado, Leroy Hood of the Institute for Systems Biology, and Michael Hunkapiller, former CEO of DNA-sequencing behemoth Pacific Biosciences. They invented the technology behind the first automated sequencers, which powered the Human Genome Project (and were Pendleburys pick for the chemistry Nobel in 2019).

Or perhaps the call from Stockholm will go out to David Klenerman and Shankar Balasubramanian of the University of Cambridge, who developed the sequencing-by-synthesis technology that came after the Human Genome Project and is now the workhorse of the modern sequencing era (and for which they won the 2020 Millennium Technology Prize and this years Breakthrough Prize in life sciences). More recent inventions, like the nanopore sequencing technologies that have enabled the construction of the first actually complete human genomes in the last few years are also in the running, but probably a longer shot, despite their obvious contributions to both chemistry and medicine. Thats because the Nobel committees tend to tilt toward true trailblazers and away from those who extend an initial, foundation-laying discovery or insight.

The Human Genome Project, a perennial topic of conversation among Nobel-casters, has inspired even more intrigue than usual this year, following the surprise exit of Eric Lander from his position as White House science adviser in the wake of workplace bullying allegations.

Although the rare Nobel has been awarded to well-known jerks or kooks Kary Mullis, the eccentric inventor of PCR, and James Watson, the dubious co-discoverer of the double-helix structure of DNA (and frequent maker of racist, sexist remarks) come to mind the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, which selects the physics and chemistry laureates, and the Nobel Assembly at the Karolinska Institute, which chooses the physiology/medicine winner, tend to steer clear of controversy.

Its hard to find many examples of a Nobel being awarded to someone whos been super controversial, said Sheltzer.

Among Pendleburys picks, the person who skirts closest is perhaps Stephen Quake of Stanford University and the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, who provided advice to He Jiankui, the Chinese scientist who created the worlds first CRISPR babies. Stanford later cleared Quake of any misconduct. Quake has made important discoveries in microfluidics which led to rapid advances in noninvasive testing and single cell sequencing, and Pendlebury sees him as a favorite for a physics Nobel.

In chemistry, Pendlebury likes another Stanford University engineer, Zhenan Bao, for her paradigm-shifting work in the field of semiconducting polymers making stretchable electronic skin. Hes also got his eye on Daniel Nocera at Harvard University for foundational work illuminating the proton-coupled electron transfer process that powers cells, and the team of Bonnie Bassler from Princeton University and E. Peter Greenberg of the University of Washington for their discovery of quorum sensing a chemical communication system between bacteria.

Besides citations, prediction prizes, and periodicity, Pendlebury is also playing the long game. I pay special attention to papers that are 15, 20, 25, 30 years old, because it usually takes a decade or two for research to be selected by the Nobel Prize Committee, he said.

That might complicate things for one of the leading vote-getters in an online poll for the chemistry Nobel John Jumper of the Alphabet-owned company DeepMind and a 2023 Breakthrough Prize in life sciences winner. His work leading the AlphaFold artificial intelligence program stunned the world two years ago by essentially solving one of biologys most enduring challenges: quickly and accurately predicting the 3D structure of a protein from its amino acid sequence.

Thats why this first-time Nobel forecaster is betting on another top vote-getter for the chemistry prize, Carolyn Bertozzi of Stanford University, who has spent much of her illustrious career devising methods to understand an elusive but critical class of sugar-coated molecules called glycans found on the surface of almost all living cells. Shes been a member of the National Academy of Sciences since 2005 and won the Wolf prize earlier this year, in recognition of founding the field of bioorthogonal chemistry a term Bertozzi coined two decades ago that refers to reactions scientists can perform within living organisms without interfering with their normal functions.

Sticking with dark-horse picks (because, why not), Im going with Yuk Ming Dennis Lo of the Chinese University of Hong Kong for the medicine prize. In 1997, he reported that a growing fetus sheds cell-free DNA into the mothers blood. Ten years later, he found a way to use that DNA to detect the signature abnormalities associated with Down syndrome. Together, these discoveries revolutionized clinical practice of screening for fetal genetic abnormalities, leading to the development of non-invasive prenatal testing now used by millions of people every year. Lo has only just begun to be recognized for that work, winning last years Breakthrough Prize for life sciences and this years Lasker Award for clinical medical research, which was announced on Wednesday. He also founded companies based on this same principle for the early detection of multiple cancers, one of which was acquired by pioneering liquid biopsy giant Grail.

Other crowdsourced efforts to predict Nobel winners arent making a return appearance, including the March Madness-style brackets run for many years by the scientific research honors society Sigma Xi. (Last year saw Bertozzi lose in the finals to Omar Yaghi and Makoto Fujita, pioneers of metal-organic self-assembling structures.) Sigma Xi couldnt be reached for comment, but the change comes amid increasingly loud criticism of the Nobel Prizes, for the way they distort the collaborative nature of the scientific enterprise and overlook many of its important contributors (including many women and people of color).

Even Nobel obsessives like Sheltzer admit those arguments are becoming more compelling. But he likes how, at least for a few days every October, he can count on scientific discoveries splashing across the front page of the New York Times and leading the hour on the nightly news. There are amazing things happening in the scientific world right now, like CRISPR gene editing and immunotherapy for cancer, that I think should really be front-page news much more frequently than they are, said Sheltzer. But Im glad that the Nobel Prize shines a spotlight on them and elevates them into the national consciousness, even if just for a brief period of time.

Here is the original post:
Who will get the call from Stockholm? It's time for STAT's 2022 Nobel Prize predictions - STAT