Biochemistry Analyzer Market Incredible Possibilities, Growth Analysis and Forecast To 2028 ELITechGroup, EKF Diagnostics, Spinreact, Mindray – The…

December 6, 2020 medical

Overview Of Biochemistry Analyzer Industry 2020-2028:

This has brought along several changes in This report also covers the impact of COVID-19 on the global market.

The Biochemistry Analyzer Market analysis summary by Reports Insights is a thorough study of the current trends leading to this vertical trend in various regions. Research summarizes important details related to market share, market size, applications, statistics and sales. In addition, this study emphasizes thorough competition analysis on market prospects, especially growth strategies that market experts claim.

Biochemistry Analyzer Market competition by top manufacturers as follow: URIT Medical Electronic, ELITechGroup, EKF Diagnostics, Spinreact, Mindray, Danaher, Roche Diagnostics

Get a Sample PDF copy of the report @ https://reportsinsights.com/sample/210314

The global Biochemistry Analyzer market has been segmented on the basis of technology, product type, application, distribution channel, end-user, and industry vertical, along with the geography, delivering valuable insights.

The Type Coverage in the Market are:

Semi-Automatic Biochemical Analyzers

Fully Automated Biochemistry Analyzers

Market Segment by Applications, covers:

Academic Research Institutes

Biotechnology Companies

Contract Research Organizations

Diagnostic Centres

Hospitals

Pharmaceutical Companies

Others

Market segment by Regions/Countries, this report coversNorth AmericaEuropeChinaRest of Asia PacificCentral & South AmericaMiddle East & Africa

Major factors covered in the report:

To get this report at a profitable rate.: https://reportsinsights.com/discount/210314

The analysis objectives of the report are:

Our report offers:

Market share assessments for the regional and country level segments. Market share analysis of the top industry players. Strategic recommendations for the new entrants. Market forecasts for a minimum of 9 years of all the mentioned segments, sub segments and the regional markets. Market Trends (Drivers, Constraints, Opportunities, Threats, Challenges, Investment Opportunities, and recommendations). Strategic recommendations in key business segments based on the market estimations. Competitive landscaping mapping the key common trends. Company profiling with detailed strategies, financials, and recent developments. Supply chain trends mapping the latest technological advancements.

Access full Report Description, TOC, Table of Figure, Chart, etc. @ https://reportsinsights.com/industry-forecast/Biochemistry-Analyzer-Market-210314

About US:

Reports Insights is the leading research industry that offers contextual and data-centric research services to its customers across the globe. The firm assists its clients to strategize business policies and accomplish sustainable growth in their respective market domain. The industry provides consulting services, syndicated research reports, and customized research reports.

:(US) +1-214-272-0234

:(APAC) +91-7972263819

Email:[emailprotected]

Sales:[emailprotected]

Biochemistry

AU may employ people to remind others of COVID guidelines – The Auburn Plainsman

December 6, 2020 medical

Provost Bill Hardgrave met with faculty for a virtual town hall on Thursday via Zoom ahead of a spring semester professors feel will be challenging because of increased face-to-face classes.

Hardgrave proposed enlisting student workers and faculty to supervise campus to remind people to adhere to Auburn's COVID-19 guidelines, which he termed "hall monitors." Hardgrave said he and members of the University's Faculty Senate Executive Committee came up with the idea after listening to concerns about the spring semester.

"We will put people in the buildings if that's what it takes," Hardgrave said. "If we need be, [we'd] have people in there for the entire semester ... to keep the traffic flowing, keep people wearing their masks, keep them spaced out and going in and out the right doors."

Hardgrave intends to walk by every classroom in every academic building on campus for at least the first week of instruction in January to check that classes are running smoothly.

"We will take corrective action immediately during that first few weeks, and we'll continue that throughout the semester," he said.

Faculty had many questions about the proposal and student and faculty safety. Vanessa Falcao, chemistry and biochemistry lecturer, expressed concern about how about 200 students will transition in and out of her classes in close quarters with one another.

"[Students] have only 10 minutes to exchange between classes," Falcao said. "Is there any [thought] being put into extending the 10 minutes or how to organize to make the exchange of students safe with social distancing and lines?"

Hardgrave said the University considered extending the time between classes but felt the decision was "unwieldy." This is where hallway supervision might come into play, he said.

"These are the type of areas that we want to make sure we have these hall monitors ... who are going to make sure that people are coming in and out of the right doors, that they're coming in and out in an orderly fashion [and] that people aren't sitting along the walls congregated waiting to come in," Hardgrave said.

The provost said instructors might still need to be flexible in where they begin and end face-to-face classes to ensure students can safely enter rooms in time.

Some faculty questioned the ethics of having "hall monitors" in campus buildings.

"I do not think that people who are not trained health experts should be evaluating the green screens of the GuideSafe program or checking symptoms, and I worry about the unevenness of enforcing masks," said Sam Sommers, lecturer in the department of English. "How will they be trained? How will they be compensated for their labor? What is the plan?"

Hardgrave responded by saying that hall monitors would only be serving to encourage people to follow guidelines, and they would not ask about symptoms. Checking GuideSafe Healthcheck screener results, he said, is not something that requires medical training, and hall monitors would be tasked with directing people flagged as potentially exposed elsewhere.

"We have not worked out all the details, but we will have people in those classroom buildings," Hardgrave said. "We will hire people. It could be ... student workers [or] it could be that we ask for volunteers from our staff and our faculty to serve at certain hours of the day."

Hardgrave said faculty should control mask use in classrooms in their classes, as this doesn't fall under the provost's jurisdiction.

"I would treat wearing a mask the same as if they were talking on the phone while they were in the class," Hardgrave said to faculty in the meeting. "They are, by not wearing a mask, disrupting the class, and you need to treat it accordingly."

Hardgrave said Bobby Woodard, senior vice president of Student Affairs, told him that there haven't been any student conduct issues of students not wearing masks in classrooms.

There were situations, the provost said, where instructors felt uneasy directing students to put on a face mask. Hardgrave said that next semester, faculty should ask students to wear masks even if it means interrupting class. If students refuse, he said they should be asked to leave unless they have medical documentation stating they are unable to wear a face covering.

Other faculty were skeptical about the effectiveness of having "hall monitors" based on behavior they saw during the fall semester with fewer students on campus. Jaena Alabi, English and psychology librarian, said from Sept. 17 to Oct. 21, Ralph Brown Draughon Library staff recorded asking people 30,000 times to put a mask on or to wear them correctly.

"We've got two areas in particular we've got to monitor one is the library, the other is the Student Center," Hardgrave said. "We've got to work on those areas. Some of you may disagree with this, but I think for the most part, our students did very well on wearing their masks. I think trust is a really key element but ... I think creating a culture of compliance is important."

Here is the original post:
AU may employ people to remind others of COVID guidelines - The Auburn Plainsman

Biochemistry

Immunomic Therapeutics’ CEO to Present at the 2nd Annual Glioblastoma Drug Development Summit – Business Wire

December 6, 2020 medical

ROCKVILLE, Md.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Immunomic Therapeutics, Inc. (ITI) announced today that it will be presenting at the 2nd Annual Glioblastoma Drug Development Virtual Summit. On Wednesday, December 9th, Chief Executive Officer at ITI, Dr. Bill Hearl, will be presenting a talk titled, Adaptive T-cell Immunotherapy for Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma: Using Targeted Antigen Presentation to Enhance Immune Responses. Dr. Hearl will discuss ITIs investigational platform technology, the companys lead program and its preliminary data in GBM, as well as the companys future focus.

Presentation details are as follows:

Title: Adaptive T-cell Immunotherapy for Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma: Using Targeted Antigen Presentation to Enhance Immune Responses

Presentation Category: Vaccines

Date and Time: Wednesday, December 9, 2020 12:40 PM EST / 9:40 AM PDT

Location: Virtual Summit

About UNITE

ITIs investigational UNITE platform, or UNiversal Intracellular Targeted Expression, works by fusing pathogenic antigens with the Lysosomal Associated Membrane Protein 1, an endogenous protein in humans, for immune processing. In this way, ITIs vaccines (DNA or RNA) have the potential to utilize the bodys natural biochemistry to develop a broad immune response including antibody production, cytokine release and critical immunological memory. This approach puts UNITE technology at the crossroads of immunotherapies in a number of illnesses, including cancer, allergy and infectious diseases. UNITE is currently being employed in a Phase II clinical trial as a cancer immunotherapy. ITI is also collaborating with academic centers and biotechnology companies to study the use of UNITE in cancer types of high mortality, including cases where there are limited treatment options like glioblastoma and acute myeloid leukemia. ITI believes that these early clinical studies may provide a proof of concept for UNITE therapy in cancer, and if successful, set the stage for future studies, including combinations in these tumor types and others. Preclinical data is currently being developed to explore whether LAMP1 nucleic acid constructs may amplify and activate the immune response in highly immunogenic tumor types and be used to create immune responses to tumor types that otherwise do not provoke an immune response.

About Immunomic Therapeutics, Inc.

Immunomic Therapeutics, Inc. (ITI) is a privately-held, clinical stage biotechnology company pioneering the development of vaccines through its investigational proprietary technology platform, UNiversal Intracellular Targeted Expression (UNITE), which is designed to utilize the bodys natural biochemistry to develop vaccines that have the potential to generate broad immune responses. The UNITE platform has a robust history of applications in various therapeutic areas, including infectious diseases, oncology, allergy and autoimmune diseases. ITI is primarily focused on applying the UNITE platform to oncology, where it could potentially have broad applications, including targeting viral antigens, cancer antigens, neoantigens and producing antigen-derived antibodies as biologics. In early 2020, an investment of over $60M by HLB Co., LTD, a global pharmaceutical company, enabled ITI to accelerate application of its immuno-oncology platform, in particular to glioblastoma multiforme, and rapidly advance other key candidates in the pipeline, including the most recent initiative into infectious diseases with development of its vaccine candidate for COVID-19. The Company has built a large pipeline from UNITE with eight oncology programs, multiple animal health programs and a SARS-CoV-2 program to prevent and treat COVID-19. ITI has entered into a significant allergy partnership with Astellas Pharma and has formed several academic collaborations with leading Immuno-oncology researchers at Duke University and the University of Florida. ITI maintains its headquarters in Rockville, Maryland. For more information, please visit http://www.immunomix.com.

Immunology

New Asthma Guidelines Published in The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, an Official Journal of the AAAAI – Yahoo Finance

December 6, 2020 medical

New Asthma Guidelines Published in The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, an Official Journal of the AAAAI

PR Newswire

MILWAUKEE, Dec. 3, 2020

The National Asthma Education and Prevention Program Coordinating Committee, coordinated by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health, has updated its asthma guidelines.

MILWAUKEE, Dec. 3, 2020 /PRNewswire-PRWeb/ -- For the first time since 2007, the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program (NAEPP) Coordinating Committee, coordinated by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), has updated its asthma guidelines.

The full document, 2020 Focused Updates to the Asthma Management Guidelines: A Report from the NAEPP Coordinating Committee Expert Panel Working Group, was published in the December issue of The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (JACI), an official journal of the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology (AAAAI).

"The publication of the 2020 Focused Updates to the Asthma Management Guidelines represents a significant advance in asthma care. Inclusion of implementation guidance and shared decision making will enable providers to assure optimal care for their patients with asthma. I would like to thank Dr. Giselle Mosnaim for her work as the AAAAI representative to the NAEPP Coordinating Committee. In addition, a special thanks to AAAAI members Drs. Robert Lemanske, Michael Schatz, Alan Baptist, Kathryn Blake, and Edward Brooks who served on the NAEPP Coordinating Committee Expert Panel Working Group," said AAAAI President Mary Beth Fasano, MD, MSPH, FAAAAI.

The newly published asthma guidelines contain updated recommendations that cover the following six different topics:

Fractional Exhaled Nitric Oxide (FeNO) Test

The document lists four recommendations when it comes to FeNO testing. A FeNO test is a way to determine how much lung inflammation is present and how well inhaled steroids are suppressing this inflammation.

Story continues

FeNO testing is not recommended for children aged 0-4 who experience recurrent wheezing to predict the future development of asthma.

For anyone 5 years and older, FeNO testing recommendations are somewhat different. It is not recommended to use FeNO as the only measurement for asthma control. It is recommended for individuals with asthma symptoms if a diagnosis is uncertain using other testing methods such as spirometry and clinical history. Additionally, for those with persistent allergic asthma, if there is uncertainty in choosing, monitoring, or adjusting asthma treatment therapies based on other methods, the Expert Panel conditionally recommends adding FeNO measurement to help monitor and manage asthma.

Allergen Mitigation

Another four recommendations were made regarding allergen mitigation as it relates to asthma. Allergen mitigation interventions are not recommended for individuals with asthma who lack sensitization to specific indoor allergens or who don't have any indoor allergen symptoms. For those who do have confirmed allergies to indoor allergens, multicomponent allergen-specific interventions are recommended.

The Expert Panel recommends the use of pest management alone or as part of a multicomponent allergen-specific mitigation intervention for individuals with asthma who are exposed and have symptoms related to exposure to pests such as cockroaches and rodents. For those with allergies to dust mites, the new recommendations do not support impermeable pillow/mattress covers alone but only as part of a multicomponent allergen-specific intervention.

Inhaled Corticosteroids (ICS)

ICS are medications used to treat asthma and were the subject of five recommendations. Low-dose ICS is recommended for individuals 12 and older with mild persistent asthma, either daily or as needed along with short-acting beta-agonists (SABA). For those 4 years and older with mild to moderate persistent asthma who adhere to daily ICS treatment, it is recommended that healthcare workers do not increase ICS doses in the short-term due to increased symptoms.

For moderate to severe persistent asthma, it is recommended to use ICS-formoterol in a single inhaler for daily asthma control and as reliever therapy. That recommendation varies slightly depending on the age group. In patients 4 to 11 years, the single inhaler is recommended compared to using a higher-dose ICS for daily controller therapy and SABA for quick-relief. It is also recommended over same-dose ICS-long-acting beta agonists (LABA) as a daily therapy with SABA for quick relief. For those 12 and older, the single inhaler is recommended compared to a higher-dose ICS-LABA for daily therapy and SABA for quick relief.

For children aged 0-4 who have recurrent wheezing due to respiratory tract infections but no wheezing between infections, a short course of daily ICS and as-needed SABA for quick-relief is recommended compared to SABA as-needed only.

Long-acting Muscarinic Antagonist (LAMA)

The document lists three recommendations when it comes to LAMA, which is a class of medications used for COPD that sometimes may be used for asthma.

It is not recommended to add LAMA to ICS therapy, compared to adding LABA to ICS therapy in children 12 and over with persistent, uncontrolled asthma. In the same population, LAMA is recommended to be added to ICS controller therapy if LABA is not used, compared to continuing the same dose of ICS alone. Adding LAMA to ICS-LABA is recommended in this population compared to continuing the same dose of ICS-LABA for uncontrolled asthma.

Immunotherapy

Two recommendations were released regarding immunotherapy and allergic asthma. The first recommends the use of subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) for individuals 5 years and up as an additional treatment to standard medications in individuals whose asthma is controlled at the initiation, build-up and maintenance phases of immunotherapy.

For those with persistent allergic asthma, the use of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) in asthma treatment is not recommended.

Bronchial Thermoplasty (BT)

One recommendation was released regarding BT, a non-drug outpatient procedure developed to treat severe, persistent asthma. This treatment is not recommended for individuals 18 and older with persistent asthma. For those over 18 who are less concerned about potential harms and more concerned with potential benefits, they may consider BT.

Dr. Robert Lemanske, who as previously mentioned is a member of the Expert Panel Working Group that authored the guidelines, provided some context on how they were updated. "The updates were developed using some new approaches compared to those used previously. First, it was not a complete revision but rather a focus on six topic areas that were decided upon initially by a needs assessment committee. Second, it used a new technique of evaluating clinical data called GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation). Third, was the inclusion of an Implementation Guidance (IG) section for each recommendation. The IG section provides further clarification of the population to which the recommendation applies, exceptions, and practical aspects of how to use the recommendation in patient care. At the end of each IG section is a list of issues suggested by the Expert Panel to communicate to patients as part of shared decision making about whether to use the therapy or intervention presented in the recommendation."

"From the beginning, the 2020 Focused Updates to the Asthma Management Guidelines was designed to help primary care providers, specialists, and patients work together to make decisions about asthma care," said James P. Kiley, PhD, director of the Division of Lung Diseases at the NHLBI, a part of the NIH. "Our goal was to provide clear summaries about each of the new recommendations, information to share with patients, and updated treatment diagrams."

You can learn more about asthma on the AAAAI website, aaaai.org.

The American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology (AAAAI) represents allergists, asthma specialists, clinical immunologists, allied health professionals and others with a special interest in the research and treatment of allergic and immunologic diseases. Established in 1943, the AAAAI has more than 7,100 members in the United States, Canada and 72 other countries. The AAAAI's Find an Allergist/Immunologist service is a trusted resource to help you find a specialist close to home.

Media Contact

April Presnell, The American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology, 414-272-6071, apresnell@aaaai.org

SOURCE The American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology

Continued here:
New Asthma Guidelines Published in The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, an Official Journal of the AAAAI - Yahoo Finance

Immunology

I-Mab Appoints Leading Immunology and Hematology Experts to Its Scientific Advisory Board – PRNewswire

December 6, 2020 medical

"We are honored and delighted to welcome Dr. Dong and Dr. Ma to our scientific advisory board," said Dr. Jingwu Zang, Founder, Honorary Chairman and Director of I-Mab. "Dr. Dong is a globally recognized leader in the field of immunology and Dr. Ma is a distinguished pioneer in hematology and oncology. I-Mab will greatly benefit from their experience and expertise in their respective fields as we advance our mission to bring transformational medicines to patients around the world through innovation."

"I-Mab has built a leading position in immuno-oncology and I have been impressed with what this company has been able to accomplish in research and clinical development. I look forward to bringing my expertise to the advisory board and contributing to I-Mab's rapid growth, in China and globally," said Dr. Chen Dong.

Dr. Dong is currently Professor and Director of the Institute for Immunology at Tsinghua University, and a principal investigator at Shanghai Renji Hospital. He is a fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science and a member of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Dr. Dong specializes in immunology, and his transformative research has led to ground-breaking discoveries in the field of T cell biology and interleukin (IL)-17 family cytokines. His research focuses on understanding the molecular mechanisms whereby immune and inflammatory responses are normally regulated, and to apply this knowledge to the understanding and treatment of autoimmunity and allergy disorders as well as cancer. With over 200 publications, Dr. Dong has been rated a highly cited researcher for seven consecutive years from 2014 to 2020. He is the recipient of several distinguished awards, including the 2009 American Association of Immunologists-BD Bioscience Investigator Award and the 2019 International Cytokine and Interferon Society Biolegend-William E. Paul Award.

"I-Mab is developing advanced and innovative programs in novel anti-cancer therapies. The company is well-positioned to bring to patients target therapies in areas of significant unmet need, and I am pleased to be joining at such an exciting stage in its growth," said Dr. Jun Ma.

Dr. Ma is currently Director of the Harbin Institute of Hematology & Oncology, and Chief Supervisor of Supervisory Committee at the Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology. He started his studies in the University of Tokyo Hospital and, over the decades, his research focused on treatments for leukemia and lymphoma. He was the first to establish a culture system for multiple hematopoietic progenitor cells in vitro in China. Since 1983, he has used sequential therapy of all-trans retinoic acid (ATRA) and arsenic trioxide (ATO) to treat acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL) for about 1200 cases. Dr. Ma has published about 200 articles and conducted 8 China's National R&D Programs and 25 provincial or municipal-level projects. He is highly recognized as the leader in hematology in China.

Dr. Dong and Dr. Ma join existing SAB members Patricia LoRusso, Eric K. Rowinsky, Howard L. Weiner, Yilong Wu, Timothy A. Yap and Roy S. Herbst.

About I-Mab

I-Mab (Nasdaq:IMAB) is a dynamic, global biotech company exclusively focused on discovery, development and soon commercialization of novel or highly differentiated biologics in the therapeutic areas of immuno-oncology and autoimmune diseases. The Company's mission is to bring transformational medicines to patients around the world through innovation. I-Mab's innovative pipeline of more than 10 clinical and pre-clinical stage drug candidates is driven by the Company's Fast-to-PoC (Proof-of-Concept) and Fast-to-Market development strategies through internal R&D and global partnerships. The Company is on track to transitioning from a clinical stage biotech company toward a fully integrated global biopharmaceutical company with cutting-edge R&D capabilities, world-class GMP manufacturing facility and commercial capability. I-Mab has offices inBeijing,Shanghai,Hangzhou,Hong KongandMaryland,United States. For more information, please visithttp://ir.i-mabbiopharma.comand follow I-Mab on LinkedIn, Twitterand WeChat.

For more information, please contact:

I-Mab

Jielun Zhu, Chief Financial OfficerE-mail: [emailprotected] Office line: +86 21 6057 8000

Gigi Feng, Chief Communications OfficerE-mail: [emailprotected] Office line: +86 21 6057 5785

Investor Inquiries:

Burns McClellan, Inc. (Americas and Europe)

Steve KlassE-mail: [emailprotected]Office line: +1 212 213 0006

The Piacente Group, Inc. (Asia)

Emilie WuE-mail: [emailprotected]Office line: + 86 21 6039 8363

SOURCE I-Mab

http://www.i-mabbiopharma.com

See the original post:
I-Mab Appoints Leading Immunology and Hematology Experts to Its Scientific Advisory Board - PRNewswire

Immunology

Vaccines Against SARS-CoV-2 Will Have Side Effects That’s A Good Thing – Global Biodefense

December 6, 2020 medical

Takeaways

In 2021 hundreds of millions of people will be vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. The success of that COVID-19 vaccination campaign will heavily depend on public trust that the vaccines are not only effective, but also safe. To build that trust, the medical and scientific communities have a responsibility to engage in difficult discussions with the public about the significant fraction of people who will experience temporary side effects from these vaccines.

I am an immunologist who studies the fundamentals of immune responses to vaccination, so part of that responsibility falls on me.

Simply put, receiving these vaccines will likely make a whole lot of people feel crappy for a few days. Thats probably a good thing, and its a far better prospect than long-term illness or death.

In 1989, immunologist Charles Janeway published an article summarizing the state of the field of immunology. Until that point, immunologists had accepted that immune responses were initiated when encountering something foreign bacteria, viruses, and parasites that was non-self.

Janeway suspected that there was more to the story, and famously laid out what he referred to as the immunologists dirty little secret: Your immune system doesnt just respond just to foreign things. It responds to foreign things that it perceives to be dangerous.

Now, 30 years later, immunologists know that your immune system uses a complex set of sensors to understand not only whether or not something is foreign, but also what kind of threat, if any, a microbe might pose. It can tell the difference between viruses like SARS-CoV-2 and parasites, like tapeworms, and activate specialized arms of your immune system to deal with those specific threats accordingly. It can even monitor the level of tissue damage caused by an invader, and ramp up your immune response to match.

Sensing the type of threat posed by a microbe, and the level of intensity of that threat, allows your immune system to select the right set of responses, wield them precisely, and avoid the very real danger of immune overreaction.

Vaccines work by introducing a safe version of a pathogen to a patients immune system. Your immune system remembers its past encounters and responds more efficiently if it sees the same pathogen again. However, it generates memory only if the vaccine packs enough danger signals to kick off a solid immune response.

As a result, your immune systems need to sense danger before responding is at once extremely important (imagine if it started attacking the thousands of species of friendly bacteria in your gut!) and highly problematic. The requirement for danger means that your immune system is programmed not to respond unless a clear threat is identified. It also means that if Im developing a vaccine, I have to convince your immune system that the vaccine itself is a threat worth taking seriously.

This can be accomplished in a number of ways. One is to inject a weakened what immunologists call attenuated or even killed version of a pathogen. This approach has the benefit of looking almost identical to the real pathogen, triggering many of the same danger signals and often resulting in strong, long-term immunity, as is seen in polio vaccination. It can also be risky if you havent weakened the pathogen enough and roll out the vaccine too fast, there is a possibility of unintentionally infecting a large number of vaccine recipients. In addition to this unacceptable human cost, the resulting loss of trust in vaccines could lead to additional suffering as fewer people take other, safer vaccines.

A safer approach is to use individual components of the pathogen, harmless by themselves but capable of training your immune system to recognize the real thing. However, these pieces of the pathogen dont often contain the danger signals necessary to stimulate a strong memory response. As a result, they need to be supplemented with synthetic danger signals, which immunologists refer to as adjuvants.

To make vaccines more effective, whole labs have been dedicated to the testing and development of new adjuvants. All are designed with the same basic purpose to kick the immune system into action in a way that maximizes the effectiveness and longevity of the response. In doing so, we maximize the number of people that will benefit from the vaccine and the length of time those people are protected.

To do this, we take advantage of the same sensors that your immune system uses to sense damage in an active infection. That means that while they will stimulate an effective immune response, they will do so by producing temporary inflammatory effects. At a cellular level, the vaccine triggers inflammation at the injection site. Blood vessels in the area become a little more leaky to help recruit immune cells into the muscle tissue, causing the area to become red and swell. All of this kicks off a full-blown immune response in a lymph node somewhere nearby that will play out over the course of weeks.

In terms of symptoms, this can result in redness and swelling at the injection site, stiffness and soreness in the muscle, tenderness and swelling of the local lymph nodes and, if the vaccine is potent enough, even fever (and that associated generally crappy feeling).

This is the balance of vaccine design maximizing protection and benefits while minimizing their uncomfortable, but necessary, side effects. Thats not to say that serious side effects dont occur they do but they are exceedingly rare. Two of the most discussed serious side effects, anaphalaxis (a severe allergic reaction) and Guillain-Barr Syndrome (nerve damage due to inflammation), occur at a frequency of less than 1 in 500,000 doses.

Early data suggest that the mRNA vaccines in development against SARS-CoV-2 are highly effective upwards of 90%. That means they are capable of stimulating robust immune responses, complete with sufficient danger signaling, in greater than nine out of 10 patients. Thats a high number under any circumstances, and suggests that these vaccines are potent.

So lets be clear here. You should expect to feel sore at the injection site the day after you get vaccinated. You should expect some redness and swelling, and you might even expect to feel generally run down for a day or two post-vaccination. All of these things are normal, anticipated and even intended.

While the data arent finalized, more than 2% of the Moderna vaccine recipients experienced what they categorized as severe temporary side effects such as fatigue and headache. The percentage of people who experience any side effects will be higher. These are signs that the vaccine is doing what it was designed to do train your immune system to respond against something it might otherwise ignore so that youll be protected later. It does not mean that the vaccine gave you COVID-19.

It all comes down to this: Some time in the coming months, you will be given a simple choice to protect yourself, your loved ones and your community from a highly transmissible and deadly disease that results in long-term health consequences for a significant number of otherwise healthy people. It may cost you a few days of feeling sick.

Please choose wisely.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Matthew Woodruff is an Instructor at the Lowance Center for Human Immunology, Emory University. Woodruff received a BS in biotechnology in 2008 from the Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT). Immediately following, he attended Harvard University as a doctoral candidate in immunology, graduating in 2014 with a thesis describing the earliest phases of immune response following influenza vaccination. In 2014 Woodruff pursued a postodoctoral fellowship at Emory University, again studying the early phases of immune response (specifically antibody selection). He published that work in 2018, and transitioned into a human immunology lab under Dr. Iaki Sanz, specializing in the study of autoimmune diseases. Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, Woodruff has refocused almost entirely on studying the immune responses in patients with severe COVID-19. Woodruff is a member of the Scholars Strategy Network, and has a strong interest in public outreach.

This article is courtesy of The Conversation.

Go here to read the rest:
Vaccines Against SARS-CoV-2 Will Have Side Effects That's A Good Thing - Global Biodefense

Immunology

Vaccines Against COVID-19 Will Have Side Effects, But That’s A Good Thing, Expert Says – LevittownNow.com

December 6, 2020 medical

By Matthew Woodruff, Instructor, Lowance Center for Human Immunology at Emory University

In 2021 hundreds of millions of people will be vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2, which is commonly known as COVID-19. The success of that COVID-19 vaccination campaign will heavily depend on public trust that the vaccines are not only effective, but also safe. To build that trust, the medical and scientific communities have a responsibility to engage in difficult discussions with the public about the significant fraction of people who will experiencetemporary side effectsfrom these vaccines.

I am an immunologistwho studiesthe fundamentals of immune responses to vaccination, so part of that responsibility falls on me.

Simply put, receiving these vaccines will likely make a whole lot of people feel crappy for a few days. Thats probably a good thing, and its a far better prospect than long-term illness or death.

In 1989, immunologistCharles Janewaypublished an articlesummarizing the state of the field of immunology. Until that point, immunologists had accepted that immune responses were initiated when encountering something foreign bacteria, viruses, and parasites that was non-self.

Now, 30 years later, immunologists know that your immune system uses a complex set of sensors to understand not only whether or not something is foreign, but alsowhat kind of threat, if any, a microbe might pose. It can tell the difference between viruses like SARS-CoV-2 and parasites, like tapeworms, and activate specialized arms of your immune system to deal withthose specific threats accordingly.It can evenmonitor the level of tissue damagecaused by an invader, and ramp up your immune response to match.

Vaccines work by introducing asafe version of a pathogen to a patients immune system. Your immune system remembers its past encounters and responds more efficiently if it sees the same pathogen again. However, it generates memory only if the vaccine packs enough danger signals to kick off a solid immune response.

This can be accomplishedin a number of ways. One is to inject a weakened what immunologists call attenuated or even killed version of a pathogen. This approach has the benefit of looking almost identical to the real pathogen, triggering many of the same danger signals and often resulting in strong, long-term immunity, as is seen in polio vaccination. It can also be risky if you havent weakened the pathogen enough and roll out the vaccine too fast, there is a possibility of unintentionally infecting a large number of vaccine recipients. In addition to this unacceptable human cost, the resulting loss of trust in vaccines could lead to additional suffering as fewer people take other, safer vaccines.

To make vaccines more effective,whole labs have been dedicated to the testing and developmentof newadjuvants. All are designed with the same basic purpose to kick the immune system into action in a way that maximizes the effectiveness and longevity of the response. In doing so, we maximize the number of people that will benefit from the vaccine and the length of time those people are protected.

This is the balance of vaccine design maximizing protection and benefits while minimizing theiruncomfortable, but necessary, side effects. Thats not to say that serious side effects dont occur they do but they are exceedingly rare. Two of the most discussed serious side effects,anaphalaxis(a severe allergic reaction) andGuillain-Barr Syndrome(nerve damage due to inflammation), occur at a frequency of less than 1 in 500,000 doses.

Early data suggest that themRNA vaccines in development against SARS-CoV-2 are highly effective upwards of 90 percent. That means they are capable of stimulating robust immune responses, complete with sufficient danger signaling, in greater than nine out of 10 patients. Thats a high number under any circumstances, and suggests that these vaccines are potent.

While the data arent finalized,more than 2 percent of the Moderna vaccine recipientsexperienced what they categorized as severe temporary side effects such as fatigue and headache. The percentage of people who experience any side effects will be higher. These are signs that the vaccine is doing what it was designed to do train your immune system to respond against something it might otherwise ignore so that youll be protected later. It does not mean that the vaccine gave you COVID-19.

It all comes down to this: Some time in the coming months, you will be given a simple choice to protect yourself, your loved ones and your community from a highly transmissible anddeadly diseasethat results inlong-term health consequencesfor a significant number of otherwise healthy people. It may cost you a few days of feeling sick.

Please choose wisely.

Read the original post:
Vaccines Against COVID-19 Will Have Side Effects, But That's A Good Thing, Expert Says - LevittownNow.com

Immunology

I worked so hard in the lab. I cried when the Covid vaccine news came – The Guardian

December 6, 2020 medical

From an early age, I was fascinated with the natural world, and in particular how living things work. For me, the interaction between organisms, such as that between a host and a pathogen, is fascinating. I have always been interested in translational research how can what I am doing at the bench have an impact on the health of the general public?

This sentiment has never been more relevant than now. In the time of a pandemic, the rolling out of vaccines that can prevent disease is a public health intervention which will benefit so many lives.

Since April, I have been working on assessing immune responses in the Oxford/AstraZeneca ChAdOx1-nCov vaccine clinical trials. In my role as a post-doctoral immunologist at the Jenner Institute, I had previously worked on clinical trials for outbreak pathogens such as Ebola, Mers-CoV and influenza. My job involved measuring antibody responses induced by these vaccines.

So when the task of undertaking immunology analyses, specifically antibody levels, for the Covid-19 vaccine came around, I had the necessary skills to hit the ground running. Granted, the task in hand for Covid-19 clinical trials would be much bigger than anything that I or any of my colleagues had ever worked on before. Currently, I lead the lab team looking at antibody responses to the vaccine in clinical trial volunteers. We are interested in the level of antibody response to our vaccine antigen for ChAdOx1-nCov that is the Sars-CoV-2 spike protein.

We have investigated the antibody response after one dose of vaccine, and after two doses seen how these compare. We also compared antibody responses in different age groups. Now we want to follow the antibody response over several months to determine whether our vaccine can elicit a long-lasting immune response.

My job involves much more than performing experiments in the lab. Planning, data analysis, logistics (such as storing thousands of samples), organising both laboratory consumables and managing people are all in a days work. Working on this vaccine, there have been many pressures, including tight turnaround times for performing assays in the lab to make immunology data available as soon as possible after blood samples are taken from volunteers.

I have worked harder in 2020 than ever before, and hopefully more than I will ever have to again! Sometimes the workload becomes frustrating particularly when you think you have completed a task and can have a small breather, but then there is another, often bigger, task a moment later.

For me, the best path forward in such situations is to pull together as a team and work out how to achieve the end-goal using the skillsets of the individuals in the lab. There have been many highs and lows in the last nine months but these have been shared among co-workers, many of whom I would never have had the pleasure of working with if it werent for these trials.

Did I ever worry, What if the vaccine doesnt work? Of course these are the kind of thoughts that would pop into my head when I should have been asleep. However, I had confidence in both the vaccine technology and in the team, who work tirelessly towards a common goal. Thankfully, we were rewarded with the news that ChAdOx1-nCoV is effective at preventing Covid-19.

On hearing this, I promptly burst into tears. Tears of relief, joy, hope and excitement for the future of this vaccine. I am so proud to be a part of this vaccine, and I look forward to how it could benefit people all over the world.

Continued here:
I worked so hard in the lab. I cried when the Covid vaccine news came - The Guardian

Immunology

Vaccines against COVID-19 will have side effects that’s a good thing – Kiowa County Press

December 6, 2020 medical

A little bit of post-injection soreness is completely normal. Jose Luis Pelaez Inc/DigitalVision via Getty Images

Matthew Woodruff, Emory University

Takeaways

Temporary side effects from vaccines are a normal sign of a developing immune response.

Vaccines work by training your immune system to recognize and remember a pathogen in a safe way.

Expected side effects from a COVID-19 vaccine include redness and swelling at the injection site and stiffness and soreness in the muscle.

A potent vaccine may even cause fever. It does not mean that the vaccine gave you COVID-19.

I am an immunologist who studies the fundamentals of immune responses to vaccination, so part of that responsibility falls on me.

Simply put, receiving these vaccines will likely make a whole lot of people feel crappy for a few days. That's probably a good thing, and it's a far better prospect than long-term illness or death.

In 1989, immunologist Charles Janeway published an article summarizing the state of the field of immunology. Until that point, immunologists had accepted that immune responses were initiated when encountering something foreign - bacteria, viruses, and parasites - that was "non-self."

Janeway suspected that there was more to the story, and famously laid out what he referred to as "the immunologist's dirty little secret": Your immune system doesn't just respond just to foreign things. It responds to foreign things that it perceives to be dangerous.

Now, 30 years later, immunologists know that your immune system uses a complex set of sensors to understand not only whether or not something is foreign, but also what kind of threat, if any, a microbe might pose. It can tell the difference between viruses - like SARS-CoV-2 - and parasites, like tapeworms, and activate specialized arms of your immune system to deal with those specific threats accordingly. It can even monitor the level of tissue damage caused by an invader, and ramp up your immune response to match.

Vaccines work by introducing a safe version of a pathogen to a patient's immune system. Your immune system remembers its past encounters and responds more efficiently if it sees the same pathogen again. However, it generates memory only if the vaccine packs enough danger signals to kick off a solid immune response.

As a result, your immune system's need to sense danger before responding is at once extremely important (imagine if it started attacking the thousands of species of friendly bacteria in your gut!) and highly problematic. The requirement for danger means that your immune system is programmed not to respond unless a clear threat is identified. It also means that if I'm developing a vaccine, I have to convince your immune system that the vaccine itself is a threat worth taking seriously.

This can be accomplished in a number of ways. One is to inject a weakened - what immunologists call attenuated - or even killed version of a pathogen. This approach has the benefit of looking almost identical to the "real" pathogen, triggering many of the same danger signals and often resulting in strong, long-term immunity, as is seen in polio vaccination. It can also be risky - if you haven't weakened the pathogen enough and roll out the vaccine too fast, there is a possibility of unintentionally infecting a large number of vaccine recipients. In addition to this unacceptable human cost, the resulting loss of trust in vaccines could lead to additional suffering as fewer people take other, safer vaccines.

A safer approach is to use individual components of the pathogen, harmless by themselves but capable of training your immune system to recognize the real thing. However, these pieces of the pathogen don't often contain the danger signals necessary to stimulate a strong memory response. As a result, they need to be supplemented with synthetic danger signals, which immunologists refer to as "adjuvants."

To make vaccines more effective, whole labs have been dedicated to the testing and development of new adjuvants. All are designed with the same basic purpose - to kick the immune system into action in a way that maximizes the effectiveness and longevity of the response. In doing so, we maximize the number of people that will benefit from the vaccine and the length of time those people are protected.

To do this, we take advantage of the same sensors that your immune system uses to sense damage in an active infection. That means that while they will stimulate an effective immune response, they will do so by producing temporary inflammatory effects. At a cellular level, the vaccine triggers inflammation at the injection site. Blood vessels in the area become a little more "leaky" to help recruit immune cells into the muscle tissue, causing the area to become red and swell. All of this kicks off a full-blown immune response in a lymph node somewhere nearby that will play out over the course of weeks.

This is the balance of vaccine design - maximizing protection and benefits while minimizing their uncomfortable, but necessary, side effects. That's not to say that serious side effects don't occur - they do - but they are exceedingly rare. Two of the most discussed serious side effects, anaphalaxis (a severe allergic reaction) and Guillain-Barre Syndrome (nerve damage due to inflammation), occur at a frequency of less than 1 in 500,000 doses.

Side effects are normal.

Early data suggest that the mRNA vaccines in development against SARS-CoV-2 are highly effective - upwards of 90%. That means they are capable of stimulating robust immune responses, complete with sufficient danger signaling, in greater than nine out of 10 patients. That's a high number under any circumstances, and suggests that these vaccines are potent.

So let's be clear here. You should expect to feel sore at the injection site the day after you get vaccinated. You should expect some redness and swelling, and you might even expect to feel generally run down for a day or two post-vaccination. All of these things are normal, anticipated and even intended.

While the data aren't finalized, more than 2% of the Moderna vaccine recipients experienced what they categorized as severe temporary side effects such as fatigue and headache. The percentage of people who experience any side effects will be higher. These are signs that the vaccine is doing what it was designed to do - train your immune system to respond against something it might otherwise ignore so that you'll be protected later. It does not mean that the vaccine gave you COVID-19.

[Deep knowledge, daily. Sign up for The Conversation's newsletter.]

Please choose wisely.

Matthew Woodruff, Instructor, Lowance Center for Human Immunology, Emory University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Originally posted here:
Vaccines against COVID-19 will have side effects that's a good thing - Kiowa County Press

Immunology

UCLA receives $7.3 million grant to build state-of-the-art facility for developing gene, cell therapies – UCLA Newsroom

December 6, 2020 medical

UCLA has received a $7.3 million grant from the National Institutes of Health to build a state-of-the-art facility in which to produce gene and cell therapies aimed at treating a host of illnesses and conditions.

The new 13,000-square-foot facility, to be constructed in UCLAs Center for the Health Sciences, will provide a highly regulated environment with features such as systems to manage air flow and filtering, laboratory spaces and bioreactors. The new facility is expected to be ready for use in 2023.

This grant provides critical funds to build a facility that will enable the development of a new generation of cellular therapies for cancer and other deadly diseases, said Dr. AntoniRibas, a UCLA professor of medicine and director of the Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy Center at UCLA.

The new facility will be built according to U.S. Food and Drug Administrationgood manufacturing practices, a set of guidelines intended to ensure that facilities producing products for human use are built to maximize safety and effectiveness, and to reduce the risk for contamination.

It will replace a facility in UCLAs Factor Building that UCLA scientists currently use for similar research. But that space, which was put together by combining existing research laboratories, lacks the capacity to process certain cells and handle other bioengineered products, and it cannot accommodate the growing number of UCLA scientists pursuing research on gene and cell therapies, said Dr. Stephen Smale, vice dean for research at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA and principal investigator of the NIH grant.

The new facility will be larger, so it will be able to support more projects simultaneously, and its design will allow a smooth flow of products into and out of the facility, Smale said. The larger number of rooms is really important because even when a single therapy is being tested, cells from each patient need to be processed in their own room.

Dr. Eric Esrailian, chief of theUCLA Vatche and Tamar Manoukian Division of Digestive Diseases, is helping to lead the expansion of UCLAs immunology and immunotherapy efforts. It will be a cornerstone for UCLAs commitments to building on existing strengths in the areas of immunology and immunotherapy and expanding toward the creation of a transformational institute in these fields, he said.

Despite the shortcomings of the current space, UCLA researchers have still produced groundbreaking work in it. These include tumor-targeting therapies developed by Ribas, Dr. Donald Kohn, Dr. Linda Liau, and other UCLA researchers.

Ribas, Kohn and Liau are also members of theUCLA Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Centerand theUCLA Broad Stem Cell Research Center. Kohn is a distinguished professor of microbiology, immunology and molecular genetics and Liau is chair of UCLAs department of neurosurgery.

Kohn, who alsodeveloped a cure for bubble baby syndrome,said he will welcome the new facility because of its increased capacity for researchers to pursue treatments and cures that could significantly improve the health and quality of life of so many people. For instance, it will have the capacity to produce large batches of viral vectors microbes that make it possible to introduce potentially curative genes into cells for gene therapy studies.

This new facility will allow the innovative cell and gene therapies pioneered at UCLA to be available to a wider number of patients and accelerate the development of novel cures, said Kohn, whose work has also led to an experimental stem cell gene therapy for sickle cell disease that is showing promising early results in clinical trials.

Liau, a neuro-oncologist, said the new facility will enable researchers to create personalized vaccines and cell therapies for a much larger number of patients.

In the current facility, we are only able to enroll one patient at a time in our cell therapy trials, so many eligible patients have had to be turned away, Liau said.With greater capacity to manufacture gene and cell therapy products that meet FDA good manufacturing practice standards, this new UCLA facility will really allow us to further innovate and accelerate our translational research toward a cure for brain cancer.

Excerpt from:
UCLA receives $7.3 million grant to build state-of-the-art facility for developing gene, cell therapies - UCLA Newsroom