Monthly Archives: August 2021

Biodistribution of sphingolipid nanoemulsions with 68Ga | IJN – Dove Medical Press

Posted: August 31, 2021 at 2:48 am

Introduction

Over the last decades, personalized medicine has greatly evolved with the development of imaging tools that improve the management of several diseases, especially cancer.1 Among all the non-invasive imaging techniques, the nuclear imaging modalities Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography (SPECT) and Positron Emission Tomography (PET) stand out mainly due to their high sensitivity prospect of obtaining quantitative information. In fact, PET and SPECT imaging can provide detailed information about the in vivo behavior and pharmacokinetics of several compounds, such as nanomedicines, and can facilitate their translation to clinics.2

On the other hand, nanomedicine has emerged as a promising strategy to improve diagnosis and treatment of prevalent diseases including cancer.3,4 One of the most promising advantages of nanomedicine is the possibility to combine therapeutic molecules with diagnostic agents into single multifunctional nanoparticles, known as nanotheranostics, opening an entirely new field of development towards the implementation of personalized medicine.5,6 In recent years, the combination of nanoparticles with radionuclides is rapidly growing and there are a great number of submissions for the Food and Drug Administration approval.7 Different types of nanoparticles are investigated for nuclear medicine applications and multimodal imaging.8 For example, inorganic nanoparticles have been widely studied due to their intrinsic physical properties, that convert them into materials with a high potential for multimodal imaging.9,10 Nevertheless, organic nanoparticles are still the most in demand for the development of imaging probes by virtue of their biodegradable and biocompatible composition, preventing a long-term accumulation in the body and undesirable toxic side effects.11 Indeed, liposomes are the most extended type of organic nanoparticles for nuclear imaging applications. Liposomes can be radiolabeled by different methodologies, which can be adapted to different kinds of nanoparticles, such as micelles, solid lipid nanoparticles, and nanoemulsions.12 Chelator-based radiolabeling strategies offer a high versatility for the incorporation of radionuclides with different properties, suitable for complementary imaging techniques and nanotheranostics.13

Nanoemulsions are defined as nanoscale droplets in which two immiscible liquids are mixed to form a single phase. Their biocompatible composition, easy production by soft and scalable methodologies and improved drug loading capacity compared to liposomes, are relevant advantages that have prompted their use in biomedicine.14,15

Nanoemulsions have been widely studied for fluorescence, MRI and ultrasounds imaging.16,17 However, their use in nuclear imaging is still recent and there are only few reports describing radiolabeled nanoemulsions.1820 Our group has recently reported the development and characterization of sphingomyelin nanoemulsions that incorporate sphingomyelin, one of the main lipids in cell membranes (SNs), and claimed their potential in drug delivery.21 The principal advantages of SNs relate to their safe and simple composition, long-term colloidal stability, and capacity for accommodation of different types of functionalities and therapeutic payloads.2123 Previous attempts by our research group have proved that SNs can be radiolabeled with Fluorine-18 for PET imaging following a maleimide reaction. However, radiochemical yields (RCY) were found to be highly dependent on the crosslinking efficacy.24 The aim of this work was to provide an optimized composition and straightforward methodology for the radiolabeling of SNs with 68Ga and 67Ga radioisotopes using a chelator-based strategy. Radiolabeled formulations can be used for indistinct application in PET and SPECT imaging, and therefore adaptable to specific needs and biomedical applications.

Octadecylamine (stearylamine, >99%, Merck Group, Darmstadt, Germany) was conjugated to 2-(4-isothiocyanatobenzyl)-1,4,7-triazacyclononane-1,4,7-triacetic acid (p-SCN-Bn-NOTA, NOTA, >94%, Macrocyclics, Dallas, TX, USA) to obtain a lipid derivative chelator for further inclusion into the nanoemulsions. Details about the reaction protocol and the product characterization are included in the Supporting Information.

SNs were prepared following a method previously reported by our group with minor modifications.21 Briefly, oleic acid (5 mg, 6588%, Merck Group, Darmstadt, Germany), egg sphingomyelin (0.5 mg, 98%, Lipoid GmbH, Ludwigshafen, Germany) and the surfactant C16/C18-COO-C9H9O3 (0.5 mg, 96%, GalChimia S.L, A Corua, Spain) with a lipid ratio 1:0.1:0.1 w/w were dissolved in 100 L of absolute ethanol (99.7%, Cienytech S.L., A Corua, Spain). All the additional lipid derivatives used to functionalize SNs, such us 1,2-dimyristoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphoethanolamine-N-diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid (DTPA, 0.05 mg, >99%, Avanti Polar Lipids, Alabama, Al, USA), NOTA (0.05 mg) or an oleic acid modified polyethylene glycol (PEG, 2 kDa, 0.125 mg, Nanocs, New York, NY, USA) were included in the organic phase. Then, this organic phase was injected in 1 mL of MilliQ water (Millipore Milli-Q system) under magnetic stirring using an insulin syringe (0.5 mL, 0.3312 mm ICO.C.1) and nanoemulsions (SNs, DTPA-SNs, NOTA-SNs or NOTA-PEG-SNs) were spontaneously formed. To prepare SNs coated with hyaluronic acid (NOTA-HA-SNs), the organic phase containing the lipids and NOTA was injected under stirring in 1 mL of an aqueous solution of sodium hyaluronate (HA, 170 kDa, 2 mg mL1, >95%, Bioiberica, S.A.U, Barcelona, Spain).

All the nanoemulsions were physiochemically characterized using a Nanosizer 2000 (Malvern Instruments, Malvern, UK). The mean size and its distribution, defined by the polydispersity index (PDI), were measured by Dynamic Light Scattering (DLS). Measurements were performed on disposable microcuvettes (ZEN0040, Malvern Instruments) upon dilution of the SNs in MilliQ water, reaching a final lipid concentration of 0.5 mg mL1. The zeta potential (ZP) was analyzed by Laser Doppler Anemometry (LDA) diluting SNs in MilliQ water (lipid concentration 0.12 mg mL1) with Folded capillary cuvettes (DTS1070, Malvern Instruments). The stability of SNs, DTPA-SNs and NOTA-SNs was tested under storage conditions at 4 C up to one month and also after incubation with human serum at 37 C for 72 h. The colloidal properties were measured by DLS maintaining the conditions mentioned before. Parameters such as the medium (water) and the temperature (25C) were fixed for all the measurements.

The morphology of SNs was observed by Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscopy (FESEM) using a ZEISS FESEM ULTRA Plus, microscope (Carl Zeiss Micro Imaging, GmbH, Germany). Before the measurement, 20 L of sphingomyelin nanoemulsions (0.5 mg mL1) were stained with 20 L phosphotungstic acid (2% w/v). Then, 20 L of the mixture was placed on a carbon coated grid and left for 2 minutes. The excess was removed using a filter paper and the grid was allowed to dry. The grid was washed 5 times with 100 L of filtered MilliQ water and it was dried overnight.

A549 (ATCC CCL-185), MDA-MB-231 (ATCC HTB-26) were cultured in Dulbeccos modified Eagles medium high glucose (DMEM, Merck Group, Darmstadt, Germany) and OMM-2.5 (kindly provided by Martine J. Jager from Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands) were grown in RPMI (Gibco, Thermo Scientific S.L., Waltham, MA, United States). Both media were supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS) and 1% penicillin:streptomycin (Gibco, Thermo Scientific S.L., Waltham, MA, United States). Cells were maintained at 37 C with 95% relative humidity and 5% CO2.

Cellular uptake of SNs was studied by confocal microscopy. 8104 cells/well were seeded in an 8-well -chamber (SPL Life Sciences Co., Ltd., Gyeonggi-do, Korea). After 24 h, cells were treated with SNs (0.13 mg mL1 per well) labeled with C11-TopFluor sphingomyelin (>99%, Avanti Polar Lipids, Alabama, Al, USA). After 4 h of incubation at 37 C, cells were washed with 1x phosphate buffer saline (PBS) twice and fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde for 15 min. Cells were then washed twice with 1x PBS and the cellular nuclei were counterstained with Hoechst 33,342 (Thermo Scientific S.L., Waltham, MA, United States) for 5 min. After washing, the slide was mounted with Mowiol (Merck Group, Darmstadt, Germany) and a coverslip. The samples were left to dry in the dark overnight at RT, following their storage at 20 C, until taken for observation under a confocal microscope (Confocal Laser Microscope Leica SP8).

68Ga (t = 68 min, + = 89% and EC = 11%) was obtained from a 68Ge/68Ga generator system (ITG Isotope Technologies Garching GmbH, Germany) in which 68Ge (t = 270 d) was attached to a column based on an organic matrix generator. The 68Ga was eluted with 4 mL of 0.05 M hydrochloric acid. Then, 500 L of DTPA-SNs or NOTA-SNs (13 mg mL1) were mixed with 500 L of 4-(2-hydroxyethyl)-1-piperazineethanesulfonic acid buffer (HEPES, 0.5 M, pH 5.05). The mixture was incubated with 1.5 mL of 68Ga (300 MBq) at 30 C for 30 min and purified by PD-10 columns. The incorporated radioactivity was measured in an activimeter (AtomLabTM500, Biodex).

67Ga-citrate (t = 78.3 h, 100% EC = 39% 93 keV, 21% 185 keV, 17% 300 keV) was obtained from CURIUM (France) as sterile solution with a pH between 5 and 8 and a radiochemical purity at least equal to 95%. 67Ga-citrate solution was converted to 67GaCl3 using a method previously described.25 In brief, 2 mL of 67Ga-citrate (37 MBq) diluted in distilled water was filtered with a SEP-PAK Plus silica cartridge (ABX, Advanced Biochemical Compounds, Germany) using a 5 mL plastic syringe. Afterwards, the silica cartridge was washed three times with 5 mL of distilled water to remove the free citrate ions. The 67Ga3+ ions were eluted with 3 mL of HCl 0.1 M, obtaining a solution of 67GaCl3 which was concentrated on a rotary vacuum evaporator to get a final volume of 500 L. The pH was adjusted to 45 with NaOH 0.1 M and the solution was incubated with 500 L of NOTA-SNs, NOTA-HA-SNs or NOTA-PEG-SNs (10 mg mL1) diluted in HEPES buffer (1.5 M, pH 5.05) for 1 h at 37 C. The labeled nanoemulsions were eventually purified with PD-10 columns and the radioactivity was measured in the activimeter.

The radiochemical yield (RCY) was calculated as a percentage of decay corrected activity found in the post-purification solution compared to the starting activity. The radiochemical stability (RCS) of 68Ga-labeled nanoemulsions was assessed by incubating the emulsions with animal serum at 37 C for 4 hours. In case of 67Ga-labeled nanoemulsions, the stability was measured after incubation with animal serum for 0, 24, 48 and 72 h, according to the acquisition time points. In both cases, after the incubation time the mixture was purified by a PD-10 column and the activity of the elution was measured and decay corrected. Radiochemical purity (RCP) was analyzed by instant thin-layer chromatography (ITLC), and details regarding experimental protocols are included in the Supporting Information.

In vivo PET/CT imaging was performed in healthy mice (C57BL/6) with a nanoPET/CT small-animal imaging system (Mediso Medical Imaging Systems, Budapest, Hungary). List-mode PET data acquisition commenced 2 hours post bolus injection of ~12 MBq of 68Ga-DTPA-SNs or 68Ga-NOTA-SNs (12 MBq, n = 5) through the tail vein and continued for 30 minutes. At the end of PET, microCT was performed for attenuation correction and anatomic reference. The dynamic PET images in a 105105 matrix (frame rates: 310 min, 130 min, 160 min) were reconstructed using a Tera-Tomo 3D iterative algorithm. Acquisition and reconstruction were performed with proprietary Nucline software (Mediso, Budapest, Hungary). Qualitative Image analysis in mice was performed using Osirix software (Pixmeo, Switzerland). Animal experiments were conducted according to the ethical and animal welfare committee at CNIC and the Spanish and UE legislation. Experimental protocols have been approved by Madrid regional government (PROEX16/277).

SPECT studies were carried out on male SpragueDawley rats with an average weight of 299.5 23.45 g supplied by the animal facility at the University of Santiago de Compostela (Spain). Planar dynamic SPECT images were acquired with a single-head clinical Siemens Orbiter gamma camera (Siemens Medical Solutions, Inc., USA) using a parallel collimator specifically designed for low-energy photons and high spatial resolution. Data were acquired in list-mode format in order to apply energy and spatial linearity, and uniformity corrections. In vivo NOTA-SNs and free 67Ga biodistribution were studied after the intravenous injection (17.70 8.5 MBq, n = 5) in healthy rats at different time-points: 24, 48 and 72 h. In order to compare the differences in biodistribution between NOTA-SNs, HA-SNs and PEG-SNs, healthy rats were intravenously injected (13.2 0.3 MBq, n = 3) and the images were acquired dynamically during the first 60 min after injection (30 frames/2min). All images were analyzed using AMIDE software (amide.sourceforge.net). Quantitative analysis was carried out in a dynamic study by using circularly delineated Regions of Interest (ROIs) in the heart and liver, with 9 mm in diameter. The mean uptake was calculated over time in every region averaged over each of the 3 frames (6 min) and the results were reported as heart-to-liver ratio.

Ex vivo biodistribution of 68Ga-labeled nanoemulsions was conducted 4 h post-injection. In case of 67Ga-labeled nanoemulsions, biodistribution studies were performed 72 h post-injection. Animals were sacrificed in a CO2 chamber, organs were extracted and counted with a Wizard 1470 gamma counter (Perkin Elmer) for 1 min each (n=5 per experiment). Radioactivity decay was corrected, and a biodistribution was presented as the percentage of injected dose per gram (% ID/g).

All the experiments were performed at least in triplicate. Data are expressed as mean standard deviation (SD). Statistical analyses were calculated using GraphPad Prism software (version 8.0). Students t-test was used to compare significant differences between the two groups. * (p0.05), ** (p0.01), ***(p0.001)was considered statistically significant.

Here, we describe the radiolabeling of SNs with Gallium-68 and Gallium-67 for their application in PET and SPECT imaging. SNs were prepared by ethanol injection, a one-step mild technique that allows obtaining colloidal nanoemulsions within seconds (Figure 1A, left). The reproducibility of the preparation method (Figure 1A, right) was obtained after measuring 24 independent batches by DLS (raw data are showed in Table S1). SNs showed spherical morphology, as observed in FESEM images (Figure 1B). Additionally, SNs were efficiently internalized in cancer cells (Figure 1C), which is a relevant factor to take into account in order to determine the potential of a formulation for biomedicine applications. Stability determinations in cell culture media were also performed and are shown in Figure S1, Supporting Information. To convert SNs into suitable probes for PET and SPECT imaging, we followed a chelator-mediated approach, which is one of the most used methods to radiolabel nanoparticles with radionuclides, such as 64Cu, 68Ga, 99mTc or 111In.13,26 Labeling organic nanoparticles, and especially lipid nanoparticles, can be done by the use of lipid-derivative chelators. These conjugates can be inserted into the membrane of the lipid particles at the time of their preparation.2729 In this study, we used two different lipid-derivative chelators to determine the best candidate for in vivo imaging. First, we selected the acyclic chelator diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid modified with a dimyristoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphoethanolamine chain (DTPA). Second, we synthesized the amphiphilic derivative of the macrocyclic chelator 1,4,7-triazacyclononane-1,4,7-triacetic acid (NOTA) as previously described.3032 In brief, a stearylamine was reacted with the isothiocyanate macrocycle p-SCN-Bn-NOTA (1, Figure S2A, Supporting Information). The nucleophilic substitution in N,N-dimethylformamide afforded the corresponding thiourea derivative (2, NOTA-stearylamine, Figure S2A, Supporting Information) after recrystallization at moderate yield (23%). The NOTA-stearylamine derivative 2 was characterized by high-resolution mass spectrometry (Figure S2B Supporting Information) and NMR, confirming its structure (Figures S3 and S4 Supporting Information). Both lipid-modified chelators were spontaneously incorporated into the lipidic layer of SNs. According to results shown in Table 1, a slight increase in size was observed for DTPA-SNs and NOTA-SNs with respect to the control SNs, which could be indicative of the efficient incorporation of the chelators. In all cases, we observed a narrow distribution of the particles with a PDI 0.2.

Table 1 Physicochemical Characterization of SNs, DTPA-SNs and NOTA-SNs Measured by DLS and LDA (Results are Expressed as Mean Standard Deviation, n = 3)

Figure 1 (A) Scheme of the one-step method used for the preparation of SNs (left) and the method reproducibility after measuring the hydrodynamic size of 24 independent batches by DLS (right); horizontal bars represent size mean and standard deviation (127 9 nm). (B) Representative Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscopy (FESEM) images of SNs acquired with STEM (top) and InLens (bottom) detectors. (C) Confocal microscopy images showing the internalization of SNs in different cancer cell lines. SNs are labeled in green (TopFluor-SM) and cell nuclei are labeled in blue (Hoechst).

Stability studies under storage conditions at 4 C showed that all the formulations were highly stable during the tested period (Figure 2A), indicating that the incorporation of the lipid-derivative chelators does not compromise the colloidal properties of SNs. In addition, they showed high stability in the human serum for 72 h at 37 C, as shown in Figure 2B, demonstrating their potential for in vivo applications. Although organic nanoparticles offer relevant advantages with respect to inorganic nanoparticles, in general, their preparation is still complex, as dendrimers, liposomes or nanogels tend to require multi-step preparation methods and/or typically the use of high-energy techniques. On the contrary, this methodology provides long-term stable DTPA-SNs and NOTA-SNs particles in few minutes through a one-step protocol. Moreover, the preparation of DTPA-SNs and NOTA-SNs avoids the use of high-energy techniques and uses low-cost and conventional starting materials. In fact, compared with previously reported organic nanosystems, we describe here the simplest and easiest methodology for the gallium radiolabeling through a chelator-based strategy.3335

Figure 2 (A) Storage stability of SNs, DTPA-SNs and NOTA-SNs at 4 C measuring the evolution of the average size by DLS for one month (n=3). (B) Stability in human serum at 37 C during 72 h measured by DLS (n=3). (C) Radiochemical yield of 68Ga-DTPA-SNs and 68Ga-NOTA-SNs after incubation with the radioisotope for 30 min at 30 C (n=3). (D) Radiochemical stability of 68Ga-SNs, 68Ga-DTPA-SNs and 68Ga-NOTA-SNs after incubation with serum 4 h at 37 C (n=3).

The combination of nanomaterials with 68Ga for PET imaging has attracted a great deal of attention in recent years with several works devoted to the radiolabeling of inorganic nanoparticles.36 However, only a few studies with organic nanoparticles, specifically PEGylated DTPA and NODAGA liposomes, PAMAM dendrimer-DOTA conjugates, NODAGA and DOTA nanogels, NODAGA polymeric nanoparticles and PSMA-DOTA microemulsions, have been reported so far.33,3741

DTPA-SNs, NOTA-SNs and non-chelator SNs (control) were radiolabeled by incubation with 68Ga3+ at 30 C for 30 min, and then purified by gel filtration in PD-10 columns. Figure 2C reveals that DTPA-SNs and NOTA-SNs were efficiently labeled with 68Ga, reaching RCY of 82 4% for DTPA-SNs and 92 2% for NOTA-SNs. Differences in RCY might be related to some release of 68Ga-DTPA-PE from the nanoemulsions in the purification process and/or to a better incorporation of the NOTA-SA derivative with SNs. With respect to the control formulation, nonspecific radiolabeling (RCY, 30 12%) was observed. This might be due to some entrapment of the radioisotope into the lipid membrane of the nanoemulsions mediated by electrostatic interactions. Radiochemical yields were in line with other works in the field, such as liposomes, nanogels, biopolymer nanoparticles and microemulsions.33,3941 The radiochemical purity was evaluated by ITLC using a sodium citrate solution as mobile phase. Under these conditions, free 68Ga showed a retention factor of 0.75 (Figure S5A, Supporting Information). In case of 68Ga-nanoemulsions, we could not detect the presence of free 68Ga, showing an RCP higher than 99% (Figure S5B, Supporting Information).

The RCS of the nanoemulsions upon incubation with serum at 37 C was also determined (Figure 2D). As expected, radiolabeled control SNs (without a chelator) were not able to retain the gallium. In the case of DTPA-SNs, only 50 3% of 68Ga were retained, while NOTA-SNs showed the highest stability, retaining 90 2% of activity, again in line with cyclic chelators as NODAGA or DOTA.37,39,40,42 On the other hand, although DTPA is commonly used to form complexes with gallium and other radioisotopes, the formation of less stable complexes can be a consequence of its acyclic structure.43 This was confirmed after intravenous injection of DTPA-SNs and NOTA-SNs (12 MBq, n = 5) to healthy mice. 3D PET/CT images were acquired 2 h post-administration and showed major accumulation in the reticuloendothelial system (RES) organs and heart (Figure 3A). As expected, DTPA-SNs showed a higher circulation in the bloodstream due to the premature release of the radionuclide from the nanoemulsion. Ex vivo biodistribution results were conducted 4 h post-injection (Figure 3B) and corroborate major liver and spleen accumulation. This is in concordance with the in vivo pattern observed for most of the nanoparticles, especially lipid nanoparticles, such as liposomes and nanoemulsions.19,24,37,44 Remarkably, NOTA-SNs have a relatively long circulation time, showing a 10% of the injected dose in the bloodstream 4 h after intravenous injection. This in vivo pattern differs from other 68Ga-labeled emulsions recently reported, with a shorter circulation half-life, mainly due to differences in size and composition.41 These results indicate that the pharmacokinetics of NOTA-SNs can be better studied after the radiolabeling with longer half-life radioisotopes, such as 67Ga. Nevertheless, NOTA-SNs could be surface decorated with specific biomolecules in order to reduce their circulation time and to perform suitable probes for targeted 68Ga molecular imaging.45

Figure 3 (A) Representative PET/CT whole-body coronal images of 68Ga-DTPA-SNs and 68Ga-NOTA-SNs biodistribution in healthy mice 2 h after intravenous injection (n=5). (B) Ex vivo biodistribution of both radiolabeled nanoemulsions 4 h post-injection (n=5). **(p0.01), ***(p0.001) was considered statistically significant.

67Ga, compared with 68Ga (t = 68 minutes), allowed a long-term biodistribution study of NOTA-SNs by SPECT imaging. For NOTA-SNs radiolabeling, the clinical formulation 67Ga-citrate was initially converted into the chloride form (GaCl3) as previously described.25 Briefly, 67Ga-citrate was trapped in a silica cartridge, washed with distilled water and finally eluted with HCl 0.1 M, rendering a 90% yield. To ensure a successful radiolabeling and taking into account that with the half-life of 67Ga there are no strong limitations for increasing the incubation time, we optimized the process (the solution was incubated with NOTA-SNs for 1 h at 37 C). Then, the free radionuclide was removed by filtration in PD-10 columns, obtaining a 80 2% of RCY (Figure 4A, before incubation with serum), between 10% and 20% higher than polymer and protein-based nanoparticles previously reported.34,46 The measured RCP was 98.9%, conducted by ITLC (Table S2, Supporting Information). In addition, RCS studies proved that the labeling was highly stable in serum over 72 h (Figure 4A). Then, due to the longer half-time of this radioisotope, SPECT studies were designed to evaluate the pharmacokinetics of NOTA-SNs at prolonged time periods. In vivo SPECT images were acquired 24, 48 and 72 h after intravenous injection of the radiolabeled NOTA-SNs. In parallel, we evaluated the in vivo uptake of the free radioisotope as a control. Animals injected with free 67Ga (control) showed uptake in the bloodstream, liver, lacrimal and salivary glands (Figure 4B), according previous reports.34,47 We can also observe free 67Ga in the bladder and kidneys, a consequence of renal clearance. In comparison, NOTA-SNs showed similar biodistribution than observed in PET/CT images, with main accumulation in liver and RES organs, and its intensity decreases over time. After 72 h, we measured the ex vivo biodistribution and observed that the radioactivity remained only in liver and spleen with less than 5% ID/g in both organs (Figure S6, Supporting Information). This could be related to the biodegradation of the particles and/or their excretion through the urine, in line with our previous report in which we described cationic fluorine-labeled nanoemulsions.24 However, further studies must be carried out to determine the excretion routes of NOTA-SNs.

Figure 4 (A) Radiochemical yield of 67Ga-NOTA-SNs (control) and radiochemical stability after incubation with serum 37 C at different points (0, 24, 48 and 72 h, n=3). (B) Whole-body SPECT images showing the biodistribution of 67Ga-NOTA-SNs compared with free 67Ga during 72 h (n=5).

We finally investigated the possibility of surface-modification of NOTA-SNs without interfering with the radiolabeling procedure, to determine if it is possible to modulate the in vivo behavior.48 Among the different strategies for surface modification that have been reported to date, PEGylation is the most established approach.49 We coated NOTA-SNs with PEG (NOTA-PEG-SNs), using for this purpose a lipid-PEG derivative. However, it is well known that PEGylation might also lead to relevant drawbacks, such as the development of an immunological response, antibody generation and toxic side effects caused by the oxidative side products.50 Bearing in mind these limitations, we have also investigated the in vivo effect of an alternative coating, hyaluronic acid (NOTA-HA-SNs). HA is a biocompatible polysaccharide widely used in biomedical research that has been reported to increase the circulating time of lipid nanoparticles.51,52 Surface-modified nanoemulsions (NOTA-PEG-SNs and NOTA-HA-SNs) presented a similar size than the reference formulation (NOTA-SNs) (Figure 5A). With respect to the zeta potential, relevant modifications were only noticed in the case of NOTA-HA-SNs, which rendered more negative values (Figure 5B). Radiolabeling with 67Ga was successfully done, leading to RCY of 80 8% and 76 1% for NOTA-HA-SNs and NOTA-PEG-SNs, respectively (Figure 5C), indicating that the coatings do not significantly interfere in the interaction between the chelator and the radioisotope, and that coated NOTA-HA-SNs and NOTA-PEG-SNs could be tracked by SPECT in a comparable fashion to the reference formulation (NOTA-SNs) (Figure S7, Supporting Information).

Figure 5 (A) NOTA-HA-SNs and NOTA-PEG-SNs hydrodynamic size distribution measured by DLS (171 5 nm and 138 8 nm, respectively, results are expressed as mean standard deviation, n=3), (B) Zeta potential of NOTA-HA-SNs and NOTA-PEG-SNs measured by LDA ( 64 2 mV and 50 1 mV respectively, results are expressed as mean standard deviation, n=3). (C) Radiochemical yield of 67Ga-NOTA-HA-SNs and 67Ga-NOTA-PEG-SNs (n=3). (D) Quantitative analysis expressed as heart to liver ratio showing the differences in biodistribution between intravenously injected 67Ga-nanoemulsions.

A dynamic SPECT study was then carried out, and the tracer uptake ratio between heart and liver was calculated to evaluate the circulation/elimination pharmacokinetic profile. As shown in Figures 5E, 67Ga-PEG-NOTA-SNs showed significantly higher circulation in the bloodstream in line with previous reports referring to PEGylated nanoemulsions.53 Noteworthy, the PEGylation effect is observed even at a very low density (3 mol%), in concordance to other reports of nanoemulsions in which PEG densities vary between 0.5 and 50 mol% with respect to the total amount of surfactant.53,54 In the case of NOTA-HA-SNs, the results were comparable to the reference formulation of NOTA-SNs, a fact that could be explained by the influence of the HA molecular weight and density of the coating. These factors will therefore need further optimization and will be the subject of future work intended for the development of applications in cancer nanotheranostics where HA coating could be particularly relevant to improve accumulation in the tumor.55,56 Altogether, these results confirm that it is possible to modulate the composition and in vivo behavior of NOTA-SNs, to open up their application in specific indications in the biomedical field.

We described here a simple and highly efficient preparation method for chelator-functionalized biocompatible SNs and the subsequent radiolabeling with 68Ga and 67Ga. The radiolabeled formulations showed great radiochemical properties for in vivo applications and were efficiently followed-up by PET and SPECT imaging. Importantly, we have also proved that the biodistribution of the SNs can be modulated by modifying the surface properties. The capacity to modulate the radiolabeling, modality of imaging and tracking period, as well as the biodistribution properties, highlight the interest of SNs, which have the potential to be easily adapted to the requirements of different and specific biomedical applications. In summary, we believe that SNs have the potential for the development of advanced probes for nuclear imaging and nanotheranostics. In particular, future experiments could involve the evaluation of 68/67Ga-SNs in tumor bearing animal models to further determine the real potential of this formulation in cancer nanotheranostics, taking into account the anticancer properties of 67Ga.

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article and its Supporting Information file.

Animal experiments were conducted according to the ethical and animal welfare committee at CNIC and the Spanish and EU legislation. Experimental protocols were approved by Madrid regional government (PROEX16/277).

All authors contributed to data analysis, drafting or revising the article, have agreed on the journal to which the article will be submitted, gave final approval for the version to be published, and agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Authors thank the financial support given by Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ISCIII) and European Regional Development Fund (FEDER) (PI15/00828, PI18/00176 and DTS18/00133), by ERA-NET EURONANOMED III project METASTARG (AC18/00045) and by Asociacin Espaola Contra el Cncer (AECC, IDEAS18153DELA). The first author also acknowledges the financial support from Axencia Galega de Innovacin (GAIN) and Xunta de Galicia (IN848C_20170721_7) and ISCII (FI19/00206).

The author reports no conflicts of interest in this work.

1. Witney TH, Blower PJ. The chemical tool-kit for molecular imaging with radionuclides in the age of targeted and immune therapy. Cancer Imaging. 2021;21(1):114. doi:10.1186/s40644-021-00385-8

2. Prez-Medina C, Teunissen AJP, Kluza E, Mulder WJM, van der Meel R. Nuclear imaging approaches facilitating nanomedicine translation. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2020;154155:123141. doi:10.1016/j.addr.2020.07.017

3. Gabizon AA, de Rosales RTM, La-beck NM. Translational considerations in nanomedicine: the oncology perspective. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2020;158:140157. doi:10.1016/j.addr.2020.05.012

4. Germain M, Caputo F, Metcalfe S, et al. Delivering the power of nanomedicine to patients today. J Control Release. 2020;326(April):164171. doi:10.1016/j.jconrel.2020.07.007

5. Vzquez-Ros AJ, Alonso-Nocelo M, Bouzo BL, Ruiz-Baobre J, de la Fuente M. Nanotheranostics and their potential in the management of metastatic cancer. In: Conde J, editor. Handbook of Nanomaterials for Cancer Theranostics. Elsevier; 2018:199244. doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-813339-2.00008-6

6. Filippi L, Chiaravalloti A, Schillaci O, Cianni R, Bagni O. Theranostic approaches in nuclear medicine: current status and future prospects. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2020;17(4):331343. doi:10.1080/17434440.2020.1741348

7. Farzin L, Sheibani S, Moassesi ME, Shamsipur M. An overview of nanoscale radionuclides and radiolabeled nanomaterials commonly used for nuclear molecular imaging and therapeutic functions. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2019;107(1):251285. doi:10.1002/jbm.a.36550

8. Ge J, Zhang Q, Zeng J, Gu Z, Gao M. Radiolabeling nanomaterials for multimodality imaging: new insights into nuclear medicine and cancer diagnosis. Biomaterials. 2020;228. doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2019.119553

9. Maccora D, Dini V, Battocchio C, et al. Gold nanoparticles and nanorods in nuclear medicine: a mini review. Appl Sci. 2019;9(16):16. doi:10.3390/app9163232

10. Venditti I. Engineered gold-based nanomaterials: morphologies and functionalities in biomedical applications. a mini review. Bioengineering. 2019;6(2):53. doi:10.3390/bioengineering6020053

11. Mirahadi M, Ghanbarzadeh S, Ghorbani M, Gholizadeh A, Hamishehkar H. A review on the role of lipid-based nanoparticles in medical diagnosis and imaging. Ther Deliv. 2018;9(8):557569. doi:10.4155/tde-2018-0020

12. Man F, Gawne PJ, de Rosales RTM. Nuclear imaging of liposomal drug delivery systems: a critical review of radiolabelling methods and applications in nanomedicine. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2019;143:134160. doi:10.1016/j.addr.2019.05.012

13. Pellico J, Gawne PJ, de Rosales RTM. Radiolabelling of nanomaterials for medical imaging and therapy. Chem Soc Rev. 2021. doi:10.1039/d0cs00384k

14. Singh Y, Meher JG, Raval K, et al. Nanoemulsion: concepts, development and applications in drug delivery. J Control Release. 2017;252:2849. doi:10.1016/j.jconrel.2017.03.008

15. Snchez-Lpez E, Guerra M, Dias-Ferreira J, et al. Current applications of nanoemulsions in cancer therapeutics. Nanomaterials. 2019;9(6):6. doi:10.3390/nano9060821

16. Anton N, Hallouard F, Attia MF, Vandamme TF. Nano-emulsions for drug delivery and biomedical imaging. In: Prokop A,Weissig V, editors. Intracellular Delivery III, Fundamental Biomedical Technologies. Springer. Vol. 8. 2016:273300. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-43525-1_11

17. Klymchenko AS, Liu F, Collot M, Anton N. Dye-loaded nanoemulsions: biomimetic fluorescent nanocarriers for bioimaging and nanomedicine. Adv Healthc Mater. 2021;10(1):127. doi:10.1002/adhm.202001289

18. Wang C, Leach BI, Lister D, et al. Metallo-fluorocarbon nanoemulsion for inflammatory macrophage detection via PET and MRI. J Nucl Med. 2021;62(8):11461153. doi:10.2967/jnumed.120.255273

19. Sofias AM, Toner YC, Meerwaldt AE, et al. Tumor targeting by v3-integrin-specific lipid nanoparticles occurs via phagocyte hitchhiking. ACS Nano. 2020;14(7):78327846. doi:10.1021/acsnano.9b08693

20. Navascuez M, Dupin D, Grande HJ, et al. COSAN-stabilised omega-3 oil-in-water nanoemulsions to prolong lung residence time for poorly water soluble drugs. Chem Commun. 2020;56(63):89728975. doi:10.1039/d0cc00918k

21. Bouzo BL, Calvelo M, Martn-Pastor M, Garca-Fandio R, De La Fuente M. In vitro- in silico modeling approach to rationally designed simple and versatile drug delivery systems. J Phys Chem B. 2020;124(28):57885800. doi:10.1021/acs.jpcb.0c02731

22. Rowe BRC, Sheskey PJ, Cook WG, Quinn ME. Handbook of pharmaceutical excipients 7th edition. Pharm Dev Technol. 2013;18(2):544. doi:10.3109/10837450.2012.751408

23. Nagachinta S, Bouzo BL, Vazquez-Rios AJ, Lopez R, de la Fuente M. Sphingomyelin-based nanosystems (SNs) for the development of anticancer miRNA therapeutics. Pharmaceutics. 2020;12(2):189. doi:10.3390/pharmaceutics12020189

24. Nagachinta S, Becker G, Dammicco S, et al. Radiolabelling of lipid-based nanocarriers with fluorine-18 for in vivo tracking by PET. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces. 2020;188:110793. doi:10.1016/j.colsurfb.2020.110793

25. asnr V, van Lier JE. The use of SEP-PAK Sl cartridges for the preparation of gallium chloride from the citrate solution. Eur J Nucl Med. 1993;20(3):273. doi:10.1007/BF00170012

26. Stockhofe K, Postema JM, Schieferstein H, Ross TL. Radiolabeling of nanoparticles and polymers for PET imaging. Pharmaceuticals. 2014;7(4):392418. doi:10.3390/ph7040392

27. Seo JW, Ang JC, Mahakian LM, et al. Self-assembled 20-nm64Cu-micelles enhance accumulation in rat glioblastoma. J Control Release. 2015;220:5160. doi:10.1016/j.jconrel.2015.09.057

28. Wong P, Li L, Chea J, et al. PET imaging of 64Cu-DOTA-scFv-anti-PSMA lipid nanoparticles (LNPs): enhanced tumor targeting over anti-PSMA scFv or untargeted LNPs. Nucl Med Biol. 2017;47:6268. doi:10.1016/j.nucmedbio.2017.01.004

29. Kurihara K, Ueda M, Hara I, Ozeki E, Togashi K, Kimura S. Polymeric micelle of a3 b-type lactosome as a vehicle for targeting meningeal dissemination. Nanomaterials. 2018;8(2):19. doi:10.3390/nano8020079

30. Yang BY, Moon S-H, Seelam SR, et al. Development of a multimodal imaging probe by encapsulating iron oxide nanoparticles with functionalized amphiphiles for lymph node imaging. Nanomedicine. 2015;10(12):18991910. doi:10.2217/nnm.15.41

31. Seo HJ, Nam SH, Im HJ, et al. Rapid hepatobiliary excretion of micelle-encapsulated/radiolabeled upconverting nanoparticles as an integrated form. Sci Rep. 2015;5:112. doi:10.1038/srep15685

32. Lee YK, Jeong J, Hoigebazar L, et al. Facile preparation of multimodal QDs using specially designed amphiphiles for targeting angiogenesis. J Nucl Med. 2011;52(supplement 1):295.

33. Helbok A, Decristoforo C, Dobrozemsky G, et al. Radiolabeling of lipid-based nanoparticles for diagnostics and therapeutic applications: a comparison using different radiometals. J Liposome Res. 2010;20(3):219227. doi:10.3109/08982100903311812

34. de Arcocha-torres M, Quincoces G, Martnez-Lpez AL, et al. Preparation, radiolabeling with 99mTc and 67Ga and biodistribution studies of albumin nanoparticles coated with polymers. Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol. 2020;39(4):225232. doi:10.1016/j.remnie.2020.04.002

35. Drude N, Singh S, Winz OH, Mller M, Mottaghy FM, Morgenroth A. Multistage passive and active delivery of radiolabeled nanogels for superior tumor penetration efficiency. Biomacromolecules. 2017;18(8):24892498. doi:10.1021/acs.biomac.7b00629

36. Fernndez-Barahona I, Muoz-Hernando M, Pellico J, Ruiz-Cabello J, Herranz F. Molecular imaging with 68Ga radio-nanomaterials: shedding light on nanoparticles. Appl Sci. 2018;8(7):1098. doi:10.3390/app8071098

37. Malinge J, Graudie B, Savel P, et al. Liposomes for PET and MR imaging and for dual targeting (magnetic field/glucose moiety): synthesis, properties, and in vivo studies. Mol Pharm. 2017;14(2):406414. doi:10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.6b00794

38. Ghai A, Singh B, Hazari PP, et al. Radiolabeling optimization and characterization of 68 Ga labeled DOTApolyamido-amine dendrimer conjugate animal biodistribution and PET imaging results. Appl Radiat Isot. 2015;105:4046. doi:10.1016/j.apradiso.2015.07.021

39. Singh S, Bingl B, Morgenroth A, Mottaghy FM, Mller M, Schmaljohann J. Radiolabeled nanogels for nuclear molecular imaging. Macromol Rapid Commun. 2013;34(7):562567. doi:10.1002/marc.201200744

40. Krhegyi Z, Rzsa D, Hajdu I, et al. Synthesis of 68Ga-labeled biopolymer-based nanoparticle imaging agents for positron-emission tomography. Anticancer Res. 2019;39(5):24152427. doi:10.21873/anticanres.13359

41. Mandiwana V, Kalombo L, Hayeshi R, Zeevaart JR, Ebenhan T. Preclinical assessment addressing intravenous administration of a [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-617 microemulsion: acute in vivo toxicity, tolerability, PET imaging, and biodistribution. Molecules. 2021;26(9):2650. doi:10.3390/molecules26092650

42. Hbner R, Cheng X, Wngler B, Wngler C. Functional hybrid molecules for the visualization of cancer: PESIN-homodimers combined with multimodal molecular imaging probes for positron emission tomography and optical imaging: suited for tracking of GRPR-positive malignant tissue. Chem a Eur J. 2020;26(69):1634916356. doi:10.1002/chem.202002386

43. Anderson CJ, Rocque PA, Weinheimer CJ, Welch MJ. Evaluation of copper-labeled bifunctional chelate-albumin conjugates for blood pool imaging. Nucl Med Biol. 1993;20(4):461467. doi:10.1016/0969-8051(93)90077-8

44. Mitchell N, Kalber TL, Cooper MS, et al. Incorporation of paramagnetic, fluorescent and PET/SPECT contrast agents into liposomes for multimodal imaging. Biomaterials. 2013;34(4):11791192. doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2012.09.070

45. Lin M, Pallio V, Ta R, Santos EB, Ravizzini GC, Le D. Whats new for 68Ga in the world of molecular imaging? SOJ Pharm Pharm Sci. 2018;5(4):112. doi:10.15226/2374-6866/5/4/00191

46. Benito AB, Aiertza MK, Marradi M, et al. Functional single-chain polymer nanoparticles: targeting and imaging pancreatic tumors in vivo. Biomacromolecules. 2016;17(10):32133221. doi:10.1021/acs.biomac.6b00941

47. Kumar V, Boddeti DK. 68Ga-radiopharmaceuticals for PET imaging of infection and inflammation. In: Baum RP, Rsch F, editors. Theranostics, Gallium-68, and Other Radionuclides. Springer; 2013:189219. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-27994-2_11

48. Zhao Z, Ukidve A, Krishnan V, Mitragotri S. Effect of physicochemical and surface properties on in vivo fate of drug nanocarriers. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2019;143:321. doi:10.1016/j.addr.2019.01.002

49. Han X, Xu K, Taratula O, Farsad K. Applications of nanoparticles in biomedical imaging. Nanoscale. 2019;11(3):799819. doi:10.1039/c8nr07769j

50. Abbina S, Parambath A. PEGylation and Its Alternatives: A Summary. Elsevier Ltd; 2018. doi:10.1016/B978-0-08-101750-0.00014-3

51. Zhou M, Hou J, Zhong Z, Hao N, Lin Y, Li C. Targeted delivery of hyaluronic acid-coated solid lipid nanoparticles for rheumatoid arthritis therapy. Drug Deliv. 2018;25(1):716722. doi:10.1080/10717544.2018.1447050

52. Ji P, Wang L, Chen Y, Wang S, Wu Z, Qi X. Hyaluronic acid hydrophilic surface rehabilitating curcumin nanocrystals for targeted breast cancer treatment with prolonged biodistribution. Biomater Sci. 2020;8(1):462472. doi:10.1039/C9BM01605H

53. Cheng Y, Liu M, Hu H, Liu D, Zhou S. Development, optimization, and characterization of PEGylated nanoemulsion of prostaglandin E1 for long circulation. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2016;17(2):409417. doi:10.1208/s12249-015-0366-1

54. Hak S, Garaiova Z, Olsen LT, Nilsen AM, De Lange Davies C. The effects of oil-in-water nanoemulsion polyethylene glycol surface density on intracellular stability, pharmacokinetics, and biodistribution in tumor bearing mice. Pharm Res. 2015;32(4):14751485. doi:10.1007/s11095-014-1553-6

55. Kim K, Choi H, Choi ES, Park MH, Ryu JH. Hyaluronic acid-coated nanomedicine for targeted cancer therapy. Pharmaceutics. 2019;11(7):122. doi:10.3390/pharmaceutics11070301

56. Teijeiro-Valio C, Novoa-Carballal R, Borrajo E, et al. A multifunctional drug nanocarrier for efficient anticancer therapy. J Control Release. 2019;294:154164. doi:10.1016/j.jconrel.2018.12.002

Go here to see the original:
Biodistribution of sphingolipid nanoemulsions with 68Ga | IJN - Dove Medical Press

Posted in Nano medicine | Comments Off on Biodistribution of sphingolipid nanoemulsions with 68Ga | IJN – Dove Medical Press

Elevated cryptic transcription emerges as a common theme in aging mammalian cells – Baylor College of Medicine News

Posted: August 31, 2021 at 2:41 am

Although visible signs of aging are usually unmistakable, unraveling what triggers them has been quite a challenge. At Baylor College of Medicine, the lab of Dr. Weiwei Dang and others at collaborating institutions have discovered that a cellular phenomenon called cryptic transcription, which had been previously described and linked to aging in yeasts and worms, is elevated in aging mammalian stem cells.

In previous work, we showed that cryptic transcription in yeasts and worms is not only a marker of aging but also a cause, said corresponding author Dang, assistant professor ofmolecular and human geneticsand theHuffington Center on Agingat Baylor. Reducing the amount of this aberrant transcription in these organisms prolonged their lifespan.

Cryptic transcription is a phenomenon that interferes with normal cellular processes. Normal gene transcription is a first step in the production of proteins. It begins in a specific location on the DNA called the promoter. This is where the protein coding gene begins to be transcribed into RNA, which is eventually translated into protein.

Gene transcription is a well-regulated cellular process, but as cells age, they lose their ability to control it.

Promoters have a specific DNA sequence that identifies the starting point of the transcription process that is usually located preceding the actual protein coding sequence, explained Dang. But promoter look-alike sequences do exist in other locations, including along the actual protein coding sequence, and they could start transcription and generate shorter transcripts, called cryptic transcripts. Here we investigated whether cryptic transcription increased with age in mammals and potential mechanisms involved in this phenomenon.

The team worked with mammalian stem cells, which have shown to play a significant role in aging. They adapted a method to detect cryptic transcription to determine the level of this transcription in mice and human stem cells and cultured cells. When compared to young stem cells, older ones had increased cryptic transcription. They also looked into other aging cells and found that, in the majority of cells spanning a range of tissues, cryptic transcription was also elevated with age.

Altogether, our findings indicate that elevated cryptic transcription is emerging as a hallmark of mammalian aging, Dang said.

Young cells have mechanisms in place to prevent cryptic transcription. In aged mammalian cells, the researchers found that one such mechanisms, which involves limiting the access to chromatin, the material that makes up the chromosomes, is failing, facilitating the production of cryptic transcripts.

It is still not clear how elevated cryptic transcription contributes to aging, but the evidence is accumulating that it is detrimental to mammals as it is for yeast and worms, Dang said. Future studies may result in ways of reduce the pro-aging effects of cryptic transcription.

Read the complete report in the journalNature Aging.

Other contributors to this work include Brenna S. McCauley, Luyang Sun, Ruofan Yu, Minjung Lee, Haiying Liu, Dena S. Leeman, Yun Huang and Ashley E. Webb. The authors are associated with one or more of the following institutions: Baylor College of Medicine, Texas A&M University, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Stanford University, Genentech and Brown University.

This work was funded by NIH grants R01AG052507, R01AG053268, R01HL134780, R01HL146852 and T32AG000183; CPRIT award R1306 and a Ted Nash Long Life Foundation research grant.

By Ana Mara Rodrguez, Ph.D.

Read more from the original source:
Elevated cryptic transcription emerges as a common theme in aging mammalian cells - Baylor College of Medicine News

Posted in Texas Stem Cells | Comments Off on Elevated cryptic transcription emerges as a common theme in aging mammalian cells – Baylor College of Medicine News

Prolymphocytic Leukemia: What Is It and How Is It Treated? – Healthline

Posted: August 31, 2021 at 2:40 am

Prolymphocytic leukemia (PLL) is a very rare subtype of chronic leukemia. Although most forms of chronic leukemia progress slowly, PPL is often aggressive and can be difficult to treat.

Well walk you through what you need to know about PLL, including the symptoms, how its diagnosed, current treatment options, and more.

PLL is a rare and aggressive type of chronic leukemia.

The American Cancer Society estimates that more than 60,000 people will receive a diagnosis of leukemia in the United States in 2021.

Less than 1 percent of all people with chronic leukemia have PLL. Its most often diagnosed in people between ages 65 and 70 and is slightly more common in men than in women.

Like all types of leukemia, PLL affects blood cells. PLL is caused by the overgrowth of cells called lymphocytes. These cells usually help your body fight infection. In PLL, large immature lymphocyte cells called prolymphocytes are produced too quickly and overwhelm the other blood cells.

There are two subtypes of PLL:

PLL, like other chronic leukemias, is often found on lab work before any symptoms develop. When symptoms develop, they might include:

There are a few additional symptoms that are specific to T-PLL, which include:

Many of these are general leukemia symptoms and are also found in less serious conditions. The presence of any of these symptoms doesnt always indicate PLL.

In fact, since PLL is rare, its unlikely that its causing your symptoms.

However, its a good idea to see a healthcare professional if youve been experiencing any of these symptoms for more than a week or two.

Because PLL is very rare, it can be hard to diagnose. PLL sometimes develops from existing chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and is found during lab work when monitoring CLL.

PLL is diagnosed when more than 55 percent of the lymphocytes in your blood sample are prolymphocytes. Blood work can also be checked for antibodies and antigens that can signal PLL.

If PLL isnt found during routine blood work, a healthcare professional will order more tests if you have symptoms that might indicate PLL. These tests may include:

Currently, theres no one specific treatment for either type of PLL. Your treatment will depend on how fast your PLL progresses, the type you have, your age, and your symptoms.

Since PLL is rare, your doctor will likely come up with a treatment plan specific to your case. Healthcare professionals may often encourage people with PLL to sign up for clinical trials to try new medications.

Treatments you might receive for PLL include:

PLL is an aggressive form of chronic leukemia. Therefore, the outlook is generally poor due to how quickly it may spread. But outcomes and survival rates can vary greatly between people.

As mentioned earlier, one potential cure for PLL is a stem cell transplant, although not all people with PLL are eligible to receive stem cell transplants.

Newer treatments have improved survival rates in recent years, and research into new therapies is ongoing.

PLL is a rare type of chronic leukemia. Its most commonly diagnosed in people between 65 and 70 years old. It often progresses more quickly and is treatment-resistant than other forms of chronic leukemia.

Treatment options depend on your overall health, age, symptoms, and the type of PLL you have. People are often encouraged to take part in clinical trials to take advantage of new therapies.

Originally posted here:
Prolymphocytic Leukemia: What Is It and How Is It Treated? - Healthline

Posted in Stem Cell Treatments | Comments Off on Prolymphocytic Leukemia: What Is It and How Is It Treated? – Healthline

Incyte and MorphoSys Announce the European Commission Approval of Minjuvi (tafasitamab) in Combination With Lenalidomide for the Treatment of Adults…

Posted: August 31, 2021 at 2:39 am

WILMINGTON, Del. & PLANEGG, Germany & MUNICH--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Incyte (Nasdaq:INCY) and MorphoSys AG (FSE:MOR; NASDAQ:MOR) today announced that the European Commission (EC) has granted conditional marketing authorization for Minjuvi (tafasitamab) in combination with lenalidomide, followed by Minjuvi monotherapy, for the treatment of adult patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who are not eligible for autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). The EC decision follows the positive opinion received from the European Medicines Agencys Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) in June 2021 recommending the conditional marketing authorization of Minjuvi.

People living with relapsed or refractory DLBCL in the EU, have historically had limited treatment options and a poor prognosis. However, with the ECs approval of Minjuvi, eligible patients now have a new and much needed treatment option, said Herv Hoppenot, Chief Executive Officer, Incyte. We will now focus our efforts on working with individual countries in Europe to provide people access to this new treatment.

The approval of Minjuvi is a crucial milestone for patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL in Europe, said Jean-Paul Kress, M.D., Chief Executive Officer, MorphoSys. DLBCL is the most common type of non-Hodgkin lymphoma in adults and Minjuvi addresses an urgent unmet medical need for the 30-40% of people who do not respond to or relapse, after initial therapy.

The conditional approval is based on the results from the L-MIND study evaluating the safety and efficacy of Minjuvi in combination with lenalidomide as a treatment for patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL who are not eligible for autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). The results showed best objective response rate (ORR) of 56.8% (primary endpoint), including a complete response (CR) rate of 39.5% and a partial response rate (PR) of 17.3%, as assessed by an independent review committee. The median duration of response (mDOR) was 43.9 months after a minimum follow up of 35 months (secondary endpoint). Minjuvi together with lenalidomide was shown to provide a clinically meaningful response and the side effects were manageable. Warnings and precautions for Minjuvi include infusion-related reactions, myelosuppression, including neutropenia and thrombocytopenia, infections and tumour lysis syndrome.

The data from the L-MIND study demonstrate the potential benefits, including long duration of response, that tafasitamab may have for eligible DLBCL patients, said Professor Pier Luigi Zinzani M.D., Ph.D., Head of the Lymphoma Group at University of Bologna. It is encouraging to see new treatments become available for these patients, especially given the historical lack of treatment options in this area.

Incyte and MorphoSys share global development rights to tafasitamab; Incyte has exclusive commercialization rights to tafasitamab outside the United States. Tafasitamab is co-marketed by Incyte and MorphoSys under the brand name Monjuvi in the U.S., and is marketed by Incyte under the brand name Minjuvi in the EU.

About Diffuse Large B-Cell LymphomaDLBCL is the most common type of non-Hodgkin lymphoma in adults worldwide, comprising 40% of all cases4, and is characterized by rapidly growing masses of malignant B-cells in the lymph nodes, spleen, liver, bone marrow or other organs5. It is an aggressive disease with about one in three patients not responding to initial therapy or relapsing thereafter6. In Europe, each year approximately 16,000 patients are diagnosed with relapsed or refractory DLBCL7,8,9.

About L-MINDThe L-MIND trial is a single arm, open-label Phase 2 study (NCT02399085) investigating the combination of tafasitamab and lenalidomide in patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who have had at least one, but no more than three prior lines of therapy, including an anti-CD20 targeting therapy (e.g., rituximab), who are not eligible for high-dose chemotherapy (HDC) or autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). The studys primary endpoint is overall response rate (ORR). Secondary outcome measures include duration of response (DoR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). The study reached its primary completion in May 2019.

For more information about L-MIND, visit https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02399085.

About Minjuvi (tafasitamab)Tafasitamab is a humanized Fc-modified cytolytic CD19 targeting monoclonal antibody. In 2010, MorphoSys licensed exclusive worldwide rights to develop and commercialize tafasitamab from Xencor, Inc. Tafasitamab incorporates an XmAb engineered Fc domain, which mediates B-cell lysis through apoptosis and immune effector mechanism including Antibody-Dependent Cell-Mediated Cytotoxicity (ADCC) and Antibody-Dependent Cellular Phagocytosis (ADCP).

In the United States, Monjuvi (tafasitamab-cxix) is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in combination with lenalidomide for the treatment of adult patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL not otherwise specified, including DLBCL arising from low grade lymphoma, and who are not eligible for autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). This indication is approved under accelerated approval based on overall response rate. Continued approval for this indication may be contingent upon verification and description of clinical benefit in a confirmatory trial(s).

In Europe, Minjuvi (tafasitamab) received conditional approval, in combination with lenalidomide, followed by Minjuvi monotherapy, for the treatment of adult patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who are not eligible for autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT).

Tafasitamab is being clinically investigated as a therapeutic option in B-cell malignancies in several ongoing combination trials.

Minjuvi and Monjuvi are registered trademarks of MorphoSys AG. Tafasitamab is co-marketed by Incyte and MorphoSys under the brand name Monjuvi in the U.S., and marketed by Incyte under the brand name Minjuvi in the EU.

XmAb is a registered trademark of Xencor, Inc.

Safety Information from the EU Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC)Infusion-related reactions may occur and have been reported more frequently during the first infusion. Patients should be monitored closely throughout the infusion and should be advised to contact their healthcare professionals if they experience signs and symptoms of infusion related reactions including fever, chills, rash or breathing problems within 24 hours of infusion. A premedication should be administered to patients prior to starting tafasitamab infusion. Based on the severity of the infusion-related reaction, tafasitamab infusion should be interrupted or discontinued and appropriate medical management should be instituted.

Fatal and serious infections, including opportunistic infections, occurred in patients during treatment with Minjuvi.

Minjuvi should be administered to patients with an active infection only if the infection is treated appropriately and well controlled. Patients with a history of recurring or chronic infections may be at increased risk of infection and should be monitored appropriately. Patients should be advised to contact their healthcare professionals if fever or other evidence of potential infection, such as chills, cough or pain on urination, develops.

Treatment with Minjuvi in combination with lenalidomide should not be initiated in female patients unless pregnancy has been excluded.

The most common adverse reactions were infections, neutropenia, asthenia, anemia, diarrhea, thrombocytopenia, cough, oedema peripheral, pyrexia and decreased appetite.

Minjuvi may cause serious adverse reactions. The most common serious adverse reactions were infection, including pneumonia and febrile neutropenia.

Treatment with tafasitamab can cause serious or severe myelosuppression including neutropenia, thrombocytopenia and anemia. Complete blood counts should be monitored throughout treatment and prior to administration of each treatment cycle.

About IncyteIncyte is a Wilmington, Delaware-based, global biopharmaceutical company focused on finding solutions for serious unmet medical needs through the discovery, development and commercialization of proprietary therapeutics. For additional information on Incyte, please visit Incyte.com and follow @Incyte.

About MorphoSysMorphoSys (FSE & NASDAQ: MOR) is a commercial-stage biopharmaceutical company dedicated to the discovery, development and commercialization of innovative therapies for people living with cancer and autoimmune diseases. Based on its leading expertise in antibody and protein technologies, MorphoSys is advancing its own pipeline of new drug candidates and has created antibodies which are developed by partners in different areas of unmet medical need. In 2017, Tremfya (guselkumab) developed by Janssen Research & Development, LLC and marketed by Janssen Biotech, Inc., for the treatment of plaque psoriasis became the first drug based on MorphoSys antibody technology to receive regulatory approval. In July 2020, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted accelerated approval of the companys proprietary product Monjuvi (tafasitamab-cxix) in combination with lenalidomide in patients with a certain type of lymphoma. Headquartered near Munich, Germany, the MorphoSys Group, including the fully owned U.S. subsidiaries MorphoSys US Inc. and Constellation Pharmaceuticals, Inc., has more than 750 employees. For more information visit http://www.morphosys.com or http://www.morphosys-us.com.

Tremfya is a registered trademark of Janssen Biotech, Inc.

Incyte Forward-looking StatementsExcept for the historical information set forth herein, the matters set forth in this press release, including statements regarding the Companys expectations relating to the use of tafasitamab for treatment of adult patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), the Companys ongoing clinical development program for tafasitamab, and its DLBCL program generally, contain predictions, estimates, and other forward-looking statements.

These forward-looking statements are based on the Companys current expectations and subject to risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ materially, including unanticipated developments in and risks related to: unanticipated delays; further research and development and the results of clinical trials possibly being unsuccessful or insufficient to meet applicable regulatory standards or warrant continued development; the ability to enroll sufficient numbers of subjects in clinical trials and the ability to enroll subjects in accordance with planned schedules; the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and measures to address the pandemic on the Companys clinical trials, supply chain, and other third-party providers and development and discovery operations; determinations made by the European Commission and other regulatory authorities; the Companys dependence on its relationships with its collaboration partners; the efficacy or safety of the Companys products and the products of the Companys collaboration partners; the acceptance of the Companys products and the products of the Companys collaboration partners in the marketplace; market competition; sales, marketing, manufacturing, and distribution requirements; and other risks detailed from time to time in the Companys reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including its annual report and its quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2021. The Company disclaims any intent or obligation to update these forward-looking statements.

MorphoSys Forward-looking StatementsThis communication contains certain forward-looking statements concerning the MorphoSys group of companies. The forward-looking statements contained herein represent the judgment of MorphoSys as of the date of this release and involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties, which might cause the actual results, financial condition and liquidity, performance or achievements of MorphoSys, or industry results, to be materially different from any historic or future results, financial conditions and liquidity, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. In addition, even if MorphoSys' results, performance, financial condition and liquidity, and the development of the industry in which it operates are consistent with such forward-looking statements, they may not be predictive of results or developments in future periods. Among the factors that may result in differences are that MorphoSys' expectations may be incorrect, the inherent uncertainties associated with competitive developments, clinical trial and product development activities and regulatory approval requirements, MorphoSys' reliance on collaborations with third parties, estimating the commercial potential of its development programs and other risks indicated in the risk factors included in MorphoSys' Annual Report on Form 20-F and other filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Given these uncertainties, the reader is advised not to place any undue reliance on such forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of publication of this document. MorphoSys expressly disclaims any obligation to update any such forward-looking statements in this document to reflect any change in its expectations with regard thereto or any change in events, conditions or circumstances on which any such statement is based or that may affect the likelihood that actual results will differ from those set forth in the forward-looking statements, unless specifically required by law or regulation.

_____________________1 DRG Epidemiology data.2 Kantar Market Research (TPP testing 2018).3 Friedberg, Jonathan W. Relapsed/Refractory Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma. Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program 2011; 2011:498-505. doi: 10.1182/asheducation-2011.1.498.4 Cancer Research UK. Diffuse large B cell lymphoma. Available at https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/non-hodgkin-lymphoma/types/diffuse-large-B-cell-lymphoma. Accessed: May 2021.5 Sarkozy C, et al. Management of relapsed/refractory DLBCL. Best Practice Research & Clinical Haematology. 2018 31:20916. doi.org/10.1016/j.beha.2018.07.014.6 Skrabek P, et al. Emerging therapies for the treatment of relapsed or refractory diffuse large B cell lymphoma. Current Oncology. 2019 26(4): 253265. doi.org/10.3747/co.26.5421.7 DRG Epidemiology data.8 Kantar Market Research (TPP testing 2018).9 Friedberg, Jonathan W. Relapsed/Refractory Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma. Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program 2011; 2011:498-505. doi: 10.1182/asheducation-2011.1.498.

Originally posted here:
Incyte and MorphoSys Announce the European Commission Approval of Minjuvi (tafasitamab) in Combination With Lenalidomide for the Treatment of Adults...

Posted in Delaware Stem Cells | Comments Off on Incyte and MorphoSys Announce the European Commission Approval of Minjuvi (tafasitamab) in Combination With Lenalidomide for the Treatment of Adults…

MorphoSys and Incyte Announce the European Commission Approval of Minjuvi(R) (tafasitamab) in Combination with Lenalidomide for the Treatment of…

Posted: August 31, 2021 at 2:39 am

Get instant alerts when news breaks on your stocks. Claim your 1-week free trial to StreetInsider Premium here.

-The decision by the European Commission is based on data from the L-MIND study evaluating tafasitamab in combination with lenalidomide as a treatment for patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL

- Minjuvi is a new therapeutic option for eligible DLBCL patients in the European Union (EU), addressing an urgent unmet medical need

- In Europe, each year approximately 16,000 patients are diagnosed with relapsed or refractory DLBCL1,2,3

PLANEGG/MUNICH, GERMANY and WILMINGTON, DE / ACCESSWIRE / August 26, 2021 / MorphoSys AG (FSE:MOR; NASDAQ:MOR) and Incyte (INCY) today announced that the European Commission (EC) has granted conditional marketing authorization for Minjuvi (tafasitamab) in combination with lenalidomide, followed by Minjuvi monotherapy, for the treatment of adult patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who are not eligible for autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). The EC Decision follows the positive opinion received from the European Medicines Agency's Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) in June 2021 recommending the conditional marketing authorization of Minjuvi.

"People living with relapsed or refractory DLBCL in the EU have historically had limited treatment options and a poor prognosis. However, with the EC's approval of Minjuvi, eligible patients now have a new and much needed treatment option," said Herv Hoppenot, Chief Executive Officer, Incyte. "We will now focus our efforts on working with individual countries in Europe to provide people access to this new treatment."

"The approval of Minjuvi is a crucial milestone for patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL in Europe, "said Jean-Paul Kress, M.D., Chief Executive Officer, MorphoSys. "DLBCL is the most common type of non-Hodgkin lymphoma in adults and Minjuvi addresses an urgent unmet medical need for the 30-40% of people who do not respond to or relapse after initial therapy."

The conditional approval is based on the results from the L-MIND study evaluating the safety and efficacy of tafasitamab in combination with lenalidomide as a treatment for patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL who are not eligible for autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). The results showed best objective response rate (ORR) of 56.8% (primary endpoint), including a complete response (CR) rate of 39.5% and a partial response rate (PR) of 17.3%, as assessed by an independent review committee. The median duration of response (mDOR) was 43.9 months after a minimum follow up of 35 months (secondary endpoint). Tafasitamab together with lenalidomide was shown to provide a clinically meaningful response and the side effects were manageable. Warnings and precautions for tafasitamab include infusion-related reactions, myelosuppression, including neutropenia and thrombocytopenia, infections and tumour lysis syndrome.

"The data from the L-MIND study demonstrate the potential benefits, including long duration of response, that tafasitamab may have for eligible DLBCL patients," said Professor Pier Luigi Zinzani M.D., Ph.D., Head of Lymphoma Group at University of Bologna. "It is encouraging to see new treatments become available for these patients, especially given the historical lack of treatment options in this area."

Incyte and MorphoSys share global development rights to tafasitamab; Incyte has exclusive commercialization rights to tafasitamab outside the United States. Tafasitamab is co-marketed by Incyte and MorphoSys under the brand name Monjuvi in the U.S., and is marketed by Incyte under the brand name Minjuvi in the EU.

About Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma

DLBCL is the most common type of non-Hodgkin lymphoma in adults worldwide, comprising 40% of all cases4 , and is characterized by rapidly growing masses of malignant B-cells in the lymph nodes, spleen, liver, bone marrow or other organs5 . It is an aggressive disease with about one in three patients not responding to initial therapy or relapsing thereafter6 . In Europe, each year approximately 16,000 patients are diagnosed with relapsed or refractory DLBCL7,8,9 .

About L-MIND

The L-MIND trial is a single arm, open-label Phase 2 study (NCT02399085) investigating the combination of tafasitamab and lenalidomide in patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who have had at least one, but no more than three prior lines of therapy, including an anti-CD20 targeting therapy (e.g., rituximab), who are not eligible for high-dose chemotherapy (HCD) or autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). The study's primary endpoint is overall response rate (ORR). Secondary outcome measures include duration of response (DoR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). The study reached its primary completion in May 2019.

For more information about L-MIND, visit https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02399085 .

About Minjuvi (tafasitamab) Tafasitamab is a humanized Fc-modified cytolytic CD19 targeting monoclonal antibody. In 2010, MorphoSys licensed exclusive worldwide rights to develop and commercialize tafasitamab from Xencor, Inc. Tafasitamab incorporates an XmAb engineered Fc domain, which mediates B-cell lysis through apoptosis and immune effector mechanism including Antibody-Dependent Cell-Mediated Cytotoxicity (ADCC) and Antibody-Dependent Cellular Phagocytosis (ADCP).

In the United States, Monjuvi(tafasitamab-cxix) is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in combination with lenalidomide for the treatment of adult patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL not otherwise specified, including DLBCL arising from low grade lymphoma, and who are not eligible for autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). This indication is approved under accelerated approval based on overall response rate. Continued approval for this indication may be contingent upon verification and description of clinical benefit in a confirmatory trial(s).

In Europe, Minjuvi (tafasitamab) received conditional approval, in combination with lenalidomide, followed by Minjuvi monotherapy, for the treatment of adult patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who are not eligible for autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT).

Tafasitamab is being clinically investigated as a therapeutic option in B-cell malignancies in several ongoing combination trials.

Minjuvi and Monjuvi are registered trademarks of MorphoSys AG. Tafasitamab is co-marketed by Incyte and MorphoSys under the brand name Monjuvi in the U.S., and marketed by Incyte under the brand name Minjuvi in the EU.

XmAb is a registered trademark of Xencor, Inc.

Safety Information from the EU Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC)

Infusion-related reactions may occur and have been reported more frequently during the first infusion. Patients should be monitored closely throughout the infusion and should be advised to contact their healthcare professionals if they experience signs and symptoms of infusion related reactions including fever, chills, rash or breathing problems within 24 hours of infusion. A premedication should be administered to patients prior to starting tafasitamab infusion. Based on the severity of the infusion-related reaction, tafasitamab infusion should be interrupted or discontinued and appropriate medical management should be instituted.

Fatal and serious infections, including opportunistic infections, occurred in patients during treatment with Minjuvi.

Minjuvi should be administered to patients with an active infection only if the infection is treated appropriately and well controlled. Patients with a history of recurring or chronic infections may be at increased risk of infection and should be monitored appropriately. Patients should be advised to contact their healthcare professionals if fever or other evidence of potential infection, such as chills, cough or pain on urination, develops.

Treatment with Minjuvi in combination with lenalidomide should not be initiated in female patients unless pregnancy has been excluded.

The most common adverse reactions were infections, neutropenia, asthenia, anemia, diarrhea, thrombocytopenia, cough, oedema peripheral, pyrexia and decreased appetite.

Minjuvi may cause serious adverse reactions. The most common serious adverse reactions were infection, including pneumonia and febrile neutropenia.

Treatment with tafasitamab can cause serious or severe myelosuppression including neutropenia, thrombocytopenia and anemia. Complete blood counts should be monitored throughout treatment and prior to administration of each treatment cycle.

About MorphoSys MorphoSys (FSE & NASDAQ: MOR) is a commercial-stage biopharmaceutical company dedicated to the discovery, development and commercialization of innovative therapies for people living with cancer and autoimmune diseases. Based on its leading expertise in antibody and protein technologies, MorphoSys is advancing its own pipeline of new drug candidates and has created antibodies which are developed by partners in different areas of unmet medical need. In 2017, Tremfya (guselkumab) - developed by Janssen Research & Development, LLC and marketed by Janssen Biotech, Inc., for the treatment of plaque psoriasis - became the first drug based on MorphoSys' antibody technology to receive regulatory approval. In July 2020, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted accelerated approval of the company's proprietary product Monjuvi (tafasitamab-cxix) in combination with lenalidomide in patients with a certain type of lymphoma. Headquartered near Munich, Germany, the MorphoSys Group, including the fully owned U.S. subsidiaries MorphoSys US Inc. and Constellation Pharmaceuticals, Inc., has more than 750 employees. For more information visit http://www.morphosys.com or http://www.morphosys-us.com.

Tremfya is a registered trademark of Janssen Biotech, Inc.

About Incyte

Incyte is a Wilmington, Delaware-based, global biopharmaceutical company focused on finding solutions for serious unmet medical needs through the discovery, development and commercialization of proprietary therapeutics. For additional information on Incyte, please visit Incyte.com and follow @Incyte.

MorphoSys Forward-looking Statements

This communication contains certain forward-looking statements concerning the MorphoSys group of companies. The forward-looking statements contained herein represent the judgment of MorphoSys as of the date of this release and involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties, which might cause the actual results, financial condition and liquidity, performance or achievements of MorphoSys, or industry results, to be materially different from any historic or future results, financial conditions and liquidity, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. In addition, even if MorphoSys' results, performance, financial condition and liquidity, and the development of the industry in which it operates are consistent with such forward-looking statements, they may not be predictive of results or developments in future periods. Among the factors that may result in differences are that MorphoSys' expectations may be incorrect, the inherent uncertainties associated with competitive developments, clinical trial and product development activities and regulatory approval requirements, MorphoSys' reliance on collaborations with third parties, estimating the commercial potential of its development programs and other risks indicated in the risk factors included in MorphoSys' Annual Report on Form 20-F and other filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Given these uncertainties, the reader is advised not to place any undue reliance on such forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of publication of this document. MorphoSys expressly disclaims any obligation to update any such forward-looking statements in this document to reflect any change in its expectations with regard thereto or any change in events, conditions or circumstances on which any such statement is based or that may affect the likelihood that actual results will differ from those set forth in the forward-looking statements, unless specifically required by law or regulation.

Incyte Forward-looking Statements

Except for the historical information set forth herein, the matters set forth in this press release, including statements regarding the Company's expectations relating to the use of tafasitamab for treatment of adult patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), the Company's ongoing clinical development program for tafasitamab, and its DLBCL program generally, contain predictions, estimates, and other forward-looking statements.

These forward-looking statements are based on the Company's current expectations and subject to risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ materially, including unanticipated developments in and risks related to: unanticipated delays; further research and development and the results of clinical trials possibly being unsuccessful or insufficient to meet applicable regulatory standards or warrant continued development; the ability to enroll sufficient numbers of subjects in clinical trials and the ability to enroll subjects in accordance with planned schedules; the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and measures to address the pandemic on the Company's clinical trials, supply chain, and other third-party providers and development and discovery operations; determinations made by the European Commission and other regulatory authorities; the Company's dependence on its relationships with its collaboration partners; the efficacy or safety of the Company's products and the products of the Company's collaboration partners; the acceptance of the Company's products and the products of the Company's collaboration partners in the marketplace; market competition; sales, marketing, manufacturing, and distribution requirements; and other risks detailed from time to time in the Company's reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including its annual report and its quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2021. The Company disclaims any intent or obligation to update these forward-looking statements.

# # #

For more information, please contact:

MorphoSys Media contacts: Thomas BiegiTel.: +49 (0)89 / 89927 26079Thomas.Biegi@morphosys.com

Jeanette BressiTel: +1 617-404-7816jeanette.bressi@morphosys.com

Investor Contact: Dr. Julia NeugebauerTel: +49 (0)89 / 899 27 179julia.neugebauer@morphosys.com

Myles CloustonTel: +1-857-772-0240myles.clouston@morphosys.com

Incyte Media: Ela ZawislakTel: + 41 21 581 5200ezawislak@incyte.com

Catalina LovemanTel: + 1 302 498 6171cloveman@incyte.com

Investors: Christine ChiouTel: +1 302 498 5914cchiou@incyte.com

References

1DRG Epidemiology data.2Kantar Market Research (TPP testing 2018).3Friedberg, Jonathan W. Relapsed/Refractory Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma. Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program 2011; 2011:498-505. doi: 10.1182/asheducation-2011.1.498.4Cancer Research UK. Diffuse large B cell lymphoma. Available at https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/non-hodgkin-lymphoma/types/diffuse-large-B-cell-lymphoma. Accessed: May 2021.5Sarkozy C, et al. Management of relapsed/refractory DLBCL. Best Practice Research & Clinical Haematology. 2018 31:209-16. doi.org/10.1016/j.beha.2018.07.014.6Skrabek P, et al. Emerging therapies for the treatment of relapsed or refractory diffuse large B cell lymphoma. Current Oncology. 2019 26(4): 253-265. doi.org/10.3747/co.26.5421.7DRG Epidemiology data.8Kantar Market Research (TPP testing 2018).9Friedberg, Jonathan W. Relapsed/Refractory Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma. Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program 2011; 2011:498-505. doi: 10.1182/asheducation-2011.1.498.

SOURCE: MorphoSys AG

View source version on accesswire.com: https://www.accesswire.com/661575/MorphoSys-and-Incyte-Announce-the-European-Commission-Approval-of-MinjuviR-tafasitamab-in-Combination-with-Lenalidomide-for-the-Treatment-of-Adults-with-Relapsed-or-Refractory-Diffuse-Large-B-Cell-Lymphoma

Visit link:
MorphoSys and Incyte Announce the European Commission Approval of Minjuvi(R) (tafasitamab) in Combination with Lenalidomide for the Treatment of...

Posted in Delaware Stem Cells | Comments Off on MorphoSys and Incyte Announce the European Commission Approval of Minjuvi(R) (tafasitamab) in Combination with Lenalidomide for the Treatment of…

Harvard study links exposure to wildfire smoke and COVID-19 with implications for BC – The Globe and Mail

Posted: August 31, 2021 at 2:34 am

Thick smoke from wildfires blankets the area as a woman sits on a paddleboard on Okanagan Lake, in Lake Country, B.C., on Friday, August 13, 2021. Environment Canada has issued a heat warning and an air quality statement for much of the British Columbia coast and interior. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Darryl Dyck

DARRYL DYCK/The Canadian Press

Regions in British Columbia most affected by wildfires are currently reporting more COVID-19 cases per capita than most areas in the country, and some researchers suggest the fires could be driving case numbers.

Interior Health, the region comprising Okanagan, Kelowna and Kamloops, is doubling the four other B.C. health authorities in COVID-19 cases this month for the first time since the start of the pandemic. The south-central region is among the least vaccinated and the one that has suffered the majority of destruction from this years wildfires.

On Aug. 20, B.C. Health Officer Dr. Bonnie Henry announced added public health measures for the area to curb the spread, including mandatory masking in all indoor settings, a ban on high-intensity indoor group exercise, and capping outdoor gatherings at 50.

Story continues below advertisement

The B.C. Health Ministry said the recent sharp increases in COVID-19 cases in the region have more to do with the spread of the highly transmissible Delta variant and remaining pockets of unvaccinated people than with exposure to wildfire smoke.

But a recent study from Harvard has raised the possibility that there could be a link. Even if there isnt, researchers and Dr. Henry say the fires are exacerbating local COVID-19 cases. The Ministry has warned residents that wildfire smoke can irritate the lungs, affect the immune system, and make one more prone to lung infections and viruses.

B.C. is living through one of the worst wildfire seasons of its history. Since April 1, 859,000 hectares of land have burned; more than twice the yearly provincial average, and area-wise equivalent to 15 cities of Toronto. The damage is concentrated inside B.C. Interior region, but smoke from the fires has darkened the skies of Central Alberta, prompting air quality warnings in Calgary and Edmonton this summer. Currently, the three provinces with the highest COVID-19 cases per capita are Alberta, B.C. and Saskatchewan, in that order.

Fires have also been an issue further east. In July, smoke from wildfires burning in Northwestern Ontario and Northern Manitoba travelled all the way to major cities such as Montreal, Fredericton and Winnipeg and Toronto. At one point, downtown Toronto logged the highest air pollution figure recorded since the air quality station started reporting in 2003.

The Harvard study, published earlier this month, found strong evidence that particulate matter called PM2.5 coming from wildfire smoke led to a surge in COVID-19 cases and deaths in 2020 in California, Washington and Oregon.

The particles can induce inflammation in lung cells, and can worsen respiratory conditions such as pneumonia, asthma and bronchitis. The researchers found that wherever particulate matter rose for a 28-day period to the concentration much of B.C. has recently experienced, COVID-19 cases increased by 11 per cent and deaths by almost nine per cent.

Since we know this association exists, we would like to see more action taken from our respective governments to improve wildfire management, try to stem climate change, said Dr. Kevin Josey, one of the studys authors and a Harvard Postdoctoral Research Fellow in Biostatistics.

Story continues below advertisement

Wildfires have been especially destructive in the Western United States this year, but Dr. Josey said it is reasonable to expect similar associations between PM2.5 particle concentration and COVID-19 cases and deaths in British Columbia.

He said the correlation between wildfires and COVID-19 cases could be due to several factors beyond the fact that both can wage war with the respiratory system. Exposure to fire smoke could make asymptomatic people develop symptoms, resulting in regions registering more cases. Poor air quality could also be forcing people to gather indoors instead of out, creating more high-risk situations for transmission. A higher concentration of PM 2.5 particles could also create thicker air, and could allow the virus to travel farther and infect more people in close quarters.

Dr. Michael Mehta, an environmental scientist and professor at Thompson Rivers University in Kamloops, said the similarity in symptoms from COVID-19 infection and wildfire exposure could also make it more difficult to identify outbreaks in areas exposed to wildfires.

People dont know whether to get tested or isolate because lots of symptoms are the same: coughing, breathing issues, sore throat.

Dr. Mehta said he does not expect the wildfires to attenuate until the winter. Until then, he is afraid for the health of children under 12 who are still ineligible to be immunized, and tend to be vulnerable to fire smoke.

Children are unvaccinated and most likely to suffer consequences of air pollution because they still have developing lungs, and are most likely to be outside and active, he said. I think this combination can be quite devastating.

Story continues below advertisement

For as long as the fire season continues and as cases remain up, Dr. Mehta implores residents to wear proper N95 masks as much as possible, procure a high-efficiency particulate air filter for their home and get immunized as soon as possible.

The case for vaccination has never been stronger.

Dr. Christopher Carlsten, the Canada Research Chair in Occupational and Environmental Lung Disease at the University of British Columbia, agrees that the fires probably are not helping to quell the fourth wave. He said all past literature would point to the correlation between PM 2.5 and COVID-19 being a strong possibility, and that even people from neighbouring provinces should take caution.

In Alberta, where the wildfire situation is comparatively better than in B.C. and well below the average in terms of land burned, smoke has been a constant problem for the past two months. Calgary imposed a fire ban in late July not due to the fire risk, but rather because officials did not want backyard fires to worsen the already dangerous air quality.

Yet Dr. Carlsten was cautious about drawing conclusions linking wildfires and COVID-19. The research can be easy to misinterpret, he said, because it does not compare between individuals, but rather between groups, whose COVID-19 numbers could vary from each other for several reasons.

There are many things that are potentially driving this association, he said, for example differences in public health measures between regions.

Story continues below advertisement

Dr. Carlsten said the Harvard study is not enough for authorities to conclude that wildfires are the cause for the surge in COVID-19 cases in B.C. Still, he added, it would be wise for residents to take their own precautions.

I think its reasonable to take some action on this even though its not totally proven.

We want to be smart about exposure to fire smoke and exposure to COVID, and being smart about both of them at the same time seems to have little downside.

We have a weekly Western Canada newsletter written by our B.C. and Alberta bureau chiefs, providing a comprehensive package of the news you need to know about the region and its place in the issues facing Canada. Sign up today.

Originally posted here:
Harvard study links exposure to wildfire smoke and COVID-19 with implications for BC - The Globe and Mail

Posted in Oregon Stem Cells | Comments Off on Harvard study links exposure to wildfire smoke and COVID-19 with implications for BC – The Globe and Mail

Bone Marrow-Derived Stem Cells (BMSCS) Market : Size & Trends Shows a Rapid Growth by 2028 UNLV The Rebel Yell – UNLV The Rebel Yell

Posted: August 31, 2021 at 2:32 am

DBMR has added a new report titled Bone Marrow-Derived Stem Cells (BMSCS) Market with analysis provides the insights which bring marketplace clearly into the focus and thus help organizations make better decisions. With a devotion and commitment of supreme level of resilience and integrated approaches, Bone Marrow-Derived Stem Cells (BMSCS) Market research report has been structured. The report also puts a light on growth opportunity assessment (GOA), customer insights (CI), competitive business intelligence (CBI), and distribution channel assessment (DCA). This world class market report analyses and evaluates the important industry trends, market size, market share estimates, and sales volume with which industry can speculate the strategies to increase return on investment (ROI). The statistics have been represented in the graphical format for an unambiguous understanding of facts and figures.

An influential Bone Marrow-Derived Stem Cells (BMSCS) Market report brings into focus plentiful of factors such as the general market conditions, trends, inclinations, key players, opportunities, and geographical analysis which all aids to take business towards the growth and success. This report provides the broader perspective of the market place with its comprehensive market insights and analysis which eases surviving and succeeding in the market. Moreover, this market report explains better market perspective in terms of product trends, marketing strategy, future products, new geographical markets, future events, sales strategies, customer actions or behaviors. Hence, the credible report brings into the focus, the more important aspects of the market or industry.

Bone marrow-derivedstem cells(BMSCS) market is expected to gain market growth in the forecast period of 2020 to 2027. Data Bridge Market Research analyses the market to growing at a CAGR of 10.4% in the above-mentioned forecast period. Increasing awareness regarding the benefits associates with the preservation of bone marrow derived stem cells will boost the growth of the market.

Get Sample Report + All Related Graphs & Charts @

https://www.databridgemarketresearch.com/request-a-sample/?dbmr=global-bone-marrow-derived-stem-cells-bmscs-market

The major players covered in the bone marrow-derived stem cells (BMSCS) market report are CBR Systems, Inc, Cordlife Sciences India Pvt. Ltd., Cryo-Cell International, Inc.ESPERITE N.V., LifeCell International Pvt. Ltd., StemCyte India Therapeutics Pvt. Ltd, PerkinElmer Inc, Global Cord Blood Corporation., Smart Cells International Ltd., Vita 34 among other domestic and global players. Market share data is available for Global, North America, Europe, Asia-Pacific (APAC), Middle East and Africa (MEA) and South America separately. DBMR analysts understand competitive strengths and provide competitive analysis for each competitor separately.

Some of the factors such as introduction of novel technologies for the preservation of stem cells and their storage, surging investment that will help in research activities leading to stem cells benefits, adoption of hemotopoietic stem cell transplantation system will accelerate the growth of the bone marrow-derived stem cells (BMSCS) market in the forecast period of 2020-2027. Various factors that will create opportunities in the bone marrow-derived stem cells (BMSCS) market are increasing occurrences of various diseases along with rising applications in emerging economies.

Large cost of operation and strict regulatory framework will restrict the growth of bone marrow-derived stem cells (BMSCS) market in the above mentioned forecast period. Ethical concern leading to stem cells will become the biggest challenge in the market growth.

Global Bone Marrow-Derived Stem Cells (BMSCS) Market By Service Type (Sample Preservation and Storage, Sample Analysis, Sample Processing, Sample Collection and Transportation), Application (Personalized Banking Applications, Research Applications, Clinical Applications), Country (U.S., Canada, Mexico, Germany, Italy, U.K., France, Spain, Netherland, Belgium, Switzerland, Turkey, Russia, Rest of Europe, Japan, China, India, South Korea, Australia, Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, Philippines, Rest of Asia- Pacific, Brazil, Argentina, Rest of South America, South Africa, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt, Israel, Rest of Middle East & Africa), Market Trends and Forecast to 2027

Global Bone Marrow-Derived Stem Cells (BMSCS) Market Scope and Market Size

Bone marrow-derivedstem cells(BMSCS) market is segmented on the basis of service type and application. The growth amongst these segments will help you analyse meagre growth segments in the industries, and provide the users with valuable market overview and market insights to help them in making strategic decisions for identification of core market applications.

Thisbonemarrow-derived stem cells (BMSCS) market report provides details of new recent developments, trade regulations, import export analysis, production analysis, value chain optimization, market share, impact of domestic and localised market players, analyses opportunities in terms of emerging revenue pockets, changes in market regulations, strategic market growth analysis, market size, category market growths, application niches and dominance, product approvals, product launches, geographic expansions, technological innovations in the market. To gain more info on bone marrow-derived stem cells (BMSCS) market contactData Bridge Market Researchfor anAnalyst Brief, our team will help you take an informed market decision to achieve market growth.

Grab Your Report at an Impressive 30% Discount! Please click Here @https://www.databridgemarketresearch.com/inquire-before-buying/?dbmr=global-bone-marrow-derived-stem-cells-bmscs-market

Healthcare Infrastructure Growth Installed Base and New Technology Penetration

Bone marrow-derived stem cells (BMSCS) market also provides you with detailed market analysis for every country growth in healthcare expenditure for capital equipments, installed base of different kind of products for bone marrow-derived stem cells (BMSCS) market, impact of technology using life line curves and changes in healthcare regulatory scenarios and their impact on the bone marrow-derived stem cells (BMSCS) market. The data is available for historic period 2010 to 2018.

For More Insights Get Detailed TOC @ https://www.databridgemarketresearch.com/toc/?dbmr=global-bone-marrow-derived-stem-cells-bmscs-market

Competitive Landscape and Bone Marrow-Derived Stem Cells (BMSCS) Market Share Analysis

Bone marrow-derived stem cells (BMSCS) market competitive landscape provides details by competitor. Details included are company overview, company financials, revenue generated, market potential, investment in research and development, new market initiatives, global presence, production sites and facilities, production capacities, company strengths and weaknesses, product launch, product width and breadth, application dominance. The above data points provided are only related to the companies focus related to bone marrow-derived stem cells (BMSCS) market.

About Data Bridge Market Research:

Data Bridge Market Researchset forth itself as an unconventional and neoteric Market research and consulting firm with unparalleled level of resilience and integrated approaches. We are determined to unearth the best market opportunities and foster efficient information for your business to thrive in the market. Data Bridge endeavors to provide appropriate solutions to the complex business challenges and initiates an effortless decision-making process.

Contact:

Data Bridge Market Research

US: +1 888 387 2818

UK: +44 208 089 1725

Hong Kong: +852 8192 7475

Email:Corporatesales@databridgemarketresearch.com

Excerpt from:
Bone Marrow-Derived Stem Cells (BMSCS) Market : Size & Trends Shows a Rapid Growth by 2028 UNLV The Rebel Yell - UNLV The Rebel Yell

Posted in New Mexico Stem Cells | Comments Off on Bone Marrow-Derived Stem Cells (BMSCS) Market : Size & Trends Shows a Rapid Growth by 2028 UNLV The Rebel Yell – UNLV The Rebel Yell

Gene Therapy and Genetic Engineering – MU School of Medicine

Posted: August 31, 2021 at 2:26 am

Introduction

The cells of a human being or other organism have parts called genes that control the chemical reactions in the cell that make it grow and function and ultimately determine the growth and function of the organism. An organism inherits some genes from each parent and thus the parents pass on certain traits to their offspring.

Gene therapy and genetic engineering are two closely related technologies that involve altering the genetic material of organisms.The distinction between the two is based on purpose.Gene therapy seeks to alter genes to correct genetic defects and thus prevent or cure genetic diseases.Genetic engineering aims to modify the genes to enhance the capabilities of the organism beyond what is normal.

Ethical controversy surrounds possible use of the both of these technologies in plants, nonhuman animals, and humans. Particularly with genetic engineering, for instance, one wonders whether it would be proper to tinker with human genes to make people able to outperform the greatest Olympic athletes or much smarter than Einstein.

If genetic engineering is meant in a very broad sense to include any intentional genetic alteration, then it includes gene therapy. Thus one hears of therapeutic genetic engineering (gene therapy) and negative genetic engineering (gene therapy), in contrast with enhancement genetic engineering and positive genetic engineering (what we call simply genetic engineering).

We use the phrase genetic engineering more narrowly for the kind of alteration that aims at enhancement rather than therapy. We use the term gene therapy for efforts to bring people up to normalcy and genetic engineering or enhancement genetic engineering for efforts to enhancement peoples capabilities beyond normalcy.

Two fundamental kinds of cell are somatic cells and reproductive cells. Most of the cells in our bodies are somatic cells that make up organs like skin, liver, heart, lungs, etc., and these cells vary from one another. Changing the genetic material in these cells is not passed along to a persons offspring. Reproductive cells are sperm cells, egg cells, and cells from very early embryos. Changes in the genetic make-up of reproductive cells would be passed along to the persons offspring. Those reproductive cell changes could result in different genetics in the offsprings somatic cells than otherwise would have occurred because the genetic makeup of somatic cells is directly linked to that of the germ cells from which they are derived.

Two problems must be confronted when changing genes. The first is what kind of change to make to the gene. The second is how to incorporate that change in all the other cells that are must be changed to achieve a desired effect.

There are several options for what kind of change to make to the gene. DNA in the gene could be replaced by other DNA from outside (called homologous replacement). Or the gene could be forced to mutate (change structure selective reverse mutation.) Or a gene could just be added. Or one could use a chemical to simply turn off a gene and prevent it from acting.

There are also several options for how to spread the genetic change to all the cells that need to be changed. If the altered cell is a reproductive cell, then a few such cells could be changed and the change would reach the other somatic cells as those somatic cells were created as the organism develops. But if the change were made to a somatic cell, changing all the other relevant somatic cells individually like the first would be impractical due to the sheer number of such cells. The cells of a major organ such as the heart or liver are too numerous to change one-by-one. Instead, to reach such somatic cells a common approach is to use a carrier, or vector, which is a molecule or organism. A virus, for example, could be used as a vector. The virus would be an innocuous one or changed so as not to cause disease. It would be injected with the genetic material and then as it reproduces and infects the target cells it would introduce the new genetic material. It would need to be a very specific virus that would infect heart cells, for instance, without infecting and changing all the other cells of the body. Fat particles and chemicals have also been used as vectors because they can penetrate the cell membrane and move into the cell nucleus with the new genetic material.

Gene therapy is often viewed as morally unobjectionable, though caution is urged. The main arguments in its favor are that it offers the potential to cure some diseases or disorders in those who have the problem and to prevent diseases in those whose genes predisposed them to those problems. If done on reproductive cells, gene therapy could keep children from carrying such genes (for unfavorable genetic diseases and disorders) that the children got from their patients.

Genetic engineering to enhance organisms has already been used extensively in agriculture, primarily in genetically modified (GM) crops (also known as GMO --genetically modified organisms). For example, crops and stock animals have been engineered so they are resistant to herbicides and pesticides, which means farmers can then use those chemicals to control weeds and insects on those crops without risking harming those plants. In the future genetic enhancement could be used to create crops with greater yields of nutritional value and selective breeding of farm stock, race horses, and show animals.

Genetically engineered bacteria and other microorganisms are currently used to produce human insulin, human growth hormone, a protein used in blood clotting, and other pharmaceuticals, and the number of such compounds could increase in the future.

Enhancing humans is still in the future, but the basic argument in favor of doing so is that it could make life better in significant ways by enhancing certain characteristics of people. We value intelligence, beauty, strength, endurance, and certain personality characteristics and behavioral tendencies, and if these traits were found to be due to a genetic component we could enhance people by giving them such features. Advocates of genetic engineering point out that many people try to improve themselves in these ways already by diet, exercise, education, cosmetics, and even plastic surgery. People try to do these things for themselves, and parents try to provide these things for their children. If exercising to improve strength, agility, and overall fitness is a worthwhile goal, and if someone is praised for pursuing education to increase their mental capabilities, then why would it not be worthwhile to accomplish this through genetics?

Advocates of genetic engineering also see enhancement as a matter of basic reproductive freedom. We already feel free to pick a mate partly on the basis of the possibility of providing desirable children. We think nothing is wrong with choosing a mate whom we hope might provide smart, attractive kids over some other mate who would provide less desirable children. Choosing a mate for the type of kids one might get is a matter of basic reproductive freedom and we have the freedom to pick the best genes we can for our children. Why, the argument goes, should we have less freedom to give our children the best genes we can through genetic enhancement?

Those who advocate making significant modification of humans through technology such as genetic engineering are sometimes called transhumanists.

Three arguments sometimes raised against gene therapy are that it is technically too dangerous, that it discriminates or invites discrimination against persons with disabilities, and that it may be becoming increasingly irrelevant in some cases.

The danger objection points out that a few recent attempts at gene therapy in clinical trials have made headlines because of the tragic deaths of some of the people participating in the trials. It is not fully known to what extent this was due to the gene therapy itself, as opposed to pre-existing conditions or improper research techniques, but in the light of such events some critics have called for a stop to gene therapy until more is known. We just do not know enough about how gene therapy works and what could go wrong. Specific worries are that

The discrimination objection is as follows. Some people who are physically, mentally, or emotionally impaired are so as the result of genetic factors they have inherited. Such impairment can result in disablement in our society. People with disabilities are often discriminated against by having fewer opportunities than other people. Be removing genetic disorders, and resulting impairment, it is true that gene therapy could contribute to removing one of the sources of discrimination and inequality in society. But the implicit assumption being made, the objection claims, is that people impaired through genetic factors need to be treated and made normal. The objection sees gene therapy as a form of discrimination against impaired people and persons with disabilities.

The irrelevance objection is that gene therapy on reproductive cells may in some cases already be superseded by in-vitro fertilization and selection of embryos. If a genetic disorder is such that can be detected in an early embryo, and not all embryos from the parent couple would have it, then have parents produce multiple embryos through in-vitro fertilization and implant only those free from the disorder. In such a case gene therapy would be unnecessary and irrelevant.

Ethicists have generally been even more concerned about possible problems with and implications of enhancement genetic engineering than they have been about gene therapy. First, there are worries similar to those about gene therapy that not enough is known and there may be unforeseen dangerous consequences. These worries may be even more serious given that the attempts are made not just toward normalcy but into strange new territory where humans have never gone before. We just do not know what freakish creatures might result from experiments gone awry.

Following are some other important objections:

Gene therapy is becoming a reality as you read this. Genetic engineering for enhancement is still a ways off. Plenty of debate is sure to occur over both issues.

Continue reading here:
Gene Therapy and Genetic Engineering - MU School of Medicine

Posted in Genetic Engineering | Comments Off on Gene Therapy and Genetic Engineering – MU School of Medicine

Genetic engineering of animals: Ethical issues, including …

Posted: August 31, 2021 at 2:26 am

Can Vet J. 2011 May; 52(5): 544550.

Canadian Council on Animal Care, 1510-130 Albert Street, Ottawa, Ontario K1P 5G4 (Ormandy, Dale, Griffin); The University of British Columbia, Animal Welfare Program, 2357 Main Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia V6T 1Z4 (Ormandy)

The genetic engineering of animals has increased significantly in recent years, and the use of this technology brings with it ethical issues, some of which relate to animal welfare defined by the World Organisation for Animal Health as the state of the animalhow an animal is coping with the conditions in which it lives (1). These issues need to be considered by all stakeholders, including veterinarians, to ensure that all parties are aware of the ethical issues at stake and can make a valid contribution to the current debate regarding the creation and use of genetically engineered animals. In addition, it is important to try to reflect societal values within scientific practice and emerging technology, especially publicly funded efforts that aim to provide societal benefits, but that may be deemed ethically contentious. As a result of the extra challenges that genetically engineered animals bring, governing bodies have started to develop relevant policies, often calling for increased vigilance and monitoring of potential animal welfare impacts (2). Veterinarians can play an important role in carrying out such monitoring, especially in the research setting when new genetically engineered animal strains are being developed.

Several terms are used to describe genetically engineered animals: genetically modified, genetically altered, genetically manipulated, transgenic, and biotechnology-derived, amongst others. In the early stages of genetic engineering, the primary technology used was transgenesis, literally meaning the transfer of genetic material from one organism to another. However, with advances in the field, new technology emerged that did not necessarily require transgenesis: recent applications allow for the creation of genetically engineered animals via the deletion of genes, or the manipulation of genes already present. To reflect this progress and to include those animals that are not strictly transgenic, the umbrella term genetically engineered has been adopted into the guidelines developed by the Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC). For clarity, in the new CCAC guidelines on: genetically-engineered animals used in science (currently in preparation) the CCAC offers the following definition of a genetically engineered animal: an animal that has had a change in its nuclear or mitochondrial DNA (addition, deletion, or substitution of some part of the animals genetic material or insertion of foreign DNA) achieved through a deliberate human technological intervention. Those animals that have undergone induced mutations (for example, by chemicals or radiation as distinct from spontaneous mutations that naturally occur in populations) and cloned animals are also considered to be genetically engineered due to the direct intervention and planning involved in creation of these animals.

Cloning is the replication of certain cell types from a parent cell, or the replication of a certain part of the cell or DNA to propagate a particular desirable genetic trait. There are 3 types of cloning: DNA cloning, therapeutic cloning, and reproductive cloning (3). For the purposes of this paper, the term cloning is used to refer to reproductive cloning, as this is the most likely to lead to animal welfare issues. Reproductive cloning is used if the intention is to generate an animal that has the same nuclear DNA as another currently, or previously existing animal. The process used to generate this type of cloned animal is called somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) (4).

During the development of the CCAC guidelines on: genetically- engineered animals used in science, some key ethical issues, including animal welfare concerns, were identified: 1) invasiveness of procedures; 2) large numbers of animals required; 3) unanticipated welfare concerns; and 4) how to establish ethical limits to genetic engineering (see Ethical issues of genetic engineering). The different applications of genetically engineered animals are presented first to provide context for the discussion.

Genetic engineering technology has numerous applications involving companion, wild, and farm animals, and animal models used in scientific research. The majority of genetically engineered animals are still in the research phase, rather than actually in use for their intended applications, or commercially available.

By inserting genes from sea anemone and jellyfish, zebrafish have been genetically engineered to express fluorescent proteins hence the commonly termed GloFish. GloFish began to be marketed in the United States in 2003 as ornamental pet fish; however, their sale sparked controversial ethical debates in California the only US state to prohibit the sale of GloFish as pets (5). In addition to the insertion of foreign genes, gene knock-out techniques are also being used to create designer companion animals. For example, in the creation of hypoallergenic cats some companies use genetic engineering techniques to remove the gene that codes for the major cat allergen Fel d1: (http://www.felixpets.com/technology.html).

Companion species have also been derived by cloning. The first cloned cat, CC, was created in 2002 (6). At the time, the ability to clone mammals was a coveted prize, and after just a few years scientists created the first cloned dog, Snuppy (7).

With the exception of a couple of isolated cases, the genetically engineered pet industry is yet to move forward. However, it remains feasible that genetically engineered pets could become part of day-to-day life for practicing veterinarians, and there is evidence that clients have started to enquire about genetic engineering services, in particular the cloning of deceased pets (5).

The primary application of genetic engineering to wild species involves cloning. This technology could be applied to either extinct or endangered species; for example, there have been plans to clone the extinct thylacine and the woolly mammoth (5). Holt et al (8) point out that, As many conservationists are still suspicious of reproductive technologies, it is unlikely that cloning techniques would be easily accepted. Individuals involved in field conservation often harbour suspicions that hi-tech approaches, backed by high profile publicity would divert funding away from their own efforts. However, cloning may prove to be an important tool to be used alongside other forms of assisted reproduction to help retain genetic diversity in small populations of endangered species.

As reviewed by Laible (9), there is an assorted range of agricultural livestock applications [for genetic engineering] aimed at improving animal productivity; food quality and disease resistance; and environmental sustainability. Productivity of farm animal species can be increased using genetic engineering. Examples include transgenic pigs and sheep that have been genetically altered to express higher levels of growth hormone (9).

Genetically engineered farm animals can be created to enhance food quality (9). For example, pigs have been genetically engineered to express the 12 fatty acid desaturase gene (from spinach) for higher levels of omega-3, and goats have been genetically engineered to express human lysozyme in their milk. Such advances may add to the nutritional value of animal-based products.

Farm species may be genetically engineered to create disease-resistant animals (9). Specific examples include conferring immunity to offspring via antibody expression in the milk of the mother; disruption of the virus entry mechanism (which is applicable to diseases such as pseudorabies); resistance to prion diseases; parasite control (especially in sheep); and mastitis resistance (particularly in cattle).

Genetic engineering has also been applied with the aim of reducing agricultural pollution. The best-known example is the EnviropigTM; a pig that is genetically engineered to produce an enzyme that breaks down dietary phosphorus (phytase), thus limiting the amount of phosphorus released in its manure (9).

Despite resistance to the commercialization of genetically engineered animals for food production, primarily due to lack of support from the public (10), a recent debate over genetically engineered AquAdvantageTM Atlantic salmon may result in these animals being introduced into commercial production (11).

Effort has also been made to generate genetically engineered farm species such as cows, goats, and sheep that express medically important proteins in their milk. According to Dyck et al (12), transgenic animal bioreactors represent a powerful tool to address the growing need for therapeutic recombinant proteins. In 2006, ATryn became the first therapeutic protein produced by genetically engineered animals to be approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of the United States. This product is used as a prophylactic treatment for patients that have hereditary antithrombin deficiency and are undergoing surgical procedures.

Biomedical applications of genetically engineered animals are numerous, and include understanding of gene function, modeling of human disease to either understand disease mechanisms or to aid drug development, and xenotransplantation.

Through the addition, removal, or alteration of genes, scientists can pinpoint what a gene does by observing the biological systems that are affected. While some genetic alterations have no obvious effect, others may produce different phenotypes that can be used by researchers to understand the function of the affected genes. Genetic engineering has enabled the creation of human disease models that were previously unavailable. Animal models of human disease are valuable resources for understanding how and why a particular disease develops, and what can be done to halt or reverse the process. As a result, efforts have focused on developing new genetically engineered animal models of conditions such as Alzheimers disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), Parkinsons disease, and cancer. However, as Wells (13) points out: these [genetically engineered animal] models do not always accurately reflect the human condition, and care must be taken to understand the limitation of such models.

The use of genetically engineered animals has also become routine within the pharmaceutical industry, for drug discovery, drug development, and risk assessment. As discussed by Rudmann and Durham (14): Transgenic and knock out mouse models are extremely useful in drug discovery, especially when defining potential therapeutic targets for modifying immune and inflammatory responsesSpecific areas for which [genetically engineered animal models] may be useful are in screening for drug induced immunotoxicity, genotoxicity, and carcinogenicity, and in understanding toxicity related drug metabolizing enzyme systems.

Perhaps the most controversial use of genetically engineered animals in science is to develop the basic research on xenotrans-plantation that is, the transplant of cells, tissues, or whole organs from animal donors into human recipients. In relation to organ transplants, scientists have developed a genetically engineered pig with the aim of reducing rejection of pig organs by human recipients (15). This particular application of genetic engineering is currently at the basic research stage, but it shows great promise in alleviating the long waiting lists for organ transplants, as the number of people needing transplants currently far outweighs the number of donated organs. However, as a direct result of public consultation, a moratorium is currently in place preventing pig organ transplantation from entering a clinical trial phase until the public is assured that the potential disease transfer from pigs to humans can be satisfactorily managed (16). According to Health Canada, xenotransplantation is currently not prohibited in Canada. However, the live cells and organs from animal sources are considered to be therapeutic products (drugs or medical devices)No clinical trial involving xenotransplantation has yet been approved by Health Canada (see http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca for details).

Ethical issues, including concerns for animal welfare, can arise at all stages in the generation and life span of an individual genetically engineered animal. The following sections detail some of the issues that have arisen during the peer-driven guidelines development process and associated impact analysis consultations carried out by the CCAC. The CCAC works to an accepted ethic of animal use in science, which includes the principles of the Three Rs (Reduction of animal numbers, Refinement of practices and husbandry to minimize pain and distress, and Replacement of animals with non-animal alternatives wherever possible) (17). Together the Three Rs aim to minimize any pain and distress experienced by the animals used, and as such, they are considered the principles of humane experimental technique. However, despite the steps taken to minimize pain and distress, there is evidence of public concerns that go beyond the Three Rs and animal welfare regarding the creation and use of genetically engineered animals (18).

The generation of a new genetically engineered line of animals often involves the sacrifice of some animals and surgical procedures (for example, vasectomy, surgical embryo transfer) on others. These procedures are not unique to genetically engineered animals, but they are typically required for their production.

During the creation of new genetically engineered animals (particularly mammalian species) oocyte and blastocyst donor females may be induced to superovulate via intraperitoneal or subcutaneous injection of hormones; genetically engineered embryos may be surgically implanted to female recipients; males may be surgically vasectomized under general anesthesia and then used to induce pseudopregnancy in female embryo recipients; and all offspring need to be genotyped, which is typically performed by taking tissue samples, sometimes using tail biopsies or ear notching (19). However, progress is being made to refine the genetic engineering techniques that are applied to mammals (mice in particular) so that less invasive methods are feasible. For example, typical genetic engineering procedures require surgery on the recipient female so that genetically engineered embryos can be implanted and can grow to full term; however, a technique called non-surgical embryo transfer (NSET) acts in a similar way to artificial insemination, and removes the need for invasive surgery (20). Other refinements include a method referred to as deathless transgenesis, which involves the introduction of DNA into the sperm cells of live males and removes the need to euthanize females in order to obtain germ line transmission of a genetic alteration; and the use of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for genotyping, which requires less tissue than Southern Blot Analysis (20).

Many of the embryos that undergo genetic engineering procedures do not survive, and of those that do survive only a small proportion (between 1% to 30%) carry the genetic alteration of interest (19). This means that large numbers of animals are produced to obtain genetically engineered animals that are of scientific value, and this contradicts efforts to minimize animal use. In addition, the advancement of genetic engineering technologies in recent years has lead to a rapid increase in the number and varieties of genetically engineered animals, particularly mice (21). Although the technology is continually being refined, current genetic engineering techniques remain relatively inefficient, with many surplus animals being exposed to harmful procedures. One key refinement and reduction effort is the preservation of genetically engineered animal lines through the freezing of embryos or sperm (cryopreservation), which is particularly important for those lines with the potential to experience pain and distress (22).

As mentioned, the number of research projects creating and/or using genetically engineered animals worldwide has increased in the past decade (21). In Canada, the CCACs annual data on the numbers of animals used in science show an increase in Category D procedures (procedures with the potential to cause moderate to severe pain and distress) at present the creation of a new genetically engineered animal line is a Category D procedure (23). The data also show an increase in the use of mice (24), which are currently the most commonly used species for genetic engineering, making up over 90% of the genetically engineered animals used in research and testing (21). This rise in animal use challenges the Three Rs principle of Reduction (17). It has been reasoned that once created, the use of genetically engineered animals will reduce the total number of animals used in any given experiment by providing novel and more accurate animal models, especially in applications such as toxicity testing (25). However, the greater variety of available applications, and the large numbers of animals required for the creation and maintenance of new genetically engineered strains indicate that there is still progress to be made in implementation of the Three Rs principle of Reduction in relation to the creation and use of genetically engineered animals (21).

Little data has been collected on the net welfare impacts to genetically engineered animals or to those animals required for their creation, and genetic engineering techniques have been described as both unpredictable and inefficient (19). The latter is due, in part, to the limitations in controlling the integration site of foreign DNA, which is inherent in some genetic engineering techniques (such as pro-nuclear microinjection). In such cases, scientists may generate several independent lines of genetically engineered animals that differ only in the integration site (26), thereby further increasing the numbers of animals involved. This conflicts with efforts to adhere to the principles of the Three Rs, specifically Reduction. With other, more refined techniques that allow greater control of DNA integration (for example, gene targeting), unexpected outcomes are attributed to the unpredictable interaction of the introduced DNA with host genes. These interactions also vary with the genetic background of the animal, as has frequently been observed in genetically engineered mice (27). Interfering with the genome by inserting or removing fragments of DNA may result in alteration of the animals normal genetic homeostasis, which can be manifested in the behavior and well-being of the animals in unpredictable ways. For example, many of the early transgenic livestock studies produced animals with a range of unexpected side effects including lameness, susceptibility to stress, and reduced fertility (9).

A significant limitation of current cloning technology is the prospect that cloned offspring may suffer some degree of abnormality. Studies have revealed that cloned mammals may suffer from developmental abnormalities, including extended gestation; large birth weight; inadequate placental formation; and histological effects in organs and tissues (for example, kidneys, brain, cardiovascular system, and muscle). One annotated review highlights 11 different original research articles that documented the production of cloned animals with abnormalities occurring in the developing embryo, and suffering for the newborn animal and the surrogate mother (28).

Genetically engineered animals, even those with the same gene manipulation, can exhibit a variety of phenotypes; some causing no welfare issues, and some causing negative welfare impacts. It is often difficult to predict the effects a particular genetic modification can have on an individual animal, so genetically engineered animals must be monitored closely to mitigate any unanticipated welfare concerns as they arise. For newly created genetically engineered animals, the level of monitoring needs to be greater than that for regular animals due to the lack of predictability. Once a genetically engineered animal line is established and the welfare concerns are known, it may be possible to reduce the levels of monitoring if the animals are not exhibiting a phenotype that has negative welfare impacts. To aid this monitoring process, some authors have called for the implementation of a genetically engineered animal passport that accompanies an individual animal and alerts animal care staff to the particular welfare needs of that animal (29). This passport document is also important if the intention is to breed from the genetically engineered animal in question, so the appropriate care and husbandry can be in place for the offspring.

With progress in genetic engineering techniques, new methods (30,31) may substantially reduce the unpredictability of the location of gene insertion. As a result, genetic engineering procedures may become less of a welfare concern over time.

As pointed out by Lassen et al (32), Until recently the main limits [to genetic engineering] were technical: what it is possible to do. Now scientists are faced with ethical limits as well: what it is acceptable to do (emphasis theirs). Questions regarding whether it is acceptable to make new transgenic animals go beyond consideration of the Three Rs, animal health, and animal welfare, and prompt the discussion of concepts such as intrinsic value, integrity, and naturalness (33).

When discussing the nature of an animal, it may be useful to consider the Aristotelian concept of telos, which describes the essence and purpose of a creature (34). Philosopher Bernard Rollin applied this concept to animal ethics as follows: Though [telos] is partially metaphysical (in defining a way of looking at the world), and partially empirical (in that it can and will be deepened and refined by increasing empirical knowledge), it is at root a moral notion, both because it is morally motivated and because it contains the notion of what about an animal we ought to at least try to respect and accommodate (emphasis Rollins) (34). Rollin has also argued that as long as we are careful to accommodate the animals interests when we alter an animals telos, it is morally permissible. He writes, given a telos, we should respect the interests which flow from it. This principle does not logically entail that we cannot modify the telos and thereby generate different or alternative interests (34).

Views such as those put forward by Rollin have been argued against on the grounds that health and welfare (or animal interests) may not be the only things to consider when establishing ethical limits. Some authors have made the case that genetic engineering requires us to expand our existing notions of animal ethics to include concepts of the intrinsic value of animals (35), or of animal integrity or dignity (33). Veerhoog argues that, we misuse the word telos when we say that human beings can change the telos of an animal or create a new telos that is to say animals have intrinsic value, which is separate from their value to humans. It is often on these grounds that people will argue that genetic engineering of animals is morally wrong. For example, in a case study of public opinion on issues related to genetic engineering, participants raised concerns about the nature of animals and how this is affected (negatively) by genetic engineering (18).

An alternative view put forward by Schicktanz (36) argues that it is the human-animal relationship that may be damaged by genetic engineering due to the increasingly imbalanced distribution of power between humans and animals. This imbalance is termed asymmetry and it is raised alongside ambivalence as a concern regarding modern human-animal relationships. By using genetically engineered animals as a case study, Schicktanz (36) argues that genetic engineering presents a troubling shift for all human-animal relationships.

Opinions regarding whether limits can, or should, be placed on genetic engineering are often dependent on peoples broader worldview. For some, the genetic engineering of animals may not put their moral principles at risk. For example, this could perhaps be because genetic engineering is seen as a logical continuation of selective breeding, a practice that humans have been carrying out for years; or because human life is deemed more important than animal life. So if genetic engineering creates animals that help us to develop new human medicine then, ethically speaking, we may actually have a moral obligation to create and use them; or because of an expectation that genetic engineering of animals can help reduce experimental animal numbers, thus implementing the accepted Three Rs framework.

For others, the genetic engineering of animals may put their moral principles at risk. For example costs may always be seen to outweigh benefits because the ultimate cost is the violation of species integrity and disregard for the inherent value of animals. Some may view telos as something that cannot or should not be altered, and therefore altering the telos of an animal would be morally wrong. Some may see genetic engineering as exaggerating the imbalance of power between humans and animals, whilst others may fear that the release of genetically engineered animals will upset the natural balance of the ecosystem. In addition, there may be those who feel strongly opposed to certain applications of genetic engineering, but more accepting of others. For example, recent evidence suggests that people may be more accepting of biomedical applications than those relating to food production (37).

Such underlying complexity of views regarding genetic engineering makes the setting of ethical limits difficult to achieve, or indeed, even discuss. However, progress needs to be made on this important issue, especially for those genetically engineered species that are intended for life outside the research laboratory, where there may be less careful oversight of animal welfare. Consequently, limits to genetic engineering need to be established using the full breadth of public and expert opinion. This highlights the importance for veterinarians, as animal health experts, to be involved in the discussion.

Genetic engineering also brings with it concerns over intellectual property, and patenting of created animals and/or the techniques used to create them. Preserving intellectual property can breed a culture of confidentiality within the scientific community, which in turn limits data and animal sharing. Such limits to data and animal sharing may create situations in which there is unnecessary duplication of genetically engineered animal lines, thereby challenging the principle of Reduction. Indeed, this was a concern that was identified in a recent workshop on the creation and use of genetically engineered animals in science (20).

It should be noted that no matter what the application of genetically engineered animals, there are restrictions on the methods of their disposal once they have been euthanized. The reason for this is to restrict the entry of genetically engineered animal carcasses into the natural ecosystem until the long-term effects and risks are better understood. Environment Canada (http://www.ec.gc.ca/) and Health Canada (http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/) offer specific guidelines in this regard.

As genetically engineered animals begin to enter the commercial realm, it will become increasingly important for veterinarians to inform themselves about any special care and management required by these animals. As animal health professionals, veterinarians can also make important contributions to policy discussions related to the oversight of genetic engineering as it is applied to animals, and to regulatory proceedings for the commercial use of genetically engineered animals.

It is likely that public acceptance of genetically engineered animal products will be an important step in determining when and what types of genetically engineered animals will appear on the commercial market, especially those animals used for food production. Veterinarians may also be called on to inform the public about genetic engineering techniques and any potential impacts to animal welfare and food safety. Consequently, for the discussion regarding genetically engineered animals to progress effectively, veterinarians need to be aware of the current context in which genetically engineered animals are created and used, and to be aware of the manner in which genetic engineering technology and the animals derived from it may be used in the future.

Genetic engineering techniques can be applied to a range of animal species, and although many genetically engineered animals are still in the research phase, there are a variety of intended applications for their use. Although genetic engineering may provide substantial benefits in areas such as biomedical science and food production, the creation and use of genetically engineered animals not only challenge the Three Rs principles, but may also raise ethical issues that go beyond considerations of animal health, animal welfare, and the Three Rs, opening up issues relating to animal integrity and/or dignity. Consequently, even if animal welfare can be satisfactorily safeguarded, intrinsic ethical concerns about the genetic engineering of animals may be cause enough to restrict certain types of genetically engineered animals from reaching their intended commercial application. Given the complexity of views regarding genetic engineering, it is valuable to involve all stakeholders in discussions about the applications of this technology.

The authors thank the members of the Canadian Veterinary Medicine Association Animal Welfare Committee for their comments on the draft, and Dr. C. Schuppli for her insight on how the issues discussed may affect veterinarians.

Use of this article is limited to a single copy for personal study. Anyone interested in obtaining reprints should contact the CVMA office (gro.vmca-amvc@nothguorbh) for additional copies or permission to use this material elsewhere.

Here is the original post:
Genetic engineering of animals: Ethical issues, including ...

Posted in Genetic Engineering | Comments Off on Genetic engineering of animals: Ethical issues, including …

NIH awards nearly $2M to Huebsch for study | The Source – Washington University in St. Louis Newsroom

Posted: August 31, 2021 at 2:26 am

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy is the most common cause of sudden death in young people. The genetically inherited condition causes the heart muscle to enlarge, making it difficult for the muscle to relax between beats and often creating an irregular heartbeat.

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy is caused by genetic mutations in the sarcomere, a protein apparatus that cardiomyocytes use to contract as the heart pumps blood. However, not all individuals with sarcomere mutations develop hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, even if they harbor similar mutations. This suggests that non-genetic factors may trigger the disease in patients who have genetic mutations.

Nathaniel Huebsch, assistant professor of biomedical engineering at the McKelvey School of Engineering at Washington University in St. Louis, will research the role that blood pressure plays in triggering symptoms in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy with a nearly $2 million five-year grant from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). He and his team will use a heart tissue model engineered from human-induced pluripotent stem cells to identify molecular mechanisms that sensitize heart muscle to the mechanical load imparted by hypertension.

Read more on the engineering website.

View original post here:
NIH awards nearly $2M to Huebsch for study | The Source - Washington University in St. Louis Newsroom

Posted in Genetic Engineering | Comments Off on NIH awards nearly $2M to Huebsch for study | The Source – Washington University in St. Louis Newsroom