Funding, Deals & Partnerships: BIOLOGICS & MEDICAL DEVICES; BioMed e-Series; Medicine and Life Sciences Scientific Journal – http://PharmaceuticalIntelligence.com
New studies link cell cycle proteins to immunosurveillance of premalignant cells
Curator: Stephen J. Williams, Ph.D.
The following is from a Perspectives article in the journal Science by Virinder Reen and Jesus Gil called “Clearing Stressed Cells: Cell cycle arrest produces a p21-dependent secretome that initaites immunosurveillance of premalignant cells”. This is a synopsis of the Sturmlechener et al. research article in the same issue (2).
Complex organisms repair stress-induced damage to limit the replication of faulty cells that could drive cancer. When repair is not possible, tissue homeostasis is maintained by the activation of stress response programs such as apoptosis, which eliminates the cells, or senescence, which arrests them (1). Cellular senescence causes the arrest of damaged cells through the induction of cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitors (CDKIs) such as p16 and p21 (2). Senescent cells also produce a bioactive secretome (the senescence-associated secretory phenotype, SASP) that places cells under immunosurveillance, which is key to avoiding the detrimental inflammatory effects caused by lingering senescent cells on surrounding tissues. On page 577 of this issue, Sturmlechner et al. (3) report that induction of p21 not only contributes to the arrest of senescent cells, but is also an early signal that primes stressed cells for immunosurveillance.Senescence is a complex program that is tightly regulated at the epigenetic and transcriptional levels. For example, exit from the cell cycle is controlled by the induction of p16 and p21, which inhibit phosphorylation of the retinoblastoma protein (RB), a transcriptional regulator and tumor suppressor. Hypophosphorylated RB represses transcription of E2F target genes, which are necessary for cell cycle progression. Conversely, production of the SASP is regulated by a complex program that involves super-enhancer (SE) remodeling and activation of transcriptional regulators such as nuclear factor κB (NF-κB) or CCAAT enhancer binding protein–β (C/EBPβ) (4).
Senescence is a complex program that is tightly regulated at the epigenetic and transcriptional levels. For example, exit from the cell cycle is controlled by the induction of p16 and p21, which inhibit phosphorylation of the retinoblastoma protein (RB), a transcriptional regulator and tumor suppressor. Hypophosphorylated RB represses transcription of E2F target genes, which are necessary for cell cycle progression. Conversely, production of the SASP is regulated by a complex program that involves super-enhancer (SE) remodeling and activation of transcriptional regulators such as nuclear factor κB (NF-κB) or CCAAT enhancer binding protein–β (C/EBPβ) (4).
Sturmlechner et al. found that activation of p21 following stress rapidly halted cell cycle progression and triggered an internal biological timer (of ∼4 days in hepatocytes), allowing time to repair and resolve damage (see the figure). In parallel, C-X-C motif chemokine 14 (CXCL14), a component of the PASP, attracted macrophages to surround and closely surveil these damaged cells. Stressed cells that recovered and normalized p21 expression suspended PASP production and circumvented immunosurveillance. However, if the p21-induced stress was unmanageable, the repair timer expired, and the immune cells transitioned from surveillance to clearance mode. Adjacent macrophages mounted a cytotoxic T lymphocyte response that destroyed damaged cells. Notably, the overexpression of p21 alone was sufficient to orchestrate immune killing of stressed cells, without the need of a senescence phenotype. Overexpression of other CDKIs, such as p16 and p27, did not trigger immunosurveillance, likely because they do not induce CXCL14 expression.In the context of cancer, senescent cell clearance was first observed following reactivation of the tumor suppressor p53 in liver cancer cells. Restoring p53 signaling induced senescence and triggered the elimination of senescent cells by the innate immune system, prompting tumor regression (5). Subsequent work has revealed that the SASP alerts the immune system to target preneoplastic senescent cells. Hepatocytes expressing the oncogenic mutant NRASG12V (Gly12→Val) become senescent and secrete chemokines and cytokines that trigger CD4+ T cell–mediated clearance (6). Despite the relevance for tumor suppression, relatively little is known about how immunosurveillance of oncogene-induced senescent cells is initiated and controlled.
Source of image: Reen, V. and Gil, J. Clearing Stressed Cells. Science Perspectives 2021;Vol 374(6567) p 534-535.
References
2. Sturmlechner I, Zhang C, Sine CC, van Deursen EJ, Jeganathan KB, Hamada N, Grasic J, Friedman D, Stutchman JT, Can I, Hamada M, Lim DY, Lee JH, Ordog T, Laberge RM, Shapiro V, Baker DJ, Li H, van Deursen JM. p21 produces a bioactive secretome that places stressed cells under immunosurveillance. Science. 2021 Oct 29;374(6567):eabb3420. doi: 10.1126/science.abb3420. Epub 2021 Oct 29. PMID: 34709885.
More Articles on Cancer, Senescence and the Immune System in this Open Access Online Scientific Journal Include
2021 Virtual World Medical Innovation Forum, Mass General Brigham, Gene and Cell Therapy, VIRTUAL May 19–21, 2021
The 2021 Virtual World Medical Innovation Forum will focus on the growing impact of gene and cell therapy. Senior healthcare leaders from all over look to shape and debate the area of gene and cell therapy. Our shared belief: no matter the magnitude of change, responsible healthcare is centered on a shared commitment to collaborative innovation–industry, academia, and practitioners working together to improve patients’ lives.
About the World Medical Innovation Forum
Mass General Brigham is pleased to present the World Medical Innovation Forum (WMIF) virtual event Wednesday, May 19 – Friday, May 21. This interactive web event features expert discussions of gene and cell therapy (GCT) and its potential to change the future of medicine through its disease-treating and potentially curative properties. The agenda features 150+ executive speakers from the healthcare industry, venture, startups, life sciences manufacturing, consumer health and the front lines of care, including many Harvard Medical School-affiliated researchers and clinicians. The annual in-person Forum will resume live in Boston in 2022. The World Medical Innovation Forum is presented by Mass General Brigham Innovation, the global business development unit supporting the research requirements of 7,200 Harvard Medical School faculty and research hospitals including Massachusetts General, Brigham and Women’s, Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Spaulding Rehab and McLean Hospital. Follow us on Twitter: twitter.com/@MGBInnovation
Accelerating the Future of Medicine with Gene and Cell Therapy What Comes Next
Co-Chairs identify the key themes of the Forum – set the stage for top GCT opportunities, challenges, and where the field might take medicine in the future. Moderator: Susan Hockfield, PhD
President Emerita and Professor of Neuroscience, MIT
Hope that CGT emerging, how the therapies work, neuro, muscular, ocular, genetic diseases of liver and of heart revolution for the industry 900 IND application 25 approvals Economic driver Skilled works, VC disease. Modality one time intervention, long duration of impart, reimbursement, ecosystem to be built around CGT
FDA works by indications and risks involved, Standards and expectations for streamlining manufacturing, understanding of process and products
payments over time payers and Innovators relations Moderator: Julian Harris, MD
Partner, Deerfield
Promise of CGT realized, what part?
FDA role and interaction in CGT
Manufacturing aspects which is critical Speaker: Dave Lennon, PhD
President, Novartis Gene Therapies
Hope that CGT emerging, how the therapies work, neuro, muscular, ocular, genetic diseases of liver and of heart revolution for the industry 900 IND application 25 approvals Economic driver Skilled works, VC disease. Modality one time intervention, long duration of impart, reimbursement, ecosystem to be built around CGT
FDA works by indications and risks involved, Standards and expectations for streamlining manufacturing, understanding of process and products
payments over time payers and Innovators relations
GCT development for rare diseases is driven by patient and patient-advocate communities. Understanding their needs and perspectives enables biomarker research, the development of value-driving clinical trial endpoints and successful clinical trials. Industry works with patient communities that help identify unmet needs and collaborate with researchers to conduct disease natural history studies that inform the development of biomarkers and trial endpoints. This panel includes patients who have received cutting-edge GCT therapy as well as caregivers and patient advocates. Moderator: Patricia Musolino, MD, PhD
Co-Director Pediatric Stroke and Cerebrovascular Program, MGH
Assistant Professor of Neurology, HMS
What is the Power of One – the impact that a patient can have on their own destiny by participating in Clinical Trials Contacting other participants in same trial can be beneficial Speakers: Jack Hogan
Parkinson patient Constraints by regulatory on participation in clinical trial advance stage is approved participation Patients to determine the level of risk they wish to take Information dissemination is critical Barbara Lavery
Chief Program Officer, ACGT Foundation
Advocacy agency beginning of work Global Genes educational content and out reach to access the information
Patient has the knowledge of the symptoms and recording all input needed for diagnosis by multiple clinicians Early application for CGTDan Tesler
Clinical Trial Patient, BWH/DFCC
Experimental Drug clinical trial patient participation in clinical trial is very important to advance the state of scienceSarah Beth Thomas, RN
Professional Development Manager, BWH
Outcome is unknown, hope for good, support with resources all advocacy groups,
Process at FDA generalize from 1st entry to rules more generalizable Speaker: Peter Marks, MD, PhD
Director, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, FDA
Last Spring it became clear that something will work a vaccine by June 2020 belief that enough candidates the challenge manufacture enough and scaling up FDA did not predicted the efficacy of mRNA vaccine vs other approaches expected to work
Recover Work load for the pandemic will wean & clear, Gene Therapies IND application remained flat in the face of the pandemic Rare diseases urgency remains Consensus with industry advisory to get input gene therapy Guidance T-Cell therapy vs Regulation best thinking CGT evolve speedily flexible gained by Guidance
Immune modulators, Immunotherapy Genome editing can make use of viral vectors future technologies nanoparticles and liposome encapsulation
big pharma has portfolios of therapeutics not one drug across Tx areas: cell, gene iodine therapy
collective learning infrastructure features manufacturing at scale early in development Acquisitions strategy for growth # applications for scaling Rick Modi
CEO, Affinia Therapeutics
Copy, paste EDIT from product A to B novel vectors leverage knowledge varient of vector, coder optimization choice of indication is critical exploration on larger populations Speed to R&D and Speed to better gene construct get to clinic with better design vs ASAP
Data sharing clinical experience with vectors strategies patients selection, vector selection, mitigation, patient type specific Louise Rodino-Klapac, PhD
AAV based platform 15 years in development same disease indication vs more than one indication stereotype, analytics as hurdle 1st was 10 years 2nd was 3 years
Safety to clinic vs speed to clinic, difference of vectors to trust
Recent AAV gene therapy product approvals have catalyzed the field. This new class of therapies has shown the potential to bring transformative benefit to patients. With dozens of AAV treatments in clinical studies, all eyes are on the field to gauge its disruptive impact.
The panel assesses the largest challenges of the first two products, the lessons learned for the broader CGT field, and the extent to which they serve as a precedent to broaden the AAV modality.
Is AAV gene therapy restricted to genetically defined disorders, or will it be able to address common diseases in the near term?
Lessons learned from these first-in-class approvals.
Challenges to broaden this modality to similar indications.
Reflections on safety signals in the clinical studies?
Tissue types additional administrations, tech and science, address additional diseases, more science for photoreceptors a different tissue type underlying pathology novelties in last 10 years
Laxterna success to be replicated platform, paradigms measurement visual improved
More science is needed to continue develop vectors reduce toxicity,
AAV can deliver different cargos reduce adverse events improve vectorsRon Philip
Chief Operating Officer, Spark Therapeutics
The first retinal gene therapy, voretigene neparvovec-rzyl (Luxturna, Spark Therapeutics), was approved by the FDA in 2017.Meredith Schultz, MD
Executive Medical Director, Lead TME, Novartis Gene Therapies
Impact of cell therapy beyond muscular dystrophy, translational medicine, each indication, each disease, each group of patients build platform unlock the promise
Monitoring for Safety signals real world evidence remote markers, home visits, clinical trial made safer, better communication of information
AAV a complex driver in Pharmacology durable, vector of choice, administer in vitro, gene editing tissue specificity, pharmacokinetics side effects and adverse events manufacturability site variation diversify portfolios,
This panel will address the advances in the area of AAV gene therapy delivery looking out the next five years. Questions that loom large are: How can biodistribution of AAV be improved? What solutions are in the wings to address immunogenicity of AAV? Will patients be able to receive systemic redosing of AAV-based gene therapies in the future? What technical advances are there for payload size? Will the cost of manufacturing ever become affordable for ultra-rare conditions? Will non-viral delivery completely supplant viral delivery within the next five years?What are the safety concerns and how will they be addressed? Moderators: Xandra Breakefield, PhD
Ataxia requires therapy targeting multiple organ with one therapy, brain, spinal cord, heart several IND, clinical trials in 2022Mathew Pletcher, PhD
SVP, Head of Gene Therapy Research and Technical Operations, Astellas
Work with diseases poorly understood, collaborations needs example of existing: DMD is a great example explain dystrophin share placedo data
Continue to explore large animal guinea pig not the mice, not primates (ethical issues) for understanding immunogenicity and immune response Manny Simons, PhD
CEO, Akouos
AAV Therapy for the fluid of the inner ear, CGT for the ear vector accessible to surgeons translational work on the inner ear for gene therapy right animal model
Biology across species nerve ending in the cochlea
engineer out of the caspid, lowest dose possible, get desired effect by vector use, 2022 new milestones
The GCT M&A market is booming – many large pharmas have made at least one significant acquisition. How should we view the current GCT M&A market? What is its impact of the current M&A market on technology development? Are these M&A trends new are just another cycle? Has pharma strategy shifted and, if so, what does it mean for GCT companies? What does it mean for patients? What are the long-term prospects – can valuations hold up? Moderator: Adam Koppel, MD, PhD
Managing Director, Bain Capital Life Sciences
What acquirers are looking for??
What is the next generation vs what is real where is the industry going? Speakers:
Debby Baron,
Worldwide Business Development, Pfizer
CGT is an important area Pfizer is active looking for innovators, advancing forward programs of innovation with the experience Pfizer has internally
Scalability and manufacturing regulatory conversations, clinical programs safety in parallel to planning getting drug to patients
ALS – Man 1in 300, Women 1 in 400, next decade increase 7%
10% ALS is heredity 160 pharma in ALS space, diagnosis is late 1/3 of people are not diagnosed, active community for clinical trials Challenges: disease heterogeneity cases of 10 years late in diagnosis. Clinical Trials for ALS in Gene Therapy targeting ASO1 protein therapies FUS gene struck youngsters
Cell therapy for ACTA2 Vasculopathy in the brain and control the BP and stroke – smooth muscle intima proliferation. Viral vector deliver aiming to change platform to non-viral delivery rare disease , gene editing, other mutations of ACTA2 gene target other pathway for atherosclerosis
Oncolytic viruses represent a powerful new technology, but so far an FDA-approved oncolytic (Imlygic) has only occurred in one area – melanoma and that what is in 2015. This panel involves some of the protagonists of this early success story. They will explore why and how Imlygic became approved and its path to commercialization. Yet, no other cancer indications exist for Imlygic, unlike the expansion of FDA-approved indication for immune checkpoint inhibitors to multiple cancers. Why? Is there a limitation to what and which cancers can target? Is the mode of administration a problem?
No other oncolytic virus therapy has been approved since 2015. Where will the next success story come from and why? Will these therapies only be beneficial for skin cancers or other easily accessible cancers based on intratumoral delivery?
The panel will examine whether the preclinical models that have been developed for other cancer treatment modalities will be useful for oncolytic viruses. It will also assess the extent pre-clinical development challenges have slowed the development of OVs. Moderator: Nino Chiocca, MD, PhD
Neurosurgeon-in-Chief and Chairman, Neurosurgery, BWH
Harvey W. Cushing Professor of Neurosurgery, HMS
Challenges of manufacturing at Amgen what are they? Speakers: Robert Coffin, PhD
Chief Research & Development Officer, Replimune
2002 in UK promise in oncolytic therapy GNCSF
Phase III melanoma 2015 M&A with Amgen
oncolytic therapy remains non effecting on immune response
data is key for commercialization
do not belief in systemic therapy achieve maximum immune response possible from a tumor by localized injection Roger Perlmutter, MD, PhD
Chairman, Merck & Co.
response rates systemic therapy like PD1, Keytruda, OPTIVA well tolerated combination of Oncolytic with systemic
Physician, Dana Farber-Brigham and Women’s Cancer Center
Assistant Professor of Medicine, HMS
Which person gets oncolytics virus if patient has immune suppression due to other indications
Safety of oncolytic virus greater than Systemic treatment
series biopsies for injected and non injected tissue and compare Suspect of hot tumor and cold tumors likely to have sme response to agent unknown all potential
There are currently two oncolytic virus products on the market, one in the USA and one in China. As of late 2020, there were 86 clinical trials 60 of which were in phase I with just 2 in Phase III the rest in Phase I/II or Phase II. Although global sales of OVs are still in the ramp-up phase, some projections forecast OVs will be a $700 million market by 2026. This panel will address some of the major questions in this area:
What regulatory challenges will keep OVs from realizing their potential? Despite the promise of OVs for treating cancer only one has been approved in the US. Why has this been the case? Reasons such have viral tropism, viral species selection and delivery challenges have all been cited. However, these are also true of other modalities. Why then have oncolytic virus approaches not advanced faster and what are the primary challenges to be overcome?
Will these need to be combined with other agents to realize their full efficacy and how will that impact the market?
Why are these companies pursuing OVs while several others are taking a pass?
In 2020 there were a total of 60 phase I trials for Oncolytic Viruses. There are now dozens of companies pursuing some aspect of OV technology. This panel will address:
How are small companies equipped to address the challenges of developing OV therapies better than large pharma or biotech?
Will the success of COVID vaccines based on Adenovirus help the regulatory environment for small companies developing OV products in Europe and the USA?
Is there a place for non-viral delivery and other immunotherapy companies to engage in the OV space? Would they bring any real advantages?
Systemic delivery Oncolytic Virus IV delivery woman in remission
Collaboration with Regeneron
Data collection: Imageable reporter secretable reporter, gene expression
Field is intense systemic oncolytic delivery is exciting in mice and in human, response rates are encouraging combination immune stimulant, check inhibitors
Few areas of potential cancer therapy have had the attention and excitement of CAR-T. This panel of leading executives, developers, and clinician-scientists will explore the current state of CAR-T and its future prospects. Among the questions to be addressed are:
Is CAR-T still an industry priority – i.e. are new investments being made by large companies? Are new companies being financed? What are the trends?
What have we learned from first-generation products, what can we expect from CAR-T going forward in novel targets, combinations, armored CAR’s and allogeneic treatment adoption?
Early trials showed remarkable overall survival and progression-free survival. What has been observed regarding how enduring these responses are?
Most of the approvals to date have targeted CD19, and most recently BCMA. What are the most common forms of relapses that have been observed?
Is there a consensus about what comes after these CD19 and BCMA trials as to additional targets in liquid tumors? How have dual-targeted approaches fared?
The potential application of CAR-T in solid tumors will be a game-changer if it occurs. The panel explores the prospects of solid tumor success and what the barriers have been. Questions include:
How would industry and investor strategy for CAR-T and solid tumors be characterized? Has it changed in the last couple of years?
Does the lack of tumor antigen specificity in solid tumors mean that lessons from liquid tumor CAR-T constructs will not translate well and we have to start over?
Whether due to antigen heterogeneity, a hostile tumor micro-environment, or other factors are some specific solid tumors more attractive opportunities than others for CAR-T therapy development?
Given the many challenges that CAR-T faces in solid tumors, does the use of combination therapies from the start, for example, to mitigate TME effects, offer a more compelling opportunity.
Executive Director, Head of Cell Therapy Research, Exploratory Immuno-Oncology, NIBR
2017 CAR-T first approval
M&A and research collaborations
TCR tumor specific antigens avoid tissue toxicity Knut Niss, PhD
CTO, Mustang Bio
tumor hot start in 12 month clinical trial solid tumors , theraties not ready yet. Combination therapy will be an experimental treatment long journey checkpoint inhibitors to be used in combination maintenance Lipid tumor Barbra Sasu, PhD
CSO, Allogene
T cell response at prostate cancer
tumor specific
cytokine tumor specific signals move from solid to metastatic cell type for easier infiltration
Where we might go: safety autologous and allogeneic Jay Short, PhD
Chairman, CEO, Cofounder, BioAlta, Inc.
Tumor type is not enough for development of therapeutics other organs are involved in the periphery
difficult to penetrate solid tumors biologics activated in the tumor only, positive changes surrounding all charges, water molecules inside the tissue acidic environment target the cells inside the tumor and not outside
The modes of GCT manufacturing have the potential of fundamentally reordering long-established roles and pathways. While complexity goes up the distance from discovery to deployment shrinks. With the likelihood of a total market for cell therapies to be over $48 billion by 2027, groups of products are emerging. Stem cell therapies are projected to be $28 billion by 2027 and non-stem cell therapies such as CAR-T are projected be $20 billion by 2027. The manufacturing challenges for these two large buckets are very different. Within the CAR-T realm there are diverging trends of autologous and allogeneic therapies and the demands on manufacturing infrastructure are very different. Questions for the panelists are:
Help us all understand the different manufacturing challenges for cell therapies. What are the trade-offs among storage cost, batch size, line changes in terms of production cost and what is the current state of scaling naïve and stem cell therapy treatment vs engineered cell therapies?
For cell and gene therapy what is the cost of Quality Assurance/Quality Control vs. production and how do you think this will trend over time based on your perspective on learning curves today?
Will point of care production become a reality? How will that change product development strategy for pharma and venture investors? What would be the regulatory implications for such products?
How close are allogeneic CAR-T cell therapies? If successful what are the market implications of allogenic CAR-T? What are the cost implications and rewards for developing allogeneic cell therapy treatments?
Global Head of Product Development, Gene & Cell Therapy, Catalent
2/3 autologous 1/3 allogeneic CAR-T high doses and high populations scale up is not done today quality maintain required the timing logistics issues centralized vs decentralized allogeneic are health donors innovations in cell types in use improvements in manufacturing
China embraced gene and cell therapies early. The first China gene therapy clinical trial was in 1991. China approved the world’s first gene therapy product in 2003—Gendicine—an oncolytic adenovirus for the treatment of advanced head and neck cancer. Driven by broad national strategy, China has become a hotbed of GCT development, ranking second in the world with more than 1,000 clinical trials either conducted or underway and thousands of related patents. It has a booming GCT biotech sector, led by more than 45 local companies with growing IND pipelines.
In late 1990, a T cell-based immunotherapy, cytokine-induced killer (CIK) therapy became a popular modality in the clinic in China for tumor treatment. In early 2010, Chinese researchers started to carry out domestic CAR T trials inspired by several important reports suggested the great antitumor function of CAR T cells. Now, China became the country with the most registered CAR T trials, CAR T therapy is flourishing in China.
The Chinese GCT ecosystem has increasingly rich local innovation and growing complement of development and investment partnerships – and also many subtleties.
This panel, consisting of leaders from the China GCT corporate, investor, research and entrepreneurial communities, will consider strategic questions on the growth of the gene and cell therapy industry in China, areas of greatest strength, evolving regulatory framework, early successes and products expected to reach the US and world market. Moderator: Min Wu, PhD
Managing Director, Fosun Health Fund
What are the area of CGT in China, regulatory similar to the US Speakers: Alvin Luk, PhD
CEO, Neuropath Therapeutics
Monogenic rare disease with clear genomic target
Increase of 30% in patient enrollment
Regulatory reform approval is 60 days no delayPin Wang, PhD
CSO, Jiangsu Simcere Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.
Similar starting point in CGT as the rest of the World unlike a later starting point in other biologicalRichard Wang, PhD
CEO, Fosun Kite Biotechnology Co., Ltd
Possibilities to be creative and capitalize the new technologies for innovating drug
Support of the ecosystem by funding new companie allowing the industry to be developed in China
Autologous in patients differences cost challengeTian Xu, PhD
Vice President, Westlake University
ICH committee and Chinese FDA -r regulation similar to the US
Difference is the population recruitment, in China patients are active participants in skin disease
Active in development of transposome
Development of non-viral methods, CRISPR still in D and transposome
In China price of drugs regulatory are sensitive Shunfei Yan, PhD
The COVID vaccine race has propelled mRNA to the forefront of biomedicine. Long considered as a compelling modality for therapeutic gene transfer, the technology may have found its most impactful application as a vaccine platform. Given the transformative industrialization, the massive human experience, and the fast development that has taken place in this industry, where is the horizon? Does the success of the vaccine application, benefit or limit its use as a therapeutic for CGT?
How will the COVID success impact the rest of the industry both in therapeutic and prophylactic vaccines and broader mRNA lessons?
How will the COVID success impact the rest of the industry both on therapeutic and prophylactic vaccines and broader mRNA lessons?
Beyond from speed of development, what aspects make mRNA so well suited as a vaccine platform?
Will cost-of-goods be reduced as the industry matures?
How does mRNA technology seek to compete with AAV and other gene therapy approaches?
Many years of mRNA pivoting for new diseases, DARPA, nucleic Acids global deployment of a manufacturing unit on site where the need arise Elan Musk funds new directions at Moderna
How many mRNA can be put in one vaccine: Dose and tolerance to achieve efficacy
45 days for Personalized cancer vaccine one per patient
Hemophilia has been and remains a hallmark indication for the CGT. Given its well-defined biology, larger market, and limited need for gene transfer to provide therapeutic benefit, it has been at the forefront of clinical development for years, however, product approval remains elusive. What are the main hurdles to this success? Contrary to many indications that CGT pursues no therapeutic options are available to patients, hemophiliacs have an increasing number of highly efficacious treatment options. How does the competitive landscape impact this field differently than other CGT fields? With many different players pursuing a gene therapy option for hemophilia, what are the main differentiators? Gene therapy for hemophilia seems compelling for low and middle-income countries, given the cost of currently available treatments; does your company see opportunities in this market? Moderator: Nancy Berliner, MD
Safety concerns, high burden of treatment CGT has record of safety and risk/benefit adoption of Tx functional cure CGT is potent Tx relative small quantity of protein needs be delivered
Potency and quality less quantity drug and greater potency
risk of delivery unwanted DNA, capsules are critical
analytics is critical regulator involvement in potency definition
Director, Center for Rare Neurological Diseases, MGH
Associate Professor, Neurology, HMS
Single gene disorder NGS enable diagnosis, DIagnosis to Treatment How to know whar cell to target, make it available and scale up Address gap: missing components Biomarkers to cell types lipid chemistry cell animal biology
crosswalk from bone marrow matter
New gene discovered that causes neurodevelopment of stagnant genes Examining new Biology cell type specific biomarkers
The American Diabetes Association estimates 30 million Americans have diabetes and 1.5 million are diagnosed annually. GCT offers the prospect of long-sought treatment for this enormous cohort and their chronic requirements. The complexity of the disease and its management constitute a grand challenge and highlight both the potential of GCT and its current limitations.
Islet transplantation for type 1 diabetes has been attempted for decades. Problems like loss of transplanted islet cells due to autoimmunity and graft site factors have been difficult to address. Is there anything different on the horizon for gene and cell therapies to help this be successful?
How is the durability of response for gene or cell therapies for diabetes being addressed? For example, what would the profile of an acceptable (vs. optimal) cell therapy look like?
Advanced made, Patient of Type 1 Outer and Inner compartments of spheres (not capsule) no immune suppression continuous secretion of enzyme Insulin independence without immune suppression
Volume to have of-the-shelf inventory oxegenation in location lymphatic and vascularization conrol the whole process modular platform learning from others
Keep eyes open, waiting the Pandemic to end and enable working back on all the indications
Portfolio of MET, Mimi Emerging Therapies
Learning from the Pandemic – operationalize the practice science, R&D leaders, new collaboratives at NIH, FDA, Novartis
Pursue programs that will yield growth, tropic diseases with Gates Foundation, Rising Tide pods for access CGT within Novartis Partnership with UPenn in Cell Therapy
Cost to access to IP from Academia to a Biotech CRISPR accessing few translations to Clinic
Protein degradation organization constraint valuation by parties in a partnership
Novartis: nuclear protein lipid nuclear particles, tamplate for Biotech to collaborate
Game changing: 10% of the Portfolio, New frontiers human genetics in Ophthalmology, CAR-T, CRISPR, Gene Therapy Neurological and payloads of different matter
The Voice of Dr. Seidman – Her abstract is cited below
The ultimate opportunity presented by discovering the genetic basis of human disease is accurate prediction and disease prevention. To enable this achievement, genetic insights must enable the identification of at-risk
individuals prior to end-stage disease manifestations and strategies that delay or prevent clinical expression. Genetic cardiomyopathies provide a paradigm for fulfilling these opportunities. Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is characterized by left ventricular hypertrophy, diastolic dysfunction with normal or enhanced systolic performance and a unique histopathology: myocyte hypertrophy, disarray and fibrosis. Dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) exhibits enlarged ventricular volumes with depressed systolic performance and nonspecific histopathology. Both HCM and DCM are prevalent clinical conditions that increase risk for arrhythmias, sudden death, and heart failure. Today treatments for HCM and DCM focus on symptoms, but none prevent disease progression. Human molecular genetic studies demonstrated that these pathologies often result from dominant mutations in genes that encode protein components of the sarcomere, the contractile unit in striated muscles. These data combined with the emergence of molecular strategies to specifically modulate gene expression provide unparalleled opportunities to silence or correct mutant genes and to boost healthy gene expression in patients with genetic HCM and DCM. Many challenges remain, but the active and vital efforts of physicians, researchers, and patients are poised to ensure success.
Cyprus Island, kidney disease by mutation causing MUC1 accumulation and death BRD4780 molecule that will clear the misfolding proteins from the kidney organoids: pleuripotent stem cells small molecule developed for applications in the other cell types in brain, eye, gene mutation build mechnism for therapy clinical models transition from Academia to biotech
One of the most innovative segments in all of healthcare is the development of GCT driven therapies for rare and ultra-rare diseases. Driven by a series of insights and tools and funded in part by disease focused foundations, philanthropists and abundant venture funding disease after disease is yielding to new GCT technology. These often become platforms to address more prevalent diseases. The goal of making these breakthroughs routine and affordable is challenged by a range of issues including clinical trial design and pricing.
What is driving the interest in rare diseases?
What are the biggest barriers to making breakthroughs ‘routine and affordable?’
What is the role of retrospective and prospective natural history studies in rare disease? When does the expected value of retrospective disease history studies justify the cost?
Related to the first question, what is the FDA expecting as far as controls in clinical trials for rare diseases? How does this impact the collection of natural history data?
The power of GCT to cure disease has the prospect of profoundly improving the lives of patients who respond. Planning for a disruption of this magnitude is complex and challenging as it will change care across the spectrum. Leading chief executives shares perspectives on how the industry will change and how this change should be anticipated. Moderator: Meg Tirrell
Senior Health and Science Reporter, CNBC
CGT becoming staple therapy what are the disruptors emerging Speakers: Lisa Dechamps
SVP & Chief Business Officer, Novartis Gene Therapies
Reimagine medicine with collaboration at MGH, MDM condition in children
The Science is there, sustainable processes and systems impact is transformational
Value based pricing, risk sharing Payers and Pharma for one time therapy with life span effect
Head, Pharmaceuticals Research & Development, Bayer AG
CGT – 2016 and in 2020 new leadership and capability
Disease Biology and therapeutics
Regenerative Medicine: CGT vs repair building pipeline in ophthalmology and cardiovascular
During Pandemic: Deliver Medicines like Moderna, Pfizer – collaborations between competitors with Government Bayer entered into Vaccines in 5 days, all processes had to change access innovations developed over decades for medical solutions
GCT represents a large and growing market for novel therapeutics that has several segments. These include Cardiovascular Disease, Cancer, Neurological Diseases, Infectious Disease, Ophthalmology, Benign Blood Disorders, and many others; Manufacturing and Supply Chain including CDMO’s and CMO’s; Stem Cells and Regenerative Medicine; Tools and Platforms (viral vectors, nano delivery, gene editing, etc.). Bayer’s pharma business participates in virtually all of these segments. How does a Company like Bayer approach the development of a portfolio in a space as large and as diverse as this one? How does Bayer approach the support of the production infrastructure with unique demands and significant differences from its historical requirements? Moderator:
EVP, Pharmaceuticals, Head of Cell & Gene Therapy, Bayer AG
CGT will bring treatment to cure, delivery of therapies
Be a Leader repair, regenerate, cure
Technology and Science for CGT – building a portfolio vs single asset decision criteria development of IP market access patients access acceleration of new products
Bayer strategy: build platform for use by four domains
Gener augmentation
Autologeneic therapy, analytics
Gene editing
Oncology Cell therapy tumor treatment: What kind of cells – the jury is out
Of 23 product launch at Bayer no prediction is possible some high some lows
Gene delivery uses physical, chemical, or viral means to introduce genetic material into cells. As more genetically modified therapies move closer to the market, challenges involving safety, efficacy, and manufacturing have emerged. Optimizing lipidic and polymer nanoparticles and exosomal delivery is a short-term priority. This panel will examine how the short-term and long-term challenges are being tackled particularly for non-viral delivery modalities. Moderator: Natalie Artzi, PhD
Gene editing was recognized by the Nobel Committee as “one of gene technology’s sharpest tools, having a revolutionary impact on life sciences.” Introduced in 2011, gene editing is used to modify DNA. It has applications across almost all categories of disease and is also being used in agriculture and public health.
Today’s panel is made up of pioneers who represent foundational aspects of gene editing. They will discuss the movement of the technology into the therapeutic mainstream.
Successes in gene editing – lessons learned from late-stage assets (sickle cell, ophthalmology)
When to use what editing tool – pros and cons of traditional gene-editing v. base editing. Is prime editing the future? Specific use cases for epigenetic editing.
When we reach widespread clinical use – role of off-target editing – is the risk real? How will we mitigate? How practical is patient-specific off-target evaluation?
There are several dozen companies working to develop gene or cell therapies for Sickle Cell Disease, Beta Thalassemia, and Fanconi Anemia. In some cases, there are enzyme replacement therapies that are deemed effective and safe. In other cases, the disease is only managed at best. This panel will address a number of questions that are particular to this class of genetic diseases:
What are the pros and cons of various strategies for treatment? There are AAV-based editing, non-viral delivery even oligonucleotide recruitment of endogenous editing/repair mechanisms. Which approaches are most appropriate for which disease?
How can companies increase the speed of recruitment for clinical trials when other treatments are available? What is the best approach to educate patients on a novel therapeutic?
How do we best address ethnic and socio-economic diversity to be more representative of the target patient population?
How long do we have to follow up with the patients from the scientific, patient’s community, and payer points of view? What are the current FDA and EMA guidelines for long-term follow-up?
Where are we with regards to surrogate endpoints and their application to clinically meaningful endpoints?
What are the emerging ethical dilemmas in pediatric gene therapy research? Are there challenges with informed consent and pediatric assent for trial participation?
Are there differences in reimbursement policies for these different blood disorders? Clearly durability of response is a big factor. Are there other considerations?
Oligonucleotide drugs have recently come into their own with approvals from companies such as Biogen, Alnylam, Novartis and others. This panel will address several questions:
How important is the delivery challenge for oligonucleotides? Are technological advancements emerging that will improve the delivery of oligonucleotides to the CNS or skeletal muscle after systemic administration?
Will oligonucleotides improve as a class that will make them even more effective? Are further advancements in backbone chemistry anticipated, for example.
Will oligonucleotide based therapies blaze trails for follow-on gene therapy products?
Are small molecules a threat to oligonucleotide-based therapies?
Beyond exon skipping and knock-down mechanisms, what other roles will oligonucleotide-based therapies take mechanistically — can genes be activating oligonucleotides? Is there a place for multiple mechanism oligonucleotide medicines?
Are there any advantages of RNAi-based oligonucleotides over ASOs, and if so for what use?
What is occurring in the GCT venture capital segment? Which elements are seeing the most activity? Which areas have cooled? How is the investment market segmented between gene therapy, cell therapy and gene editing? What makes a hot GCT company? How long will the market stay frothy? Some review of demographics — # of investments, sizes, etc. Why is the market hot and how long do we expect it to stay that way? Rank the top 5 geographic markets for GCT company creation and investing? Are there academic centers that have been especially adept at accelerating GCT outcomes? Do the business models for the rapid development of coronavirus vaccine have any lessons for how GCT technology can be brought to market more quickly? Moderator: Meredith Fisher, PhD
The promise of stem cells has been a highlight in the realm of regenerative medicine. Unfortunately, that promise remains largely in the future. Recent breakthroughs have accelerated these potential interventions in particular for treating neurological disease. Among the topics the panel will consider are:
Stem cell sourcing
Therapeutic indication growth
Genetic and other modification in cell production
Cell production to final product optimization and challenges
The dynamics of venture/PE investing and IPOs are fast evolving. What are the drivers – will the number of investors grow will the size of early rounds continue to grow? How is this reflected in GCT target areas, company design, and biotech overall? Do patients benefit from these trends? Is crossover investing a distinct class or a little of both? Why did it emerge and what are the characteristics of the players? Will SPACs play a role in the growth of the gene and cell therapy industry. What is the role of corporate investment arms eg NVS, Bayer, GV, etc. – has a category killer emerged? Are we nearing the limit of what the GCT market can absorb or will investment capital continue to grow unabated? Moderator: Roger Kitterman
Nearly one hundred senior Mass General Brigham Harvard faculty contributed to the creation of this group of twelve GCT technologies that they believe will breakthrough in the next two years. The Disruptive Dozen identifies and ranks the GCT technologies that will be available on at least an experimental basis to have the chance of significantly improving health care. 11:35 AM – 11:45 AM
Computer connection to the iCloud of WordPress.com FROZE completely at 10:30AM EST and no file update was possible. COVERAGE OF MAY 21, 2021 IS RECORDED BELOW FOLLOWING THE AGENDA BY COPY AN DPASTE OF ALL THE TWEETS I PRODUCED ON MAY 21, 2021 8:30 AM – 8:55 AM
What is occurring in the GCT venture capital segment? Which elements are seeing the most activity? Which areas have cooled? How is the investment market segmented between gene therapy, cell therapy and gene editing? What makes a hot GCT company? How long will the market stay frothy? Some review of demographics — # of investments, sizes, etc. Why is the market hot and how long do we expect it to stay that way? Rank the top 5 geographic markets for GCT company creation and investing? Are there academic centers that have been especially adept at accelerating GCT outcomes? Do the business models for the rapid development of coronavirus vaccine have any lessons for how GCT technology can be brought to market more quickly? Moderator: Meredith Fisher, PhD
The promise of stem cells has been a highlight in the realm of regenerative medicine. Unfortunately, that promise remains largely in the future. Recent breakthroughs have accelerated these potential interventions in particular for treating neurological disease. Among the topics the panel will consider are:
Stem cell sourcing
Therapeutic indication growth
Genetic and other modification in cell production
Cell production to final product optimization and challenges
The dynamics of venture/PE investing and IPOs are fast evolving. What are the drivers – will the number of investors grow will the size of early rounds continue to grow? How is this reflected in GCT target areas, company design, and biotech overall? Do patients benefit from these trends? Is crossover investing a distinct class or a little of both? Why did it emerge and what are the characteristics of the players? Will SPACs play a role in the growth of the gene and cell therapy industry. What is the role of corporate investment arms eg NVS, Bayer, GV, etc. – has a category killer emerged? Are we nearing the limit of what the GCT market can absorb or will investment capital continue to grow unabated? Moderator: Roger Kitterman
Nearly one hundred senior Mass General Brigham Harvard faculty contributed to the creation of this group of twelve GCT technologies that they believe will breakthrough in the next two years. The Disruptive Dozen identifies and ranks the GCT technologies that will be available on at least an experimental basis to have the chance of significantly improving health care. 11:35 AM – 11:45 AM
The co-chairs convene to reflect on the insights shared over the three days. They will discuss what to expect at the in-person GCT focused May 2-4, 2022 World Medical Innovation Forum.
The co-chairs convene to reflect on the insights shared over the three days. They will discuss what to expect at the in-person GCT focused May 2-4, 2022 World Medical Innovation Forum.Christine Seidman, MD
Cyprus Island, kidney disease by mutation causing MUC1 accumulation and death BRD4780 molecule that will clear the misfolding proteins from the kidney organoids: pleuripotent stem cells small molecule developed for applications in the other cell types in brain, eye, gene mutation build mechnism for therapy clinical models transition from Academia to biotech
One of the most innovative segments in all of healthcare is the development of GCT driven therapies for rare and ultra-rare diseases. Driven by a series of insights and tools and funded in part by disease focused foundations, philanthropists and abundant venture funding disease after disease is yielding to new GCT technology. These often become platforms to address more prevalent diseases. The goal of making these breakthroughs routine and affordable is challenged by a range of issues including clinical trial design and pricing.
What is driving the interest in rare diseases?
What are the biggest barriers to making breakthroughs ‘routine and affordable?’
What is the role of retrospective and prospective natural history studies in rare disease? When does the expected value of retrospective disease history studies justify the cost?
Related to the first question, what is the FDA expecting as far as controls in clinical trials for rare diseases? How does this impact the collection of natural history data?
The power of GCT to cure disease has the prospect of profoundly improving the lives of patients who respond. Planning for a disruption of this magnitude is complex and challenging as it will change care across the spectrum. Leading chief executives shares perspectives on how the industry will change and how this change should be anticipated. Moderator: Meg Tirrell
Senior Health and Science Reporter, CNBC
CGT becoming staple therapy what are the disruptors emerging Speakers: Lisa Dechamps
SVP & Chief Business Officer, Novartis Gene Therapies
Reimagine medicine with collaboration at MGH, MDM condition in children
The Science is there, sustainable processes and systems impact is transformational
Value based pricing, risk sharing Payers and Pharma for one time therapy with life span effect
Head, Pharmaceuticals Research & Development, Bayer AG
CGT – 2016 and in 2020 new leadership and capability
Disease Biology and therapeutics
Regenerative Medicine: CGT vs repair building pipeline in ophthalmology and cardiovascular
During Pandemic: Deliver Medicines like Moderna, Pfizer – collaborations between competitors with Government Bayer entered into Vaccines in 5 days, all processes had to change access innovations developed over decades for medical solutions
GCT represents a large and growing market for novel therapeutics that has several segments. These include Cardiovascular Disease, Cancer, Neurological Diseases, Infectious Disease, Ophthalmology, Benign Blood Disorders, and many others; Manufacturing and Supply Chain including CDMO’s and CMO’s; Stem Cells and Regenerative Medicine; Tools and Platforms (viral vectors, nano delivery, gene editing, etc.). Bayer’s pharma business participates in virtually all of these segments. How does a Company like Bayer approach the development of a portfolio in a space as large and as diverse as this one? How does Bayer approach the support of the production infrastructure with unique demands and significant differences from its historical requirements? Moderator:
EVP, Pharmaceuticals, Head of Cell & Gene Therapy, Bayer AG
CGT will bring treatment to cure, delivery of therapies
Be a Leader repair, regenerate, cure
Technology and Science for CGT – building a portfolio vs single asset decision criteria development of IP market access patients access acceleration of new products
Bayer strategy: build platform for use by four domains
Gener augmentation
Autologeneic therapy, analytics
Gene editing
Oncology Cell therapy tumor treatment: What kind of cells – the jury is out
Of 23 product launch at Bayer no prediction is possible some high some lows
Gene delivery uses physical, chemical, or viral means to introduce genetic material into cells. As more genetically modified therapies move closer to the market, challenges involving safety, efficacy, and manufacturing have emerged. Optimizing lipidic and polymer nanoparticles and exosomal delivery is a short-term priority. This panel will examine how the short-term and long-term challenges are being tackled particularly for non-viral delivery modalities. Moderator: Natalie Artzi, PhD
Gene editing was recognized by the Nobel Committee as “one of gene technology’s sharpest tools, having a revolutionary impact on life sciences.” Introduced in 2011, gene editing is used to modify DNA. It has applications across almost all categories of disease and is also being used in agriculture and public health.
Today’s panel is made up of pioneers who represent foundational aspects of gene editing. They will discuss the movement of the technology into the therapeutic mainstream.
Successes in gene editing – lessons learned from late-stage assets (sickle cell, ophthalmology)
When to use what editing tool – pros and cons of traditional gene-editing v. base editing. Is prime editing the future? Specific use cases for epigenetic editing.
When we reach widespread clinical use – role of off-target editing – is the risk real? How will we mitigate? How practical is patient-specific off-target evaluation?
There are several dozen companies working to develop gene or cell therapies for Sickle Cell Disease, Beta Thalassemia, and Fanconi Anemia. In some cases, there are enzyme replacement therapies that are deemed effective and safe. In other cases, the disease is only managed at best. This panel will address a number of questions that are particular to this class of genetic diseases:
What are the pros and cons of various strategies for treatment? There are AAV-based editing, non-viral delivery even oligonucleotide recruitment of endogenous editing/repair mechanisms. Which approaches are most appropriate for which disease?
How can companies increase the speed of recruitment for clinical trials when other treatments are available? What is the best approach to educate patients on a novel therapeutic?
How do we best address ethnic and socio-economic diversity to be more representative of the target patient population?
How long do we have to follow up with the patients from the scientific, patient’s community, and payer points of view? What are the current FDA and EMA guidelines for long-term follow-up?
Where are we with regards to surrogate endpoints and their application to clinically meaningful endpoints?
What are the emerging ethical dilemmas in pediatric gene therapy research? Are there challenges with informed consent and pediatric assent for trial participation?
Are there differences in reimbursement policies for these different blood disorders? Clearly durability of response is a big factor. Are there other considerations?
Oligonucleotide drugs have recently come into their own with approvals from companies such as Biogen, Alnylam, Novartis and others. This panel will address several questions:
How important is the delivery challenge for oligonucleotides? Are technological advancements emerging that will improve the delivery of oligonucleotides to the CNS or skeletal muscle after systemic administration?
Will oligonucleotides improve as a class that will make them even more effective? Are further advancements in backbone chemistry anticipated, for example.
Will oligonucleotide based therapies blaze trails for follow-on gene therapy products?
Are small molecules a threat to oligonucleotide-based therapies?
Beyond exon skipping and knock-down mechanisms, what other roles will oligonucleotide-based therapies take mechanistically — can genes be activating oligonucleotides? Is there a place for multiple mechanism oligonucleotide medicines?
Are there any advantages of RNAi-based oligonucleotides over ASOs, and if so for what use?
Computer connection to the iCloud of WordPress.com FROZE completely at 10:30AM EST and no file update was possible. COVERAGE OF MAY 21, 2021 IS RECORDED BELOW FOLLOWING THE AGENDA BY COPY AN DPASTE OF ALL THE TWEETS I PRODUCED ON MAY 21, 2021
What is occurring in the GCT venture capital segment? Which elements are seeing the most activity? Which areas have cooled? How is the investment market segmented between gene therapy, cell therapy and gene editing? What makes a hot GCT company? How long will the market stay frothy? Some review of demographics — # of investments, sizes, etc. Why is the market hot and how long do we expect it to stay that way? Rank the top 5 geographic markets for GCT company creation and investing? Are there academic centers that have been especially adept at accelerating GCT outcomes? Do the business models for the rapid development of coronavirus vaccine have any lessons for how GCT technology can be brought to market more quickly? Moderator: Meredith Fisher, PhD
Partner, Mass General Brigham Innovation Fund
Strategies, success what changes are needed in the drug discovery process Speakers:
Bring disruptive frontier as a platform with reliable delivery CGT double knock out disease cure all change efficiency and scope human centric vs mice centered right scale of data converted into therapeutics acceleratetion
Innovation in drugs 60% fails in trial because of Toxicology system of the future deal with big diseases
Moderna is an example in unlocking what is inside us Microbiome and beyond discover new drugs epigenetics
Manufacturing change is not a new clinical trial FDA need to be presented with new rethinking for big innovations Drug pricing cheaper requires systematization How to systematically scaling up systematize the discovery and the production regulatory innovations
The promise of stem cells has been a highlight in the realm of regenerative medicine. Unfortunately, that promise remains largely in the future. Recent breakthroughs have accelerated these potential interventions in particular for treating neurological disease. Among the topics the panel will consider are:
Stem cell sourcing
Therapeutic indication growth
Genetic and other modification in cell production
Cell production to final product optimization and challenges
Director, Neuroregeneration Research Institute, McLean
Professor, Neurology and Neuroscience, MGH, HMS
Opportunities in the next generation of the tactical level Welcome the oprimism and energy level of all Translational medicine funding stem cells enormous opportunities
Ear inside the scall compartments and receptors responsible for hearing highly differentiated tall ask to identify cell for anticipated differentiation
The dynamics of venture/PE investing and IPOs are fast evolving. What are the drivers – will the number of investors grow will the size of early rounds continue to grow? How is this reflected in GCT target areas, company design, and biotech overall? Do patients benefit from these trends? Is crossover investing a distinct class or a little of both? Why did it emerge and what are the characteristics of the players? Will SPACs play a role in the growth of the gene and cell therapy industry. What is the role of corporate investment arms eg NVS, Bayer, GV, etc. – has a category killer emerged? Are we nearing the limit of what the GCT market can absorb or will investment capital continue to grow unabated? Moderator: Roger Kitterman
VP, Venture, Mass General Brigham
Saturation reached or more investment is coming in CGT
Pharmacologic agent in existing cause another disorders locomo-movement related
efficacy Autologous cell therapy transplantation approach program T cells into dopamine generating neurons greater than Allogeneic cell transplantation
Current market does not have delivery mechanism that a drug-delivery is the solution Trials would fail on DELIVERY
Immune suppressed patients during one year to avoid graft rejection Autologous approach of Parkinson patient genetically mutated reprogramed as dopamine generating neuron – unknowns are present
Circuitry restoration
Microenvironment disease ameliorate symptoms – education of patients on the treatment
Nearly one hundred senior Mass General Brigham Harvard faculty contributed to the creation of this group of twelve GCT technologies that they believe will breakthrough in the next two years. The Disruptive Dozen identifies and ranks the GCT technologies that will be available on at least an experimental basis to have the chance of significantly improving health care. 11:35 AM – 11:45 AM
The co-chairs convene to reflect on the insights shared over the three days. They will discuss what to expect at the in-person GCT focused May 2-4, 2022 World Medical Innovation Forum.
ALL THE TWEETS PRODUCED ON MAY 21, 2021 INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING:
Bob Carter, MD, PhD Chairman, Department of Neurosurgery, MGH William and Elizabeth Sweet, Professor of Neurosurgery, HMS Neurogeneration REVERSAL or slowing down?
Penelope Hallett, PhD NRL, McLean Assistant Professor Psychiatry, HMS efficacy Autologous cell therapy transplantation approach program T cells into dopamine genetating cells greater than Allogeneic cell transplantation
Roger Kitterman VP, Venture, Mass General Brigham Saturation reached or more investment is coming in CGT Multi OMICS and academia originated innovations are the most attractive areas
Peter Kolchinsky, PhD Founder and Managing Partner, RA Capital Management Future proof for new comers disruptors Ex Vivo gene therapy to improve funding products what tool kit belongs to
Chairman, Department of Neurosurgery, MGH, Professor of Neurosurgery, HMS Cell therapy for Parkinson to replace dopamine producing cells lost ability to produce dopamine skin cell to become autologous cells reprogramed
Kapil Bharti, PhD Senior Investigator, Ocular and Stem Cell Translational Research Section, NIH Off-th-shelf one time treatment becoming cure Intact tissue in a dish is fragile to maintain metabolism to become like semiconductors
Ole Isacson, MD, PhD Director, Neuroregeneration Research Institute, McLean Professor, Neurology and Neuroscience, MGH, HMS Opportunities in the next generation of the tactical level Welcome the oprimism and energy level of all
Erin Kimbrel, PhD Executive Director, Regenerative Medicine, Astellas In the ocular space immunogenecity regulatory communication use gene editing for immunogenecity Cas1 and Cas2 autologous cells
Nabiha Saklayen, PhD CEO and Co-Founder, Cellino scale production of autologous cells foundry using semiconductor process in building cassettes by optic physicists
Joe Burns, PhD VP, Head of Biology, Decibel Therapeutics Ear inside the scall compartments and receptors responsible for hearing highly differentiated tall ask to identify cell for anticipated differentiation control by genomics
Kapil Bharti, PhD Senior Investigator, Ocular and Stem Cell Translational Research Section, NIH first drug required to establish the process for that innovations design of animal studies not done before
Robert Nelsen Managing Director, Co-founder, ARCH Venture Partners Manufacturing change is not a new clinical trial FDA need to be presented with new rethinking for big innovations Drug pricing cheaper requires systematization
David Berry, MD, PhD CEO, Valo Health GP, Flagship Pioneering Bring disruptive frontier platform reliable delivery CGT double knockout disease cure all change efficiency scope human centric vs mice centered right scale acceleration
Kush Parmar, MD, PhD Managing Partner, 5AM Ventures build it yourself, benefit for patients FIrst Look at MGB shows MEE innovation on inner ear worthy investment
Robert Nelsen Managing Director, Co-founder, ARCH Venture Partners Frustration with supply chain during the Pandemic, GMC anticipation in advance CGT rapidly prototype rethink and invest proactive investor .edu and Pharma
Injectable inclisiran (siRNA) as 3rd anti-PCSK9 behind mAbs Repatha and Praluent
Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN
UPDATED on 4/27/2021
Combining AstraZeneca’s ‘good’ cholesterol booster with PCSK9 inhibition shows promise in heart disease
The drug, dubbed MEDI5884, is designed to neutralize a circulating enzyme called endothelial lipase. The protein regulates HDL in the blood by breaking down lipids called phospholipids. Previous studies have found increased endothelial lipase levels in people with obesity and coronary artery disease.
In monkeys, blocking endothelial lipase with MEDI5884 increased plasma HDL-C in a dose-dependent manner, the AZ team reported in a study published in Science Translational Medicine. At the highest dose tested, researchers recorded a roughly twofold increase in HDL-C within two weeks. The effect lasted throughout the two-month study.
The AZ team also tested the drug in a small group of healthy volunteers in a phase 1 study. The treatment increased HDL-C—though to a lesser extent than it had in the monkeys—without causing any major side effects, the researchers said. The drug also increased the size and number of HDL particles.
Oddly, the researchers also observed a concurrent increase in bad cholesterol in both monkeys and humans. So they decided to combine MEDI5884 with an anti-PCSK9 antibody drug. The FDA has approved two PCSK9 inhibitors to lower LDL-C and reduce CV risks: Sanofi and Regeneron’s Praluent and Amgen’s Repatha.
In monkeys pretreated with a PCSK9 inhibitor, MEDI5884 raised HDL-C to a similar degree while the magnitude of the increase in LDL-C was reduced, according to the team.
PCSK9 drugs once carried megablockbuster potential thanks to their strong LDL-lowering effects, but neither Praluent nor Repatha has lived up to expectations. Payer pressure and an ongoing price war haven’t helped either player in the market.
The AZ team suggested combining endothelial lipase inhibition with a PCSK9 blockade could enhance the efficacy of each component. “[I]t is intriguing to consider dual inhibition of EL and PCSK9 and the potential for synergy that may arise from combined action of the two complementary mechanisms, both targeting different aspects of [reverse cholesterol transport],” the scientists wrote in the study.
Next stop, filing for approval. The Medicines Company has said it plans to submit inclisiran for FDA review by the end of 2019 and EMA review in the first quarter of 2020. If the drug’s approved it’ll be the third anti-PCSK9 behind mAbs Repatha and Praluent, and could try to compete on price to gain market share.
The company’s been very careful not to disclose its pricing plans for inclisiran, said ORION-10 principal investigator Dr. Scott Wright, professor and cardiologist at the Mayo Clinic. But, Wright said, The Medicines Co. and other companies he advises on clinical trial design “have learned the lesson from the sponsors of the monoclonal antibodies [against PCSK9], they’re not going to come in and price a drug that’s out of proportion to what the market will bear.”
Because the anti-PCSK9 mAbs were initially priced beyond what patients and insurers were willing to pay, “now most of the physicians that I meet have a resistance to using them just because they’re fearful about the pre-approval process” with insurers, said Wright. “They’re much easier to get approved and paid for today than they’ve ever been, but that message is not out in the medical community yet.”
Extracellular RNA and their carriers in disease diagnosis and therapy, Volume 2 (Volume Two: Latest in Genomics Methodologies for Therapeutics: Gene Editing, NGS and BioInformatics, Simulations and the Genome Ontology), Part 1: Next Generation Sequencing (NGS)
Reporter and Curator: Dr. Sudipta Saha, Ph.D.
RNA plays various roles in determining how the information in our genes drives cell behavior. One of its roles is to carry information encoded by our genes from the cell nucleus to the rest of the cell where it can be acted on by other cell components. Rresearchers have now defined how RNA also participates in transmitting information outside cells, known as extracellular RNA or exRNA. This new role of RNA in cell-to-cell communication has led to new discoveries of potential disease biomarkers and therapeutic targets. Cells using RNA to talk to each other is a significant shift in the general thought process about RNA biology.
Researchers explored basic exRNA biology, including how exRNA molecules and their transport packages (or carriers) were made, how they were expelled by producer cells and taken up by target cells, and what the exRNA molecules did when they got to their destination. They encountered surprising complexity both in the types of carriers that transport exRNA molecules between cells and in the different types of exRNA molecules associated with the carriers. The researchers had to be exceptionally creative in developing molecular and data-centric tools to begin making sense of the complexity, and found that the type of carrier affected how exRNA messages were sent and received.
As couriers of information between cells, exRNA molecules and their carriers give researchers an opportunity to intercept exRNA messages to see if they are associated with disease. If scientists could change or engineer designer exRNA messages, it may be a new way to treat disease. The researchers identified potential exRNA biomarkers for nearly 30 diseases including cardiovascular disease, diseases of the brain and central nervous system, pregnancy complications, glaucoma, diabetes, autoimmune diseases and multiple types of cancer.
As for example some researchers found that exRNA in urine showed promise as a biomarker of muscular dystrophy where current studies rely on markers obtained through painful muscle biopsies. Some other researchers laid the groundwork for exRNA as therapeutics with preliminary studies demonstrating how researchers might load exRNA molecules into suitable carriers and target carriers to intended recipient cells, and determining whether engineered carriers could have adverse side effects. Scientists engineered carriers with designer RNA messages to target lab-grown breast cancer cells displaying a certain protein on their surface. In an animal model of breast cancer with the cell surface protein, the researchers showed a reduction in tumor growth after engineered carriers deposited their RNA cargo.
Other than the above research work the scientists also created a catalog of exRNA molecules found in human biofluids like plasma, saliva and urine. They analyzed over 50,000 samples from over 2000 donors, generating exRNA profiles for 13 biofluids. This included over 1000 exRNA profiles from healthy volunteers. The researchers found that exRNA profiles varied greatly among healthy individuals depending on characteristics like age and environmental factors like exercise. This means that exRNA profiles can give important and detailed information about health and disease, but careful comparisons need to be made with exRNA data generated from people with similar characteristics.
Next the researchers will develop tools to efficiently and reproducibly isolate, identify and analyze different carrier types and their exRNA cargos and allow analysis of one carrier and its cargo at a time. These tools will be shared with the research community to fill gaps in knowledge generated till now and to continue to move this field forward.
The second annual PureTech Health BIG Summit brings together an elite ensemble of leading scientific researchers, investors, and CEOs and R&D leaders from major pharmaceutical, technology, and biotech companies.
The BIG Summit is designed to stimulate ideas that will have an impact on existing pipelines and catalyze future interactions among a group of delegates that represent leaders and innovators in their fields.
Please follow the discussion on Twitter using #BIGAxisSummit
By invitation only; registration is non-transferable.
For more information, please contact PureTechHealthSummit@PureTechHealth.com
Back for final sessions at #BIGAxisSummit. @PureTechH Jim Harper of Sonde Health talking about how voice data — pacing, fine motor articulation, oscillation — can point the way to objective, quantitative measures for detecting and monitoring depression.
Paul Biondi at #BIGAxisSummit : What makes big deals happen is financial, and *deep conviction* of a big future fit. Disproportionate valuation from bidders is expected.
Love this. We often reduce everything to mathematical analyses to champion or ridicule deals. Not that simple
Bob Langer (@MIT) asks how #lymphatics affected by #aging. Santambrogio: typically blame aging #immune cells for increased disease, but aging affects lymphatics too (less efficient trafficking shown). Rejuvenating these could affect several aging-related diseases #BigAxisSummit
QIAGEN – International Leader in NGS and RNA Sequencing, Volume 2 (Volume Two: Latest in Genomics Methodologies for Therapeutics: Gene Editing, NGS and BioInformatics, Simulations and the Genome Ontology), Part 1: Next Generation Sequencing (NGS)
QIAGEN – International Leader in NGS and RNA Sequencing
Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN
The reader is encouraged to review all the products of QIAGEN on the company web site.
miRCURY Exosome Kits
For enrichment of exosomes and other extracellular vesicles from serum/plasma or cell/urine/CSF samples
Excellent recovery of exosomes and other extracellular vesicles
Easy and straightforward protocol that takes less than 2 hours
No ultracentrifugation or phenol/chloroform steps required
Fully compatible with the miRCURY LNA miRNA PCR System
Suited for a variety of applications, such as miRNA or RNA profiling
miRCURY Exosome Kits enable high-quality and scalable exosome isolation with an easy protocol that does not require special laboratory equipment. The miRCURY Exosome Serum/Plasma Kit is optimized for serum and plasma samples, while the miRCURY Exosome Cell/Urine/CSF Kit is designed for processing cell-conditioned media, urine and CSF samples. Both kits provide high exosomal recovery and seamless integration with different downstream assays.
On 9/25/2017, Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN commissioned Dr. Larry H. Bernstein to write a short article on the following topic reported on 9/22/2017 in sciencemission.com
During the period between 9/2015 and 6/2017 the Team at Leaders in Pharmaceutical Business Intelligence (LPBI) has launched an R&D effort lead by Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN in conjunction with SBH Sciences, Inc. headed by Dr. Raphael Nir.
The newly created think-piece on the relationship between regulatory functions of Exosomes and Metabolic processes is developed conceptually, below.
The Role of Exosomes in Metabolic Regulation
Author: Larry H. Bernstein, MD, FCAP
We have had more than a half century of research into the genetic code and transcription leading to abundant work on RNA and proteomics. However, more recent work in the last two decades has identified RNA interference in siRNA. These molecules may be found in the circulation, but it has been a challenge to find their use in therapeutics. Exosomes were first discovered in the 1980s, but only recently there has been a huge amount of research into their origin, structure and function. Exosomes are 30–120 nm endocytic membrane-bound extracellular vesicles (EVs)(1-23) , and more specifically multiple vesicle bodies (MVBs) by a budding process from invagination of the outer cell membrane that carry microRNA (miRNA), and have structures composed of protein and lipids (1,23-27 ). EVs are the membrane vesicles secreted by eukaryotic cells for intracellular communication by transferring the proteins, lipids, and RNA under various physiologic conditions as well as during the disease stage. EVs also act as a signalosomes in many biological processes. Inward budding of the plasma membrane forms small vesicles that fuse. Intraluminal vesicles (ILVs) are formed by invagination of the limiting endosomal membrane during the maturation process of early endosome.
EVs are the MVBs secreted that serve in intracellular communication by transferring a cargo consisting of proteins, lipids, and RNA under various physiologic conditions (4, 23). Exosome-mediated miRNA transfer between cells is considered to be necessary for intercellular signaling and exosome-associated miRNAs in biofluids (23). Exosomes carry various molecular constituents of their cell of origin, including proteins, lipids, mRNAs, and microRNAs (miRNAs) (. They are released from many cell types, such as dendritic cells (DCs), lymphocytes, platelets, mast cells, epithelial cells, endothelial cells, and neurons, and can be found in most bodily fluids including blood, urine, saliva, amniotic fluid, breast milk, hydrothoracic fluid, and ascitic fluid, as well as in culture medium of most cell types.Exosomes have also been shown to be involved in noncoding RNA surveillance machinery in generating antibody diversity (24). There are also a vast number of long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) and enhancer RNAs (eRNAs) that accumulate R-loop structures upon RNA exosome ablation, thereby, resolving deleterious DNA/RNA hybrids arising from active enhancers and distal divergent eRNA-expressing elements (lncRNA-CSR) engaged in long-range DNA interactions (25). RNA exosomes are large multimeric 3′-5′ exo- and endonucleases representing the central RNA 3′-end processing factor and are implicated in processing, quality control, and turnover of both coding and noncoding RNAs. They are large macromolecular cages that channel RNA to the ribonuclease sites (29). A major interest has been developed to characterize of exosomal cargo, which includes numerous non-randomly packed proteins and nucleic acids (1). Moreover, exosomes play an active role in tumorigenesis, metastasis, and response to therapy through the transfer of oncogenes and onco-miRNAs between cancer cells and the tumor stroma. Blood cells and the vascular endothelium is also exosomal shedding, which has significance for cardiovascular, neurologicological disorders, stroke, and antiphospholipid syndrome (1). Dysregulation of microRNAs and the affected pathways is seen in numerous pathologies their expression can reflect molecular processes of tumor onset and progression qualifying microRNAs as potential diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers (30).
Exosomes are secreted by many cells like B lymphocytes and dendritic cells of hematopoietic and non-hematopoietic origin viz. platelets, Schwann cells, neurons, mast cells, cytotoxic T cells, oligodendrocytes, intestinal epithelial cells were also found to be releasing exosomes (4). They are engaged in complex functions like persuading immune response as the exosomes secreted by antigen presenting cells activate T cells (4). They all have a common set of proteins e.g. Rab family of GTPases, Alix and ESCRT (required for transport) protein and they maintain their cytoskeleton dynamics and participate in membrane fusion. However, they are involved in retrovirus disease pathology as a result of recruitment of the host`s endosomal compartments in order to generate viral vesicles, and they can either spread or limit an infection based on the type of pathogen and its target cells (5).
Upon further consideration, it is understandable how this growing biological work on exosomes has enormous significance for laboratory diagnostics (1, 3, 5, 6, 11, 14, 15, 17-20, 23,30-41) . They are released from many cell types, such as dendritic cells (DCs), lymphocytes, platelets, mast cells, epithelial cells, endothelial cells, and neurons, and can be found in most bodily fluids including blood, urine, saliva, amniotic fluid, breast milk, thoracic and abdominal effusions, and ascitic fluid (1). The involvement of exosomes in disease is broad, and includes: cancer, autoimmune and infectious disease, hematologic disorders, neurodegenerative diseases, and cardiovascular disease. Proteins frequently identified in exosomes include membrane transporters and fusion proteins (e.g., GTPases, annexins, and flotillin), heat shock proteins (e.g., HSC70), tetraspanins (e.g., CD9, CD63, and CD81), MVB biogenesis proteins (e.g., alix and TSG101), and lipid-related proteins and phospholipases. The exosomal lipid composition has been thoroughly analyzed in exosomes secreted from several cell types including DCs and mast cells, reticulocytes, and B-lymphocytes (1). Dysregulation of microRNAs of pathways observed in numerous pathologies (5, 10, 12, 21, 27, 35, 37) including cancers (30), particularly, colon, pancreas, breast, liver, brain, lung (2, 6, 17-20, 30, 33-36, 38, 39). Following these considerations, it is important that we characterize the content of exosomal cargo to gain clues to their biogenesis, targeting, and cellular effects which may lead to identification of biomarkers for disease diagnosis, prognosis and response to treatment (42).
We might continue in pursuit of a particular noteworthy exosome, the NLRP3 inflammasome, which is activated by a variety of external or host-derived stimuli, thereby, initiating an inflammatory response through caspase-1 activation, resulting in inflammatory cytokine IL-1b maturation and secretion (43).
Inflammasomes are multi-protein signaling complexes that activate the inflammatory caspases and the maturation of interleukin-1b. The NLRP3 inflammasome is linked with human autoinflammatory and autoimmune diseases (44). This makes the NLRP3 inflammasome a promising target for anti-inflammatory therapies. The NLRP3 inflammasome is activated in response to a variety of signals that indicate tissue damage, metabolic stress, and infection (45). Upon activation, the NLRP3 inflammasome serves as a platform for activation of the cysteine protease caspase-1, which leads to the processing and secretion of the proinflammatory cytokines interleukin-1β (IL-1β) and IL-18. Heritable and acquired inflammatory diseases are both characterized by dysregulation of NLRP3 inflammasome activation (45).
Receptors of innate immunity recognize conserved moieties associated with either cellular damage [danger-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs)] or invading organisms [pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs)](45). Either chronic stimulation or overwhelming tissue damage is injurious and responsible for the pathology seen in a number of autoinflammatory and autoimmune disorders, such as arthritis and diabetes. The nucleotide-binding domain leucine-rich repeat (LRR)-containing receptors (NLRs) are PRRs are found intracellularly and they share a unique domain architecture. It consists of a central nucleotide binding and oligomerization domain called the NACHT domain that is located between an N-terminal effector domain and a C-terminal LRR domain (45). The NLR family members NLRP1, NLRP3, and NLRC4 are capable of forming multiprotein complexes called inflammasomes when activated.
The (NLRP3) inflammasome is important in chronic airway diseases such as asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease because the activation results, in pro-IL-1β processing and the secretion of the proinflammatory cytokine IL-1β (46). It has been proposed that Activation of the NLRP3 inflammasome by invading pathogens may prove cell type-specific in exacerbations of airway inflammation in asthma (46). First, NLRP3 interacts with the adaptor protein ASC by sensing microbial pathogens and self-danger signals. Then pro-caspase-1 is recruited and the large protein complex called the NLRP3 inflammasome is formed. This is followed by autocleavage and activation of caspase-1, after which pro-IL-1β and pro-IL-18 are converted into their mature forms. Ion fluxes disrupt membrane integrity, and also mitochondrial damage both play key roles in NLRP3 inflammasome activation (47). Depletion of mitochondria as well as inhibitors that block mitochondrial respiration and ROS production prevented NLRP3 inflammasome activation. Futhermore, genetic ablation of VDAC channels (namely VDAC1 and VDAC3) that are located on the mitochondrial outer membrane and that are responsible for exchanging ions and metabolites with the cytoplasm, leads to diminished mitochondrial (mt) ROS production and inhibition of NLRP3 inflammasome activation (47). Inflammasome activation not only occurs in immune cells, primarily macrophages and dendritic cells, but also in kidney cells, specifically the renal tubular epithelium. The NLRP3 inflammasome is probably involved in the pathogenesis of acute kidney injury, chronic kidney disease, diabetic nephropathy and crystal-related nephropathy (48). The inflammasome also plays a role in autoimmune kidney disease. IL-1 blockade and two recently identified specific NLRP3 inflammasome blockers, MCC950 and β-hydroxybutyrate, may prove to have value in the treatment of inflammasome-mediated conditions.
Autophagosomes derived from tumor cells are referred to as defective ribosomal products in blebs (DRibbles). DRibbles mediate tumor regression by stimulating potent T-cell responses and, thus, have been used as therapeutic cancer vaccines in multiple preclinical cancer models (49). It has been found that DRibbles could induce a rapid differentiation of monocytes and DC precursor (pre-DC) cells into functional APCs (49). Consequently, DRibbles could potentially induce strong innate immune responses via multiple pattern recognition receptors. This explains why DRibbles might be excellent antigen carriers to induce adaptive immune responses to both tumor cells and viruses. This suggests that isolated autophagosomes (DRibbles) from antigen donor cells activate inflammasomes by providing the necessary signals required for IL-1β production.
The Hsp90 system is characterized by a cohort of co-chaperones that bind to Hsp90 and affect its function (50). The co-chaperones enable Hsp90 to chaperone structurally and functionally diverse client proteins. Sahasrabudhe et al. (50) show that the nature of the client protein dictates the contribution of a co-chaperone to its maturation. The study reveals the general importance of the cochaperone Sgt1 (50). In addition to Hsp90, we have to consider Hsp60. Adult cardiac myocytes release heat shock protein (HSP)60 in exosomes. Extracellular HSP60, when not in exosomes, causes cardiac myocyte apoptosis via the activation of Toll-like receptor 4. the protein content of cardiac exosomes differed significantly from other types of exosomes in the literature and contained cytosolic, sarcomeric, and mitochondrial proteins (21).
A new Protein Organic Solvent Precipitation (PROSPR) method efficiently isolates the EV repertoire from human biological samples. Proteomic profiling of PROSPR-enriched CNS EVs indicated that > 75 % of the proteins identified matched previously reported exosomal and microvesicle cargoes. In addition lipidomic characterization of enriched CNS vesicles identified previously reported EV-specific lipid families and novel lipid isoforms not previously detected in human EVs. The characterization of these structures from central nervous system (CNS) tissues is relevant to current neuroscience, especially to advance the understanding of neurodegeneration in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), Parkinson’s disease (PD) and Alzheimer’s disease (AD)(15). In addition, study of EVs in brain will enable characterization of the degenerative posttranslational modifications (DPMs) occurring in those proteins.
Neurodegenerative disease is characterized by dysregulation because of NLRP3 inflammasome activation. Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and Parkinson’s disease (PD), both neurodegenerative diseases are associated with the NLRP3 inflammasome. PD is characterized by accumulation of Lewy bodies (LB) formed by a-synuclein (aSyn) aggregation. A recent study revealed that aSyn induces synthesis of pro-IL-1b by an interaction with TLR2 and activates NLRP3 inflammasome resulting in caspase-1 activation and IL-1b maturation in human primary monocytes (43). In addition mitophagy downregulates NLRP3 inflammasome activation by eliminating damaged mitochondria, blocking NLRP3 inflammasome activating signals. It is notable that in this aberrant activation mitophagy downregulates NLRP3 inflammasome activation by eliminating damaged mitochondria, blocking NLRP3 inflammasome activating signals (43).
REFERENCES
Lin J, Li J, Huang B, Liu J, Chen X. Exosomes: Novel Biomarkers for Clinical Diagnosis. Scie World J 2015; Article ID 657086, 8 pages http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/657086
Kahlert C, Melo SA, Protopopov A, Tang J, Seth S, et al. Identification of Double-stranded Genomic DNA Spanning All Chromosomes with Mutated KRAS and p53 DNA in the Serum Exosomes of Patients with Pancreatic Cancer. J Biol Chem 2014; 289: 3869-3875. doi: 10.1074/jbc.C113.532267.
Lässer C, Eldh M, Lötvall J. Isolation and Characterization of RNA-Containing Exosomes. J. Vis. Exp. 2012; 59, e3037. doi:10.3791/3037(2012).
Kaur A, Leishangthem GD, Bhat P, et al. Role of Exosomes in Pathology – A Review. Journal of Pathology and Toxicology 2014; 1: 07-11
Hosseini HM, Fooladi AAI, Nourani MR and Ghanezadeh F. The Role of Exosomes in Infectious Diseases. Inflammation & Allergy – Drug Targets 2013; 12:29-37.
Ciregia F, Urbani A and Palmisano G. Extracellular Vesicles in Brain Tumors and Neurodegenerative Diseases. Front. Mol. Neurosci. 2017;10:276. doi: 10.3389/fnmol.2017.00276
Zhang B, Yin Y, Lai RC, Lim SK. Immunotherapeutic potential of extracellular vesicles. Front Immunol (2014)
McKelvey KJ, Powell KL, Ashton AW, Morris JM and McCracken SA. Exosomes: Mechanisms of Uptake. J Circ Biomark, 2015; 4:7 DOI: 10.5772/61186
Xiao T, Zhang W, Jiao B, Pan C-Z, Liu X and Shen L. The role of exosomes in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer’ disease. Translational Neurodegen 2017; 6:3. DOI 10.1186/s40035-017-0072-x
Gonzales PA, Pisitkun T, Hoffert JD, et al. Large-Scale Proteomics and Phosphoproteomics of Urinary Exosomes. J Am Soc Nephrol 2009; 20: 363–379. doi: 10.1681/ASN.2008040406
Waldenström A, Ronquist G. Role of Exosomes in Myocardial Remodeling. Circ Res. 2014; 114:315-324.
Xin H, Li Y and Chopp M. Exosomes/miRNAs as mediating cell-based therapy of stroke. Front. Cell. Neurosci. 10 Nov, 2014; 8(377) doi: 10.3389/fncel.2014.00377
Wang S, Zhang L, Wan S, Cansiz S, Cui C, et al. Aptasensor with Expanded Nucleotide Using DNA Nanotetrahedra for Electrochemical Detection of Cancerous Exosomes. ACS Nano, 2017; 11(4):3943–3949 DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.7b00373
Gallart-Palau X, Serra A, Sze SK. (2016) Enrichment of extracellular vesicles from tissues of the central nervous system by PROSPR. Mol Neurodegener 11(1):41.
Simpson RJ, Jensen SS, Lim JW. Proteomic profiling of exosomes: current perspectives. Proteomics. 2008 Oct; 8(19):4083-99. doi: 10.1002/pmic.200800109.
Sandfeld-Paulsen R, Aggerholm-Pedersen N, Bæk R, Jakobs KR, et al. Exosomal proteins as prognostic biomarkers in non-small cell lung cancer. Mol Onc 2016 Dec; 10(10):1595-1602.
Li W, Li C, Zhou T, et al. Role of exosomal proteins in cancer diagnosis. Molecular Cancer 2017; 16:145 DOI 10.1186/s12943-017-0706-8
Zhang W, Xia W, Lv Z, Xin Y, Ni C, Yang L. Liquid Biopsy for Cancer: Circulating Tumor Cells, Circulating Free DNA or Exosomes? Cell Physiol Biochem 2017; 41:755-768. DOI: 10.1159/00045873
Thakur BK ,…, Williams C, Rodriguez-Barrueco R, Silva JM, Zhang W, et al. Double-stranded DNA in exosomes: a novel biomarker in cancer detection. Cell Research 2014 June; 24(6):766-769. doi:10.1038/cr.2014.44.
Malik ZA, Kott KS, Poe AJ, Kuo T, Chen L, Ferrara KW, Knowlton AA. Cardiac myocyte exosomes: stability, HSP60, and proteomics. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 304: H954–H965, 2013. doi:10.1152/ajpheart.00835.2012.
De Toro J, Herschlik L, Waldner C and Mongini C. Emerging roles of exosomes in normal and pathological conditions: new insights for diagnosis and therapeutic applications. Front. Immunol. 2015; 6:203. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00203
Chevilleta JR, Kanga Q, Rufa IK, Briggs HA, et al. Quantitative and stoichiometric analysis of the microRNA content of exosomes. PNAS 2014 Oct 14; 111(41): 14888–14893. pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1408301111
Basu U, Meng F-L, Keim C, Grinstein V, Pefanis E, et al. The RNA Exosome Targets the AID Cytidine Deaminase to Both Strands of Transcribed Duplex DNA Substrates. Cell 2011; 144: 353–363, DOI 10.1016/j.cell.2011.01.001
Pefanis E, Wang J, …, Rabadan R, Basu U. RNA Exosome-Regulated Long Non-Coding RNA Transcription Controls Super-Enhancer Activity. Cell 2015; 161: 774–789. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2015.04.034
Kilchert C,Wittmann S & Vasiljeva L. The regulation and functions of the nuclear RNA exosome complex. In RNA processing and modifications. Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology 17, 227–239 (2016) doi:10.1038/nrm.2015.15
Guay C, Regazzi R. Exosomes as new players in metabolic organ cross-talk. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2017;19(Suppl. 1):137–146. DOI: 10.1111/dom.13027.
Abramowicz A, Widlak P, Pietrowska M. Proteomic analysis of exosomal cargo: the challenge of high purity vesicle isolation. Molecular BioSystems MB-REV-02-2016-000082.R1
Fuessel S, Lohse-Fischer A, Vu Van D, Salomo K, Erdmann K, Wirth MP. (2017) Quantification of MicroRNAs in Urine-Derived Specimens. In Urothelial Carcinoma, Methods Mol Biol 1655:201-226.
Street JM, Barran PE, Mackay CL, Weidt S, et al. Identification and proteomic profiling of exosomes in human cerebrospinal fluid. Journal of Translational Medicine 2012; 10:5. http://www.translational-medicine.com/content/10/1/5
Duijvesz D, Burnum-Johnson KE, Gritsenko MA, Hoogland AM, Vredenbregt-van den Berg MS, et al. Proteomic Profiling of Exosomes Leads to the Identification of Novel Biomarkers for Prostate Cancer. PLoS ONE 2013; 8(12): e82589. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0082589
Welton JL, Khanna S, Giles PJ, Brennan P, et al. Proteomics Analysis of Bladder Cancer Exosomes. Molecular & Cellular Proteomics 2010; 9:1324–1338. DOI 10.1074/mcp.M000063-MCP201
Lee S, Suh G-Y, Ryter SW, and Choi AMK. Regulation and Function of the Nucleotide Binding Domain Leucine-Rich Repeat-Containing Receptor, PyrinDomain-Containing-3 Inflammasome in Lung Disease. Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol 2016 Feb; 54(2):151–160. DOI: 10.1165/rcmb.2015-0231TR.
Zhang X, Yuan X, Shi H, Wu L, Qian H, Xu W. Exosomes in cancer: small particle, big player. J Hematol Oncol (2015)
Zhao X, Wu Y, Duan J, Ma Y, Shen Z, et al. Quantitative Proteomic Analysis of Exosome Protein Content Changes Induced by Hepatitis B Virus in Huh-7 Cells Using SILAC Labeling and LC–MS/MS. J. Proteome Res.; 2014, 13 (12):5391–5402. DOI: 10.1021/pr5008703
Liang B, Peng P, et al. Characterization and proteomic analysis of ovarian cancer-derived exosomes. J Proteomics. 2013 Mar; 80:171-182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jprot.2012.12.029
Alvarez-Llamas G, Díaz J, Zubiri I. Proteome of Human Urinary Exosomes in Diabetic Nephropathy. In Biomarkers in Kidney Disease. Vinood B. Patel, Ed. Springer Science 2015; pp 1-21. DOI 10.1007/978-94-007-7743-9_22-1
Simpson RJ, Jensen SS, Lim JW. Proteomic profiling of exosomes: current perspectives. Proteomics. 2008 Oct; 8(19):4083-99. doi: 10.1002/pmic.200800109.
Eun-Kyeong Jo, Kim JK, Shin D-M and C Sasakawa. Molecular mechanisms regulating NLRP3 inflammasome activation. Cell Molec Immunol 2016; 13: 148–159. doi:10.1038/cmi.2015.95
Leemans JC, Cassel SL, and Sutterwala FS. Sensing damage by the NLRP3 inflammasome. Immunol Rev. 2011 Sept; 243(1): 152–162. doi:10.1111/j.1600-065X.2011.01043.x.
Hirota JA, Im H, Rahman MM, Rumzhum NN, Manetsch M, Pascoe CD, Bunge K, Alkhouri H, Oliver BG, Ammit AJ. The nucleotide-binding domain and leucine-rich repeat protein-3 inflammasome is not activated in airway smooth muscle upon toll-like receptor-2 ligation. Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol. 2013 Oct; 49(4):517-24. doi: 10.1165/rcmb.2013-0047OC.
Zhong Z, Sanchez-Lopez E, Karin M. Autophagy, NLRP3 inflammasome and auto-inflammatory immune diseases. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2016 Jul-Aug; 34(4 Suppl 98):12-6. Epub 2016 Jul 21.
Hutton HL, Ooi JD, Holdsworth SR, Kitching AR. The NLRP3 inflammasome in kidney disease and autoimmunity. Nephrology (Carlton). 2016 Sep; 21(9):736-44. doi: 10.1111/nep.12785
Xing Y, Cao R and Hu H-M. TLR and NLRP3 inflammasome-dependent innate immune responses to tumor-derived autophagosomes (DRibbles). Cell Death and Disease (2016) 7, e2322; doi:10.1038/cddis.2016.206
Sahasrabudhe P, Rohrberg J, Biebl MM, Rutz DA, Buchner J. The Plasticity of the Hsp90 Co-chaperone System. Molecular Cell 2017 Sept; 67:947–961. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2017.08.004
Various cells of the human physiological system have the capability to release extracellular vesicles (EVs) involved in intercellular transport of proteins and nucleic acids. Exosomes are a subtype of extracellular vesicles having their origin through endocytic pathway. While being involved in intercellular transport of macromolecules, exosomes, due to their presence in several body fluids, can also be utilized as a system to commute RNA molecules and proteins in the body. Recent advances in gene therapy have provided a new outlook in disease therapeutics by modulation of gene expression using oligonucleotide based approach and exosomes have been reported a potential carrier for nucleic acid based therapeutic moieties. In recent years, small interfering RNA (siRNA) has emerged as promising therapeutic alternative for diseases with gene-based pathophysiology, however poor bioavailability limits its therapeutic potential. For effective delivery and enhancement of bioavailability of siRNA, several carriers including dendrimers, liposomes, siRNA conjugates, and siRNA aptamer chimeras, to name a few, have been explored. Exosomes can be considered a promising carrier for effective delivery of siRNA due to their existence in body’s endogenous system and high tolerance. The present review focuses on delivering knowledge about exosomes, siRNA, and capability of exosomes to act as natural carriers for siRNA delivery.
Keywords: Extracellular vesicles, endogenous, exosomes, oligonucleotide, small interfering RNA.
2012pharmaceutical
Amandeep Kaur
Aashir Awan, Phd
Abhisar Anand
Adina Hazan
Alan F. Kaul, PharmD., MS, MBA, FCCP
alexcrystal6
anamikasarkar
apreconasia
aviralvatsa
David Orchard-Webb, PhD
danutdaagmailcom
Demet Sag, Ph.D., CRA, GCP
Dror Nir
dsmolyar
Ethan Coomber
evelinacohn
Gail S Thornton
Irina Robu
jayzmit48
jdpmd
jshertok
kellyperlman
Ed Kislauskis
larryhbern
Madison Davis
marzankhan
megbaker58
ofermar2020
Dr. Pati
pkandala
ritusaxena
Rick Mandahl
sjwilliamspa
Srinivas Sriram
stuartlpbi
Dr. Sudipta Saha
tildabarliya
vaishnavee24
zraviv06
zs22