Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Personalized and Precision Medicine & Genomic Research’ Category

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

 

Five Psych Disorders Have Common Genetics

By Michael Smith, North American Correspondent, MedPage Today

Published: February 27, 2013

Reviewed by Zalman S. Agus, MD; Emeritus Professor, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania

share common genetic underpinnings — despite differences in symptoms and course of disease, researchers discovered.

In particular, single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in two genes involved in calcium-channel activity appear to play a role in all five, Jordan Smoller, MD, ScD, of Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, and colleagues reported online in The Lancet.

The findings come from a genome-wide analysis of 33,332 cases and 27,888 controls in what the authors described as the largest-ever genetic study of psychiatric illness.

The results are “new evidence that may inform a move beyond descriptive syndromes in psychiatry and towards classification based on underlying causes,” Smoller said in a statement.

The findings are especially important because of revisions to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and the International Classification of Diseases, which have “reinvigorated debate about the validity of diagnostic boundaries,” the authors noted.

Indeed, the findings confirm previous evidence of “abundant pleiotropy in human complex disorders” – meaning the same genetic variant plays a role in several diseases, argued Alessandro Serretti, MD, PhD, and Chiara Fabbri of the University of Bologna in Italy.

For instance, they noted in an accompanying commentary, calcium signaling, a key regulator of the growth and development of neurons, was expected to be highly pleiotropic, an expectation that “has now been confirmed.”

But while some gene variants play a role in many disorders, there are almost certainly others that contribute to the “consistent diversity among disorders,” Serretti and Fabbri argued.

“Many genes and polymorphisms are expected to confer a liability to individual psychiatric diseases,” they wrote.

Nonetheless, they concluded, one implication of the study is that genetics “can contribute to prediction and prevention of psychiatric diseases, along with the identification of molecular targets for new generations of psychotropic drugs.”

But that is not likely to happen soon, according to Randy Ross, MD, of the University of Colorado School of Medicine in Aurora, Colo.

The study is a “beginning step to give us ideas that will eventually lead to new treatments,” he told MedPage Today.

In the long run, however, this study and subsequent research will change both diagnosis and treatment, Ross said, as psychiatric diseases are put on a biological footing.

The researchers found that SNPs (single-letter changes in the genetic code) in four regions were associated with all five disorders:

The statistical significance of all four surpassed the cutoff for genome-wide significance of P<5×10-8, Smoller and colleagues reported.

The calcium-channel gene CACNA1C  has been previously linked to

  • bipolar disorder,
  • schizophrenia, and
  • major depressive disorder, they wrote, as well as to
  • Timothy syndrome, a developmental disorder that can include autism.

The other calcium-channel gene has been linked to bipolar disorder in people of Han Chinese ethnicity, they added.

“Our results suggest that voltage-gated calcium signaling, and, more broadly, calcium-channel activity, could be an important biological process in psychiatric disorders,” they argued.

The region on chromosome 3 includes more than 30 genes, Smoller and colleagues noted, but previous research has linked SNPs in the area to

  • bipolar disorder,
  • schizophrenia, and
  • depression.

They cautioned that they compared models of cross-disorder effects with widely used goodness-of-fit measures, but different criteria might yield other results.

They also noted that diagnostic misclassification in the study cohort might produce “spurious evidence of genetic overlap between disorders,” although such errors would have to be widespread to affect the results.

Another limitation: the members of the study cohort were of European ancestry, so it’s not known if the findings apply to other populations.

The study was supported by the National Institute of Mental Health, as well as grants from the NIH, government grants from other countries, and private and foundation support.

The authors declared they had no conflicts.

The comment authors declared they had no conflicts.

Primary source: Lancet

Source reference:
Smoller JW, et al “Identification of risk loci with shared effects on five major psychiatric disorders: a genome-wide analysis” Lancet 2013; DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)62129-1.

Additional source: Lancet
Source reference:
Alessandro Serretti, Chiara Fabbri “Shared genetics among major psychiatric disorders” Lancet 2013; DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60223-8.

 SOURCE:

Read Full Post »

Genomics and Ethics: DNA Fragments are Products of Nature or Patentable Genes?

Curator: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

UPDATED 6/17/2013 – OPINIONS ON COURT DECISION of 6/13/2013

Experts say court’s decision on human gene patents is a win-win

Jun 16, 2013

Jun 16, 2013 (St. Louis Post-Dispatch – McClatchy-Tribune Information Services via COMTEX News Network) — The Supreme Court ruling Thursday that naturally occurring human genes cannot be patented effectively ended the monopoly that Utah-based Myriad Genetics had on breast and ovarian cancer tests.

The news was hailed as a victory by health advocates and medical researchers, who can now not only access the genes at issue — the BRCA1 and BRCA2 — but all other patented human genes without infringement. In the wake of the decision, several other testing companies, including Quest Diagnostics, announced it would perform the tests — and at far cheaper prices than Myriad’s.

The court’s unanimous ruling, however, was mixed. It said that naturally occurring DNA could not be patented, but synthetic DNA can still be, giving patent protection advocates and Myriad a victory, too. The decision also means that methods of isolating genes still qualify for patent protection.

The Post-Dispatch interviewed experts from a broad range of fields, from medicine to law, about the court’s ruling.

Here’s what they had to say about what was at stake and what the decision could mean.

Christopher Mason

Professor of physiology, biophysics and computational biomedicine, and author of a study showing that 41 percent of the human genome is covered by patents, Cornell University

I’d say this represents a great win for genetic liberty, both for patients and for doctors. The American Medical Association said it was a big win for patients, and I couldn’t agree more — especially for breast and ovarian cancer, but for all types of cancer. This is an important cancer gene and now it’s open for study to everyone.

(Myriad) didn’t just own a test or a method, they owned anyone’s DNA as soon as it was isolated. They didn’t say we patented a series of letters, they said we patent anything that remotely looks like that, which the court correctly said is not patentable.

It would have been great to have both the patents (on natural and synthetic DNA), but of the two this is the most restrictive one — 99.9 percent of testing is done on DNA not cDNA.

Plenty of companies aren’t scared anymore. This is going to open the floodgates on new research and ideas.

Dr. Julie Margenthaler

Associate professor of surgery and breast cancer specialist, Siteman Cancer Center

This ruling has important implications for physician scientists actively engaged in genetic research. We are on the brink of significant strides in our understanding of the genetic links to many diseases.

For those of us who care for cancer patients, personalized cancer care hinges on the ability to genetically examine the pathways that result in a normal cell becoming a malignant cell. Because some companies held patents to pieces of the genome involved when whole genome sequencing is performed, there was at least some concern over patent infringement. With this ruling, we can continue to move our research forward and benefit the lives of our current and future patients.

Michael Watson

Executive director, American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (plaintiffs in the case), and former professor of pediatrics at Washington University

It has enormous implications for labs and the public, certainly for breast cancer and for many other cancers. Since the case was settled (Thursday), at least four labs have put the test online. Prices are about half of Myriad’s — $3,500 down to $2,000 overnight.

It’s a win-win for everybody. It used to be when you had the tests done by Myriad, you couldn’t get that test confirmed by anyone else. Now the public can confirm the test and get second opinions, and that has a lot of value for patients. And I think it’ll open up the research.

There are two aspects of this that still remain open. Because 4,000 to 5,000 genes have patents on them, many people signed licensing agreements to use the gene. One of the questions is about the contract they signed. They will probably be able to challenge their contract now.

Nathan Lakey President and CEO, Orion Genomics

I think the ruling is positive because it removes a cloud of uncertainty as to where the Supreme Court stood on patents relating to gene sequences. I appreciate the thoughtfulness that went into the ruling. Justice Thomas adds a section that talks about what the ruling did not address that’s interesting. He emphasizes that method patents, or patents covering gene sequences that apply knowledge of those sequences, are patentable. I think this is what the justices sought to do, to not limit science and to not limit innovation and improvements in patient care. I think they do a markedly good job laying out the framework by which the business of science needs to consider the issue going forward as we all seek to lower the cost of care and improve outcomes.

We’re thrilled because our patents have been crafted primarily as method patents that involve naturally occurring gene sequences, and at the same time we add on to that a novel method that was not known and is quite valuable. We have biomarkers that we believe will be able to predict the risk of an individual getting colon cancer in the future, not unlike the Myriad test, but this is for colon cancer. We feel that our path forward is actually more clear and more positive given the clear line that the Supreme Court drew around what is and what isn’t patentable.

Janet S. Hendrickson

Patent attorney, specializing in chemical, pharmaceutical and food science companies, Senniger Powers law firm

They split it down the middle, and it seems to be, when looking at the commentary, that most people agree with that. They didn’t preclude the patenting of everything related to DNA, just natural DNA.

There are so many considerations and it’s hard to know what ramifications there are going to be, and what might be the best policy. It does mean that for companies that have these claims on natural DNA in their portfolio, they need to make sure they have the other range of claims for the cDNA (synthetic DNA). For companies that have past patents, it’s going to figure into those claims for those natural DNA products.

So it’s hard to tell whether it has broader implications for other things, that when you take them out of their natural milieu we thought were patentable.

Kevin Emerson Collins Professor, Washington University School of Law and patent law expert

This is going to mean one thing for patent lawyers and another thing for biotech companies. For patent lawyers, we now have a new source of business. The court hasn’t given us precise guidelines that say exactly when in other situations do we pass from something being a product of nature to a patentable invention. That’s a new frontier that patent lawyers are going to have to advise companies on.

For biotech companies it’s going to mean they pay patent lawyers a little more. Although the Myriad Genetics ruling deals with DNA, it would seem from the language of the opinion that the ruling should also apply to nongenetic, naturally occurring materials, but exactly how is yet to be determined.

A historical example that predates the Myriad controversy is the debate over the patentability of insulin in the early 20th century. A very famous lower court opinion held that isolated and purified human insulin was patentable so long as it became isolated insulin with impurities removed and took on new commercial value. I bet that case might well come out differently under the Myriad Genetics ruling. The insulin question is moot; that patent has expired. Similarly there a number of other therapeutics which are components that nature already makes that are isolated in a way they can be used in medicine but not in their natural state. Those are the kinds of things we’re going to have to grapple with.

Josh Newby-Harpole Founder, Theresa Harpole Foundation for Metastatic Breast Cancer in Alton

We have a foundation we started this year in honor of my mom. She was diagnosed over seven years ago with stage zero breast cancer. They did genetic testing and found out she had the BRCA gene. In 2010 she got diagnosed with metastatic breast cancer after she had a lump in her neck and it had spread to her bones. I needed to get tested at that point. I had testing done in Chicago and found out that I had the BRCA gene. As a male I’m lucky she had a son and not a daughter. My mom has been on different courses of treatment, and I monitor my health as well as I can, because I have a higher risk for certain kinds of cancer such as prostate and skin cancer and a higher than 3 percent chance of breast cancer.

The cost was probably over $2,000 to have the test done, and I paid close to $1,000 for it. We’re very excited about the Supreme Court ruling. I think a lot of people are hesitant to get the test done because of the cost. It’s exciting because it means possibilities. More people are going to be motivated to do research in labs to try to find a cure. Maybe they can come up with better treatment options for women because some of them will find out they have the gene and they don’t have evidence of disease. It’s something that is really getting a lot of attention right now, and the population is maybe not as aware about things like BRCA and metastatic breast cancer.

Yvette Liebesman Assistant professor of law, St. Louis University

It’s very good for research and in fact it’s very good for health care in the sense that already today a competitor for Myriad said they would run the same test for thousands less. Already we’re seeing a good thing happening that more women are going to be able to be tested for this gene. Now we’re talking about more women being aware of their health risks. Now a company that wants to develop a drug isn’t going to have to go through Myriad to isolate this gene in order to test drugs for breast cancer.

If Myriad won this case it would be like saying while a tree is made by nature, if I find a way to pick the leaves off it, the leaf is my patented product. Myriad did win in one sense, that there is a form of DNA not found in nature that is patentable. This is very logical. I think that like with most things, the people who are doomsayers will say it’s not going to have as great of an impact. The idea that now this opens up the ability to develop treatments is going to be huge.

___ (c)2013 the St. Louis Post-Dispatch Visit the St. Louis Post-Dispatch at
www.stltoday.com Distributed by MCT Information Services

Georgina Gustin and Blythe Bernhard

Copyright (C) 2013, St. Louis Post-Dispatch

SOURCE: Comtex

http://predictwallstreet.com/news/Story.aspx?StoryID=31159b4101f28d00

UPDATED 6/13/2013, following the new Supreme Court Decision on 6/13/2013 to include it, below.

The Supreme Court ruled unanimously Thursday that human genes cannot be patented, a decision that could shape the future of medical and genetic research and have profound effects on pharmaceuticals and agriculture.The ruling was a split decision for Myriad Genetics Inc., which holds patents on genes that have been linked to breast and ovarian cancer.

Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for the court, said that merely isolating those specific genes — called BRCA1 and BRCA2 — was not worthy of a patent.

“Myriad found the location of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, but that discovery, by itself, does not render the BRCA genes . . . patent eligible,” Thomas wrote.On the other hand, Thomas wrote, Myriad’s creation of a synthetic form of DNA — called cDNA — based on its discovery does deserve patent protection.“The lab technician creates something new when cDNA is made,” Thomas wrote.Responding to the decision, Myriad focused on the favorable cDNA ruling. “We believe the court appropriately upheld our claims on cDNA, and underscored the patent eligibility of our method claims, ensuring strong intellectual property protection for our BRACAnalysis test moving forward,” said Peter D. Meldrum, company president and chief executive. “More than 250,000 patients rely upon our BRACAnalysis test annually, and we remain focused on saving and improving peoples’ lives and lowering overall health-care costs.”DNA research is a vital component of personalized medicine. The challenge to Myriad’s patents came from scientists and doctors who said that allowing patents on genes inflated the cost of testing and hindered research.

The American Civil Liberties Union praised the high court’s ruling as a victory. “Today, the court struck down a major barrier to patient care and medical innovation,” said Sandra Park of the ACLU, which represented the groups that brought the challenge. “Because of this ruling, patients will have greater access to genetic testing, and scientists can engage in research on these genes without fear of being sued.”

The test that Myriad offers for determining whether a woman contains the genetic mutation that heightens her chance of cancer has received much attention lately after actress Angelina Jolie wrote about it in a letter to the editor to the New York Times. In the letter, Jolie revealed that she had a double mastectomy because the test showed she carried the defective gene.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/supreme-court-rules-human-genes-may-not-be-patented/2013/06/13/9e5c55d2-d43d-11e2-a73e-826d299ff459_story.html?hpid=z1

[bold and green added by the Curator]

START QUOTE

1 (Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2012

Syllabus

NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued.The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

Syllabus

ASSOCIATION FOR MOLECULAR PATHOLOGY ET AL.

v. MYRIAD GENETICS, INC., ET AL.

CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

No. 12–398. Argued April 15, 2013—Decided June 13, 2013

Each human gene is encoded as deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), which takes the shape of a “double helix.” Each “cross-bar” in that helix consists of two chemically joined nucleotides. Sequences of DNA nucleotides contain the information necessary to create strings of amino acids used to build proteins in the body. The nucleotides that code for amino acids are “exons,” and those that do not are “introns.” Scientists can extract DNA from cells to isolate specific segments for study. They can also synthetically create exons-only strands of nucleotides known as composite DNA (cDNA). cDNA contains only the exons that occur in DNA, omitting the intervening introns. Respondent Myriad Genetics, Inc. (Myriad), obtained several patents after discovering the precise location and sequence of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, mutations of which can dramatically increase the risk of breast and ovarian cancer. This knowledge allowed Myriad to determine the genes’ typical nucleotide sequence, which, in turn, enabled it to develop medical tests useful for detecting mutations in these genes in a particular patient to assess the patient’s cancer risk. If valid, Myriad’s patents would give it the exclusiveright to isolate an individual’s BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, and would give Myriad the exclusive right to synthetically create BRCA cDNA. Petitioners filed suit, seeking a declaration that Myriad’s patents areinvalid under 35 U. S. C. §101. As relevant here, the District Court granted summary judgment to petitioners, concluding that Myriad’s claims were invalid because they covered products of nature. The Federal Circuit initially reversed, but on remand in light of Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., 566 U. S. ___, the Circuit found both isolated DNA and cDNA patent eligible. 2 ASSOCIATION FOR MOLECULAR PATHOLOGY v. MYRIAD GENETICS, INC. Syllabus

Held: A naturally occurring DNA segment is a product of nature and not patent eligible merely because it has been isolated, but cDNA is patent eligible because it is not naturally occurring. Pp. 10–18. 

(a) The Patent Act permits patents to be issued to “[w]hoever invents or discovers any new and useful . . . composition of matter,” §101, but “laws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas”“ ‘are basic tools of scientific and technological work’ ” that lie beyond the domain of patent protection, Mayo, supra, at ___. The rule against patents on naturally occurring things has limits, however. Patent protection strikes a delicate balance between creating “incentives that lead to creation, invention, and discovery” and “imped[ing] the flow of information that might permit, indeed spur, invention.” Id., at ___. This standard is used to determine whether Myriad’s patents claim a “new and useful . . . composition of matter,” §101, or claim naturally occurring phenomena. Pp. 10–11. 

(b) Myriad’s DNA claim falls within the law of nature exception.Myriad’s principal contribution was uncovering the precise location and genetic sequence of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 447 U. S. 303, is central to the patent-eligibility inquiry whether such action was new “with markedly different characteristics from any found in nature,” id., at 310. Myriad did not create or alter either the genetic information encoded in the BCRA1 and BCRA2 genes or the genetic structure of the DNA. It found an important and useful gene, but ground breaking, innovative, or even brilliant discovery does not by itself satisfy the §101 inquiry. See Funk Brothers Seed Co. v. Kalo Inoculant Co., 333 U. S. 127. Finding the location of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes does not render the genes patent eligible “new . . . composition[s] of matter,” §101. Myriad’s patent descriptions highlight the problem with its claims: They detail the extensive process of discovery, but extensive effort alone isinsufficient to satisfy §101’s demands. Myriad’s claims are not saved by the fact that isolating DNA from the human genome severs the chemical bonds that bind gene molecules together. The claims are not expressed in terms of chemical composition, nor do they rely on the chemical changes resulting from the isolation of a particular DNA section. Instead, they focus on the genetic information encoded in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. Finally, Myriad argues that the Patent and Trademark Office’s past practice of awarding gene patents is entitled to deference, citing J. E. M. Ag Supply, Inc. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred Int’l, Inc., 534 U. S. 124, a case where Congress had endorsed a PTO practice in subsequent legislation. There has been no such endorsement here, and the United States argued in the Federal Circuit and in this Court that isolated DNA was not patent eligible under §101. Pp. 12–16. 

3 Cite as: 569 U. S. ____ (2013)

Syllabus

(c) cDNA is not a “product of nature,” so it is patent eligible under§101. cDNA does not present the same obstacles to patentability as naturally occurring, isolated DNA segments. Its creation results in an exons-only molecule, which is not naturally occurring. Its order of the exons may be dictated by nature, but the lab technician unquestionably creates something new when introns are removed from a DNA sequence to make cDNA. Pp. 16–17.

(d) This case, it is important to note, does not involve method claims, patents on new applications of knowledge about the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, or the patentability of DNA in which the order of the naturally occurring nucleotides has been altered. Pp. 17–18. 

689 F. 3d 1303, affirmed in part and reversed in part. 

THOMAS, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS,  C. J., and KENNEDY, GINSBURG, BREYER, ALITO, SOTOMAYOR, and KAGAN, JJ., joined, and in which SCALIA, J., joined in part. SCALIA, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment.

1 Cite as: 569 U. S. ____ (2013) Opinion of SCALIA, J.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

No. 12–398

ASSOCIATION FOR MOLECULAR PATHOLOGY, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. MYRIAD GENETICS, INC., ET AL.

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

[June 13, 2013]

JUSTICE SCALIA, concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. 

I join the judgment of the Court, and all of its opinion except Part I–A and some portions of the rest of the opinion going into fine details of molecular biology. I am un-able to affirm those details on my own knowledge or even my own belief. It suffices for me to affirm, having studied the opinions below and the expert briefs presented here, that the portion of DNA isolated from its natural state sought to be patented is identical to that portion of the DNA in its natural state; and that complementary DNA (cDNA) is a synthetic creation not normally present in nature.

END QUOTE

http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2013/06/the-humble-justice-scalia.html

 

Evolution of the case ASSOCIATION FOR MOLECULAR PATHOLOGY ET AL. v. MYRIAD GENETICS, INC., ET AL. priot to 6/13/2013 Supreme Court decision

Curator: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

In an amicus brief, the Broad Institute‘s Eric Lander shares his personal view of the ongoing gene patenting case between Myriad Genetics and the American Civil Liberties Union, saying that isolated DNA fragments are products of Nature.

The central issue of the case revolves around Myriad’s patents on the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. In a mixed ruling, the federal appeals court found that while some of the company’s methods patents may not be patentable, its BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene patents, as they concern isolated DNA fragments, are patentable items as human intervention is needed to isolate DNA.

Lander argues that that is not true, though, as the Boston Globe points out, his brief was not filed in support of either side. Isolated DNA, he says, happens all the time in nature. “It is well-accepted in the scientific community that

(a) chromosomes are constantly being broken into DNA fragments by natural biological processes that break the covalent bonds within DNA chains;

(b) these DNA fragments can be routinely found in the human body … and

(c) these fragments cover the entire human genome and, in particular, include many of the DNA fragments claimed by Myriad’s patents,” the brief says.

The US Supreme Court announced in December that it will re-hear the Myriad gene patenting case.

 SOURCE:

Eric Lander weighs in on gene patenting case

By Carolyn Y. Johnson

 |  GLOBE STAFF

FEBRUARY 26, 2013

Late last year, the nation’s highest court said it would consider a legal challenge to patents that biotechnology company Myriad Genetics holds on breast cancer genes. Now, Eric Lander, head of the Broad Institute in Cambridge, has filed an amicus brief that he says reflects his personal opinion. Utah-based Myriad, Lander argues, has patented products of nature, and its patents are an “insurmountable barrier” to studying DNA, with serious repercussions for medical progress.
 
In the Supreme Court of the United States – On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
The Association for Molecular Pathology, et al., v. Mariad Genetics, Inc, et al.,
Brief for Amicus Curiae Eric S. Lander in support of neither party
 
SCIENTIFIC CITATIONS
Eric S. Lander et al., Initial Sequencing and Analysis of the Human Genome, 409 Nature 860 (2001)
Eric S. Lander, Initial Impact of the Sequencing of the Human Genome, 470 Nature 187 (2011)
ARGUMENT
1. THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT INCORRECTLY ASSUMED, WITHOUT CITING SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE, THAT ISOLATED DNA FRAGMENTS OF THE HUMAN GENOME DO NOT OCCUR IN NATURE, WHEN IT IS WELL-ACCEPTED IN THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY THAT THEY DO
2. MYRIAD’S COMPOSITION-OF-MATTER CLAIMS ON ISOLATED FRAGMENTS OF THE GENOMIC DNA ARE INCONSISTENT WITH THIS COURT’S SECTION 101 JURISPRUDENCE BECAUSE THEY (1) ARE DIRECTED TO PREEXISTING PRODUCTS OF NATURE (2) EXCLUDE OTHERS FROM OBSERVING, CHARACTERIZING OR ANALYZING THESE PRODUCTS OF NATURE BY ANY MEANS WHATSOEVER; AND (3) CREATE AN INSURMOUNTABLE BARRIER TO SCIENTIFIC PROGRESS AND TECHNOLOGICAL INNOVATION CONCERNING THESE PRODUCTS OF NATURE
3. A NARROWLY CRAFTED DECISION BY THIS COURT WOULD NOT UNDERMINE THE BIOTECHNOLOGY INDUSTRY AND INSTEAD WOULD FOSTER INNOVATION
CONCLUSION
It is well-accepted in the scientific community that isolated DNA fragments of the human genome – including isolated DNA fragments of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes – are found routinely in th human body and are thus patent-ineligible products of Nature. The biotechnology industry would not be substantially affected by a narrowly crafted decision here holding that
1) fragments of human genome DNA are patent-ineligible where the claimed molecules themselves are routinely found in Nature and where the process for purification or synthesis of such molecules iS routine and
(2) cDNAs are patent-eligible.

Susan McBee and Bryan Jones Guest

Posted Thu, February 7th, 2013 10:16 am

The Supreme Court should be mindful of naturally derived products other than nucleic acids when deciding Myriad

The following contribution to our gene patenting symposium come from Susan McBee and Bryan Jones. Ms. McBee is the Chair of the Life Sciences Intellectual Property Team for Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell, and Berkowitz, P.C. Bryan Jones is a registered patent attorney in the Washington D.C. office of Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell, and Berkowitz, P.C.  

In April, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad, ostensibly on the question whether so-called “gene patents” satisfy 35 U.S.C. § 101.  However, Myriad is about more than whether “genes” can be patented.  It is about what types of activities justify patent protection.  Does one need to create something that is unlike anything else that has ever existed in order to justify a patent?  Or is it enough to discover something that was previously unknown, remove it from its natural environment, and show that it has a practical application?

This is a critical question to the biotechnology industry, because many biotechnological products are not novel chemical structures, but naturally occurring products.  Between 1981 and 2006, approximately forty percent of all pharmaceuticals approved for use by the FDA were a biologic, natural product, or derived from a natural product.  Moreover, for start-up biotechnology companies, patents covering such products are incredibly important, “as they are often the most crucial asset they own in a sector that is extremely research-intensive and with low imitation costs.” Strong and enforceable patents to these core products therefore are vitally important to the healthy development of the biotechnology industry.

Before the Myriad case, the Court has not had an opportunity to consider the patentability of such products.  Therefore, this case has the potential to have an enormous impact on the viability of the business model in this industry.

In Myriad, Judge Lourie and Judge Moore both found “isolated” nucleic acids to be patentable, but for different reasons.  Judge Lourie was convinced that isolated nucleic acids are patentable because isolation “breaks covalent bonds” relative to the longer native nucleic acid, thereby resulting in a new chemical entity.  Judge Moore reasoned that, if analyzed on a blank slate, she would require the product to have a “substantial new utility” relative to its natural function in order to satisfy 35 U.S.C. § 101.  While we agree that the generation of a novel chemical entity or demonstration of a new utility would be sufficient to satisfy 35 U.S.C. § 101, we do not believe these to be necessary requirements.

Consider, for example, Taq polymerase.  The inclusion of Taq into a process called polymerase chain reaction (PCR) has often been credited as being the single most important technological advance to the modern biotechnology industry.  PCR uses repeated cycles of increasing and decreasing temperatures in the presence of a polymerase to amplify a target nucleic acid.  In the original iteration of PCR, new polymerase enzyme had to be added to the reaction mixture after each heat cycle, because the high temperature permanently deactivated the enzyme.  Taq, however, is heat stable and thus does not lose activity when subjected to high temperatures.  Because of this stability, Taq only needs to be added to a PCR reaction mixture once, thus greatly reducing the costs and the time of performing the process, and permitting easy automation.  Clearly, then, the identification and characterization of this enzyme is a significant technological advance, from which the public obtains a significant benefit.  Yet the properties of Taq that make it so attractive for PCR are a consequence of its structure and function in the natural world.  Taq is naturally produced by Thermus aquaticus, a bacterium that is naturally found in hot springs.  Therefore, in nature, just like in PCR, Taq functions as a thermostable enzyme that catalyzes the amplification of a nucleic acid.  Why should this render Taq unpatentable?

The Constitution does not require a claimed compound to have a formally “new” chemical structure or new function to justify a patent.  Article I, section 8 of the Constitution authorizes patents “[t]o promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts . . . .”  As explained by the Court:

Congress may not authorize the issuance of patents whose effects are to remove existent knowledge from the public domain, or to restrict free access to materials already available.  Innovation, advancement, and things which add to the sum of useful knowledge are inherent requisites in a patent system which by constitutional command must ‘promote the Progress of useful Arts.’  This is the standard expressed in the Constitution and it may not be ignored.

Thus, the Constitution only limits patents that “remove existent knowledge from the public domain” or “restrict free access to materials already available.”  Assuming that Taq was not previously known, a claim to it in isolated form simply cannot “remove existent knowledge from the public domain.”  Because Taq naturally exists only in the context of a living organism, claiming it in “isolated” form cannot “restrict free access to” its source.  Thus, constitutional limits cannot justify a prohibition on patents covering isolated naturally occurring products.

Nor does 35 U.S.C. § 101 clearly prohibit such patents.  The statute specifically encompasses “discoveries,” so long as those discoveries relate to processes, compositions of matter, or articles of manufacture that are “new” and “useful.”  In most cases, naturally occurring products are found in very minute quantities in complex association with other molecules inside living organisms.  The act of isolating the natural product removes them from this context, thereby inevitably resulting in a composition that is materially different than anything that exists in nature.  An “isolated” natural product therefore is “new” compared to the same product in its natural state.  Its discovery thus could justify a claim under 35 U.S.C. § 101.

Finally, Supreme Court precedent does not clearly prohibit patenting of such claims.  Under the closest Supreme Court precedent, a patent that is limited to a “non-naturally occurring article of manufacture or composition of matter” satisfies 35 U.S.C. § 101.  Although it is often convenient to describe naturally occurring compounds in terms of chemical structure or nucleotide or amino acid sequence, they rarely if ever exist in nature as isolated compositions.  Rather, they are found in complex associations with other compositions, usually within living organisms.  The removal of these products from their natural context sometimes results in distinct chemical entities, such as the isolated nucleic acids in Myriad.  Other times, the result is a highly purified form of the compound, such as isolated adrenaline or purified vitamin B12.  In each case, however, the intervention of man is required to produce the “isolated” composition.  Claims directed to “isolated” natural compounds thus are limited to purely artificial, non-naturally occurring compositions of matter.  This should make them patentable, irrespective of whether they have a novel chemical structure or new utility in isolated form.

It is our sincere hope that the Court will not only find isolated nucleic acids to be patentable, but that it will do so under a rationale which allows for other naturally derived products to similarly be patentable.  In as much as a possible test can be garnered, our recommendation is to find that a naturally derived product satisfies 35 U.S.C. § 101 as long as it is claimed in a purely man-made form (and thus is “new”), and the form in which it is claimed has a practical utility disclosed in the Specification (and thus is “useful”).  This test closely aligns with the plain language of 35 U.S.C. § 101.  Challenges to the eligibility of such claims could then focus on two clear issues: (1) whether the claim encompasses the product in its natural state; and (2) whether the claim is reasonably commensurate in scope with the disclosed utility (i.e., is the claim narrowly tailored to products that possess the disclosed utility?).  This allows overly broad claims to be invalidated without resorting to a categorical ban on a broad class of subject matter.  Moreover, it would not require courts to answer the philosophical question of whether something has enough of a structural or functional change to justify a patent.

Posted in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad GeneticsFeaturedGene Patenting Symposium

Recommended Citation: Susan McBee and Bryan Jones, The Supreme Court should be mindful of naturally derived products other than nucleic acids when deciding Myriad, SCOTUSblog (Feb. 7, 2013, 10:16 AM), http://www.scotusblog.com/2013/02/the-supreme-court-should-be-mindful-of-naturally-derived-products-other-than-nucleic-acids-when-deciding-myriad/

– See more at: http://www.scotusblog.com/?p=159001#sthash.UGzQgi2x.dpuf

Appeals Court Affirms Isolated DNA Patents in Myriad Case

August 16, 2012

NEW YORK (GenomeWeb News) – A federal appeals court today has for a second time reversed a lower district court’s decision that isolated genes are not patentable, but it also partly affirmed the District Court’s decision that certain methods patents “comparing” or “analyzing” gene sequences may not be patentable.

The Supreme Court recently asked the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to reconsider its earlier decision in the case, The Association for Molecular Pathology v. the US Patent and Trademark Office and Myriad Genetics, in light of its ruling in another lawsuit, called Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories.

AMP v USPTO focuses on the patentability of Myriad Genetics’ claims on isolated gene sequences and diagnostic methods related to its BRACAnalysis test. In Mayo v Prometheus, the Supreme Court recently invalidated patents held by diagnostics firm Prometheus because they merely described laws of nature, and did not apply those laws of nature in a markedly different manner as to warrant a patent.

Despite the Supreme Court’s ruling in Mayo, the CAFC in a 2-1 decision maintained that although isolated gene sequences may be derived from naturally occurring substances, their isolation requires human intervention in order to make them useful in medical care and so are deserving of patent protection.

“We are very pleased with the favorable decision the Court rendered today which again confirmed that isolated DNA is patentable,” Myriad Genetics President and CEO Peter Meldrum said in a statement. “Importantly, the court agreed with Myriad that isolated DNA is a new chemical matter with important utilities which can only exist as the product of human ingenuity.”

The decision was met with disappointment by those opposing gene patenting.

“It is extremely disappointing that despite the Supreme Court’s ruling, the appeals court has failed to fully re-consider the facts of this case,” Chris Hansen, a staff attorney with the ACLU Speech, Privacy and Technology Project, said in a statement.

The case against Myriad was filed in 2009 by the Public Patent Foundation, American Civil Liberties Union, AMP, and others who claim that patents cannot cover natural phenomena and that Myriad’s patents, and others like them, will hinder genetics research and keep some people from accessing tests and second opinions.

“This ruling prevents doctors and scientists from exchanging their ideas and research freely,” Hansen added the ACLU statement today. “Human DNA is a natural entity like air or water. It does not belong to any one company.”

Myriad said again today what it has argued all along, that gene patents have not thwarted research, that the cost of its BRACAnalysis test is not prohibitive and is covered through most insurance for “appropriate” patients, and that second opinion testing is available in many US labs.

“Certainly, you could hear a collective sigh of relief from the biotech industry, as of this decision,” Jennifer Camacho, an attorney and shareholder with law firm Greenberg Traurig, told GenomeWeb Daily News today.

“Isolated DNA patents remain intact. We still have patent eligibility for isolated DNA,” Camacho said, explaining that the court’s decision to uphold the patentability of isolated DNA may be seen by the biotech industry as more important than its reading of the reach of the Prometheus decision.

“They did actually take [the Prometheus decision] into consideration,” Camacho said, adding that it did not change the judges’ analysis.

“This puts a narrow interpretation of Prometheus in the books, as being limited to the ‘laws of nature’ exclusion, she added.

Camacho told GWDN that she was struck by how similar today’s CAFC ruling was to the original. She pointed out that part of one judge’s opinion, which argued that whether some patents should or should not be awarded are policy questions that are best left to Congress, was the same language as in the first opinion.

For Myriad, the ruling provided mixed results, Goldman Sachs Investment Research analyst Isaac Ro said in a note today.

On the positive side for Myriad, the patent eligibility of its BRCA1 and BRCA2-based tests was upheld again based on its isolated DNA claims and screening method claims. But a potential negative is that the CAFC also upheld the District Court’s opinion that Myriad’s method claims for comparing DNA sequences are not eligible.

“The outcome is modestly disappointing,” Ro stated, adding that the critical question now is whether or not the Supreme Court will agree to hear the case next year.

US Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Myriad Patent Case Again

NEW YORK (GenomeWeb News) – The US Supreme Court decided on Friday to once again hear the American Civil Liberty Union’s case against Myriad Genetics challenging the firm’s patent rights related to BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes.

The decision by the court to hear the case — originally filed by ACLU, the Public Patent Foundation, the Association for Molecular Pathology and others in 2009 — comes a little more than three months after a federal appeals courtissued a mixed ruling in which it found that isolated genes are patentable, but that certain methods patents that compare or analyze gene sequences may not be.

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its decision in August after the Supreme Court asked it in March to reconsider a decision rendered by the appeals court in 2011 in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in another case, Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories. In that case, the Supreme Courtinvalidated patents held by Prometheus, saying the patents merely described laws of nature but did not apply those laws of nature in a markedly different manner as to warrant a patent.

The appeals court originally ruled in July 2011 that Myriad’s patents covering isolated DNA are patentable under Section 101 of the US Patent Act, reversing a decision by the Federal District Court for the Southern District of New York that isolated DNA is not much different from gene sequences found in nature and therefore is not patentable.

This past September, ACLU and the Public Patent Foundation asked the Supreme Court to once again take up the issue of whether Myriad’s claims on genes that predict the risk of ovarian and breast cancer can be patented. ACLU and the foundation contend that Myriad’s BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene patents should be invalidated because the genes are products of nature and allowing Myriad patent protection stifles scientific research and patient access to medical care.

“Myriad did not invent human genes, and has no right to claim ownership of them just because they removed them from the body,” Daniel Ravicher, executive director of PUBPAT, said in a statement on Friday. “The government does not have the right to give a corporation the exclusive power to control what we know about our own genetic makeup.”

Myriad President and CEO Peter Meldrum said in a statement, however, that patent protection is necessary to drive technological innovation.

“Two previous decisions by the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals confirmed the patentability of our groundbreaking diagnostic test that has helped close to 1 million people learn about their hereditary cancer risk,” he said. “Myriad devoted more than 17 years and $500 million to develop its BRACAnalysis test. The discovery and development of pioneering diagnostics and therapeutics require a huge investment and our US patent system is the engine that drives this innovation.

“This case has great importance for the hundreds of millions of patients whose lives are saved and enhanced by the life science industry’s products,” he said.

Read Full Post »

Personalized Cardiovascular Genetic Medicine at Partners HealthCare and Harvard Medical School

Curator: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

UPDATED on 5/4/2015

Goes to Clinic @MGH: Clinically validated versions of Exome Sequencing and Analysis using Broad-developed methods like Hybrid Capture, the Genome Analysis Toolkit (GATK), and MuTect

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2015/05/04/goes-to-clinic-mgh-clinically-validated-versions-of-exome-sequencing-and-analysis-using-broad-developed-methods-like-hybrid-capture-the-genome-analysis-toolkit-gatk-and-mutect/

Center for Personalized Genetic Medicine, Partners HealthCare and Harvard Medical School

The Partners HealthCare Center for Personalized Genetic Medicine offers technologies and technical support for the research activities of Partners investigators. Our objective is to help investigators advance their research programs and to provide the highest quality service, technical expertise, and leading technologies for genomics research. Our goal is to broaden the access to these technologies while offering the best customer service in the most cost conscious and time efficient manner possible.

We are organized into four principal service areas:

  • sequence analysis,
  • genotyping,
  • expression analysis, and
  • bioprocessing/sample management

Our platforms include next generation sequencing with Illumina HiSeq2000 and GA ii analyzers as well as Sanger sequencing using ABI 3730 XL sequence analyzers. Targeted custom genotyping is offered using Sequenom and Illumina GoldenGate panels as well as GWAS scale projects using Illumina Infinium and DNA methylation analysis using Illumina bead arrays. Expression analysis is available with capabilities for processing total RNA on either Affymetrix or Illumina arrays.

Through services from our BioSample Services Facility (BSF) and Partners Biorepository for Medical Discovery (PBMD) teams we provide a research platform for handling samples in a standardized manner to provide consistency from sample to sample. The BSF is able to assist investigators to configure projects utilizing your own samples or coupled with the PCPGM-PBMD we are able to support the integration of cohorts of samples selected from the PBMD into analysis on our genomics platforms.

DNA Sequencing

The DNA Sequencing Group at the Partners HealthCare Center for Personalized Genetic Medicine has a strong history of producing high quality, dependable, and informative results for collaborators and clients. The DNA Sequencing Group participated in the Human Genome Project, building the STS-Based BAC map for Human Chromosome 12, and providing Chromosome 12 tiling path clones to the Baylor Human Genome Sequencing Center for sequencing.

The group sequenced 113 BACs for the Mouse Genome Project, contributing 24 megabases of finished mouse sequences to the published Mouse Genome, as well as providing draft sequences for unique strains of several bacterial genomes, including Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Vibrio cholerae. More recently, the group participated in identifying mutations linked to numerous diseases, either in collaborations or by providing client laboratories with full service resequencing and analysis.

Services by Project Goals

Mutation Identification via Resequencing

This facility provides full-service resequencing of regions of interest in one or more genomic DNAs, including the following:

  • Discussion of the scope of the project and a cost quote
  • Identification of genes in the region of interest as needed, with the Investigator
  • Primer design using our automated system, to amplify desired regions
  • Primer ordering
  • QC of the primers on DNA standards, if required
  • PCR amplification of DNA provided by Investigator
  • PCR clean-up
  • Sequencing reactions
  • Sequencing reaction clean-up
  • Sequence application to the ABI 3730 XL Analyzer
  • Chromatograms are made available to Investigator over web (GIGPAD)
  • Data assembly and analysis using Phred Phrap and PolyPhred
  • One round of repeats and redesign if necessary
  • Report of variations found throughout sequence
  • Trouble shooting for 100% coverage if desired
Research Services
  • Fee-for-service sequencing
  • Fragment analysis / genotyping (Microsatellite Instability)
Technology Development
  • New technology testing and development
  • Collaborative Protocol development
  • Beta-test site for instrumentation and software
Clinical Diagnosis
  • Diagnostic test development
  • Sequencing for clinical diagnostics group
Genomic Sequencing Projects
  • Human
  • Rodent
  • Bacteria

http://pcpgm.partners.org/research-services/sequencing

Advancing Translational Genomics through Personalized Medicine Projects

The mission of the Partners HealthCare Center for Personalized Genetic Medicine (PCPGM) is to utilize genetics and genomics to promote and implement personalized medicine in caring for patients throughout the Partners HealthCare system and in health care nationally and globally.

The Personalized Medicine Project program was developed to support the clinical research efforts of junior Partners HealthCare investigators for translational genetics and genomic projects to advance personalized medicine.  The goal of this program is to identify biological markers that can be used as potential predictive tests.  This will be accomplished by:

  • Leveraging the Partners HealthCare Research Patient Data Registry (RPDR) and the Partners Biorepository for Medical Discovery (PBMD), centralized locations where Partners HealthCare patient data and/or samples are stored.
  • Identifying novel biological markers or new uses for existing markers.
  • Focusing on tests that could:
    • improve diagnostic sensitivity or specificity;
    • further stratify patient groups with a given diagnosis;
    • predict improved clinical outcomes; or
    • assist with selection of therapies or methods to manage disease.

http://pcpgm.partners.org/biorepository/pmprojectsrfp

Harvard Medical School Genetics Training Program

The Harvard Medical School (HMS) Genetics Training Program is one of the oldest and largest programs in the country. It was founded by Drs. John Littlefield at the Massachusetts General Hospital and Park Gerald at Children’s Hospital Boston in the early 1970’s. The program has trained scientists and clinicians who have become leaders in academic genetics, and has supported investigators who have made major contributions to the clinical practice of genetics and genetics research.

The HMS Genetics Training Program is accredited by the ABMG in all areas of training – Clinical Genetics, Biochemical Genetics, Cytogenetics, and Molecular Genetics. This provides an opportunity for our trainees to become active candidates for board certification in a discipline(s) of medical genetics in addition to receiving laboratory training. The training laboratories and clinics of the program are centered at HMS and its affiliated institutions including Brigham and Women’s Hospital (BWH), the HMS Department of Genetics, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC), Children’s Hospital Boston (CHB), Dana Farber Cancer Institute (DFCI), and Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH). The HMS Genetics Training Program provides trainees the opportunity to take advantage of the extraordinarily rich academic environment offered at HMS and its affiliated institutions as well as the greater Boston scientific community.

Cardiovascular Research Center @MGH

The Cardiovascular Research Center was founded in 1990, and occupies over 30,000 sq. ft. of laboratory space in both the Charlestown Navy Yard and the Richard B. Simches Research Building. Dr. Mark Fishman, now president of the Novartis Institutes for Biomedical Research, directed the Center from 1990 until 2002. From 2002-2005, Dr. Kenneth Bloch served as Interim Director and then in June 2005, the Massachusetts General Hospital welcomed Dr. Kenneth Chien as the new scientific director of the Cardiovascular Research Center. Prior to his MGH appointments, Dr. Chien directed the Institute for Molecular Medicine at the University of California at San Diego. An internationally recognized biologist specializing in cardiovascular science, he is a true pioneer in developing new therapeutic strategies to prevent the onset and progression of heart failure. Dr. Chien served as director until 2012.

Cardiovascular Research Center investigators have made many groundbreaking discoveries. Among these include:

• first identification of progenitor cells in the heart
• cloning of the first vertebrate cell death genes
• knocking out the genes that produce nitric oxide (NO), showing the importance of this molecule to atherosclerosis and stroke
• clinical use of NO to treat patients with pulmonary hypertension
• development of gene and cell transfer approaches to treat heart failure
• performance of the first large-scale genetic screen in a vertebrate (the zebrafish)
• identification of genes critical to cardiac pacemaking, rhythm, contractile function, and normal heart patterning
• discovery of a new methylase gene responsible for altering DNA structure during an individual’s lifetime

The Cardiovascular Research Center has taken great pride in the training of scientists with MDs and/or PhDs, as well as graduate students from a variety of Boston area institutions.

The Cardiovascular Research Center has two locations, one in the Charlestown Navy Yard and the other on the main campus’s Charles River Plaza complex in the Richard Simches Research Center.

Both the Simches and Navy Yard sites offer state of the art facilities, including tissue culture rooms, warm and cold rooms, histology rooms, autoclave facilities, hot labs, scope rooms and conference rooms. The Navy Yard lab has a topnotch zebrafish facility that is utilized by many scientists both inside and outside the Center, and a transgenic mouse core for both knock-ins and knock-outs. The Navy Yard facilities also contain echocardiogram equipment, specialized microscopes equipped with video capability for making movies, as well as a confocal microscope available to the Center researchers. The Simches lab houses the CVRC Stem Cell Biology + Therapy program, including a dedicated facility for human ES cell based technology, run by Dr. Chad Cowan, and future plans for high throughput screening facility to allow chemical screening in ESX cell based systems. Other cores available to researchers include a Cell Sorting and Flow Cytometry lab and a DNA sequencing core.

The Cardiology Laboratory for Integrative Physiology & Imaging lab is dedicated to large animal studies. An in house interventional cardiologist specializing in large animals performs the surgeries. In addition there are technicians that assist in the daily operations of the lab and can assist in experiment design and project implementation. This lab specializes in large animal imaging, CAT scans and catheter base manipulations. There is also an MRI imaging facility housed in the lab.

http://www2.massgeneral.org/cvrc/about.html

Genomics and Cardiovascular Medicine @MGH

Translational Medicine: Genomics and Proteomics @MGH

The goal of the Translational Medicine Program is to harness the rich clinical cardiovascular population at the Massachusetts General Hospital to identify and validate novel genomic determinants of cardiovascular disease. Our goal is not to capture the entire cohort of cardiovascular patients presenting to Massachusetts General Hospital, but rather to focus our efforts on extremely well-phenotyped human models that are unique to cardiovascular disease. Of particular interest are “perturbational” studies in humans (e.g., cardiac exercise testing) that elicit robust phenotypes in affected individuals to serve as the springboard for analyses that span from genomics to proteomics and biochemical profiling. The Translational Medicine Program will involve a multidisciplinary group of investigators who contribute expertise in cardiovascular basic science, clinical cardiology, genetic/genomic epidemiology, bioinformatics, imaging, pathology, as well as clinical chemistry and mass spectrometry. While the Program in Translational Medicine will be physically located at the Massachusetts General Hospital Main Campus, the effort will leverage ongoing interdisciplinary collaborations with investigators at the Framingham Heart Study, the Broad Institute of M.I.T., Harvard University, and Harvard Medical School. Our goals are to:• Identify specific unmet needs in cardiovascular biomarker and pathway discovery (e.g., genomic markers of subclinical premature coronary artery disease, serum biomarkers of myocardial ischemia)• Match cutting-edge technologies with our unique patient cohorts for “first in man” studies• Establish the infrastructure necessary to phenotype patients with the targeted condition (from plasma samples, RNA, DNA, imaging, etc.) and enroll sufficiently sized cohort(s) with the requisite power to validate novel biomarkers.• Establish scientifically high priority research projects to target for independent funding.• Ultimately, develop novel therapeutic interventions.While efforts in translational investigation are already underway, this program will identify synergies between ongoing studies and catalyze new opportunities. Several of the ongoing projects that are anticipated to serve as cornerstones of this effort include:Proteomics and Metabolomics Studies (PI: Gerszten , Wang)
Recent advances in proteomic and metabolic profiling technologies have enhanced the feasibility of high throughput patient screening for the diagnosis of disease states. Small biochemicals and proteins are the end result of the entire chain of regulatory changes that occur in response to physiological stressors, disease processes, or drug therapy. In addition to serving as biomarkers, both circulating metabolites and proteins participate as regulatory signals, such as in the control of blood pressure. Our ongoing studies have helped pioneer the application of novel mass spectrometry and liquid chromatography techniques to plasma analysis. In parallel with the profiling efforts, we have developed statistical software for functional pathway trend analysis and used it to demonstrate significant coordinate changes in specific pathways. Such analysis allows us to gain insight into the functionally relevant cellular mechanisms contributing to disease pathways and increases the likelihood that prospective biomarkers will be validated in other patient cohorts. Support for this effort would be synergistic with ongoing funding, including the recent appointment and support for Dr. Gerszten to lead a metabolomics initiative at the Broad Institute.Cardiovascular Genetics and Genomics Studies (PIs: KathiresanNewton-Cheh,Wang, and O’Donnell)
Through the Human Genome Project and the International Haplotype Map project, researchers now have available the complete human genome sequence, a nearly complete set of common single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), and a map of the patterns of correlation (“linkage disequilibrium”) among SNPs. Research on a large-scale is now possible to define associations of common, complex human cardiovascular diseases —such as myocardial infarction and sudden cardiac death—with genetic variants using candidate gene and genome-wide association studies, gene sequencing, and family-based linkage studies. Specific diseases and traits being studied by CVRC researchers include early-onset myocardial infarction, sudden cardiac death, blood lipids, blood pressure, electrocardiographic QT interval and blood hemostatic factor levels. These studies draw clinical material from the Massachusetts General Hospital and from collaborations with population-based epidemiologic cohorts such as the Framingham Heart Study. Like the metabolomics/proteomics work, these efforts build on the technologic and scientific expertise at the Broad Institute. Specifically, CVRC researchers leverage the Broad Institute’s expertise in large-scale genotyping, genomics, and statistical genetics. The collaboration between the Massachusetts General Hospital, the Framingham Heart Study, and the Broad Institute brings together resources that are unique to each institution to identify genes related to complex cardiovascular traits and to ultimately impact human health.Chemical Biology Program (PIs: Peterson and Shaw) Dr. Peterson’s group has championed the zebrafish as a tool for drug discovery. The zebrafish has become a widely used model organism because of its fecundity, its morphological and physiological similarity to mammals, the existence of many genomic tools and the ease with which large, phenotype-based screens can be performed. Because of these attributes, the zebrafish also provides opportunities to accelerate the process of drug discovery. By combining the scale and throughput of in vitro screens with the physiological complexity of animal studies, the zebrafish promises to contribute to several aspects of the drug development process, including target identification, disease modeling, lead discovery and toxicology. The Program in Translational Medicine will specifically support efforts to test novel pro-angiogenic factors (discovered as suppressors of the “gridlock” phenotype in zebrafish) on human cells such as circulating endothelial precursors.Dr. Shaw’s group is studying the cellular effects of human disease mutations in patient samples, by perturbing cells with a panel of thousands of drugs, and asking whether mutant versus wild-type cells react differently to a given biochemical (reminiscent of a genetic interaction screen). Dr. Shaw has demonstrated the feasibility of this approach using lymphoblast cell lines from a family affected by a monogenic form of diabetes (MODY1), and shown that glucocorticoid signaling differs between affected vs. unaffected patients. Because his studies incorporate the use of FDA-approved drugs, he can quickly identify both potentially “druggable” disease pathways as well as novel therapeutic agents. Further validation of these efforts in other monogenic disorders, such as LDL-receptor deficient patients is planned next. Ultimately this work will be extended to studies in complex genetic diseases.Director: Rob Gerszten, MDPrincipal Investigators:
• Farouc Jaffer, MD, PhD
• Sekar Kathiresan, MD
• Chris Newton-Cheh, MD, MPH
• Randall Peterson, PhD
• Stanley Shaw, MD, PhD
• Thomas Wang, MD

Genetic Basis of Cardiomyopathy

Original gene identification for Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Dysplasia/Cardiomyopathy, Autosomal Dominant

McNally E, MacLeod H, Dellefave L. Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Dysplasia/Cardiomyopathy, Autosomal Dominant. 2005 Apr 18 [Updated 2009 Oct 13]. In: Pagon RA, Bird TD, Dolan CR, et al., editors. GeneReviews™ [Internet]. Seattle (WA): University of Washington, Seattle; 1993-.

Summary

Disease characteristics. Autosomal dominant arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia/cardiomyopathy (ARVD/C) is characterized by progressive fibrofatty replacement of the myocardium that predisposes to ventricular tachycardia and sudden death in young individuals and athletes. It primarily affects the right ventricle; with time, it may also involve the left ventricle. The presentation of disease is highly variable even within families, and affected individuals may not meet established clinical criteria. The mean age at diagnosis is 31 years (±13; range: 4-64 years).

Available from:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK1131/

Pan Cardiomyopathy Panel

@the Center for Personalized Genetic Medicine of Partners HealthCare and Harvard Medical School

The Pan Cardiomyopathy (PCM) Panel contains 51 cardiomyopathy genes including Titin (TTN), which encodes the largest human protein. This panel covers genes associated with HCM, DCM, RCM, LVNC, ARVC and CPVT and uses a combination of Next Generation Sequencing technology and conventional Sanger sequencing.

For illustrative reference, click to see one of our images or diagrams. Genes on Pan Cardiomyopathy Panels, Disease-Gene AssociationsGene Cellular Location.

Please select on the disease to read moreHCM,DCMARVC/CPVT, or LVNC.

Current Tests:

Pan Cardiomyopathy Panel – 51 genes

  • HCM Panel – 18 genes§
  • DCM Panel – 27 genes§
  • ARVC/CPVT Panel – 8 genes§
  • LVNC Panel – 10 genes§

§Optional reflex to remaining genes

Storage Cardiomyopathy – please select a disease to learn more

For any other single gene tests, please call the LMM at 617-768-8499 or lmm@partners.org.

For Variant Classification Rules – Lab for Molecular Medicine (LMM)

http://pcpgm.partners.org/sites/default/files/LMM/Resources/LMM_VariantClassification_05.26.11.pdf 

For LMM Reference Sequences

http://pcpgm.partners.org/sites/default/files/LMM/Resources/LMMRefSeq-2.20.13.pdf

When to order which panel?

The Pan Cardiomyopathy panel may shorten the “testing odyssey” when a clear diagnosis has not been established. However, because many genes have not yet been associated with more than one cardiomyopathy, interpretation of novel variants may be more difficult when they are found in a gene that is not (yet) known to cause the patient’s cardiomyopathy. Please note: We are expecting an increase in “variants of unknown significance” and recommend careful consideration of the following factors when deciding whether to order the full panel or the disease specific sub-panels. The Pan Cardiomyopathy Panel may be best suited for patients who have already exhausted current testing options or whose clinical diagnosis is not yet clear. It may also be a good first line test for patients who have a family history where the number of living affected relatives would allow segregation analysis to establish or rule out pathogenicity for “variants of unknown significance (VUSs)”. Finally, the patient’s personal preferences should be considered as VUSs can cause anxiety.

Disease Backgrounds

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is characterized by unexplained left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) in a non-dilated ventricle. With a prevalence estimated to be ~1/500 in the general population, HCM is the most common monogenic cardiac disorder. To date, over 1000 variants have been identified in genes causative of HCM, most of which affect the sarcomere, the contractile unit of the cardiac muscle. In addition, defects in genes involved in storage diseases, such as LAMP2, PRKAG2 and GLA, typically cause systemic disease but may also result in predominant cardiac manifestations, which can mimic hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). For additional information about HCM, please visit GeneReviews. 

Dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) is characterized by ventricular chamber enlargement and systolic dysfunction with normal left ventricular wall thickness. The estimated prevalence of DCM is 1/2,500 and about 20-35% of cases have a family history showing a predominantly autosomal mode of inheritance. To date, over 40 genes have been demonstrated to cause DCM, encoding proteins involved in the sarcomere, Z-disk, nuclear lamina, intermediate filaments and the dystrophin-associated glycoprotein complex. Variants in some genes cause additional abnormalities: LMNA variants are frequently found in DCM that occurs with progressive conduction system disease. Variants in the TAZ gene cause Barth syndrome, an X-linked cardioskeletal myopathy in infants. In addition, variants in several genes (including LMNA, DES, SGCD, TCAP and EMD) can cause DCM in conjunction with skeletal myopathy.  For additional information about DCM, please visit GeneReviews.

Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy (ARVC) is estimated to affect approximately 1/5,000 individuals in the general population, about half of which have a family history. The disease is characterized by replacement of myocytes by fatty or fibrofatty tissue, mainly in the right ventricle. The resulting manifestations are broad and include ventricular tachyarrhythmias and sudden death in young individuals and athletes. ARVC is typically inherited in an autosomal dominant fashion with incomplete penetrance and variable expressivity and to date, 5 ARVC genes (DSP, DSC2, DSG2, PKP2, TMEM43) have been identified, all but one (TMEM43) encode components of the desmosome. For more information about ARVC, please visit GeneReviews.

Catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia (CPVT) is typically characterized by exercise induced syncope due to ventricular tachycardia in individuals without structural heart disease. Two CPVT genes are known to date (RYR2 – autosomal dominant; CASQ2 – autosomal recessive). For more information about CPVT, please visit GeneReviews.

Left ventricular noncompaction (LVNC) has recently been established as a specific type of cardiomyopathy and is characterized by a spongy appearance of the left ventricular myocardium, resulting from an arrest in normal cardiac development. LVNC can be found in isolation or in association with other cardiomyopathies (HCM, DCM) as well as congenital cardiac abnormalities. The population prevalence is not known but LVNC is reported in ~0.014% of echocardiograms. LVNC is often familial and the genetic spectrum is beginning to emerge although it is not yet well defined. LVNC genes reported to date include ACTC, DTNA, LDB3, MYBPC3, MYH7, TAZ, and TNNT2 (Montserrat 2007, Klaassen 2008; Kaneda 2007, Zaragoza 2007; reviewed in: Maron 2006, Finsterer 2009). For more information about LVNC, please visit OMIM.org.


For any additional information, please contact us at 617-768-8500 or lmm@partners.org.

SOURCE:
Genes: 51 genesMethodology: A combination of next generation sequencing technology and Sanger sequencingAnalytical Sensitivity:Substitutions: 100% (95%CI=98.5-100)Small InDels: 95% (95%CI=83-99)Clinical Sensitivity: See below.Additional Links:

Cardiomyopathy

Price TAT CPT Codes
Pan Cardiomyopathy Panel (51 Genes)  –  lmPCM-pnlAv2_L 
$3,950 8-12 wks 81479
HCM Panel (18 Genes)  –  lmPCM-pnlB_L
$3,200 8-12 wks 81479
DCM Panel (27 Genes)  –  lmPCM-pnlCv2_L
$3,850 8-12 wks 81479
ARVC/CPVT Panel (8 Genes)  –  lmPCM-pnlD_L
$3,000 8-12 wks 81479
LVNC Panel (10 Genes)  –  lmPCM-pnlE_L
$3,200 8-12 wks 81479
Remaining Pan Cardiomyopathy Genes (HCM Reflex)  –  lmPCM-pnlFv2_L
$2,000 8-12 wks 81479
Remaining Pan Cardiomyopathy Genes (DCM Reflex)  –  lmPCM-pnlGv2_L
$2,000 8-12 wks 81479
Remaining Pan Cardiomyopathy Genes (ARVC/CPVT Reflex)  –  lmPCM-pnlHv2_L
$2,000 8-12 wks 81479
Remaining Pan Cardiomyopathy Genes (LVNC Reflex)  –  lmPCM-pnlIv2_L
$2,000 8-12 wks 81479
Remaining Pan Cardiomyopathy Genes (Version 1 Reflex) – lmPCM-pnlL_L
$750 8-12 wks 81479
Unexplained Cardiac Hypertrophy Panel (2 genes)  –  lmUCH-pnlA_L
$1,500 3 wks 81479
ABCC9 Gene Sequencing  –  lmABCC9-a_L
$1,800 3 wks 81479
ACTC Gene Sequencing  –  lmACTC-a_L
$700 3 wks 81405
ACTN2 Gene Sequencing  –  lmACTN2-a_L
$1,500 3 wks 81479
CSRP3 Gene Sequencing  –  lmCSRP3-a_L
$900 3 wks 81479
CTF1 Gene Sequencing  –  lmCTF1-a_L
$800 3 wks 81479
DES Gene Sequencing  –  lmDES-a_L
$750 3 wks 81479
DSC2 Gene Sequencing  –  lmDSC2-a_L
$1,150 3 wks 81479
DSG2 Gene Sequencing  –  lmDSG2-a_L
$1,075 3 wks 81479
DSP Gene Sequencing  –  lmDSP-a_L
$1,700 3 wks 81479
DTNA Gene Sequencing – lmDTNA-a_L
$1,500 5-6 wks 81479
EMD Gene Sequencing  –  lmEMD-a_L
$450 3 wks 81479
GLA Gene Sequencing  –  lmGLA-a_L
$700 3 wks 81405
LAMP2 Gene Sequencing  –  lmLAMP2-a_L
$700 3 wks 81405
LDB3 Gene Sequencing  –  lmLDB3-a_L
$950 3 wks 81406
LMNA Gene Sequencing  –  lmLMNA-a_L
$700 3 wks 81406
MYBPC3 Gene Sequencing  –  lmMYBPC3-a_L
$1,500 3 wks 81407
MYH7 Gene Sequencing  –  lmMYH7-a_L
$1,700 3 wks 81407
MYL2 Gene Sequencing  –  lmMYL2-a_L
$700 3 wks 81405
MYL3 Gene Sequencing  –  lmMYL3-a_L
$700 3 wks 81405
PKP2 Gene Sequencing  –  lmPKP2-a_L
$1,500 3 wks 81479
PLN Gene Sequencing  –  lmPLN-a_L
$400 3 wks 81479
PRKAG2 Gene Sequencing  –  lmPRKAG2-a_L
$1,000 3 wks 81406
SCN5A Gene Sequencing – lmSCN5A-a_L
$1,700 5-6 wks 81407
SGCD Gene Sequencing  –  lmSGCD-a_L
$1,100 3 wks 81405
TAZ Gene Sequencing  –  lmTAZ-a_L
$700 3 wks 81406
TCAP Gene Sequencing  –  lmTCAP-a_L
$700 3 wks 81479
TMEM43 Gene Sequencing  –  lmTMEM43-a_L
$700 3 wks 81479
TNNI3 Gene Sequencing  –  lmTNNI3-a_L
$700 3 wks 81405
TNNT2 Gene Sequencing  –  lmTNNT2-a_L
$1,000 3 wks 81406
TPM1 Gene Sequencing  –  lmTPM1-a_L
$700 3 wks 81405
TTN Gene Sequencing  –  lmTTN-a_L
$3,000 8-12 wks 81479
TTR Gene Sequencing – lmTTR-a_L
$485 3 wks 81404
VCL Gene Sequencing  –  lmVCL-a_L
$1,500 3 wks 81479

Congenital Heart Disease/Defects

Price TAT CPT Codes
Congenital Heart Disease Panel A (GATA4, NKX2-5, JAG1)  –  lmCHD-pnlA_L
$1,300 4 wks 81479
ELN (Elastin) Gene Sequencing  –  lmELN-a_L
$1,300 4 wks  81479
GATA4 Gene Sequencing  –  lmGATA4-a_L
$750 3 wks 81479
JAG1 Gene Sequencing  –  lmJAG1-a_L
$1,100 3 wks 81407
NKX2-5 Gene Sequencing  –  lmNKX2-5-a_L
$600 3 wks 81479
SOURCE:

Lakdawala NK, Funke BH, Baxter S, Cirino A, Roberts AE, Judge DP, Johnson N, Mendelsohn NJ, Morel C, Care M, Chung WK, Jones C, Psychogios A, Duffy ERehm HL, White E, Seidman JG, Seidman CE, Ho CY.  Genetic Testing for Dilated Cardiomyopathy in Clinical Practice. J Card Fail 2012, In press.

Neri PM, Pollard SE, Volk LA, Newmark L, Varugheese M, Baxter S, Aronson SJRehm HL, Bates DW. Usability of a Novel Clinician Interface for Genetic ResultsJ Biomed Informatics. 2012. In press.

Genomics @Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School  

The goal of The Cardiovascular Genome Unit (TCGU) is to foster interdisciplinary interaction between clinical investigators and scientists to comprehensively explore the era of human genomic research. In particular, our aim would be to identify, categorize and characterize the genes and genetic pathways of the vascular and cardiac tissues of the cardiovascular system during oncogenesis, normal function and the pathogenesis of cardiovascular diseases.

    The Cardiovascular Genome Unit is responsible for indexing gene expression, profiling gene expression, identifying SNPs and generation of protein profiles from a wide variety of tissues representative of various anatomical regions as well as developmental and pathological stages in the cardiovascular system. This information resource emphasizes on cardiovascular disease and should aid in the discovery of disease causing genes, diagnostic and prognostic markers, drug targets, protein therapeutics and improved therapeutic strategies for cardiovascular disease.

    Our laboratory is the curator of a genome-based resource for molecular cardiovascular medicine consisting of over 52,000 ESTs generated from nine heart and artery libraries, representing different developmental stages and disease states (Liew et al 1994, Hwang et al 1997, Dempsey et al 2000). 

    This comprehensive catalogue of cardiac and hematopoietic genes is an unmined molecular resource for microarray analysis and a genetic gold mine for the discovery of genes that may play a role in cardiovascular disorders. In order to exploit this raw data, we propose to develop cDNA microarrays consisting of known and novel sequence-tagged genes. The arrayed clones provide an excellent substrate for expression profiling of cardiovascular disease, for example heart failure or ischemic heart disease, leading the potential discovery of diagnostic as well as prognostic markers.

    In order to accomplish the goals of the center, several cutting edge technologies are being employed.

The human cardiovascular research component of our labs.

One of the most efficient and effective strategies for the identification genes is the Expressed Sequence Tag (EST) approach.  In this approach, randomly selected cDNA clones are subjected to automated sequencing (PCR or plasmid templates) to generate a partial sequence from either the 5’- or 3’-end termed an EST.  This method allows for large-scale gene tagging and indexing from any tissue- or cell-type of interest.  A comprehensive cardiovascular gene index could be developed using a variety of cardiovascular tissues representing different anatomical, developmental and pathological states.

Comparing transcript profiles between different development or disease states is a powerful way to gain insight into the genetic changes underlying these events.  This is especially important when looking at complex systems, such as in development or disease (e.g. hypertension or atherosclerosis).  There are several unique approaches to this problem, several of which are:

a)      EST profile Comparison– After the production of a significant number of ESTs from 2 or more libraries, the frequencies of ESTs can be compared to identify those genes which are differentially expressed.     However, normalized or subtracted cDNA libraries cannot be used for this and this method is most effective for finding large differences in expression.

 

b)      cDNA Microarray Hybridization– The recent introduction of the cDNA microarray, a technology capable of analyzing the expression of thousands of genes simultaneously in a single experimentmay  provide one of the best ways to delineate gene expression patterns.  In the cDNA microarray, cDNA clones are spotted onto a glass slide matrix and hybridized with fluorescently labeled cDNA probes derived from total RNA pools of test and reference cells or tissues.  The signal intensity for each probe is quantified and any differences between the two samples becomes readily apparent.  Thus, the genetic changes underlying the phenotype of study can be identified at the level of a single gene. 

 

c)      Identification of Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms– SNPs are single-base heritable variations in the genome which occur once in approximately 1000 bases in the human genome and occur at a frequency of >1% in the human population.  SNPs provide an important genetic resource useful for disease gene discovery. including the identification of disease susceptible genes.  SNPs can be identified through comparison of EST sequences, DNA hybridization strategies and direct sequencing of genomic DNA.  The generation of a SNP database for genes expressed in the cardiovascular system will provide a valuable resource to aid in disease gene discovery. 

 

d)      Quantitative determination of expressed genes– the up- and down- regulated genes are crucial to the phenotypic expression of any given cell.  The frequency of gene expressed in development or disease state can be obtained from an EST approach using cDNA libraries as well as its intensity detected using microarrays.  Such results can be verified through RT-PCR analysis from the tissue samples.  A high through-put analysis of 96 samples can be performed by real-time PCR analyses.

Using our 10,000 element “CardioChip”, we elucidated over 100 differentially expressed genes in end-stage heart failure resulting from dilated cardiomyopathy. The results were published in

Am J Pathol. 2002 June; 160(6): 2035–2043.

Global Gene Expression Profiling of End-Stage Dilated Cardiomyopathy Using a Human Cardiovascular-Based cDNA Microarray

From Cardiovascular Genome Unit*, the Department of Medicine, and the Department of Anesthesiology,Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; and the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology,University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Abstract

To obtain a genomic portrait of heart failure derived from end-stage dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM), we explored expression analysis using the CardioChip, a nonredundant 10,848-element human cardiovascular-based expressed sequence tag glass slide cDNA microarray constructed in-house. RNA was extracted from the left ventricular free wall of seven patients undergoing transplantation, and five nonfailing heart samples. Cy3- and Cy5-labeled (and reverse dye-labeled) cDNA probes were synthesized from individual diseased or nonfailing adult heart RNA, and hybridized to the array. More than 100 transcripts were consistently differentially expressed in DCM >1.5-fold (versus pooled nonfailing heart,P < 0.05). Atrial natriuretic peptide was found to be up-regulated in DCM (19-fold compared to nonfailing, P < 0.05), as well as numerous sarcomeric and cytoskeletal proteins (eg, cardiac troponin, tropomyosin), stress response proteins (eg, HSP 40, HSP 70), and transcription/translation regulators (eg, CCAAT box binding factor, eIF-1AY). Down-regulation was most prominently observed with cell-signaling channels and mediators, particularly those involved in Ca2+ pathways (Ca2+/calmodulin-dependent kinase, inositol 1,4,5-trisphosphate receptor, SERCA). Most intriguing was the co-expression of several novel, cardiac-enriched expressed sequence tags. Quantitative real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction of a selection of these clones verified expression. Our study provides a preliminary molecular profile of DCM using the largest human heart-specific cDNA microarray to date.

Dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) is characterized clinically by left ventricular dilatation, wall thinning, and homogeneous dysfunction of the myocardium leading to congestive heart failure. Genetically, DCM seems to evolve through primary mutations in the genes of the sarcomeric proteins. 1 However, recent evidence suggests that, despite distinct pathways leading to divergent endpoint phenotypes of each disease, there may exist some overlapping genetic modifiers leading to a conversion of one to the other. 2 How this occurs is under question; to understand this, a better knowledge of the molecular pathways and intermediary regulators is required.

Global analysis of gene expression has proven to be a fruitful means of examining the overall molecular portrait of a particular event as well as seeking out novel candidate transcripts that may play a role in formulating the phenotype or genotype of interest. By using this strategy, multiple genes and pathways in complex disorders can be visualized simultaneously, allowing for a feasible platform from which to investigate new and interesting genes. Using expressed sequence tag technology, our laboratory has generated a compendium of genes expressed in the human cardiovascular system, with the ultimate goal of assembling the intricacies of development and of disease, particularly the pathways leading to heart failure. 3 Through a computer-based in silico strategy, we have been able to identify—in a large scale—both known and previously unsuspected genetic modulators contributing to the growth of the myocardium from fetal through adult, and from normal to a perturbed hypertrophic phenotype. In contrast a gene-by-gene approach in elucidating the genes and mechanisms involved is time-consuming and cumbersome.

Recently, microarray technology has been used as a means of large-scale screening of vast numbers of genes—if not whole genomes—that possess differential expression in two distinct conditions. Although new and exciting developments have arisen in such fields as cancer 4 and yeast, 5 advances in understanding the complexity of cardiovascular disease, 6 specifically DCM, have been limited. One recent study examined gene expression in two failing hearts using oligo-based arrays. 7 Although the GeneChip® (Affymetrix, Santa Clara, CA) offers a carefully controlled systematic method of analysis, its current lack of user flexibility in its design hinders novel gene discovery currently available in tissue-specific arrays. Our laboratory has taken advantage of our vast previously acquired resources and has constructed what we believe to be the first ever custom-made cardiovascular-based cDNA microarray, which we term the “CardioChip.” 8 Its practicality and flexibility has allowed us to conceptualize the molecular events surrounding end-stage heart failure.

This report describes the most informative cDNA microarray-based analysis of end-stage heart failure derived from DCM currently available. Although we believe we have effectively demonstrated reproducibility and reliability of our technology (both for the entire array and for a selection of genes located on it), a larger n from our population would enhance the validity of our conclusions. Certainly, there exists no homogeneous heart failure genotype, especially among only seven DCM patients. Nonetheless, we have demonstrated a common expression pattern among our set of samples, from both microarray and QRT-PCR analysis. We are also limited by the genes (both in number and identity) present on this array. Although we are currently unable to spot every gene and gene cluster on our CardioChip, we have tried to draw from a diverse assortment of genes and gene pathways, both known and unknown. It must be emphasized that this investigation is not exhaustive; by no means does it attempt to fully characterize the molecular basis of heart failure. Its intention is to provide a preliminary portrait of global gene expression in complex cardiovascular disease using cDNA microarray and QRT-PCR technology, and to highlight the effectiveness of our ever-evolving platform for gene discovery. With even more patient samples and a CardioChip toward completeness, we will be in a better position to reap the important benefits from this initial work and expand our body of knowledge.

REFERENCES

http://www.pnas.org/content/91/22/10645.full.pdf

1. Towbin JA, Bowles NE: Genetic abnormalities responsible for dilated cardiomyopathy. Curr Cardiol Rep 2000, 2:475-480. [PubMed]
2. Chien KR: Stress pathways and heart failure. Cell 1999, 98:555-558. [PubMed]
3. Hwang JJ, Dzau VJ, Liew CC: Genomics and the pathophysiology of heart failure. Curr Cardiol Rep2001, 3:198-207. [PubMed]
4. Alizadeh AA, Eisen MB, Davis RE, Ma C, Lossos IS, Rosenwald A, Boldrick JC, Sabet H, Tran T, Yu X, Powell JI, Yang L, Marti GE, Moore T, Hudson J, Jr, Lu L, Lewis DB, Tibshirani R, Sherlock G, Chan WC, Greiner TC, Weisenburger DD, Armitage JO, Warnke R, Levy R, Wilson W, Grever M, Byrd JC, Botstein D, Brown PO, Staudt LM: Distinct types of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma identified by gene expression profiling. Nature 2000, 403:503-511. [PubMed]
5. Gasch AP, Spellman PT, Kao CM, Carmel-Harel O, Eisen MB, Storz G, Botstein D, Brown PO: Genomic expression programs in the response of yeast cells to environmental changes. Mol Biol Cell 2000, 11:4241-4257. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
6. Taylor LA, Carthy CM, Yang D, Saad K, Wong D, Schreiner G, Stanton LW, McManus BM: Host gene regulation during coxsackievirus B3 infection in mice: assessment by microarrays. Circ Res 2000, 87:328-334. [PubMed]
7. Yang J, Moravec CS, Sussman MA, DiPaola NR, Fu D, Hawthorn L, Mitchell CA, Young JB, Francis GS, McCarthy PM, Bond M: Decreased SLIM1 expression and increased gelsolin expression in failing human hearts measured by high-density oligonucleotide arrays. Circulation 2000, 102:3046-3052.[PubMed]
8. Barrans JD, Stamatiou D, Liew CC: Construction of a human cardiovascular cDNA microarray: portrait of the failing heart. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2001, 280:964-969. [PubMed]
9. Hwang DM, Hwang WS, Liew CC: Single pass sequencing of a unidirectional human fetal heart cDNA library to discover novel genes of the cardiovascular system. J Mol Cell Cardiol 1994, 26:1329-1333.[PubMed]
10. Hwang DM, Dempsey AA, Lee CY, Liew CC: Identification of differentially expressed genes in cardiac hypertrophy by analysis of expressed sequence tags. Genomics 2000, 66:1-14. [PubMed]
11. Hwang DM, Dempsey AA, Wang RX, Rezvani M, Barrans JD, Dai KS, Wang HY, Ma H, Cukerman E, Liu YQ, Gu JR, Zhang JH, Tsui SK, Waye MM, Fung KP, Lee CY, Liew CC: A genome-based resource for molecular cardiovascular medicine: toward a compendium of cardiovascular genes. Circulation 1997,96:4146-4203. [PubMed]
12. Liew CC, Hwang DM, Fung YW, Laurenssen C, Cukerman E, Tsui S, Lee CY: A catalogue of genes in the cardiovascular system as identified by expressed sequence tags. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1994,91:10645-10649. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
13. Liew CC, Hwang DM, Wang RX, Ng SH, Dempsey A, Wen DH, Ma H, Cukerman E, Zhao XG, Liu YQ, Qiu XK, Zhou XM, Gu JR, Tsui S, Fung KP, Waye MM, Lee CY: Construction of a human heart cDNA library and identification of cardiovascular based genes (CVBest). Mol Cell Biochem 1997, 172:81-87.[PubMed]
14. Altschul SF, Gish W, Miller W, Myers EW, Lipman DJ: Basic local alignment search tool. J Mol Biol1990, 215:403-410. [PubMed]
15. DeRisi J, Penland L, Brown PO, Bittner ML, Meltzer PS, Ray M, Chen Y, Su YA, Trent JM: Use of a cDNA microarray to analyze gene expression patterns in human cancer. Nat Genet 1996, 14:457-460.[PubMed]
16. Vikstrom KL, Bohlmeyer T, Factor SM, Leinwand LA: Hypertrophy, pathology, and molecular markers of cardiac pathogenesis. Circ Res 1998, 82:773-778. [PubMed]
17. Towbin JA: The role of cytoskeletal proteins in cardiomyopathies. Curr Opin Cell Biol 1998, 10:131-139.[PubMed]
18. Elliott K, Watkins H, Redwood CS: Altered regulatory properties of human cardiac troponin I mutants that cause hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. J Biol Chem 2000, 275:22069-22074. [PubMed]
19. Kimura A, Harada H, Park JE, Nishi H, Satoh M, Takahashi M, Hiroi S, Sasaoka T, Ohbuchi N, Nakamura T, Koyanagi T, Hwang TH, Choo JA, Chung KS, Hasegawa A, Nagai R, Okazaki O, Nakamura H, Matsuzaki M, Sakamoto T, Toshima H, Koga Y, Imaizumi T, Sasazuki T: Mutations in the cardiac troponin I gene associated with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Nat Genet 1997, 16:379-382. [PubMed]
20. Redwood C, Lohmann K, Bing W, Esposito GM, Elliott K, Abdulrazzak H, Knott A, Purcell I, Marston S, Watkins H: Investigation of a truncated cardiac troponin T that causes familial hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: Ca(2+) regulatory properties of reconstituted thin filaments depend on the ratio of mutant to wild-type protein. Circ Res 2000, 86:1146-1152. [PubMed]
21. Geisterfer-Lowrance AA, Kass S, Tanigawa G, Vosberg HP, McKenna W, Seidman CE, Seidman JG: A molecular basis for familial hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: a beta cardiac myosin heavy chain gene missense mutation. Cell 1990, 62:999-1006. [PubMed]
22. Thierfelder L, Watkins H, MacRae C, Lamas R, McKenna W, Vosberg HP, Seidman JG, Seidman CE: Alpha-tropomyosin and cardiac troponin T mutations cause familial hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: a disease of the sarcomere. Cell 1994, 77:701-712. [PubMed]
23. Arber S, Hunter JJ, Ross J, Jr, Hongo M, Sansig G, Borg J, Perriard JC, Chien KR, Caroni P: MLP-deficient mice exhibit a disruption of cardiac cytoarchitectural organization, dilated cardiomyopathy, and heart failure. Cell 1997, 88:393-403. [PubMed]
24. Dalakas MC, Park KY, Semino-Mora C, Lee HS, Sivakumar K, Goldfarb LG: Desmin myopathy, a skeletal myopathy with cardiomyopathy caused by mutations in the desmin gene. N Engl J Med 2000,342:770-780. [PubMed]
25. Satoh M, Takahashi M, Sakamoto T, Hiroe M, Marumo F, Kimura A: Structural analysis of the titin gene in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: identification of a novel disease gene. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 1999, 262:411-417. [PubMed]
26. Olson TM, Michels VV, Thibodeau SN, Tai YS, Keating MT: Actin mutations in dilated cardiomyopathy, a heritable form of heart failure. Science 1998, 280:750-752. [PubMed]
27. Schonberger J, Seidman CE: Many roads lead to a broken heart: the genetics of dilated cardiomyopathy. Am J Hum Genet 2001, 69:249-260. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
28. Dempsey AA, Ton C, Liew CC: A cardiovascular EST repertoire: progress and promise for understanding cardiovascular disease. Mol Med Today 2000, 6:231-237. [PubMed]
29. Francis GS: Changing the remodeling process in heart failure: basic mechanisms and laboratory results. Curr Opin Cardiol 1998, 13:156-161. [PubMed]
30. Rao VU, Spinale FG: Controlling myocardial matrix remodeling: implications for heart failure.Cardiol Rev 1999, 7:136-143. [PubMed]
31. McKinsey TA, Olson EN: Cardiac hypertrophy: sorting out the circuitry. Curr Opin Genet Dev 1999,9:267-274. [PubMed]
32. Chien KR: Genomic circuits and the integrative biology of cardiac diseases. Nature 2000, 407:227-232. [PubMed]
33. Miyamoto MI, del Monte F, Schmidt U, DiSalvo TS, Kang ZB, Matsui T, Guerrero JL, Gwathmey JK, Rosenzweig A, Hajjar RJ: Adenoviral gene transfer of SERCA2a improves left ventricular function in aortic-banded rats in transition to heart failure. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2000, 97:793-798.[PMC free article] [PubMed]
34. Tada M, Yabuki M, Toyofuku T: Molecular regulation of phospholamban function and gene expression. Ann NY Acad Sci 1998, 853:116-129. [PubMed]
35. Marks AR: Cardiac intracellular calcium release channels: role in heart failure. Circ Res 2000, 87:8-11. [PubMed]
36. Dewaste V, Pouillon V, Moreau C, Shears S, Takazawa K, Erneux C: Cloning and expression of a cDNA encoding human inositol 1,4,5-trisphosphate 3-kinase C. Biochem J 2000, 352:343-351.[PMC free article] [PubMed]
Books (partial list):

Liew CC, Jackowski, G, Ma T, Jung, YC, Sole, MJ. Possible role of nonhistone chromatin proteins associated with heterogeneous nuclear RNA in myocardial differentiation and in the genesis of cardiomyopathy. In: Alpert NR, editor. Perspectives in
Cardiovascular Research. Raven Press; 1983. p. 497-511.

Liew CC, Takihara KY, Jandreski M, Liew J, Sole MJ. Structure and expression of human b-myosin heavy chain gene. In: Carraro U, editor. Sarcomeric and Non-sarcomeric Muscles: Basic and Applied Research Prospects for the 90s. Padova, Italy: Unipress
Padova; 1988. P 11-17.

Liew CC, Takihara KY, Liew J, Sole MJ. Characterization of human cardiac myosin heavy chain genes. In: Wu F, Wu CW, editors. Structure and Function of Nucleic Acids and Proteins, New York, Raven Press; 1990. pp.303-309.

Wang RX, Cukerman E, Chen B, Liew CC. Differential screening and megasequencing of human heart cDNA library: A search for genes associated with heart failure. In: Dhalla NS, Pierce GN, Panagia V, Beamish RE, editors. Boston: Kluwer Academic Press; 1995. P. 67-77.

Dempsey A, Liew CC. Genes involved in normal cardiac development. In: Sheridan DJ, editor. Left Ventricular Hypertrophy. London: Churchill Communications Europe Ltd; 1998: p. 61-70.

Tan K, Dempsey A, Liew CC. Cardiac genes and gene databases for cardiovascular disease genetics. In: Hollenberg NK, editor. Current Hypertension Reports. Philadelphia: Current Science Group; 1999: Vol 1:51-58.

Liew, CC. Expressed Sequence Tags. In: Encyclopedia of Molecular Medicine, Ed: T. Creighton, John Wiley and Son, New York. 2001

Hwang J-J, Dzau V and Liew CC. Genomics and thePathophysiology of Heart Failure. In: Current Cardiology Reports; Current Science Inc; 2001: Vol 3: 198-207.

Read Full Post »

Intersexuality: Management of Patients

Reporter and Curator: Dr. Sudipta Saha, Ph.D.

Introduction

Humans can be immensely strong and adaptable. Certainly some intersexed individuals can, in dignity, maintain themselves in a manner that they neither would have chosen nor in which they feel comfortable — as have others with a life condition from birth that cannot be changed (from cleft palate to meningomyelocele).

Many can adjust to surgery and reassignment for which they were not consulted and many have learned to accept secrecy, misrepresentations, white and black lies and loneliness. People make life accommodations every day and try to better their lot for tomorrow. Many individuals that have come to terms with their life regardless of how stressed or painful.

However, there are individuals who have been given neonatal surgery for cleft palate or meningomyelocele, many of those who have had genital surgery or been sex reassigned neonatally have complained bitterly of the treatment. Some have sex reassigned themselves. Others treated similarly have reasons not to make an issue of the matter but are living in silent despair but coping.

Guidelines

  • In all cases of ambiguous genitalia, to establish most probable cause, do a complete history and physical. The physical must include careful evaluation of the gonads and the internal as well as external genital structures. Genetic and endocrine evaluations are usually needed and interpretation can require the assistance of a pediatric endocrinologist, radiologist and urologist. Pelvic ultrasonography and genitography may be required. Do not hesitate to seek expert help; a team effort is best. The history must include assessment of the immediate and extended family.Be rapid in this decision making but take as much time as needed. Hospitals should have established House Staff Operating Procedures to be followed in such cases. Many consider this a medical emergency (and in cases of electrolyte imbalance this may be immediately so) nevertheless, it is believed that most doubt should be resolved before a final determination is made. It is simultaneously advised that all births be accompanied by a full genital inspection. Many cases of intersex go undetected.
  • Immediately, and simultaneously with the above, advise parents of the reasons for the delay. Full and honest disclosure is best and counseling must start directly. Insure that the parents understand this condition is a natural variety of intersex that is uncommon or rare but not unheard of. Convey strongly to the parents that they are not at fault for the development and the child can have a full, productive and happy life. Repeat this counseling at the next opportunity and as often as needed.
  • The child’s condition is nothing to be ashamed of but it is also nothing to be broadcast as a hospital curiosity. The child and family confidentiality must be respected.
  • In the most common cases, those of hypospadias and congenital adrenal hyperplasia (C.A.H.) diagnosis should be rapid and clear. In other situations, with a known diagnosis, declare sex based on the most likely outcome for the child involved. Encourage the parents to accept this as best; their desire as to sex of assignment is secondary. The child remains the patient. When assignment is based on the most likely outcome, most children will adapt and accept their gender assignment and it will coincide with their sexual identity.
  • The sex of assignment, when based on the nature of the diagnosis rather than only considering the size or functionality of the phallus, respects the idea that the nervous system involved in adult sexuality has been influenced by genetic and endocrine events that will most likely become manifest with or after puberty. In the majority of cases this sex of assignment will indeed be in concert with the appearance of the genitalia. In certain childhood situations, however, such assignment will be counter to the genital appearance (e.g., for reductase deficiency). The concern is primarily how the individual will develop and prefer to live post puberty when he or she becomes most sexually active.

Rear as male:

XY individuals with Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (A.I.S.) (Grades 1-3)

XX individuals with Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia (C.A.H.) with extensively fused labia and a penile clitoris

XY individuals with Hypospadias

Persons with Klinefelter syndrome

XY individuals with Micropenis

XY individuals with 5-alpha or 17-beta reductase deficiency

Rear as female:

XY individuals with Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (A.I.S.) (Grades 4-7)

XX individuals with Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia (C.A.H.) with hypertrophied clitoris

XX individuals with Gonadal dysgenesis

XY individuals with Gonadal dysgenesis

Persons with Turner’s syndrome

For those individuals with mixed gonadal dysgenesis (MGD) assign male or female dependent upon the size of the phallus and extent of the labia/scrotum fusion. The genital appearance of individuals with MGD can range from that of a typical Turner’s syndrome to that of a typical male. Evaluation of high male-like testosterone levels in these cases is also rationale for male assignment.

True hermaphrodites should be assigned male or female dependent upon the size of the phallus and extent of the labia/scrotum fusion. If there is a micropenis, assign as male. Admittedly, in some cases a clear diagnosis is not possible, the genital appearance will seem equally male as female and prediction as to future development and gender preference is difficult. There is little evidence a poorly functioning clitoris and vagina is any better than a poorly functioning penis and there is no higher reason to save the reproductive capacity of ovaries over testes. In such difficult cases, whichever decision is made, the likelihood of the individual independently switching gender remains. The medical team in such cases will be taxed to make the best management decision.

  • While sex determination is ongoing, the hospital administration can wait for a final diagnosis before entering a sex of record and Staff can refer to the child as “Infant Jones” or “Baby Brown.” After a sex designation has been made, naming and registration can occur. In those cases mentioned above, where prediction of future outcome is in doubt, parents might consider that a name be used that is appropriate for either males or females (e.g., Lee, Terry, Kim, Francis, Lynn, etc.).
  • Perform no major surgery for cosmetic reasons alone; only for conditions related to physical/medical health. This will entail a great deal of explanation needed for the parents who will want their children to “look normal.” Explain to them that appearances during childhood, while not typical of other children, may be of less importance than functionality and post pubertal erotic sensitivity of the genitalia. Surgery can potentially impair sexual/erotic function. Therefore such surgery, which includes all clitoral surgery and any sex reassignment, should typically wait until puberty or after when the patient is able to give truly informed consent.
  • Major prolonged steroid hormone administration (other than for management of C.A.H.) too should require informed consent. Many intersex or sex reassigned individual’s have felt they were not consulted about their use and effects and regretted the results.
  • In individuals with A.I.S, do not remove gonads for fear of potential tumor growth; such tumors have not been reported to occur in prepubertal children. Retention of the gonads will forestall the need for hormone replacement therapy and possibly help reduce osteoporosis.Furthermore, delaying gonadectomy until after puberty will allow the young woman to come to terms with her diagnosis, understand the reason for her surgery and participate in the decision.
  • Advice regarding gonad removal from true hermaphrodites, individuals with streak gonads and others where malignancies can potentially occur is not so clear. Prophylactically it is common to remove these early; particularly in cases of gonadal dysgenesis.Watchful waiting with frequent checks is always prudent. It is suggested, whenever the gonads are removed, is to explain as best as possible why the procedure is needed and attempt to get consent. If the child is too young to understand the reason for the surgery, its necessity should be explained as early as possible.
  • In rearing, parents must be consistent in seeing their child as either a boy or girl; not neuter. In the society intersex is a designation of medical fact but not yet a commonly accepted social designation. With age and experience, however, an increasing number of hermaphroditic and pseudohermaphroditic individuals are adopting this identification. In any case, advise parents to allow their child free expression as to choices in toy selection, game preference, friend association, future aspirations and so forth.
  • Offer advice and tips on how to meet anticipated situations, e.g., how to deal with grandparents, siblings, baby sitters and others that might question the child’s genital appearance (e.g., “He/she is different but normal. When the child is older he/she and the doctors will do what seems best.”) Parents should minimize the opportunities for such questioning by strangers.
  • Be clear that the child is special and, in some cases might, before or after puberty, accept life as a tomboy or a sissy or even switch gender altogether. The individual may demonstrate androphilic, gynecophilic or ambiphilic orientation. These behaviors are not due to poor parental supervision but will be related to an interaction of the biological, psychological, social and cultural forces to which a child with intersexuality is subject. Some individuals will be quite sexually active and others will be altogether reserved and have little or no interest in sexual relationships.
  • The patient’s special situation will require guidance as to how to meet potential challenges from parents, peers and strangers. He or she will need love and friendly support.Not all parents will be helpful, understanding, or benign and childhood, adolescent, and adult peers can be cruel. Positive peer interaction should be facilitated and encouraged.
  • Maintain contact with family so that counsel is available particularly at crucial times.Counseling should be multi-staged (at birth, and at least again at age two, at school entry, prior to and during pubertal changes, and yearly during adolescence) and it should be detailed and honest. Counseling should be straight-forward, neither patronizing or paternalistic, to parents and to the child as he or she develops with as much full disclosure as the parents and child can absorb. The counseling should ideally be by those trained in sexual/gender/intersex matters.
  • As the child matures there must be opportunity for private counseling sessions and it is essential the door remains open for additional consultation as needed. On the one hand, the full impact of the situation will not always be immediately apparent to the parents or child. On the other hand, they might magnify the developmental potential of the genital ambiguity. As above, the counseling should ideally be by those trained in sexual/gender/intersex matters.
  • Counseling must include developmental sequelae to be anticipated. This should be along medical/biological lines and along social/psychological lines. Do not avoid honest and frank talk of sexual and erotic matters. Discuss the probabilities of puberty such as the presence or absence of menses and the potential for fertility or infertility. Contraception advice may be needed and safe-sex advice is always warranted. Certainly the full gamut of heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual and even celibate options –however these are interpreted by the patient– must be offered and candidly discussed. Adoption possibilities can be broached for those that will be infertile. It is better to discuss these issues early rather than late. Do not obfuscate; knowledge is power enabling the individuals to structure their lives accordingly.
  • The family should be encouraged to openly discuss the situation among themselves, with and without a counselor present, so the child and parents can honestly come to terms with whatever the future holds. Parents have to understand their child’s needs and feelings and the child has to understand the concerns of the parents.
  • As early as possible put the family in touch with a support group. There are such groups for individuals with Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome, Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia, Klinefelter Syndrome, and Turner’s Syndrome. Intersexed individuals as a whole (hermaphrodites and pseudohermaphrodites of all etiologies) have a support group, the Intersex Society of North America [addresses for these groups are listed below]. It is emphasized that one on one contact with another person having similar experiences can be the most uplifting factor in an intersexed person’s healthy development! Individual groups or chapters might be more inclined toward parental concerns while others might be tilted toward the intersexed person’s concerns. Both perspectives are needed and separate meetings for each faction are useful. Parents need to talk about their feelings in an environment free of intersexed children and adults and the intersexed children and adults similarly need to be able to discuss their feelings and concerns free of their parents. There are times when it is appropriate for physicians to be present and times when it is not.
  • Keep genital inspection to a minimum and request permission for inspection even from a child. Hold in mind that a child may not feel able to deny a physician’s request even though that might be his/her wish. The individuals must come to realize that their genitals are their own and they, not the doctors, parents or anyone else, have control over them. Allow others to view the patient only with his or her permission. Often the genital inspections themselves become traumatic events.
  • Let the child grow and develop as normally as possible with a minimum of interference other than needed for medical care and counseling. Let him/her know that help is available if needed. Listen to the patient; even when as a child. The physician should be seen as a friend.
  • With increasing maturity the designation of intersex may be acceptable to some and not to others. It should be offered as an optional identity along with male and female.
  • As puberty approaches be open and honest with the endocrine and surgical options and life choices available. Be candid at the sexual/erotic and other trade-offs involved with surgery or gender change and insure that any decision finally be that of the fully informed individual regardless of age. To have him/her discuss the treatment with someone who has undergone the procedure is ideal.
  • Most individuals are convinced by the age of 10-15 as to the direction that would be most suitable for them; male or female. Some decisions, however, should be stalled as long as possible to increase the likelihood that the individual has some experience with which to judge. For instance, a female with a phallic clitoris, sexually inexperienced with partner or masturbation, may not realize the loss in genital sensitivity and responsivity that can accompany cosmetic clitoral reduction. Insure that sufficient information is provided to aid in any decision.
  • Most intersex conditions can remain without any surgery at all. A woman with a phallus can enjoy her hypertrophied clitoris and so can her partner. Women with the androgen insensitivity syndrome or virilizing congenital adrenal hyperplasia who have smaller than usual vaginas can be advised to use pressure dilation to fashion one to facilitate coitus; a woman with partial A.I.S. likewise can enjoy a large clitoris. A male with hypospadias might have to sit to urinate without mishap but can function sexually without surgery. An individual with a micropenis can satisfy a partner and father children.There is disagreement as to whether gonads that might prove masculinizing or feminizing at puberty should be removed early on to prevent such changes in a child that does not desire such changes. The disagreement involves the concept that the individual faced with such changes might actually come to prefer them to the habitus of rearing but will only become aware of them post hoc. The bias is to leave them in so any genetic-endocrine predisposition imposed prenatally can come to be activated with puberty. It is admitted that however there is no good body of clinical data from which the best prognosis can be made in such cases. There are some indications, however, that even without the gonads the adrenals might prod pubertal changes.
  • If a gender change is being considered, have the individual experience a real-life living test. In this way the individual will have first hand experience in how it actually is to live in the other role. Experience has shown that most indeed make the switch permanent but some return to their original sex of rearing. Some, usually as adults, will accept an identity as an intersex and plot their own course.
  • Maintain accurate medical, surgical, and psychotherapy records of all aspects of each case. This will facilitate whatever treatment is needed and assist in future research to enhance management of subsequent intersex cases. These records should be available to the patient.
  • Whenever possible, long term follow-up evaluations, e.g., at 5, 10, 15, and even 20 years of age, should become part of the record.
  • Last, it is believed that information and advice may be provided as much as possible but not to be “authoritarian” in the actions. The postpubertal individual must be allowed time to consider, reflect, discuss and evaluate and then, have the last word in his or her genital modification and gender role and final sex assignment.

CASE STUDY

European Congress of Endocrinology 2008

Berlin, Germany
03 May 2008 – 07 May 2008
European Society of Endocrinology

Hypospadias and micropenis in congenital adrenal hyperplasia: a case study

Sandra Fleischer, Ute S Groß, Hjördis HS Drexler, Achim Wüsthof & Heinrich M Schulte

Endokrinologikum Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.


Introduction: Congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH) is a group of autosomal recessive diseases with increased adrenal androgens secretion from the adrenal cortex, characterized by simple virilizing and salt wasting forms. Deficiency of 21-hydroxylase, caused by mutations in the 21-hydroxylase gene (CYP21A2) is the most frequent CAH, accounting for more than 90 percent of CAH cases. Deficiency of 3 beta-Hydroxysteroid-Dehydrogenase Type II is caused by mutations in the HSD3B2 gene and accounts for about 1–10 percent of cases of CAH.

Patient: This report is about a 2-year-old patient of Turkish origin referred to our center with clinical finding of penoscrotal hypospadias and micropenis (stretched penile length 1.5 cm). Testicles were palpable bilaterally in the scrotum. Due to initial biochemical and hormonal findings moleculargentic analysis of CYP21A2 gene was already done, showing heterozygous germline mutations p.Val281Leu, p.Leu307fs, p.Gln318Stop and p.Arg356Trp. His parents are cousin-german to each other.

Methods: Genomic DNA was extracted from peripheral blood leukocytes. Coding regions and corresponding exon-intron boundaries of the CYP21A2 gene and the HSD3B2 gene were amplified by PCR and subjected to direct sequencing.

Results: A compound heterozygous state of these mutations was excluded by sequencing analysis ofCYP21A2 genes of both parents (father has no mutation). Further hormonal studies suggested a 3 β-Hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type II deficiency and justified sequence analysis of the HSD3B2 gene. A novel homozygous germline mutation (p.Trp355Arg) was found, for which both parents are heterozygous carriers.

Conclusion: To judge a case of CAH in the right way it is important to look at all clinical aspects in a differentiated way. Comprehensive (clinical, biochemical, hormonal) analysis should be conducted and approved by moleculargenetic analysis in line with a genetic counseling.


 

REFERENCES

http://www.ukia.co.uk/diamond/diaguide.htm

http://www.hawaii.edu/PCSS/biblio/articles/1961to1999/1997-management-of-intersexuality.html

Endocrine Abstracts (2008) 16 P589

References on Ethics and Treatment Options:

  1. ^ David A. Warrell (2005). Oxford textbook of medicine: Sections 18-33. Oxford University Press. pp. 261–. ISBN 978-0-19-856978-7. Retrieved 14 June 2010.
  2. ^ Aubrey Milunsky; Jeff Milunsky (29 January 2010). Genetic Disorders and the Fetus: Diagnosis, Prevention and Treatment. John Wiley and Sons. pp. 600–. ISBN 978-1-4051-9087-9. Retrieved 14 June 2010.
  3. ^ Richard D. McAnulty, M. Michele Burnette (2006) Sex and sexuality, Volume 1Greenwood Publishing Group, p.165
  4. ^ Elton, Catherine (2010-06-18). “A Prenatal Treatment Raises Questions of Medical Ethics”TIME. Retrieved 2010-07-05.
  5. ^ Dreger, Alice; Ellen K. Feder, Anne Tamar-Mattis (2010-06-29). “Preventing Homosexuality (and Uppity Women) in the Womb?”. Bioethics Forum, a service of the Hastings Center. Retrieved 2010-07-05.
  6. ^ Dreger, Alice; Ellen K. Feder, Anne Tamar-Mattis (30 July 2012). “Prenatal Dexamethasone for Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia”Journal of Bioethical Inquiry. Retrieved 3 August 2012.
  7. ^ Fernández-Balsells, M.M.; K. Muthusamy, G. Smushkin, et al (2010). “Prenatal dexamethasone use for the prevention of virilization in pregnancies at risk for classical congenital adrenal hyperplasia because of 21-hydroxylase (CYP21A2) deficiency: A systematic review and meta-analyses”Clinical Endocrinology 73 (4): 436–444. Retrieved 3 August 2012.
  8. ^ Bongiovanni, Alfred M.; Root, Allen W. (1963). “The Adrenogenital Syndrome”. New England Journal of Medicine 268 (23): 1283.doi:10.1056/NEJM196306062682308.

Read Full Post »

New development in measuring mechanical properties of tissue

Author – Writer: Dror Nir, PhD

Measuring the effects induced onto imaging by the mechanical properties of tissue is a common approach to differentiate tissue abnormalities. In previous posts I discussed the applicability of imaging applications that visualize variations in tissue stiffness; e.g. ultrasound-elastography and MRI-elastography as aid in the diagnosis workflow of cancer. Today, I would like to report on a recent publication made in SPIE Newsroom describing an optical-imaging system to measure tissue stiffness at high resolution. I think that such emerging technologies should be followed up as they bear promise to bridge deficiencies of the traditional modalities currently in use.

Reporting on: Optical elastography probes mechanical properties of tissue at high resolution

By: David Sampson, Kelsey Kennedy, Robert McLaughlin and Brendan Kennedy

Information published at: SPIE Newsroom – Biomedical Optics & Medical Imaging

Probing the micro-mechanical properties of tissue using optical imaging might offer new surgical tools that enable improved differentiation of tissue pathologies, such as cancer or atherosclerosis.

11 January 2013, SPIE Newsroom. DOI: 10.1117/2.1201212.004605

Elastography is an emerging branch of medical imaging that uses mechanical contrast to better characterize tissue pathology than can be achieved with structural imaging alone. It achieves this by imaging a tissue’s response to mechanical loading. Although commercial products based on ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) have been available for several years, these new modalities offer superior tissue differentiation deep in the human body. However, elastography is limited by its low resolution compared with the length scales relevant to many diseases. Increasing the resolution with optical techniques might offer new opportunities for elastography in medical imaging and surgical guidance.

An elastography system requires a means of loading the tissue to cause deformation and an imaging system with sufficient sensitivity and range to capture this deformation. Implicit in these requirements is access to the tissue of interest. Optical elastography has previously been largely based on schemes that suit small tissue samples rather than intact tissue in living humans. Additionally, such schemes have not had the sensitivity or range to produce high-fidelity images of mechanical properties. We have addressed both these issues in our recent work, developing the means to access tissues in vivo and improve the sensitivity and range of optical elastography using phase-sensitive optical coherence tomography as the underlying modality. The use of optical coherence tomography to perform elastography has come to be referred to as optical coherence elastography.1

To make optical coherence elastography on human subjects feasible, we designed an annular piezoelectric loading transducer (see Figure 1), through which we could simultaneously image, enabling the first in vivo dynamic optical coherence elastography on human subjects.2 We were subsequently able to extend this to three dimensions (see Figure 2), in collaboration with Stephen Boppart’s group at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.3 This extension took advantage of the high speed of spectral-domain optical coherence tomography, and the maturity of phase-sensitive detection techniques originally developed for Doppler flowmetry and microangiography.

Figure 1. Schematic (left) and photograph (right) of the annular load transducer and imaging optics for in vivo optical coherence elastography.

 

Figure 2. 2D images of in vivo human skin selected from 3D stacks. (a) Optical coherence tomography image and (b) the same image overlaid by the 2D dynamic elastogram recorded at 125Hz load frequency, highlighting the greater strain in the epidermis. Reprinted in modified form with permission.3

For general access to tissues in the body, optical coherence elastography faces two basic limitations. The free-space probe requires miniaturization for versatile access to tissue in confined or convoluted geometries. We addressed this in studies of the elastic properties of human airways using catheter-based anatomical optical coherence tomography.4

 

Figure 3. (a) Schematic diagram of needle optical coherence elastography. The phase difference Δφ=φ1– φ2 determines the displacement, d, when scaled by the wavelength, λ, and refractive index, n. (b) Needle and pig trachea. (c) Local displacement versus distance, with tissue boundaries indicated by red stars. (d) Representative histology. Reprinted in modified form with permission.6

More fundamentally, optical coherence tomography can only penetrate, at best, 1–2mm into most tissues, limiting it to superficial applications. To address this issue, we combined optical coherence elastography with needle probes, an active research area in our group (see Figure 3).5 We conveniently use the needle probe itself to deform the tissue during insertion.6 The deformation ahead of the needle tip depends on the mechanical properties of the tissue encountered, as well as on the nearby tissue environment, particularly on any interfaces ahead of it. We measure the local sub-micrometer displacement of the tissue between two positions of the moving needle probe. We plot this displacement versus distance ahead of the probe: see Figure 3(c). The slope of the displacement at location z is a measure of the local strain. A change in slope signifies a change in tissue stiffness; the steeper the slope, the softer the tissue (other things being equal). Figure 3 highlights this effect in a layered sample of pig trachea. The positions of the changes in slope correlate well with the tissue interfaces shown in the accompanying histology: see Figure 3(d).

The other key area of improvement we have focused on is lowering the optical coherence elastography noise floor by increasing the detection sensitivity, which is vital to make clinical imaging practical. We firstly showed that Gaussian-smoothed, weighted-least squares strain estimation improved the sensitivity of estimates by up to 12dB over conventional finite-difference methods.7 Next, we showed that performance could be further improved at low optical coherence tomo- graphy signal-to-noise ratios (and, therefore, at greater depths in tissue) by employing a 2D Fourier transform technique.8Combined with other system refinements, these improvements have enabled us to reach a displacement sensitivity of 300pm for typical optical coherence tomography signal-to-noise ratios in tissue, with room for improvement.

The Young’s modulus of soft tissue varies from kPa to tens of MPa, whereas the scattering coefficient of such tissues—which is largely responsible for determining the contrast of optical coherence tomography—is typically in the range 2–20mm−1. This apparent native advantage in mechanical over optical contrast (see the example in Figure 4), combined with the maturation of optical coherence elastography methods, bodes well for the future. In our group, we are pursuing tumor-margin identification using elastography; others have begun to consider corneal elastography,9, 10 and still others are examining shear wave schemes with the aim of probing Young’s modulus much deeper in tissues.11,12

 

Figure 4. Optical coherence tomography (a) and optical coherence elastography (b) images of the same phantom with two inclusions visible, showing enhanced mechanical over scattering contrast.

Optical elastography currently sits at a similar stage of development as ultrasound elastography did in 1999. Based on a similar trajectory, this field will rapidly expand over the next decade. Our recent results point to the first convincing applications of optical elastography being just around the corner.

We acknowledge funding for this work from Perpetual Trustees, the Raine Medical Research Foundation, the Cancer Council of Western Australia, the Australian Research Council, the National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia), and the National Breast Cancer Foundation (Australia).


David Sampson

Optical+Biomedical Engineering Laboratory
School of Electrical, Electronic and Computer Engineering

and
Centre for Microscopy, Characterisation and Analysis
The University of Western Australia

 

Perth, Australia
Kelsey Kennedy, Robert McLaughlin, Brendan Kennedy

Optical+Biomedical Engineering Laboratory
School of Electrical, Electronic and Computer Engineering
The University of Western Australia

Perth, Australia

References:
1. J. Schmitt, OCT elastography: imaging microscopic deformation and strain of tissue, Opt. Express 3(6), p. 199-211, 1998.doi:10.1364/OE.3.000199
2. B. F. Kennedy, T. R. Hillman, R. A. McLaughlin, B. C. Quirk, D. D. Sampson, In vivo dynamic optical coherence elastography using a ring actuator, Opt. Express 17(24), p. 21762-21772, 2009.doi:10.1364/OE.17.021762
3. B. F. Kennedy, X. Liang, S. G. Adie, D. K. Gerstmann, B. C. Quirk, S. A. Boppart, D. D. Sampson, In vivo three-dimensional optical coherence elastography, Opt. Express 19(7), p. 6623-6634, 2011.doi:10.1364/OE.19.006623
4. J. P. Williamson, R. A. McLaughlin, W. J. Noffsingerl, A. L. James, V. A. Baker, A. Curatolo, J. J. Armstrong, Elastic properties of the central airways in obstructive lung diseases measured using anatomical optical coherence tomography, Am. J. Resp. Crit. Care 183(5), p. 612-619, 2011.doi:10.1164/rccm.201002-0178OC
5. R. A. McLaughlin, B. C. Quirk, A. Curatolo, R. W. Kirk, L. Scolaro, D. Lorenser, P. D. Robbins, B. A. Wood, C. M. Saunders, D. D. Sampson, Imaging of breast cancer with optical coherence tomography needle probes: Feasibility and initial results, IEEE J. Sel. Topics Quantum Electron. 18(3), p. 1184-1191, 2012. doi:10.1109/JSTQE.2011.2166757
6. K. M. Kennedy, B. F. Kennedy, R. A. McLaughlin, D. D. Sampson, Needle optical coherence elastography for tissue boundary detection, Opt. Lett. 37(12), p. 2310-2312, 2012. doi:10.1364/OL.37.002310
7. B. F. Kennedy, S. H. Koh, R. A. McLaughlin, K. M. Kennedy, P. R. T. Munro, D. D. Sampson, Strain estimation in phase-sensitive optical coherence elastography, Biomed. Opt. Express 3(8), p. 1865-1879, 2012.doi:10.1364/BOE.3.001865
8. B. F. Kennedy, M. Wojtkowski, M. Szkulmowski, K. M. Kennedy, K. Karnowski, D. D. Sampson, Improved measurement of vibration amplitude in dynamic optical coherence elastography, Biomed. Opt. Express 3(12), p. 3138-3152, 2012. doi:10.1364/BOE.3.003138
9. R. K. Manapuram, S. R. Aglyamov, F. M. Monediado, M. Mashiatulla, J. Li, S. Y. Emelianov, K. V. Larin, In vivo estimation of elastic wave parameters using phase-stabilized swept source optical coherence elastography, J. Biomed. Opt. 17(10), p. 100501, 2012.doi:10.1117/1.JBO.17.10.100501
10. W. Qi, R. Chen, L. Chou, G. Liu, J. Zhang, Q. Zhou, Z. Chen, Phase-resolved acoustic radiation force optical coherence elastography, J. Biomed. Opt. 17(11), p. 110505, 2012. doi:10.1117/1.JBO.17.11.110505
11. C. Li, G. Guan, S. Li, Z. Huang, R. K. Wang, Evaluating elastic properties of heterogeneous soft tissue by surface acoustic waves detected by phase-sensitive optical coherence tomography, J. Biomed. Opt. 17(5), p. 057002, 2012. doi:10.1117/1.JBO.17.5.057002
12. M. Razani, A. Mariampillai, C. Sun, T. W. H. Luk, V. X. D. Yang, M. C. Kolios, Feasibility of optical coherence elastography measurements of shear wave propagation in homogeneous tissue equivalent phantoms,Biomed. Opt. Express 3(5), p. 972-980, 2012. doi:10.1364/BOE.3.00097

Read Full Post »

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

Somatic mutations in ATP1A1 and ATP2B3 lead to aldosterone-producing adenomas and secondary hypertension

Nature Genetics

Published online 17 February 2013
Mutations affecting a pair of related enzyme-coding genes can contribute to the 

risk of benign glandular tumors 

called adenomas and secondary hypertension, a new 

Nature Genetics

 study suggests. An international team led by investigators in Germany performed

exome sequencing

on matched tumor and normal samples from nine individuals with forms of adenoma that enhance aldosterone hormone production. This leads to a type of so-called aldosteronism that can bump up blood pressure and cause other adverse symptoms.

When researchers sorted through the exome sequence data, they saw ties between aldosterone-producing adenoma and mutations in two ATPase genes — ATP1A1 and ATP2B3 — that participate in sodium/potassium and calcium signaling, respectively. Somatic ATP1A1 mutations turned up in more than 5 percent of 308 aldosterone-producing adenoma samples screened subsequently, the team noted, while 1.6 percent of those tumors contained ATP2B3 alterations.

“[T]hese findings expand the spectrum of somatic alterations leading to [aldosterone-producing adenomas] to two members of the P-type ATPase pump family, extend knowledge of the molecular mechanism leading to [aldosterone-producing adenoma],” the Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich researcher Martin Reincke, the study’s corresponding author, and colleagues wrote, “and indicate new potential therapeutic targets for the most frequent secondary form of arterial hypertension.”

SOURCE:

http://www.genomeweb.com//node/1194476?hq_e=el&hq_m=1505701&hq_l=6&hq_v=6fcaf1aef4

Somatic mutations in ATP1A1 and ATP2B3 lead to aldosterone-producing adenomas and secondary hypertension

Primary aldosteronism is the most prevalent form of secondary hypertension. To explore molecular mechanisms of autonomous aldosterone secretion, we performed exome sequencing of aldosterone-producing adenomas (APAs). We identified somatic hotspot mutations in the ATP1A1 (encoding an Na+/K+ ATPase α subunit) and ATP2B3 (encoding a Ca2+ ATPase) genes in three and two of the nine APAs, respectively. These ATPases are expressed in adrenal cells and control sodium, potassium and calcium ion homeostasis. Functional in vitro studies of ATP1A1 mutants showed loss of pump activity and strongly reduced affinity for potassium. Electrophysiological ex vivo studies on primary adrenal adenoma cells provided further evidence for inappropriate depolarization of cells with ATPase alterations. In a collection of 308 APAs, we found 16 (5.2%) somatic mutations in ATP1A1 and 5 (1.6%) in ATP2B3.

Mutation-positive cases showed

  • male dominance,
  • increased plasma aldosterone concentrations and
  • lower potassium concentrations compared with mutation-negative cases.

In summary, dominant somatic alterations in two members of the ATPase gene family result in autonomous aldosterone secretion.

Author information

Primary authors

  1. These authors contributed equally to this work.

    • Maria-Christina Zennaro &
    • Tim M Strom

Affiliations

  1. Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik IV, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany.

    • Felix Beuschlein,
    • Andrea Osswald,
    • Urs D Lichtenauer,
    • Evelyn Fischer &
    • Martin Reincke
  2. Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM), Unité Mixte de Recherche Scientifique (UMRS) 970, Paris Cardiovascular Research Center, Paris, France.

    • Sheerazed Boulkroun,
    • Laurence Amar,
    • Benoit Samson-Couterie,
    • Pierre-Francois Plouin,
    • Xavier Jeunemaitre &
    • Maria-Christina Zennaro
  3. Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, France.

    • Sheerazed Boulkroun,
    • Laurence Amar,
    • Benoit Samson-Couterie,
    • Pierre-Francois Plouin,
    • Xavier Jeunemaitre &
    • Maria-Christina Zennaro
  4. Institute of Human Genetics, Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany.

    • Thomas Wieland,
    • Anett Walther,
    • Thomas Schwarzmayr,
    • Susanne Diener,
    • Elisabeth Graf,
    • Thomas Meitinger &
    • Tim M Strom
  5. Department of Biomedicine, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.

    • Hang N Nielsen,
    • Vivien R Schack &
    • Bente Vilsen
  6. Medizinische Zellbiologie, Universität Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.

    • David Penton,
    • Philipp Tauber &
    • Richard Warth
  7. Assistance Publique–Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Paris, France.

    • Laurence Amar,
    • Pierre-Francois Plouin,
    • Xavier Jeunemaitre &
    • Maria-Christina Zennaro
  8. Department of Medicine I, Endocrine and Diabetes Unit, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.

    • Bruno Allolio
  9. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), Institut des Hautes Etudes Scientifiques, Bures sur Yvette, France.

    • Arndt Benecke
  10. Clinical Endocrinology, Campus Mitte, University Hospital Charité, Berlin, Germany.

    • Marcus Quinkler
  11. Department of Medicine, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.

    • Francesco Fallo
  12. Endocrine Unit, Department of Medicine, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.

    • Franco Mantero
  13. Institute of Human Genetics, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany.

    • Thomas Meitinger &
    • Tim M Strom
  14. DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), partner site Munich Heart Alliance, Munich, Germany.

    • Thomas Meitinger
  15. Department of Medical Sciences, Division of Internal Medicine and Hypertension, University of Torino, Turin, Italy.

    • Paolo Mulatero

Contributions

S.B., H.N.N., U.D.L., D.P., V.R.S., A.W., P.T., S.D. and B.S.-C. performed the experiments. A.O., T.W., L.A., E.F., T.S., T.M.S., E.G. and A.B. performed statistical analysis and analyzed the data. B.A., M.Q., F.F., P.-F.P., F.M. and P.M. contributed materials. F.B., T.M., X.J., R.W., B.V., M.-C.Z., T.M.S. and M.R. jointly supervised research, conceived and designed the experiments, analyzed the data, contributed reagents, materials and/or analysis tools and wrote the manuscript.

SOURCE:

http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ng.2550.html

Read Full Post »

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

Genetic Basis of Complex Human Diseases: Dan Koboldt’s Advice to Next-Generation Sequencing Neophytes

Word Cloud by Daniel Menzin

UPDATED 3/27/2013

The Exome is Not Enough

March 27, 2013

Dan Koboldt at MassGenomics explains why exome sequencing often fails to identify causal variants, even in Mendelian disorders — “the very plausible possibility that a noncoding functional variant is responsible.”

Koboldt, the analysis manager in the human genetics group at the Genome Institute at Washington University, says that researchers shouldn’t overlook the importance of noncoding functional variants, which require a suite of technologies to detect, including RNA-seq, ChiP-seq, DNAse sequencing and footprinting, bisulfite sequencing, and chromosome conformation capture.

“These types of experiments generate a wealth of data about regulatory activity in genomes,” he says. “While studying each of these independently is certainly informative, integrative analysis will be required to elucidate how all of these different regulatory mechanisms work together.”

While this effort will require “robust statistical models, substantial computing resources, and productive collaboration among research groups, the end result “will be a far more complete understanding of how the genome works,” he says.

 
SOURCE:

Dan Koboldt works as a staff scientist in the Human Genetics group of the Genome Institute at Washington University in St. Louis. There, he works with scientists, physicians, programmers, and data analysts to understand the genetic basis of complex human diseases such as cancer, vision disorders, and metabolic syndromes through next-gen sequencing analysis. He received bachelor’s degrees in Computer Science and French from the University of Missouri-Columbia, and a master’s degree in Biology fromWashington University.

Dan has worked in the field of human genetics since 2003, when he joined the lab of Raymond E. Miller, which played a role in the International HapMap Project and later the genetic map of C. briggsae, a model organism related to C. elegans.

Disclaimer: The views expressed on this site, including blog posts and static pages, do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Genome Institute at Washington University, the Washington University School of Medicine, or Washington University in St. Louis.

Before diving in with both feet, next-generation sequencing neophytes might want to take a gander at a post by Dan Koboldt at MassGenomics where he describes his 10 commandments for good next-gen sequencing.

In his post, Koboldt breaks up his instructions into four categories: analysis, publications, data sharing and submissions, and research ethics and cost.

His list includes some oft repeated warnings. For example, he cautions against reinventing the wheel when it comes to developing analysis software, and, for pity’s sake, don’t invent any more words that end in “ome” or “omics.”

Some other no-no’s, according to Koboldt, include publishing results before they’ve been vetted properly, testing new methods on simulated data only, and taking “unfair advantage of submitted data.”

He also admonishes newcomers to think a little bit about the cost of analysis without which “your sequencing data, your $1,000 genome, is about as useful as a chocolate teapot,” and to have a care for the privacy of their study participants’ samples and data.

Ten Commandments for Next-Gen Sequencing

10 ngs commandmentsJust as the reach of next-generation sequencing has continued to grow — in both research and clinical realms — so too has the community of NGS users.  Some have been around since the early days. The days of 454 and Solexa sequencing. Since then, the field has matured at an astonishing pace. Many standards were established to help everyone make sense of this flood of data. The recent democratization of sequencing has made next-gen sequencing available to just about anyone.

And yet, there have been growing pains. With great power comes great responsibility. To help some of the newcomers into the field, I’ve drafted these ten commandments for next-gen sequencing.

NGS Analysis

1. Thou shalt not reinvent the wheel. In spite of rapid technological advances, NGS is not a new field. Most of the current “workhorse” technologies have been on the market for a couple of years or more. As such, we have a plethora of short read aligners, de novo assemblers, variant callers, and other tools already. Even so, there is a great temptation for bioinformaticians to write their own “custom scripts” to perform these tasks. There’s a new “Applications Note” every day with some tool that claims to do something new or better.

Can you really write an aligner that’s better than BWA? More importantly, do we need one? Unless you have some compelling reason to develop something new (as we did when we developed SomaticSniper and VarScan), take advantage of what’s already out there.

2. Thou shalt not coin any new term ending with “ome” or “omics”. We have enough of these already, to the point where it’s getting ridiculous. Genome, transcriptome, and proteome are obvious applications of this nomenclature. Epigenome, sure. But the metabolome, interactome, and various other “ome” words are starting to detract from the naming system. The ones we need have already been coined. Don’t give in to the temptation.

3. Thou shall follow thy field’s conventions for jargon. Technical terms, acronyms, and abbreviations are inherent to research. We need them both for precision and brevity. When we get into trouble is when people feel the need to create their own acronyms when a suitable one already exists. Is there a significant difference between next-generation sequencing (NGS), high-throughput sequencing (HTS), and massively parallel sequencing (MPS)?

Widely accepted terms provide something of a standard, and they should be used whenever possible. Insertion/deletion variants are indels, not InDels or INDELs DIPs. Structural variants are SVs, not SVars or GVs. We don’t need any more acronyms!

NGS Publications

These commandments address behaviors that get on my nerves, both as a blogger and a peer reviewer.

4. Thou shalt not publish by press release. This is a disturbing trend that seems to happen more and more frequently in our field: the announcement of “discoveries” before they have been accepted for publication. Peer review is the required vetting process for scientific research. Yes, it takes time and yes, your competitors are probably on the verge of the same discovery. That doesn’t mean you get to skip ahead and claim credit by putting out a press release.

There are already examples of how this can come back to bite you. When the reviewers trash your manuscript, or (gasp) you learn that a mistake was made, it looks bad. It reflects poorly on the researchers and the institution, both in the field and in the eyes of the public.

5. Thou shalt not rely only on simulated data. Often when I read a paper on a new method or algorithm, they showcase it using simulated data. This often serves a noble purpose, such as knowing the “correct” answer and demonstrating that your approach can find it. Even so, you’d better apply it to some real data too. Simulations simply can’t replicate the true randomness of nature and the crap-that-can-go-wrong reality of next-gen sequencing. There’s plenty of freely available data out there; go get some of it.

6. Thou shalt obtain enough samples. One consequence of the rapid growth of our field (and accompanying drop in sequencing costs) is that small sample numbers no longer impress anyone. They don’t impress me, and they certainly don’t impress the statisticians upstairs. The novelty of exome or even whole-genome sequencing has long worn off. Now, high-profile studies must back their findings with statistically significant results, and that usually means finding a cohort of hundreds (or thousands) of patients with which to extend your findings.

This new reality may not be entirely bad news, because it surely will foster collaboration between groups that might otherwise not be able to publish individually.

Data Sharing and Submissions

7. Thou shalt withhold no data. With some exceptions, sequencing datasets are meant to be shared. Certain institutions, such as large-scale sequencing centers in the U.S., are mandated by their funding agencies to deposit data generated using public funds on a timely basis following its generation. Since the usual deposition site is dbGaP, this means that IRB approvals and dbGaP certification letters must be in hand before sequencing can begin.

Any researchers who plan to publish their findings based on sequencing datasets will have to submit them to public datasets before publication.This is not optional. It is not “something we should do when we get around to it after the paper goes out.” It is required to reproduce the work, so it should really be done before a manuscript is submitted. Consider this excerpt from Nature‘s publication guidelines:

Data sets must be made freely available to readers from the date of publication, and must be provided to editors and peer-reviewers at submission, for the purposes of evaluating the manuscript.

For the following types of data set, submission to a community-endorsed, public repository is mandatory. Accession numbers must be provided in the paper.

The policies go on to list various types of sequencing data:

  • DNA and RNA sequences
  • DNA sequencing data (traces for capillary electrophoresis and short reads for next-generation sequencing)
  • Deep sequencing data
  • Epitopes, functional domains, genetic markers, or haplotypes.

Every journal should have a similar policy; most top-tier journals already do. Editors and referees need to enforce this submission requirement by rejecting any manuscripts that do not include the submission accession numbers.

8. Thou shalt not take unfair advantage of submitted data. Many investigators are concerned about data sharing (especially when mandated upon generation, not publication) from fear of being scooped. This is a valid concern. When you submit your data to a public repository, others can find it and (if they meet the requirements) use it. Personally, I think most of these fears are not justified — I mean, have you ever tried to get data out of dbGaP? The time it takes for someone to find, request, obtain, and use submitted data should allow the producers of the data to write it up.

Large-scale efforts to which substantial resources have been devoted — such as the Cancer Genome Atlas — have additional safeguards in place. Their data use policy states that, for a given cancer type, submitted data can’t be used until the “marker paper” has been published. This is a good rule of thumb for the NGS community, and something that journal editors (and referees) haven’t always enforced.

Just because you can scoop someone doesn’t mean that you should. It’s not only bad karma, but bad for your reputation. Scientists have long memories. They will likely review your manuscript or grant proposal sometime in the future. When that happens, you want to be the person who took the high road.

Research Ethics and Cost

9. Thou shalt not discount the cost of analysis. It’s true that since the advent of NGS technology, the cost of sequencing has plummeted. The cost of analysis, however, has not. And making sense of genomic data — alignment, quality control, variant calling, annotation, interpretation — is a daunting task indeed. It takes computational resources as well as expertise. This infrastructure is not free; in fact, it can be more expensive than the sequencing itself. 

Without analysis, your sequencing data, your $1,000 genome, is about as useful as a chocolate teapot.

10. Thou shalt honor thy patients and their samples. Earlier this month, I wrote about how supposedly anonymous individuals from the CEPH collection were identified using a combination of genetic markers and online databases. It is a simple fact that we can no longer guarantee a sequenced sample’s anonymity. That simple fact, combined with our growing ability to interpret the possible consequences of an individual genome, means a great deal of risk for study volunteers.

We must safeguard the privacy of study participants — and find ways to protect them from privacy violations and/or discrimination — if we want their continued cooperation.

This means obtaining good consent documents and ensuring that they’re all correct before sequencing begins. It also means adhering to the data use policies those consents specify. As I’ve written before, samples are the new commodity in our field. Anyone can rent time on a sequencer. If you don’t make an effort to treat your samples right, someone else will.

Related Posts:

SOURCE:

Dan Koboldt’s Publications

Bose R, Kavuri SM, Searleman AC, Shen W, Shen D, Koboldt DC, Monsey J, Goel N, Aronson AB, Li S, Ma CX, Ding L, Mardis ER, & Ellis MJ (2013).Activating HER2 mtations in HER2 gene amplification negative breast cancer. Cancer discovery PMID: 23220880

The 1000 Genomes Project Consortium (2012). An integrated map of genetic variation from 1,092 human genomes. Nature 491, 56-65. DOI: 10.1038/nature11632

Cancer Genome Atlas Network (2012). Comprehensive molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature, 490 (7418), 61-70 PMID:23000897

Ellis MJ, Ding L, Shen D, Luo J, Suman VJ, Wallis JW, Van Tine BA, Hoog J, Goiffon RJ, Goldstein TC, Ng S, Lin L, Crowder R, Snider J, Ballman K, Weber J, Chen K, Koboldt DC, Kandoth C, Schierding WS, McMichael JF, Miller CA, Lu C, Harris CC, McLellan MD, Wendl MC, DeSchryver K, Allred DC, Esserman L, Unzeitig G, Margenthaler J, Babiera GV, Marcom PK, Guenther JM, Leitch M, Hunt K, Olson J, Tao Y, Maher CA, Fulton LL, Fulton RS, Harrison M, Oberkfell B, Du F, Demeter R, Vickery TL, Elhammali A, Piwnica-Worms H, McDonald S, Watson M, Dooling DJ, Ota D, Chang LW, Bose R, Ley TJ, Piwnica-Worms D, Stuart JM, Wilson RK, & Mardis ER (2012). Whole-genome analysis informs breast cancer response to aromatase inhibition. Nature, 486 (7403), 353-60 PMID: 22722193

Welch JS, Ley TJ, Link DC, Miller CA, Larson DE, Koboldt DC, Wartman LD, Lamprecht TL, Liu F, Xia J, Kandoth C, Fulton RS, McLellan MD, Dooling DJ, Wallis JW, Chen K, Harris CC, Schmidt HK, Kalicki-Veizer JM, Lu C, Zhang Q, Lin L, O’Laughlin MD, McMichael JF, Delehaunty KD, Fulton LA, Magrini VJ, McGrath SD, Demeter RT, Vickery TL, Hundal J, Cook LL, Swift GW, Reed JP, Alldredge PA, Wylie TN, Walker JR, Watson MA, Heath SE, Shannon WD, Varghese N, Nagarajan R, Payton JE, Baty JD, Kulkarni S, Klco JM, Tomasson MH, Westervelt P, Walter MJ, Graubert TA, DiPersio JF, Ding L, Mardis ER, & Wilson RK (2012). The origin and evolution of mutations in acute myeloid leukemia. Cell, 150 (2), 264-78 PMID: 22817890

Cancer Genome Atlas Network (2012). Comprehensive molecular characterization of human colon and rectal cancer. Nature, 487(7407), 330-7 PMID: 22810696

Dees ND, Zhang Q, Kandoth C, Wendl MC, Schierding W, Koboldt DC, Mooney TB, Callaway MB, Dooling D, Mardis ER, Wilson RK, & Ding L (2012). MuSiC: identifying mutational significance in cancer genomes.Genome research, 22 (8), 1589-98 PMID: 22759861

Walter MJ, Shen D, Ding L, Shao J, Koboldt DC, Chen K, Larson DE, McLellan MD, Dooling D, Abbott R, Fulton R, Magrini V, Schmidt H, Kalicki-Veizer J, O’Laughlin M, Fan X, Grillot M, Witowski S, Heath S, Frater JL, Eades W, Tomasson M, Westervelt P, DiPersio JF, Link DC, Mardis ER, Ley TJ, Wilson RK, & Graubert TA (2012). Clonal architecture of secondary acute myeloid leukemia. The New England journal of medicine, 366(12), 1090-8 PMID: 22417201

Matsushita H, Vesely MD, Koboldt DC, Rickert CG, Uppaluri R, Magrini VJ, Arthur CD, White JM, Chen YS, Shea LK, Hundal J, Wendl MC, Demeter R, Wylie T, Allison JP, Smyth MJ, Old LJ, Mardis ER, & Schreiber RD (2012).Cancer exome analysis reveals a T-cell-dependent mechanism of cancer immunoediting. Nature, 482 (7385), 400-4 PMID: 22318521

Koboldt DC, Zhang Q, Larson DE, Shen D, McLellan MD, Lin L, Miller CA, Mardis ER, Ding L, & Wilson RK (2012). VarScan 2: Somatic mutation and copy number alteration discovery in cancer by exome sequencing. Genome Research PMID: 22300766

Koboldt DC, Larson DE, Chen K, Ding L, & Wilson RK (2012). Massively parallel sequencing approaches for characterization of structural variation. Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.), 838, 369-84 PMID:22228022

Graubert TA, Shen D, Ding L, Okeyo-Owuor T, Lunn CL, Shao J, Krysiak K, Harris CC, Koboldt DC, Larson DE, McLellan MD, Dooling DJ, Abbott RM, Fulton RS, Schmidt H, Kalicki-Veizer J, O’Laughlin M, Grillot M, Baty J, Heath S, Frater JL, Nasim T, Link DC, Tomasson MH, Westervelt P, DiPersio JF, Mardis ER, Ley TJ, Wilson RK, & Walter MJ (2011). Recurrent mutations in the U2AF1 splicing factor in myelodysplastic syndromes. Nature genetics, 44 (1), 53-7 PMID: 22158538

Larson DE, Harris CC, Chen K, Koboldt DC, Abbott TE, Dooling DJ, Ley TJ, Mardis ER, Wilson RK, & Ding L. (2011). SomaticSniper: Identification of Somatic Point Mutations in Whole Genome Sequencing Data.Bioinformatics, Online : doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btr665

Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network (2011). Integrated genomic analyses of ovarian carcinoma. Nature, 474 (7353), 609-15 PMID:21720365

Marth GT, Yu F, Indap AR, Garimella K, et al & the 1000 Genomes Project (2011). The functional spectrum of low-frequency coding variation.Genome biology, 12 (9) PMID: 21917140

Ross JA, Koboldt DC, Staisch JE, Chamberlin HM, Gupta BP, Miller RD, Baird SE, & Haag ES (2011). Caenorhabditis briggsae recombinant inbred line genotypes reveal inter-strain incompatibility and the evolution of recombination. PLoS genetics, 7 (7) PMID: 21779179

Bowne SJ, Humphries MM, Sullivan LS, Kenna PF, Tam LC, Kiang AS, Campbell M, Weinstock GM, Koboldt DC, Ding L, Fulton RS, Sodergren EJ, et al (2011). A dominant mutation in RPE65 identified by whole-exome sequencing causes retinitis pigmentosa with choroidal involvement. European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 19 (10) PMID:21938004

Link DC, Schuettpelz LG, Shen D, Wang J, Walter MJ, Kulkarni S, Payton JE, Ivanovich J, Goodfellow PJ, Le Beau M, Koboldt DC, Dooling DJ, Fulton RS, et al (2011). Identification of a novel TP53 cancer susceptibility mutation through whole-genome sequencing of a patient with therapy-related AML. JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association, 305 (15), 1568-76 PMID: 21505135

Ley T, Ding L, Walter M, McLellan M, Lamprecht T, Larson D, Kandoth C, Payton J, Baty J, Welch J, Harris C, Lichti C, Townsend R, Fulton R, Dooling D, Koboldt D, et al. (2010). DNMT3A Mutations in Acute Myeloid Leukemia
New England Journal of Medicine DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1005143

Ding L, Wendl MC, Koboldt DC, & Mardis ER (2010). Analysis of next-generation genomic data in cancer: accomplishments and challenges. Human Molecular Genetics, 19 (R2):R188-96. PMID:20843826

Sudmant PH, Kitzman JO, Antonacci F, Alkan C, Malig M, Tsalenko A, Sampas N, Bruhn L, Shendure J, 1000 Genomes Project, & Eichler EE (2010). Diversity of human copy number variation and multicopy genes. Science (New York, N.Y.), 330 (6004), 641-6 PMID: 21030649

The 1000 Genomes Project Consortium (2010). A map of human genome variation from population-scale sequencing. Nature, 467(7319), 1061-1073 DOI: 10.1038/nature09534

Bowne SJ, Sullivan LS, Koboldt DC, Ding L, Fulton R, Abbott RM, Sodergren EJ, Birch DG, Wheaton DH, Heckenlively JR, Liu Q, Pierce EA, Weinstock GM, & Daiger SP (2010). Identification of Disease-Causing Mutations in Autosomal Dominant Retinitis Pigmentosa (adRP) Using Next-Generation DNA Sequencing. Investigative ophthalmology & visual science PMID: 20861475

Fehniger, T., Wylie, T., Germino, E., Leong, J., Magrini, V., Koul, S., Keppel, C., Schneider, S., Koboldt, D., Sullivan, R., Heinz, M., Crosby, S., Nagarajan, R., Ramsingh, G., Link, D., Ley, T., & Mardis, E. (2010). Next-generation sequencing identifies the natural killer cell microRNA transcriptome Genome Research DOI: 10.1101/gr.107995.110

Ramsingh G, Koboldt DC, Trissal M, Chiappinelli KB, Wylie T, Koul S, Chang LW, Nagarajan R, Fehniger TA, Goodfellow P, Magrini V, Wilson RK, Ding L, Ley TJ, Mardis ER, & Link DC (2010). Complete characterization of the microRNAome in a patient with acute myeloid leukemia. BloodPMID: 20876853

Koboldt DC, Ding L, Mardis ER & Wilson RK. (2010). Challenges of sequencing human genomes. Briefings in Bioinformatics DOI:10.1093/bib/bbq016

Ding L, Ellis MJ, Li S, Larson DE, Chen K, Wallis JW, Harris CC, McLellan MD, Fulton RS, Fulton LL, Abbott RM, Hoog J, Dooling DJ, Koboldt DC, et al. (2010). Genome remodelling in a basal-like breast cancer metastasis and xenograft. Nature, 464 (7291), 999-1005 PMID:20393555

Koboldt DC and Miller RD (2010). Identification of polymorphic markers for genetic mapping. Genomics: Essential Methods, In Press.

Koboldt DC, Staisch J, Thillainathan B, Haines K, Baird SE, Chamberlin HM, Haag ES, Miller RD, & Gupta BP (2010). A toolkit for rapid gene mapping in the nematode Caenorhabditis briggsae. BMC genomics, 11 (1) PMID: 20385026

Voora D, Koboldt DC, King CR, Lenzini PA, Eby CS, Porche-Sorbet R, Deych E, Crankshaw M, Milligan PE, McLeod HL, Patel SR, Cavallari LH, Ridker PM, Grice GR, Miller RD, & Gage BF (2010). A polymorphism in the VKORC1 regulator calumenin predicts higher warfarin dose requirements in African Americans. Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics, 87 (4), 445-51 PMID: 20200517

Zhang Q, Ding L, Larson DE, Koboldt DC, McLellan MD, Chen K, Shi X, Kraja A, et al (2009). CMDS: a population-based method for identifying recurrent DNA copy number aberrations in cancer from high-resolution data. Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) PMID: 20031968

Mardis ER, Ding L, Dooling DJ, Larson DE, McLellan MD, Chen K, Koboldt DC, et al (2009). Recurring mutations found by sequencing an acute myeloid leukemia genome. The New England journal of medicine, 361(11), 1058-66 PMID: 19657110

Koboldt DC, Chen K, Wylie T, Larson DE, McLellan MD, Mardis ER, Weinstock GM, Wilson RK, & Ding L (2009). VarScan: variant detection in massively parallel sequencing of individual and pooled samples.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 25 (17), 2283-5 PMID: 19542151

Ley TJ, Mardis ER, Ding L, Fulton B, McLellan MD, Chen K, Dooling D, Dunford-Shore BH, McGrath S, Hickenbotham M, Cook L, Abbott R, Larson DE, Koboldt DC, et al (2008). DNA sequencing of a cytogenetically normal acute myeloid leukaemia genome. Nature, 456 (7218), 66-72 PMID: 18987736

Ding L, Getz G, Wheeler DA, Mardis ER, McLellan MD, Cibulskis K, Sougnez C, et al (2008). Somatic mutations affect key pathways in lung adenocarcinoma. Nature, 455 (7216), 1069-75 PMID: 18948947

Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network (2008). Comprehensive genomic characterization defines human glioblastoma genes and core pathways. Nature, 455 (7216), 1061-8 PMID: 18772890

International HapMap Consortium (2007). A second generation human haplotype map of over 3.1 million SNPs. Nature, 449 (7164), 851-61 PMID: 17943122

Sabeti PC, Varilly P, Fry B, et al (2007). Genome-wide detection and characterization of positive selection in human populations. Nature, 449 (7164), 913-8 PMID: 17943131

Hillier LW, Miller RD, Baird SE, Chinwalla A, Fulton LA, Koboldt DC, & Waterston RH (2007). Comparison of C. elegans and C. briggsaegenome sequences reveals extensive conservation of chromosome organization and synteny. PLoS biology, 5 (7) PMID: 17608563

Stanley SL Jr, Frey SE, Taillon-Miller P, Guo J, Miller RD, Koboldt DC, Elashoff M, Christensen R, Saccone NL, & Belshe RB (2007). The immunogenetics of smallpox vaccination. The Journal of infectious diseases, 196 (2), 212-9 PMID: 17570108

Koboldt DC, Miller RD, & Kwok PY (2006). Distribution of human SNPs and its effect on high-throughput genotyping. Human mutation, 27(3), 249-54 PMID: 16425292

The International HapMap Consortium (2005). A haplotype map of the human genome. Nature, 437 (7063), 1299-1320 PMID: 16255080

Miller RD, Phillips MS, et al (2005). High-density single-nucleotide polymorphism maps of the human genome. Genomics, 86 (2), 117-26 PMID: 15961272

Other Writing by Dan Koboldt

Dan Koboldt is also the author of Get Your Baby to Sleep, a resource to help new parents whose baby won’t sleep with advice on establishing healthy baby sleep habits and handling baby sleep problems. He contributes to The Best of Twins and In Search of Whitetails blogs as well.

How would you like to start your own blog? See this guide to building a blog or website in 20 minutes. It walks you through setting up a site with open-source WordPress software, which happens to be what runs Massgenomics.

SOURCE:

Other related articles on this Open Access Online Scientific Journal:

“Genome in a Bottle”: NIST’s new metrics for Clinical Human Genome Sequencing “Genome in a Bottle”: NIST’s new metrics for Clinical Human Genome Sequencing

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/09/06/genome-in-a-bottle-nists-new-metrics-for-clinical-human-genome-sequencing/

DNA – The Next-Generation Storage Media for Digital Information

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/08/27/dna-the-next-generation-storage-media-for-digital-information/

How Genome Sequencing is Revolutionizing Clinical Diagnostics

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/08/20/how-genome-sequencing-is-revolutionizing-clinical-diagnostics/

NGS Market: Trends and Development for Genotype-Phenotype Associations Research

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/02/19/ngs-market-trends-and-development-for-genotype-phenotype-associations/

What is the Future for Genomics in Clinical Medicine?

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/02/17/what-is-the-future-for-genomics-in-clinical-medicine/

Genomically Guided Treatment after CLIA Approval: to be offered by Weill Cornell Precision Medicine Institute

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/02/06/genomically-guided-treatment-after-clia-approval-to-be-offered-by-weill-cornell-precision-medicine-institute/

Inaugural Genomics in Medicine – The Conference Program, 2/11-12/2013, San Francisco, CA

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/02/04/inaugural-genomics-in-medicine-the-conference-program-211-122013-san-francisco-ca/

GSK for Personalized Medicine using Cancer Drugs needs Alacris systems biology model to determine the in silico effect of the inhibitor in its “virtual clinical trial”

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/11/14/gsk-for-personalized-medicine-using-cancer-drugs-needs-alacris-systems-biology-model-to-determine-the-in-silico-effect-of-the-inhibitor-in-its-virtual-clinical-trial/

arrayMap: Genomic Feature Mining of Cancer Entities of Copy Number Abnormalities (CNAs) Data

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/11/01/arraymap-genomic-feature-mining-of-cancer-entities-of-copy-number-abnormalities-cnas-data/

NGS Cardiovascular Diagnostics: Long-QT Genes Sequenced – A Potential Replacement for Molecular Pathology

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/10/01/ngs-cardiovascular-diagnostics-long-qt-genes-sequenced-a-potential-replacement-for-molecular-pathology/

Speeding Up Genome Analysis: MIT Algorithms for Direct Computation on Compressed Genomic Datasets

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/09/18/speeding-up-genome-analysis-mit-algorithms-for-direct-computation-on-compressed-genomic-datasets/

Clinical Genetics, Personalized Medicine, Molecular Diagnostics, Consumer-targeted DNA – Consumer Genetics Conference (CGC) – October 3-5, 2012, Seaport Hotel, Boston, MA

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/09/06/clinical-genetics-personalized-medicine-molecular-diagnostics-consumer-targeted-dna-consumer-genetics-conference-cgc-october-3-5-2012-seaport-hotel-boston-ma/

“CRACKING THE CODE OF HUMAN LIFE: The Birth of BioInformatics & Computational Genomics” lays the manifold multivariate systems analytical tools that has moved the science forward to a groung that ensures clinical application.

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/02/13/cracking-the-code-of-human-life-the-birth-of-bioinformatics-and-computational-genomics/

Read Full Post »

Curator: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is ArticleID-27.png

WordCloud Image Produced by Adam Tubman

Dr. M. Michael Barmada, Associate Professor at Center for Computational Genetics, University of Pittsburgh, tells about how the hot topic of the times now – genetics – has challenged the computational resources across the University:

Associate Professor at Center for Computational Genetics at University of Pittsburgh, Dr. M. Michael Barmada

CLC bio Annual Survey Results

http://www.clcbio.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/annual_survey_clcbio.pdf?utm_source=Survey2012&utm_medium=CLC

CLC Bio has published the results of a survey of researchers in the next-generation sequencing market to find out which sequencers and software are used the most.

The company says it received responses from 708 individuals in 73 countries.

Not surprisingly, they found that Sequencers

  • Illumina’s HiSeq and MiSeq are the most used instruments with about 34.6 percent and 21.3 percent of respondents, respectively, stating that they use the systems. Meanwhile,
  • Roche’s 454 sequencers got 21.2 percent of the votes and
  • Life Technologies’ Ion Torrent Personal Genome Machine got 11.5 percent of the responses.

In terms of Bioinformatics tools, the

  • UCSC Genome Browser has the most use, according to the survey, with 28.9 percent of respondents reporting that they use the program. Next in line is
  • Ensembl tools and then – 26.9
  • Bowtie with  23.4 percent of the votes, respectively.

Also worth noting is that NGS is being used primarily for

  • whole-genome sequencing — 40.8 percent of the votes — followed by
  • RNA-seq and — 40.1 percent
  • de novo sequencing with  39.8 percent of the votes, respectively.

Of the 708 respondents, about 24.6 percent work in the US, according to CLC. Also,

  • 73 percent of respondents work in academic research while
  • 9 percent work in industry, another
  • 9 percent in government, and
  • 6 percent work in not-for-profit organizations, according to the survey.
We believe MedQL has the potential to be an effective time saver for researchers working with variant prioritization, making it a promising new plugin for CLC Genomics Workbench. We’re excited to add BioQL’s technology for evidence-based downstream analysis of Next Generation Sequencing data to our products.
Director of Global Partner Relations at CLC bio, Mikael Flensborg
Using CLC Genomics Workbench, a common workflow to detect causative mutations in medical genomics involves read mapping and variant detection. The result is a list of candidate gene variants that differ from the reference genome. The MedQL plugin uses an evidence-based approach to prioritize these genes for functional studies and, thereby, allowing researchers to focus their efforts on the most promising candidates.

CLC BIO AND BIOQL RELEASE MEDICAL GENOMICS PLUGIN FOR GENOTYPE–PHENOTYPE ASSOCIATIONS

Aarhus, Denmark — November 7, 2012 — Today, CLC bio and the independent software vendor, BioQL, announced the release of the MedQL Variant Prioritizer plugin for CLC Genomics Workbench. The plugin connects with MedQL’s online database to prioritize a list of variants in gene regions based on their degree of association with a given phenotype.

The MedQL database contains more than 20 million articles from Medline, indexed using a dictionary of nearly 300,000 terms from authoritative ontologies such as the HUGO Gene Nomenclature Committee (HGNC), the Human Disease Ontology, and the Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man (OMIM).

CLC BIO

We’re the world’s leading bioinformatics software developers and the only ones providing an analysis platform where both desktop and server software are seamlessly integrated and optimized for best performance.

Our wide range of analyses are available both through a user-friendly graphical user-interface as well as through command-line, allowing scientists to choose their preferred interface.

By developing our own proprietary algorithms, based on published methods, we have successfully accelerated the data calculations to achieve remarkable improvements in speed over comparable solutions.

Our enterprise platform serves as the backbone of sequence analysis pipelines for a large number of the world’s most prominent research institutions. With around 2000 different organizations as our customers around the globe, including the ten biggest pharmaceutical companies in the world, we have established ourselves as the market-leader in sequence analysis software.

One of our key strategies is to be ‘cross-platform’, which means we support all the major next generation sequencing platforms as well as traditional Sanger-based sequencing, effectively giving our customers a one-stop-shop for their analysis needs across all sequencing platforms.

http://www.clcbio.com/corporate/about-clc-bio/

 Desktop software for Sequence Analysis based on an overall level of subjects.

FEATURES

Next Generation Sequencing analysis
Genomics
Transcriptomics (Gene expression features also available in CLC Main Workbench)
Epigenomics
RNA secondary structure
BLAST searches
Protein analyses
Primer design
Assembly of Sanger sequencing data
Molecular cloning
Pattern discovery and motif search
Nucleotide analyses
GenBank Entrez searches
Sequence alignment
Phylogenetic trees
Detailed history log
Batch processing
Customization of your workbenches

CLC Genomics Machine

Our turnkey solution, for small research labs. It includes CLC Genomics Server and CLC Genomics Workbench. Everything is preinstalled on a powerful desktop computer or server blade – ready to plug-in and run from the day it is delivered.

CLC Genomics Factory

Our turnkey solution for medium and large research labs that needs a complete IT infrastructure for their NGS data analysis.

USER-FRIENDLY BIOINFORMATICS

Our software is made for biologists by biologists, so it’s easy to analyze, visualize, and compare DNA, RNA, and Protein data, as well as run advanced workflows with large and complicated datasets.

J. CRAIG VENTER INSTITUTE EXTENDS CLC BIO SITE LICENSE THROUGH 2017

Aarhus, Denmark — January 8, 2013 — Today CLC bio, the global leader in commercial sequence analysis software, announced that the J. Craig Venter Institute (JCVI) has extended their site license agreement with CLC bio through 2017.

JCVI has been utilizing CLC bio’s enterprise platform since 2009 and currently uses it on more than 30 research grants, including their work as part of the Human Microbiome Project (HMP). The HMP is a National Institutes of Health-funded project to catalogue and characterize the microbes living in and on the human body. Recently, the HMP Consortium published a series of papers with results from this work in Nature and PLOSone. CLC’s bio software was used in the analysis of this work.

The complexity and diversity of our research projects necessitates unique tools to analyze these increasingly large data sets. In our pursuit of excellence we always test and employ the best available tools for our research projects. As such we’re happy to announce the extension of our site license with CLC bio through 2017.
Karen Nelson, Ph.D., President, JCVI
For us, it’s always very exciting to see the results of all the intriguing research that our customers are doing, and no less so, when JCVI published their papers on the HMP project this summer. JCVI was one of our first site license deals with a premier institution in the genomics research field, and we’re proud to announce it has been extended for another five years.
Thomas Knudsen, CEO, CLC bio

The original 4-year site license agreement between JCVI and CLC bio was signed in the summer of 2009, and has now been extended by another 5 years, through 2017. JCVI deploys CLC bio’s platform in an integrated environment across multiple geographical locations and together with international collaborators.

Read Full Post »

Reporter and Curator: Dr. Sudipta Saha, Ph.D.

Human sex refers to the processes by which an individual becomes either a male or female during development. Complex mechanisms are responsible for male sex determination and differentiation. The steps of formation of the testes are dependent on a series of Y-linked, X-linked and autosomal genes actions and interactions. After formation of testes the gonads secrete hormones, which are essential for the formation of the male genitalia. Hormones are transcription regulators, which function by specific receptors. Ambiguous genitalia are result of disruption of genetic interaction. This review describes the mechanisms, which lead to differentiation of male sex and ways by which the determination and differentiation may be interrupted by naturally occurring mutations, causing different syndromes and diseases.

 

Sex determination: Initial event that determines whether the gonads will develop as testes or ovaries. Sex is determined by “the heat of the male partner during intercourse” –Aristotle (335 B.C.). Today: both environmental and internal mechanisms of sex determination can operate in different species.

 

Sex differentiation: Subsequent events that ultimately produce either the male or female sexual phenotype. Sexual differentiation is conformed in the human during four successive steps: the constitution of the genetic sex, the differentiation of the gonads, the differentiation of the internal and the external genital tractus and the differentiation of the brain and the hypothalamus.

Sex determination, which depends on the sex-chromosome complement of the embryo, is established by multiple molecular events that direct the development of germ cells, their migration to the urogenital ridge, and the formation of either a testis, in the presence of the Y chromosome (46, XY), or an ovary in the absence of the Y chromosome and the presence of a second X chromosome (46, XX). Sex determination sets the stage for sex differentiation, the sex-specific response of tissues to hormones produced by the gonads after they have differentiated in a male or female pattern. A number of genes have been discovered that contribute both early and late to the process of sex determination and differentiation. In many cases our knowledge has derived from studies of either spontaneous or engineered mouse mutations that cause phenotypes similar to those in humans. How mutations in these genes cause important clinical syndromes and the clinical entities that continue to elude classification at the molecular level have to be tested. Knowledge of the molecular basis of disorders of sex determination and differentiation pathways will continue to have a strong influence on the diagnosis and management of these conditions.

Source References:

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMra022784

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_determination_and_differentiation_(human)

Read Full Post »

What is the Future for Genomics in Clinical Medicine?

What is the Future for Genomics in Clinical Medicine?

Author and Curator: Larry H Bernstein, MD, FCAP

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is ArticleID-26.png

WordCloud Image Produced by Adam Tubman

Introduction

This is the last in a series of articles looking at the past and future of the genome revolution.  It is a revolution indeed that has had a beginning with the first phase discovery leading to the Watson-Crick model, the second phase leading to the completion of the Human Genome Project, a third phase in elaboration of ENCODE.  But we are entering a fourth phase, not so designated, except that it leads to designing a path to the patient clinical experience.
What is most remarkable on this journey, which has little to show in treatment results at this time, is that the boundary between metabolism and genomics is breaking down.  The reality is that we are a magnificent “magical” experience in evolutionary time, functioning in a bioenvironment, put rogether like a truly complex machine, and with interacting parts.  What are those parts – organelles, a genetic message that may be constrained and it may be modified based on chemical structure, feedback, crosstalk, and signaling pathways.  This brings in diet as a source of essential nutrients, exercise as a method for delay of structural loss (not in excess), stress oxidation, repair mechanisms, and an entirely unexpected impact of this knowledge on pharmacotherapy.  I illustrate this with some very new observations.

Gutenberg Redone

The first is a recent talk on how genomic medicine has constructed a novel version of the “printing press”, that led us out of the dark ages.

Topol_splash_image

In our series The Creative Destruction of Medicine, I’m trying to get into critical aspects of how we can Schumpeter or reboot the future of healthcare by leveraging the big innovations that are occurring in the digital world, including digital medicine.

We have this big thing about evidence-based medicine and, of course, the sanctimonious randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Well, that’s great if one can do that, but often we’re talking about needing thousands, if not tens of thousands, of patients for these types of clinical trials. And things are changing so fast with respect to medicine and, for example, genomically guided interventions that it’s going to become increasingly difficult to justify these very large clinical trials.

For example, there was a drug trial for melanoma and the mutation of BRAF, which is the gene that is found in about 60% of people with malignant melanoma. When that trial was done, there was a placebo control, and there was a big ethical charge asking whether it is justifiable to have a body count. This was a matched drug for the biology underpinning metastatic melanoma, which is essentially a fatal condition within 1 year, and researchers were giving some individuals a placebo.

The next observation is a progression of what he have already learned. The genome has a role is cellular regulation that we could not have dreamed of 25 years ago, or less. The role is far more than just the translation of a message from DNA to RNA to construction of proteins, lipoproteins, cellular and organelle structures, and more than a regulation of glycosidic and glycolytic pathways, and under the influence of endocrine and apocrine interactions. Despite what we have learned, the strength of inter-molecular interactions, strong and weak chemical bonds, essential for 3-D folding, we know little about the importance of trace metals that have key roles in catalysis and because of their orbital structures, are essential for organic-inorganic interplay. This will not be coming soon because we know almost nothing about the intracellular, interstitial, and intrvesicular distributions and how they affect the metabolic – truly metabolic events.

I shall however, use some new information that gives real cause for joy.

Reprogramming Alters Cells’ Fate

Kathy Liszewski
Gordon Conference  Report: June 21, 2012;32(11)
New and emerging strategies were showcased at Gordon Conference’s recent “Reprogramming Cell Fate” meeting. For example, cutting-edge studies described how only a handful of key transcription factors were needed to entirely reprogram cells.
M. Azim Surani, Ph.D., Marshall-Walton professor at the Gurdon Institute, University of Cambridge, U.K., is examining cellular reprogramming in a mouse model. Epiblast stem cells are derived from the early-stage embryonic stage after implantation of blastocysts, about six days into development, and retain the potential to undergo reversion to embryonic stem cells (ESCs) or to PGCs.”  They report two critical steps both of which are needed for exploring epigenetic reprogramming.  “Although there are two X chromosomes in females, the inactivation of one is necessary for cell differentiation. Only after epigenetic reprogramming of the X chromosome can pluripotency be acquired. Pluripotent stem cells can generate any fetal or adult cell type but are not capable of developing into a complete organism.”
The second read-out is the activation of Oct4, a key transcription factor involved in ESC development. The expression of Oct4 in epiSCs requires its proximal enhancer.  Dr. Surani said that their cell-based system demonstrates how a systematic analysis can be performed to analyze how other key genes contribute to the many-faceted events involved in reprogramming the germline.
Reprogramming Expressway
A number of other recent studies have shown the importance of Oct4 for self-renewal of undifferentiated ESCs. It is sufficient to induce pluripotency in neural tissues and somatic cells, among others. The expression of Oct4 must be tightly regulated to control cellular differentiation. But, Oct4 is much more than a simple regulator of pluripotency, according to Hans R. Schöler, Ph.D., professor in the department of cell and developmental biology at the Max Planck Institute for Molecular Biomedicine.
Oct4 has a critical role in committing pluripotent cells into the somatic cellular pathway. When embryonic stem cells overexpress Oct4, they undergo rapid differentiation and then lose their ability for pluripotency. Other studies have shown that Oct4 expression in somatic cells reprograms them for transformation into a particular germ cell layer and also gives rise to induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) under specific culture conditions.
Oct4 is the gatekeeper into and out of the reprogramming expressway. By modifying experimental conditions, Oct4 plus additional factors can induce formation of iPSCs, epiblast stem cells, neural cells, or cardiac cells. Dr. Schöler suggests that Oct4 a potentially key factor not only for inducing iPSCs but also for transdifferention.  “Therapeutic applications might eventually focus less on pluripotency and more on multipotency, especially if one can dedifferentiate cells within the same lineage. Although fibroblasts are from a different germ layer, we recently showed that adding a cocktail of transcription factors induces mouse fibroblasts to directly acquire a neural stem cell identity.

Stem cell diagram illustrates a human fetus st...

Stem cell diagram illustrates a human fetus stem cell and possible uses on the circulatory, nervous, and immune systems. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

English: Embryonic Stem Cells. (A) shows hESCs...

English: Embryonic Stem Cells. (A) shows hESCs. (B) shows neurons derived from hESCs. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Transforming growth factor beta (TGF-β) is a s...

Transforming growth factor beta (TGF-β) is a secreted protein that controls proliferation, cellular differentiation, and other functions in most cells. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TGFbeta (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Pioneer Transcription Factors

Pioneer transcription factors take the lead in facilitating cellular reprogramming and responses to environmental cues. Multicellular organisms consist of functionally distinct cellular types produced by differential activation of gene expression. They seek out and bind specific regulatory sequences in DNA. Even though DNA is coated with and condensed into a thick fiber of chromatin. The pioneer factor, discovered by Prof. KS Zaret at UPenn SOM in 1996, he says, endows the competence for gene activity, being among the first transcription factors to engage and pry open the target sites in chromatin.
FoxA factors, expressed in the foregut endoderm of the mouse,are necessary for induction of the liver program. They found that nearly one-third of the DNA sites bound by FoxA in the adult liver occur near silent genes

A Nontranscriptional Role for HIF-1α as a Direct Inhibitor of DNA Replication

ME Hubbi, K Shitiz, DM Gilkes, S Rey,….GL Semenza. Johns Hopkins University SOM
Sci. Signal 2013; 6(262) 10pgs. [DOI: 10.1126/scisignal.2003417]   http:dx.doi.org/10.1126/scisignal.2003417

http://SciSignal.com/A Nontranscriptional Role for HIF-1α as a Direct Inhibitor of DNA Replication/

Many of the cellular responses to reduced O2 availability are mediated through the transcriptional activity of hypoxia-inducible factor 1 (HIF-1). We report a role for the isolated HIF-1α subunit as an inhibitor of DNA replication, and this role was independent of HIF-1β and transcriptional regulation. In response to hypoxia, HIF-1α bound to Cdc6, a protein that is essential for loading of the mini-chromosome maintenance (MCM) complex (which has DNA helicase activity) onto DNA, and promoted the interaction between Cdc6 and the MCM complex. The binding of HIF-1α to the complex decreased phosphorylation and activation of the MCM complex by the kinase Cdc7. As a result, HIF-1α inhibited firing of replication origins, decreased DNA replication, and induced cell cycle arrest in various cell types. To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: gsemenza@jhmi.edu
Citation: M. E. Hubbi, Kshitiz, D. M. Gilkes, S. Rey, C. C. Wong, W. Luo, D.-H. Kim, C. V. Dang, A. Levchenko, G. L. Semenza, A Nontranscriptional Role for HIF-1α as a Direct Inhibitor of DNA Replication. Sci. Signal. 6, ra10 (2013).

Identification of a Candidate Therapeutic Autophagy-inducing Peptide

Nature 2013;494(7436).    http://nature.com/Identification_of_a_candidate_therapeutic_autophagy-inducing_peptide/   http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23364696
http://www.readcube.com/articles/10.1038/nature11866

Beth Levine and colleagues have constructed a cell-permeable peptide derived from part of an autophagy protein called beclin 1. This peptide is a potent inducer of autophagy in mammalian cells and in vivo in mice and was effective in the clearance of several viruses including chikungunya virus, West Nile virus and HIV-1.

Could this small autophagy-inducing peptide may be effective in the prevention and treatment of human diseases?

PR-Set7 Is a Nucleosome-Specific Methyltransferase that Modifies Lysine 20 of

Histone H4 and Is Associated with Silent Chromatin

K Nishioka, JC Rice, K Sarma, H Erdjument-Bromage, …, D Reinberg.   Molecular Cell, Vol. 9, 1201–1213, June, 2002, Copyright 2002 by Cell Press   http://www.cell.com/molecular-cell/abstract/S1097-2765(02)00548-8

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1097276502005488           http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12086618
http://www.cienciavida.cl/publications/b46e8d324fa4aefa771c4d6ece4d2e27_PR-Set7_Is_a_Nucleosome-Specific.pdf

We have purified a human histone H4 lysine 20methyl-transferase and cloned the encoding gene, PR/SET07. A mutation in Drosophila pr-set7 is lethal: second in-star larval death coincides with the loss of H4 lysine 20 methylation, indicating a fundamental role for PR-Set7 in development. Transcriptionally competent regions lack H4 lysine 20 methylation, but the modification coincided with condensed chromosomal regions polytene chromosomes, including chromocenter euchromatic arms. The Drosophila male X chromosome, which is hyperacetylated at H4 lysine 16, has significantly decreased levels of lysine 20 methylation compared to that of females. In vitro, methylation of lysine 20 and acetylation of lysine 16 on the H4 tail are competitive. Taken together, these results support the hypothesis that methylation of H4 lysine 20 maintains silent chromatin, in part, by precluding neighboring acetylation on the H4 tail.

Next-Generation Sequencing vs. Microarrays

Shawn C. Baker, Ph.D., CSO of BlueSEQ
GEN Feb 2013
With recent advancements and a radical decline in sequencing costs, the popularity of next generation sequencing (NGS) has skyrocketed. As costs become less prohibitive and methods become simpler and more widespread, researchers are choosing NGS over microarrays for more of their genomic applications. The immense number of journal articles citing NGS technologies it looks like NGS is no longer just for the early adopters. Once thought of as cost prohibitive and technically out of reach, NGS has become a mainstream option for many laboratories, allowing researchers to generate more complete and scientifically accurate data than previously possible with microarrays.

Gene Expression

Researchers have been eager to use NGS for gene expression experiments for a detailed look at the transcriptome. Arrays suffer from fundamental ‘design bias’ —they only return results from those regions for which probes have been designed. The various RNA-Seq methods cover all aspects of the transcriptome without any a priori knowledge of it, allowing for the analysis of such things as novel transcripts, splice junctions and noncoding RNAs. Despite NGS advancements, expression arrays are still cheaper and easier when processing large numbers of samples (e.g., hundreds to thousands).
Methylation
While NGS unquestionably provides a more complete picture of the methylome, whole genome methods are still quite expensive. To reduce costs and increase throughput, some researchers are using targeted methods, which only look at a portion of the methylome. Because details of exactly how methylation impacts the genome and transcriptome are still being investigated, many researchers find a combination of NGS for discovery and microarrays for rapid profiling.

Diagnostics

They are interested in ease of use, consistent results, and regulatory approval, which microarrays offer. With NGS, there’s always the possibility of revealing something new and unexpected. Clinicians aren’t prepared for the extra information NGS offers. But the power and potential cost savings of NGS-based diagnostics is alluring, leading to their cautious adoption for certain tests such as non-invasive prenatal testing.
Cytogenetics
Perhaps the application that has made the least progress in transitioning to NGS is cytogenetics. Researchers and clinicians, who are used to using older technologies such as karyotyping, are just now starting to embrace microarrays. NGS has the potential to offer even higher resolution and a more comprehensive view of the genome, but it currently comes at a substantially higher price due to the greater sequencing depth. While dropping prices and maturing technology are causing NGS to make headway in becoming the technology of choice for a wide range of applications, the transition away from microarrays is a long and varied one. Different applications have different requirements, so researchers need to carefully weigh their options when making the choice to switch to a new technology or platform. Regardless of which technology they choose, genomic researchers have never had more options.

Sequencing Hones In on Targets

Greg Crowther, Ph.D.

GEN Feb 2013

Cliff Han, PhD, team leader at the Joint Genome Institute in the Los Alamo National Lab, was one of a number of scientists who made presentations regarding target enrichment at the “Sequencing, Finishing, and Analysis in the Future” (SFAF) conference in Santa Fe, which was co-sponsored by the Los Alamos National Laboratory and DOE Joint Genome Institute. One of the main challenges is that of target enrichment: the selective sequencing of genomic or transcriptomic regions. The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) can be considered the original target-enrichment technique and continues to be useful in contexts such as genome finishing. “One target set is the unique gaps—the gaps in the unique sequence regions. Another is to enrich the repetitive sequences…ribosomal RNA regions, which together are about 5 kb or 6 kb.” The unique-sequence gaps targeted for PCR with 40-nucleotide primers complementary to sequences adjacent to the gaps, did not yield the several-hundred-fold enrichment expected based on previously published work. “We got a maximum of 70-fold enrichment and generally in the dozens of fold of enrichment,” noted Dr. Han.

“We enrich the genome, put the enriched fragments onto the Pacific Biosciences sequencer, and sequence the repeats,” continued Dr. Han. “In many parts of the sequence there will be a unique sequence anchored at one or both ends of it, and that will help us to link these scaffolds together.” This work, while promising, will remain unpublished for now, as the Joint Genome Institute has shifted its resources to other projects.
At the SFAF conference Dr. Jones focused on going beyond basic target enrichment and described new tools for more efficient NGS research. “Hybridization methods are flexible and have multiple stop-start sites, and you can capture very large sizes, but they require library prep,” said Jennifer Carter Jones, Ph.D., a genomics field applications scientist at Agilent. “With PCR-based methods, you have to design PCR primers and you’re doing multiplexed PCR, so it’s limited in the size that you can target. But the workflow is quick because there’s no library preparation; you’re just doing PCR.” She discussed Agilent’s recently acquired HaloPlex technology, a hybrid system that includes both a hybridization step and a PCR step. Because no library preparation is required, sequencing results can be obtained in about six hours, making it suitable for clinical uses. However, the hybridization step allows capture of targets of up to 5 megabases—longer than purely PCR-based methods can deliver. The Agilent talk also provided details on the applications of SureSelect, the company’s hybridization technology, to Methyl-Seq and RNA-Seq research. With this technology, 120-mer baits hybridize to targets, then are pulled down with streptavidin-coated magnetic beads.
These are selections from the SFAF conference, which is expected to be a boost to work on the microbiome, and lead to infectious disease therapeutic approaches.

Summary

We have finished a breathtaking ride through the genomic universe in several sessions.  This has been a thorough review of genomic structure and function in cellular regulation.  The items that have been discussed and can be studied in detail include:

  1.  the classical model of the DNA structure
  2. the role of ubiquitinylation in managing cellular function and in autophagy, mitophagy, macrophagy, and protein degradation
  3. the nature of the tight folding of the chromatin in the nucleus
  4. intramolecular bonds and short distance hydrophobic and hydrophilic interactions
  5. trace metals in molecular structure
  6. nuclear to membrane interactions
  7. the importance of the Human Genome Project followed by Encode
  8. the Fractal nature of chromosome structure
  9. the oligomeric formation of short sequences and single nucletide polymorphisms (SNPs)and the potential to identify drug targets
  10. Enzymatic components of gene regulation (ligase, kinases, phosphatases)
  11. Methods of computational analysis in genomics
  12. Methods of sequencing that have become more accurate and are dropping in cost
  13. Chromatin remodeling
  14. Triplex and quadruplex models not possible to construct at the time of Watson-Crick
  15. sequencing errors
  16. propagation of errors
  17. oxidative stress and its expected and unintended effects
  18. origins of cardiovascular disease
  19. starvation and effect on protein loss
  20. ribosomal damage and repair
  21. mitochondrial damage and repair
  22. miscoding and mutational changes
  23. personalized medicine
  24. Genomics to the clinics
  25. Pharmacotherapy horizons
  26. driver mutations
  27. induced pluripotential embryonic stem cell (iPSCs)
  28. The association of key targets with disease
  29. The real possibility of moving genomic information to the bedside
  30. Requirements for the next generation of electronic health record to enable item 29

Other Related articles on this Open Access Online Scientific Journal, include the following:

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/01/14/oogonial-stem-cells-purified-a-view-towards-the-future-of-reproductive-biology/   SSaha

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/10/22/blood-vessel-generating-stem-cells-discovered/ RSaxena

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/08/22/a-possible-light-by-stem-cell-therapy-in-painful-dark-of-osteoarthritis-kartogenin-a-small-molecule-differentiates-stem-cells-to-chondrocyte-healthy-cartilage-cells/   ASarkar and RSaxena

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/08/07/human-embryonic-pluripotent-stem-cells-and-healing-post-myocardial-infarction/    LHB

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/02/03/genome-wide-detection-of-single-nucleotide-and-copy-number-variation-of-a-single-human-cell/  SJWilliams

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/01/09/gene-therapy-into-healthy-heart-muscle-reprogramming-scar-tissue-in-damaged-hearts/ ALev-Ari

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/01/03/differentiation-therapy-epigenetics-tackles-solid-tumors/  SJWilliams

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/12/09/naotech-therapy-for-breast-cancer/  TBarliya

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »