Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Doctor of Philosophy’

Highlights from 8th Annual Personalized Medicine Conference, November 28-29,  2012, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA — Method used “Tweets Content Analysis”

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

Article ID #5: Highlights from 8th Annual Personalized Medicine Conference, November 28-29, 2012, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. Published on 11/24/2012

WordCloud Image Produced by Adam Tubman

 

 

 

 

  • Audience poll: 75% think a hypothetical cancer diagnostic is patentable, but the number plummets to 25% if that Dx is DNA-based.

 

 

 

  • 30% of #PMConf audience says lack of physician education & awareness is biggest obstacle to adoption of #personalizedmedicine in the clinic

 

 

 

  • 30% of #PMConf audience says lack of physician education & awareness is biggest obstacle to adoption of #personalizedmedicine in the clinic

 

 

 

  • Cost of informatics can be a bottleneck, but technology pushes boundaries & advances

 

 

 

  • “next generation sequencing will become the sole platform for molecular diagnostics”

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • 56% of #PMConf audience thinks that DNA sequence will become a routine part of an individual’s medical record within the next 10 years

 

 

 

  • Programs @AmerMedicalAssn are being developed to support physicians as genetic medicine is put into practice

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • “We have the ability and the technology. It just needs to be applied appropriately”

 

 

 

 

 

  • Information is only going to grow & change over time. We’ll always be interpreting our genomes

 

 

 

  • audience comment on need to adjust insurance system to use genetic info, encourage prevention and disease management

 

 

 

  • We need to be cognizant of how economics can affect the delivery of healthcare

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Audience poll: 75% think clinical whole-genome sequencing useful in select situations only (vs say standard for all…

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • After 10 years of the genomic revolution, #genomics is entering clinical medicine at an accelerated rate

 

SELECTIVE Live TWEETS from the conference are recorded below:

Tweets

David Resnick (@NixonPeabodyLLP): Patents have the potential to prevent folks from getting into next generation sequencing #PMConf#NGS

David Resnick @NixonPeabodyLLP & Laura Coruzzi @JonesDaydiscuss Myriad gene patent case @ #PMConf

Audience poll: 75% think a hypothetical cancer diagnostic is patentable, but the number plummets to 25% if that Dx is DNA-based. #PMConf

RT @nixonpeabodyllp: We’ll be live tweeting the next hour of the@HarvardPMConf. NP’s David Resnick talking #genetics & law.#PMConf

 

Dr. Bob Tepper (Third Rock) introduces panelists from @JonesDay@NixonPeabodyLLP @kpcb for a discussion on genetics & the law#PMConf

Dr. Joshi (@Oracle) – Clinicians must communicate w/ researchers to faithfully implement standards & avoid redundant infrastructures#PMConf

30% of #PMConf audience says lack of physician education & awareness is biggest obstacle to adoption of #personalizedmedicinein the clinic

Joshi (@Oracle) – Cost of informatics can be a bottleneck, but technology pushes boundaries & advances #personalizedmedicine#PMConf

 

Trevor Hawkins (@SiemensHealth) says “next generation sequencing will become the sole platform for molecular diagnostics” #PMConf

 

Kevin Hrusovsky @PerkinElmer Personalized medicine evolving into personalized health with addition of prevention & detection #PMConf

 Retweeted by PM Conference

 

56% of #PMConf audience thinks that DNA sequence will become a routine part of an individual’s medical record within the next 10 years

Kris Joshi @Oracle_at_HIMSS comments on the likely transformation of healthcare into a truly global network #PMConf

 

Beginning now: panel discussion on “Business Models for Use of Genetic Information,” moderated by Dr. Brophy of @GEHealthcare#PMConf

 

Dr. Scott says “In next 10-20 yrs, anyone in any developed healthcare system will have access to #genomesequencing#PMConf

 

RT @bioitworld: Randy Scott: It’s Metcalfe’s Law on network effect — not Moore’s Law — that drove computing boom, and will by…

 

Dr. Randall Scott (@Genomic_Health & InVitae Corporation): “Every disease is a rare disease & #genomics will help us prove this”#PMConf

 

Ed Abrahams & Stafford O’Kelly (PMC) present Award for Leadership in #PersonalizedMedicine to Randall Scott (InVitae Corporation) at#PMConf

 

Panel highlights need for drug developers to collaborate with Dx companies & build partnerships throughout development process.#PMConf

 Retweeted by PM Conference

 

Pharma engaging in solid partnerships w/ FDA to try new approaches to #drugdevelopment, says Dr. Yancopoulos #PMConf

 

Dr. Hakan Sakul @pfizer_news begins Q&A session, asking about changing attitudes of the use of #genetics in #drugdevelopment#PMConf

 

Dr. Yancopoulos @ Regeneron Pharma comments that the ability to humanize mouse models has had great impact on#drugdevelopment #PMConf

 

Michael Streit @GSKUS: “One size does not fit all. Thinking beyond one pathway mutation is necessary to help #cancer patients”#PMConf

 

Jeff Leiden @VertexPharma on Genetics & #DrugDevelopment panel @ #PMConf “Need to think about diff molecules to treat specific disease”

 

Biggest barrier to widespread use of genetics in drug dvlpmt: 29% say attitude of drug dvlprs, 22% say regulatory considerations#PMConf

Retweeted by PM Conference

 

Audience poll at #PMConf: 84% say #genetics is making a meaningful impact on #drugdevelopment

 

Heidi Rehm @PartnersNews @harvardmed expresses need for more communication btw physicians & scientists in world of genomic analysis #PMConf

 

Jon Retzlaff explains @AACR work to advance#personalizedmedicine, including Cancer Biomarkers Collaborative w/ @theNCI @US_FDA #PMConf

Retweeted by PM Conference

 

Programs @AmerMedicalAssn are being developed to support physicians as genetic medicine is put into practice #PMConf – Katie Johansen Taber

Randy Burkholder @PhRMA – “#personalizedmedicine is the solution to the healthcare cost challenge that we all face” #PMConf

 

Joe Beery (@LIFECorporation): “We have the ability and the technology. It just needs to be applied appropriately” #PMConf

 

Dr. Snyder @SUMedicine: Information is only going to grow & change over time. We’ll always be interpreting our genomes#PMConf

 

Beery agrees w/ audience comment on need to adjust insurance system to use genetic info, encourage prevention and disease management #PMConf

 Retweeted by PM Conference

 

Dr. Holmes Morton (The Clinic for Special Children): We need to be cognizant of how economics can affect the delivery of healthcare#PMConf

 

John Lauerman, reporter @BloombergNews comments on his diagnosis with the JAK-2 gene variation and benefits of#genomesequencing #PMConf

 

Joe Beery @LIFECorporation shares the “medical odyssey” of his children and his personal experience with #rarediseases at #PMConf

 

Dr. Michael Snyder @SUMedicine discusses #genomics integration into medicine, may lead to a shift to predictive healthcare #PMConf

 

RT @bioitworld: Audience poll: 75% think clinical whole-genome sequencing useful in select situations only (vs say standard for all…

 

Dr. Stephen Eck of @AstellasUS begins a panel discussion on the impact of #genomesequencing #PMConf

 

Dr. Kucherlapati @harvardmed polls #PMConf audience: 75% of attendees think #personalizedmedicine is being built into medical practice

 

Dr. Jeffrey Filer @harvardmed discusses key impacts of#personalizedmedicine across multiple disease areas #PMConf

 

Dr. Weiss @PartnersNews: After 10 years of the genomic revolution,#genomics is entering clinical medicine at an accelerated rate#PMConf

 

Conference Introduction

The past few years have witnessed a revolution in the understanding of health and disease, brought on in large part by the sequencing of the human genome and the creation of a map of human genetic variation. Personalized medicine is the translation of this knowledge to patient care by using genetic and genomic information in diagnosis, prognosis and treatment. The goal of personalized medicine is to provide the right diagnosis and treatment to the right patient at the right time at the right cost. Already there are abundant examples that personalized medicine is poised to transform healthcare by offering the possibility of improved health outcomes and the potential to make healthcare more cost-effective.

The eighth annual Personalized Medicine conference will take place November 28-29, 2012 at The Joseph B. Martin Conference Center at Harvard Medical School in Boston. This year’s two-day conference will once again bring the most current updates on Personalized Medicine and how recent experience may guide and inform the policies, plans and actions of stakeholders among government, academe and the private sector. Widely considered the premier event in the field, the conference attracts over 600 national and international thought leaders.

The conference reflects a distinctive collaboration of the Partners HealthCare Center for Personalized Genetic Medicine, Harvard Medical School and Harvard Business School. The alliance of these renowned academic enterprises presents an exceptional opportunity to address the integrating of medicine and business in facilitating personalized medicine.

PROGRAM
Wednesday, November 28, 2012
7:00 a.m. Registration and Continental Breakfast
8:00 a.m.
Welcome & Opening Remarks
Raju Kucherlapati, Ph.D.
Paul C. Cabot Professor of Genetics, Professor of Medicine, Harvard Medical School
Scott Weiss, M.D., M.S.
Scientific Director, Partners HealthCare Center for Personalized Genetic Medicine; Associate Director, Channing Laboratory; Professor of Medicine, Harvard Medical School
Jeffrey Flier, M.D.
Dean of the Faculty of Medicine, Harvard Medical School
Introducer:  Jeffrey Leerink
Chair and CEO, Leerink Swann LLC
8:30 a.m.
Panel:
Impact of Genome Sequencing
on Health
Human genome sequencing promises to be an important tool in assessing risk, diagnosing disease and stratifying patient populations for targeted therapy.  The panelists will describe some personal experiences of receiving sequence information and talk about how this rapidly growing technology is transforming medical practice.
Moderator: Stephen Eck, M.D., Ph.D.
Vice President, Global Head of Medical Oncology, Astellas Pharma Global Development, Inc.
Joe Beery
Senior Vice President & Chief Information Officer, Life Technologies
John Lauerman
Reporter-at-Large, Bloomberg News
D. Holmes Morton, M.D.
Clinic Director, The Clinic for Special Children
Michael Snyder, Ph.D.
Stanford University School of Medicine
9:45 a.m. Perspectives From Professional Organizations
Randy Burkholder
Deputy Vice President, Policy
Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA)
Heidi Rehm, Ph.D., FACMG
Director, Laboratory for Molecular Medicine, Partners HealthCare Center for Personalized Genetic Medicine; Assistant Professor of Pathology, Harvard Medical School
Jon Retzlaff
Managing Director, Office of Science Policy & Government Affairs, American Association for Cancer Research (AARC)
Katherine Johansen Taber, Ph.D.
Senior Scientist, American Medical Association
10:15 a.m.
Networking Break
11:00 a.m.
Speakers:

Genetic Basis for Drug Development

Many drug developers are beginning to successfully use genetic information and genetic markers in drug development.  This panel will provide perspectives from three different companies on how they have used and are using genetic information in successful drug development.
Moderator:  Hakan Sakul, Ph.D.
Executive Director, Head of Diagnostics, Worldwide R&D, Clinical Research and Precision Medicine, Pfizer, Inc.
Jeffrey Leiden, M.D., Ph.D.
President & CEO, Vertex Pharmaceuticals
Michael Streit, M.D., M.B.A.
Executive Director, GlaxoSmithKline-Oncology
George D. Yancopoulos, M.D., Ph.D.
President, Research Laboratories and  Chief Scientific Officer , Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
12:00 noon
Presentation of Personalized Medicine Coalition’s Eighth Annual Award for Leadership in Personalized Medicine

 

Award Recipient: Randall Scott, Ph.D.
Founder and Director, Genomic Health, CEO, InVitae Corporation
Introduction:  Edward Abrahams, Ph.D.
President, Personalized Medicine Coalition
Presenter: D. Stafford O’Kelly
Chairman of the Board, Personalized Medicine Coalition
12:30 p.m.
Luncheon
1:45 p.m.
Panel:
Business Models for Use of Genetic Information
The discussion should highlight new business opportunities for large companies, such as the three represented on the panel and for small businesses in the services and IT sectors.
Moderator:  Ger Brophy, Ph.D.General Manager, New Product Development, Medical Diagnostics, GE Healthcare
Kris Joshi, Ph.D.
Global Vice President, Healthcare Strategy, Oracle
Trevor Hawkins, Ph.D.
Chief Strategy Officer, Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics
Kevin Hrusovsky
President of Life Sciences & Technology, PerkinElmer
2:45 p.m.
Conversation:

Genetics and the Law

There are conflicting views regarding Intellectual Property for genetic tests.  The panel will offer opposing views on prominent recent litigation and consider how investors see the impact of the legal decisions.
Moderator: Robert Tepper, M.D.
Partner, Third Rock Ventures
Laura Coruzzi, Ph.D., J.D.
Partner, Jones Day
David Resnick, Esq.
Partner, Co-Leader Patents, Nixon Peabody
Risa Stack, Ph.D.
Partner, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers
3:45 p.m.
Networking Break
4:15 p.m.
Panel:
International  Commitments to Personalized Medicine
Many countries are considering and developing plans to implement the principles of personalized medicine.  Are there lessons from these efforts that the U.S. can learn from?  How can we make personalized medicine a world-wide effort?
Moderator: Jeffrey Elton, Ph.D.
Managing Director, Accenture
Prof. Abraham Israeli, M.D., M.P.H., M.B.A.
Chief Scientist of the Ministry of Health, Head, Department of Health Policy, Health Care Management and Health Economics, Hebrew University – Hadassah Faculty of Medicine; Professor, Hewbrew University – Hadassah School of Public Health, Jerusalem, Israel
Michael Hayden, M.D., Ph.D.
Director and Senior Scientist, Center for Molecular Medicine and Therapeutics, University of British Columbia, Canada
Prof. Ola Myklebost, Ph.D.
Senior Scientist and Group Leader, Department of Tumor Biology, Institute for Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, Norway
Ming Qi, Ph.D.Professor, Zhejiang UniversitySchool of Medicine, China
5:15 p.m.
Reception at Elements Café
Thursday, November 29, 2012
7:30 a.m.
Registration & Continental Breakfast
8:30 a.m.
Keynote
William Hait, M.D., Ph.D.
Global Head of Janssen R&D, Johnson & Johnson

Introducer: John Niederhuber, M.D.
Professor of Oncology & Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine; Former Director of the National Cancer Institute; Executive Vice President, Inova Health System; CEO, Inova Translational Medicine Institute
9:00 a.m.
Panel:

Genetics in Medical Practice

Each institution represented in this panel is making efforts to bring personalized medicine to their patients What are the different approaches that are being used? How are they evolving? What kinds of investments are necessary to build these enterprises? How do these efforts inform us about the progress of personalized medicine?
Moderator: M. Kathleen Behrens Wilsey, Ph.D.
President & CEO, KEW Group
Joe Vockley, Ph.D.
Chief Operating Officer,
Chief Scientific Officer
Inova Translational Medicine Institute
A. John Iafrate, M.D., Ph.D.
Associate Chief of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Center for Integrated Diagnostics
Mia Levy, M.D., Ph.D.
Assistant Professor of Biomedical Informatics, Assistant Professor of Medicine, Cancer Clinical Informatics Officer, Vanderbilt Ingram Cancer Center
10:00 a.m. Networking Break
10:30 a.m.
Panel:
Molecular Diagnostics and Public Policy
Will bringing molecular diagnostics into routine practice require bringing together many interest groups and educating and informing regulatory and legislative bodies about the importance of personalized medicine and the need for policy change? What changes are needed? How and by whom the views can best be presented to policy makers and legislators?
Moderator: Amy Miller, Ph.D.
Vice President, Public Policy, Personalized Medicine Coalition
Alan Mertz
President, American Clinical Laboratory Association
Richard Naples
Sr. Vice President, Regulatory Affairs,
BD Biosciences
Paul Radensky, M.D.
Partner, McDermott Will & Emery
11:30 a.m.
Ethical Aspects of Whole Genome Sequencing
Lisa Lee, Ph.D., M.S.
Executive Director, Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues
Robert Green, M.D., M.P.H.
Associate Professor of Medicine, Division of Genetics, Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School; Associate Director for Research, Partners HealthCare Center for Personalized Genetic Medicine
12:00 noon
 Bag Lunch
 Open Seating
1:00 p.m.
Conversation:
Decision Making in the Development
of Zelboraf
Roche and Plexxicon collaborated in developing a targeted therapy for a subset of melanoma patients.  How did the two companies decide to collaborate?  What were the mechanics of the collaboration?  How did the submission of a NDA with a companion diagnostic come about?  What lessons can be drawn from this experience?
K. Peter Hirth, Ph.D.
CEO, Plexxikon
Suzanne Cheng, Ph.D.
Director, Genomics & Oncology Research, Roche Molecular Systems, Inc.
Raju Kucherlapati, Ph.D.
Paul C. Cabot Professor of Genetics, Professor of Medicine, Harvard Medical School
1:45 p.m.
Keynote
Lt. Col.  Cecili K. Sessions, M.D., M.P.H., FAAP
Chief, AFMS Personalized Medicine, Air Force Medical Support Agency (AFMSA), Medical Research &  Innovations (SG5I)
Introducer: Heidi Rehm, Ph.D., FACMG
Director, Laboratory for Molecular Medicine, Partners HealthCare Center for Personalized Genetic Medicine; Assistant Professor of Pathology, Harvard Medical School
2:15 p.m. Industry Study on Interpretation
Anthony Flynn
Chief Marketing Officer, Director of Healthcare Strategy and Commercialization, GenomeQuest
2:20 p.m.
Interactive Case Study on Business Strategies for Personalized Medicine
Case: Companion Diagnostics: Uncertainties for Approval and Reimbursement
Richard Hamermesh, D.B.A.
MBA Class of 1961 Professor of Management Practice, Faculty Chair, HBS Healthcare Initiative, Harvard Business School
Norman Selby
Executive Chairman, Physicians Interactive Inc. and Real Endpoints llc
3:35 p.m.
Closing Remarks
Raju Kucherlapati, Ph.D.
Paul C. Cabot Professor of Genetics, Professor of Medicine, Harvard Medical School
SPEAKERS
 
Joe Beery
Joe Beery is Chief Information Officer for Life Technologies and served the same role at Invitrogen since September 2008. Prior to Invitrogen, Mr. Beery held the executive position of Chief Information Officer at US Airways and America West Airlines. Previously, Mr. Beery spent ten years at Motorola Semiconductor, holding various positions in the computer integrated manufacturing group. Mr. Beery also served as a manufacturing and software engineer at NV Philips in Albuquerque, N.M. Mr. Beery holds a B.S. in business administration and business computer systems from the University of New Mexico.

Ger Brophy, Ph.D.
Ger Brophy, Ph.D. is General Manager, New Product Development at GE Healthcare Medical Diagnostics. In this role, Ger is responsible for the overarching R&D strategy encompassing in vivo and in vitro diagnostic technologies, with oversight of discovery (research) and clinical development; regulatory and medical affairs; project and portfolio management; product acquisition and licensing; R&D efficiency projects and collaborations across GE.
Previously, Ger led Strategic Planning & Licensing within Medical Diagnostics business. He was centrally involved in the expansion of the business into the Personalized Medicine space through inorganic and organic investments in in vitro diagnostics and pathology.
Ger joined GE Healthcare through the acquisition of Amersham in 2004. Before joining the Medical Diagnostics business, Ger ran the Life Sciences Advanced Systems business in Sweden. The focus on that business was in the commercialization of improved tools for drug discovery. In that capacity he lead an R&D group of 200 researchers developing new products and services used in academia and Pharma to better understand disease.
Ger began his career in R&D developing high throughput drug screening tools. He advanced to become Development Director for Amersham’s Bioassay’s business unit, leading a group of 60 people. Within GE Healthcare he has held positions in Licensing, Business Development and R&D.
Ger has had international assignments in the UK, Sweden and in Chicago & New Jersey. He relocated to New Jersey in August 2009.
Ger holds a Ph.D. in Molecular Biology.

Randy Burkholder
Randy Burkholder is Deputy Vice President of Policy at the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. Mr. Burkholder directs PhRMA work on issues related to use of evidence in healthcare decision-making, health technology assessment, comparative and cost-effectiveness research, Medicare coverage policy, and innovation and personalized medicine. Mr. Burkholder represents PhRMA at federal agencies and advisory bodies including the Medicare Evidence Development and Coverage Advisory Committee, the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research, Institute of Medicine Committees, and President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. He also is a founding member of the Board of Directors of the Personalized Medicine Coalition and serves on the Steering Committee of the Partnership to Improve Patient Care.
Mr. Burkholder has over 17 years experience in health care policy, advocacy and communications in the medical technology and pharmaceutical industries.
Prior to joining PhRMA, Mr. Burkholder was Associate Vice President for Public Affairs at AdvaMed, the leading association of the medical device and diagnostics industries.
Suzanne Cheng, Ph.D.
Suzanne Cheng, Ph.D. is currently a Director in the Genomics and Oncology Research Department at Roche Molecular Systems, overseeing several assay teams that support the early development of companion diagnostic assays in oncology. She was the IVD Lead for vemurafenib, a targeted therapy for treatment of patients with BRAF V600E mutation-positive metastatic or inoperable melanoma that was approved in 2011 together with a companion diagnostic, the cobas® 4800 BRAF V600 Mutation Test. She has experienced first-hand the challenges of drug and diagnostic co-development from early development through to successful FDA approvals.
Prior to joining Genomics and Oncology, Dr. Cheng was a member of the Human Genetics Department, contributing to the development of long PCR technology and the evaluation of genetic predisposition markers for the development and progression of cardiovascular disease. She received her degree from the University of California, Berkeley.

Laura Coruzzi, Ph.D., J.D.
Laura Coruzzi, Ph.D., J.D. has represented clients in biotechnology and pharmaceuticals for close to 30 years. Prior to joining Jones Day, she practiced at Pennie & Edmonds LLP and was one of the first members of that firm’s biotechnology group founded by S. Leslie Misrock, affectionately known as the “father of biotechnology patent law.” Laura’s practice has evolved with the patent laws and matured with the needs of the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries. Her practice involves all aspects of patent law as it relates to a variety of disciplines in the life sciences, including genetic engineering, molecular biology, virology, vaccines, immunology, therapeutic antibodies, biologic and small molecule therapeutics, diagnostics, drug discovery, and drug delivery.
Laura’s patent procurement practice focuses on strategic planning and management of patent portfolios designed to protect emerging new technologies as well as mature biologic and pharmaceutical therapeutics and diagnostics. She counsels clients on portfolio evaluation, due diligence investigations, patent prosecution and interferences, European oppositions, and licensing. Laura’s practice also encompasses patent litigation and appeals before the USPTO Board of Appeals and the Federal Circuit. She is a member of the Jones Day team representing Myriad in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics (2011) upholding the patent-eligibility of isolated human genes. Prior to joining Jones Day, she and her team won reversal of an $18 million jury verdict in 2000 for Cadus Pharmaceutical Corporation in a case involving cell-based assays for drug screening.
Laura is frequently invited to speak at symposia on patent law issues related to life sciences.

Stephen Eck, M.D., Ph.D.
Stephen Eck, M.D., Ph.D is Vice President and Global Head of Oncology Medical Sciences at Astellas Pharma Global Development (Headquartered in Northbrook, IL). He is directly responsible for the oversight of oncology drug development plans. Much of this work is focused on special cancer populations for which unique biology enables the development of personalized cancer therapies. Dr. Eck previously served as Vice President, Translational Medicine & Pharmacogenomics at Eli Lilly and Company (2007-2011) where he was responsible for the clinical pharmacology components of drug development including both early phase clinical studies and late stage drug development studies.  His group also developed the biomarkers and companion diagnostics needed for effective decision-making and for tailoring therapeutics to the right patient population.  An essential part of this work was conducted in the Diagnostic and Experimental Medicine Group and the Laboratory for Experimental Medicine. Prior to Joining Lilly, Dr. Eck served in a variety of drug development leadership roles at Pfizer, Inc (2002-2007).
Dr. Eck is a board certified Hematologist/Oncologist with broad drug development experience in Oncology and Neuroscience. He is a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. He serves on the Scientific Advisory Board of the ACGT Foundation, which supports academic cancer research, and is a member of the Scientific Advisory Committee of the Fairbanks Institute, an institution dedicated to developing data banks to enable personalized medicine. He also serves on the Advisory Board of the Keck Graduate School (Claremont, CA), and is a Board member of the Personalized Medicine Coalition.

Jeffrey Elton, Ph.D.
Jeff Elton, Ph.D. is Managing Director in Life Sciences in Accenture. Jeff has over 20 years of experience as a global executive and consultant in the biopharmaceutical and healthcare sectors. Jeff serves clients in pharmaceutical, biopharmaceutical, and health provider sectors. Jeff also co-leads Accenture’s pilot initiative in the application of health data analytics to pharmaceutical managed markets, commercial, and clinical development analytics.
Recently, Jeff was founding CEO of a Personalized Oncology Company, and Board member and senior advisor to four early stage companies in protein therapeutics, diabetes, oncology therapeutics, and oncology diagnostics.
From 2004 through 2009, Jeff served as Senior Vice President of Strategy and Global Chief Operating Officer at Novartis Institutes of BioMedical Research, Inc. (NIBR) in Cambridge, MA. He led the definition of therapeutic area strategies, formed strategic partnerships, and oversaw global operations in the US, Europe, and Asia.
Prior to Novartis, Jeff was a senior partner with McKinsey & Company for pharmaceutical & medical products practice where he focused on healthcare delivery strategies, new product launches, global commercial management structures, and R&D performance.
Jeff is currently a board member of the Massachusetts Biotechnology Council, a board and executive committee member of the Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation, and faculty member of the Boston University School of Management, Health Management Program.

 
Jeffrey Flier, M.D.
Jeffrey Flier, M.D. is one of the country’s leading investigators in the areas of obesity and diabetes. His research has produced major insights into the molecular mechanism of insulin action, the molecular mechanisms of insulin resistance in human disease, and the molecular pathophysiology of obesity.
Flier was born in New York City. He received a BS from City College of New York in 1968, and an MD from Mount Sinai School of Medicine in 1972, graduating with the Elster Award for Highest Academic Standing. Following residency training in internal medicine at Mount Sinai Hospital from 1972 to 1974, Flier moved to the National Institutes of Health as a Clinical Associate. In 1978, he joined the Faculty of Medicine at Harvard Medical School, serving as Chief of the Diabetes Unit at Beth Israel Hospital until 1990, when he was named chief of the hospital’s Endocrine Division.
In 2002, Flier was named Chief Academic Officer of BIDMC, a newly created senior position responsible for research and academic programs. He worked with Beth Israel Deaconess academic department chairs to ensure the quality and breadth of academic programs at the Medical Center, through which most Harvard Medical School students pass. He also served as the formal liaison to Harvard Medical School, sitting on the Council of Academic Deans.
Flier has authored over 200 scholarly papers and reviews and has held many editorial positions. An elected member of the Institute of Medicine and a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, Flier’s honors also include the Eli Lilly Award of the American Diabetes Association, the Berson Lecture of the American Physiological Society, and Honorary Doctorates from the University of Athens and the University of Edinburgh. He was the recipient of the 2003 Edwin B. Astwood Lecture Award from the Endocrine Society, and In 2005, he received the Banting Medal from the American Diabetes Association, its highest scientific honor.
Flier, the father of two daughters, lives in Newton, MA with his wife Eleftheria Maratos-Flier, MD, who is a Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School and with whom he has collaborated on research in the area of neuroendocrine

Robert C. Green, M.D., M.P.H.
Robert C. Green, M.D., M.P.H. is a medical geneticist and a clinical researcher who directs the G2P research program (genomes2people.org) in translational genomics and health outcomes in the Division of Genetics at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School.
Dr. Green is principal investigator of the NIH-funded REVEAL Study, in which a cross-disciplinary team has conducted 4 separate multi-center randomized clinical trials collectively enrolling 1100 individuals to disclose a genetic risk factor for Alzheimer’s disease in order to explore emerging themes in translational genomics. Dr. Green also co-directs the NIH-funded PGen Study, the first prospective study of direct-to-consumer genetic testing services and leads the MedSeq Project, the first NIH-funded research study to explore the use of whole genome sequencing in the clinical practice of medicine.
Dr. Green is currently Associate Director for Research of the Partners Center for Personalized Genetic Medicine, a Board Member of the Council for Responsible Genetics and a member of the Informed Cohort Oversight Boards for both the Children’s Hospital Boston Gene Partnership Program and the Coriell Personalized Medicine Collaborative. He co-chairs the ACMG working group that is currently developing recommendations for management of incidental findings in clinical sequencing.

William N. Hait, M.D., Ph.D.
William N. Hait, M.D., Ph.D. is Global Head, Janssen Research & Development, LLC, the global research and development arm of Janssen, the pharmaceutical companies of Johnson & Johnson. In this role, he leads the global R&D group in its mission to discover and develop innovative new medicines to address the world’s most serious unmet medical needs.
Dr. Hait joined Johnson & Johnson in 2007 as Senior Vice President, Worldwide Head of Hematology and Oncology, Ortho Biotech Oncology R&D, and assumed the role of Global TA Head, Oncology, in 2009.
Prior to joining Johnson & Johnson, he was the founding Director of The Cancer Institute of New Jersey and Professor of Medicine and Pharmacology and Associate Dean for Oncology Programs at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School from January 1993 to March 2007. Under Dr. Hait’s leadership, The Cancer Institute of New Jersey was successful in obtaining cancer center designation from the National Cancer Institute in 1996 and received the National Cancer Institute’s highest designation of Comprehensive Cancer Center in 2002.
After earning his B.A. from the University of Pennsylvania, Dr. Hait received his M.D. and Ph.D. (Pharmacology) cum laude from the Medical College of Pennsylvania, where he was elected to Alpha Omega Alpha. He joined the Yale University School of Medicine faculty in 1984 and was quickly promoted to Associate Professor of Medicine and Pharmacology. Dr. Hait served as Associate Director of the Yale University Comprehensive Cancer Center and Director of the Breast Cancer Unit and Co-Director of the Lung Cancer Unit at the Yale University School of Medicine. He was appointed Chief of Medical Oncology at the Yale University School of Medicine in 1988. Dr. Hait is Board Certified in Internal Medicine and Medical Oncology.
Dr. Hait is a member of the Medical Advisory Board of both the New Jersey Breast Cancer Coalition and Susan G. Komen Foundation and is an active member on Scientific Advisory Boards of several universities. He served on various committees for the American Association for Cancer Research (Chair, Clinical Cancer Research Committee), American Society of Clinical Oncology, the Association of American Cancer Institutes (Board of Directors), and the National Cancer Institute Board of Scientific Advisors. Dr. Hait served as President of the American Association for Cancer Research from 2007 – 2008, and is currently serving as treasurer.

 
Richard Hamermesh, D.B.A.
Richard Hamermesh is the MBA Class of 1961 Professor of Management Practice at the Harvard Business School where he teaches in the MBA Program and is the Faculty Chair of the HBS Healthcare Initiative. Richard created and teaches the second-year MBA elective, Entrepreneurship and Venture Capital in Healthcare. Previously, he was the Course Head for the required first year course entitled The Entrepreneurial Manager. In addition Richard participates in several HBS Executive Education programs.
From 1987 to 2001, Richard was a co-founder and a Managing Partner of The Center for Executive Development, an executive education and development consulting firm. Prior to this, from 1976 to 1987, he was a member of the faculty of the Harvard Business School.

Richard is also an active investor and entrepreneur, having participated as a principal, director, and investor in the founding and early stages of over 20 organizations. These have included start-ups, leveraged buy-outs, industry roll-ups, and non-profit foundations. He was the founding president of the Newton (MA) Schools Foundation and served on the editorial board of the Harvard Business Review. He is currently on the Boards of one public and two private corporations, as well as two non-profit Boards. From 1991 to 1996, he was the founding Chairman of Synthes Spine, Inc. Richard is the author or co-author of five books, including New Business Ventures and the Entrepreneur. His best-known book, Fad-Free Management, was published in 1996. He has published numerous articles and more than 100 case studies. His most recent article, “Realizing the Potential of Personalized Medicine”, appeared in the Harvard Business Review(October 2007). Richard received his AB from the University of California, and his MBA and DBA from HBS. He is married, has two children, and his hobbies include tennis, skiing, and yoga.


 
Trevor Hawkins, Ph.D.
Trevor Hawkins, Ph.D., as the past Director of the Human Genome Project for the US DOE, has built a recognized career in the healthcare industry over the past 20 years spanning business, academic innovation and as an entrepreneur.
Dr. Hawkins is the Senior Vice President of Strategy and Innovation for Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics.
Prior to joining Siemens he has held several senior executive roles, as Chief Scientific Officer of Royal Philips Electronics focusing on healthcare, CEO of Philips Molecular Healthcare business unit, CEO of GEs Molecular diagnostics business and President of Amershams Genomics business. He was also Chairman & CEO of ProGenTech, a privately held company based in Shanghai & San Francisco.
Dr. Hawkins invented SPRI, Solid Phase Reversible Immobilization the magnetic bead nucleic acid isolation method that was used extensively as the sample prep method for the Human Genome Project. The SPRI patent remains as one of the most important in the field of magnetic bead use for life sciences and diagnostics.
Dr. Hawkins has published over 50 peer-reviewed articles on automation, genomics, human diseases and the human genome project. He was also a founder of the Beijing Genome Institute (BGI), Chinas’ genome program and remains an Honorary Professor of the BGI.
Dr. Hawkins has served on several public and private Boards and is currently involved in non-profit organizations in California.

 
Michael Hayden, M.D., Ph.D.
Michael Hayden, M.D., Ph.D. is the Killam Professor of Medical Genetics at the UBC and Canada Research Chair in Human Genetics and Molecular Medicine. He is the Director of the Center for Molecular Medicine and Therapeutics (CMMT) and founder of three biotechnology companies: NeuroVir Therapeutics Inc., Xenon Pharmaceuticals Inc., and Aspreva Pharmaceuticals Corp.
Author of over 700 peer-reviewed publications and invited submissions, Michael focuses his research primarily on genetic diseases, including genetics of lipoprotein disorders, Huntington disease, predictive and personalized medicine. Michael and his research group have identified 10 disease-causing genes which includes the identification of the major gene underlying high-density lipoprotein (HDL) in humans. Michael also identified the first mutations underlying Lipoprotein Lipase (LPL) Deficiency and developed gene therapy approaches to treat this condition. Michael is also the most cited author in the world for ABCA1 and Huntington Disease.
Michael is the recipient of numerous recent prestigious honours and awards, including the Margolese National Brain Disorder Prize (2011), awarded to Canadians who have made outstanding contributions to the treatment, amelioration, or cure of brain diseases; the Killam Prize by the Canada Council of the Arts (2011), in recognition of his outstanding career achievements; and the Canada Gairdner Wightman award (2011), recognizing him as a physician-scientist who has demonstrated outstanding leadership in medicine and medical science. Michael has also been awarded the Order of Canada (2011), and the Order of British Columbia (2010). He was named Canada’s Health Researcher of the Year by CIHR in 2008, and he received the Prix Galien in 2007, which recognizes the outstanding contribution of a researcher to Canadian pharmaceutical research.

 
K. Peter Hirth, Ph.D.
K. Peter Hirth, Ph.D. co-founded Plexxikon in December 2000, and has over 25 years of biotechnology and pharmaceutical discovery and development experience. Plexxikon was built as a novel, structure-guided drug discovery platform. Over the last ten years, Plexxikon has brought several NCEs into the clinic in a variety of indications. Most advanced from this portfolio is a selective B-raf V600 inhibitor that has been approved by the FDA for the treatment of patients with BRAFV600E mutation-positive inoperable or metastatic melanoma, as detected by an FDA-approved test, and is sold under the brand name Zelboraf®. Plexxikon was acquired in April 2011 by Daiichi Sankyo and is now a member of the Daiichi Sankyo Group.
Previously, Peter was president of Sugen, Inc. until the sale of the company to Pharmacia Corporation in 1999. At Sugen, he helped build the company from its inception and advanced several kinase inhibitors through clinical trials for the treatment of oncology. This includes the drug Sutent, now owned by Pfizer through its acquisition of Pharmacia. Prior to Sugen, Dr. Hirth was a vice president in research with Boehringer Mannheim where, among other responsibilities, he successfully led the company’s erythropoietin program. Previously, he also was a research scientist with the Max Planck Institute, following the completion of his post doctoral work at the University of California, San Diego. Dr. Hirth received his Ph.D. in molecular genetics from Heidelberg University, Germany.

E. Kevin Hrusovsky
E. Kevin Hrusovsky was appointed President, Life Sciences & Technology, PerkinElmer in November 2011 when Caliper Life Sciences (CALP) was acquired. This transaction was the culmination of significant value creation for the CALP stakeholders. In July 2003, Hrusovsky became CEO of Caliper Life Sciences, when Zymark Corporation was acquired by Caliper. Subsequently, Caliper acquired and integrated three additional innovative tools companies and made substantial R&D and commercialization investments. Through these actions, Hrusovsky and Team transformed Caliper into a leading edge personalized medicine / health technology company. The Company’s rapid growth in sales and market valuation over the past three years made Caliper one of the fastest growing innovative life science technology companies in the industry, and a credible resource for articulating these important trends in medicine and health. Prior to the acquisition, Hrusovsky served as President and CEO for Zymark starting in late 1996, where he successfully transformed Zymark from a custom robotics company into a formidable Life Sciences tools company. From 1992 to 1996, he was Director of International Business, Agricultural Chemical Division, and President of the Pharmaceutical Division, for FMC Corporation. From 1983 to 1992, he held several management positions at E.I. DuPont de Nemours, including North American Sales and Marketing Head, Teflon.
Hrusovsky currently sits on the Educational Board of the Massachusetts Biotech Council, the Advisory Committee for the Center for Biomedical Engineering at Brown University, the Association for Laboratory Automation, the JALA Editorial Board, and the Strategy Committee of Children’s Hospital Boston. He formerly served on the boards of SeraCare Life Sciences, Caliper Life Sciences, Xenogen Corporation and Alliant Medical Technology. Hrusovsky received an Honorary Doctorate degree from Framingham State University for contributions to life sciences. He received his B.S. in Mechanical Engineering from Ohio State University and an M.B.A. from Ohio University. He and his family are authentic Buckeyes!

Professor Abraham Israeli, M.D., M.P.H., M.B.A.
Professor Abraham (Avi) Israeli, M.D., M.P.H., M.B.A. is Chief Scientist of the Ministry of Health, and the Head of the Health Policy, Health Care Management and Health Economics Department at the Hebrew University – Hadassah Faculty of Medicine. Prior to this he was the Director General of the Israel Ministry of Health (2003-2009) and the Director – General of Hadassah Medical Organization (1998 -2001).  He holds the Chair of Dr. Julien Rozan Professorship of Family Medicine and Health Promotion Chair at the Hebrew University-Hadassah Medical School, Jerusalem (since 1996) and teaches there regularly.
Professor Israeli chaired the national committee to update the Israeli national standard basket of health services.
Professor Israeli received his medical degree and his master in public health from the Hadassah – Hebrew University Medical School. He completed residencies in Internal Medicine and in Health-Care Management at Hadassah University Hospital and has certification in both specialties. He received his Master’s Degree from the Sloan School of Management at MIT, Boston.
His scientific activities are related to applied, methodological and theoretical research in the fields of health policy, health care management, and the epidemiological, economic, social and cultural basis for decision-making.
His publications deal with translation of academic knowledge and inputs from the field into policy setting and decision-making processes.
Two additional key research foci are rationing / priority setting and comparative health care systems.

Kris Joshi, Ph.D.
Kris Joshi, Ph.D.  is Global Vice President responsible for Oracle’s Healthcare product portfolio. Kris helped launch the Health Sciences Global Business Unit within Oracle, and led the business unit’s growth strategy, including the acquisitions of Relsys and Phase Forward. He oversees a product portfolio that covers Analytics, Health Information Exchange, Care Management, and solutions for Personalized Medicine and Translational Research serving healthcare payer, provider and life sciences segments.
Prior to Oracle, Kris served in senior strategy roles in IBM’s Global Sales & Distribution organization where he helped shape IBM’s global distribution strategy and emerging markets strategy. Prior to IBM, Kris spent several years as a consultant with McKinsey and Co where he served Fortune 500 clients in Banking, Media, Healthcare and Life Sciences industries on business strategy issues. Kris has a long-standing personal commitment to help bridge the gap between the social and business worlds through entrepreneurship, innovation, and public-private partnerships. He has championed numerous initiatives aimed at leveraging technology to improve the quality, safety, and affordability of healthcare globally.
Kris holds a Bachelor of Science in Mathematics from CalTech and a Ph.D. in Astrophysics from MIT.

Raju Kucherlapati, Ph.D.
Raju Kucherlapati, Ph.D. is the Paul C.Cabot Professor in the Harvard Medical School Department of Genetics. He is also a professor in the Department of Medicine at Brigham and Women’s Hospital. Dr. Kucherlapati was the first Scientific Director of the Harvard Medical School-Partners Healthcare Center for Genetics and Genomics. His research focuses on gene mapping, gene modification, and cloning disease genes. During 1989-2001, Dr. Kucherlapati was the Lola and Saul Kramer Professor of Molecular Genetics and Chairman of the Department of Molecular Genetics at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York. He was previously a professor in the Department of Genetics at the University of Illinois, College of Medicine. He began his research as an assistant professor in the Department of Biochemical Sciences at Princeton University.
He has chaired numerous NIH committees and served on the National Advisory Council for Human Genome Research and the NCI Mouse Models for Human Cancer Consortium. He is also a member of the Cancer Genome Atlas project of the National Institutes of Health. He is a member of the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences and a fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. He is a member of Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues.
Dr. Kucherlapati received his B.S. and M.S. in Biology from universities in India, and he received his Ph.D. from the University of Illinois at Urbana, as well as conducting post-doctoral work at Yale University.

John Lauerman
John Lauerman is a reporter-at-large at Bloomberg News writing about health and higher education. Lauerman and his colleagues won a Polk Award and were Pulitzer finalists in 2011 for a series of stories on for-profit colleges that recruit low-income students, often to leave them with debt and no degree. The series also won a Gerald Loeb Award, a National Headliner Award, and the Education Writers Association Grand Prize. In 2010, he won a New York Press Club award for coverage of Harvard University’s $1 billion loss on risky investments. He won a 2009 award from the Society of the Silurians for his stories on the failed search for a vaccine against HIV. His team won a 2005 award from the Society of American Business Writers and Editors for coverage of Merck & Co.’s withdrawal of the painkiller Vioxx after it was linked to heart disease. He has been a fellow of the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts Health Coverage program and the Kaiser Family Foundation’s program for science journalists. Before coming to Bloomberg, Lauerman was a science writer at Harvard Medical School from 1985 thorugh 1988. Later, as a freelance journalist, he wrote a health column for Harvard Magazine, contributed to newspapers and magazines across the U.S., and edited the public health journal “Health and Human Rights.” He is the co-author of two books: “Diabetes: Understand Your Condition, Make the Right Treatment Choices, and Cope Effectively,” and “Living to 100.” He lives with his wife and two children in Brookline, Massachusetts.

Lisa M. Lee, Ph.D., M.S.
Lisa M. Lee, Ph.D., M.S., is the Executive Director of the Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues. Lee previously had been with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) since 1998, most recently serving as Chief Science Officer in the Office of Surveillance, Epidemiology, and Laboratory Sciences.
Lee, who has a Ph.D. from Johns Hopkins and an M.S. in bioethics from Alden March Bioethics Institute at Albany Medical College, is an epidemiologist, surveillance scientist, and public health ethicist. Lee’s work at CDC has included ethics of public health surveillance, scientific integrity, development and evaluation of surveillance systems, research on HIV and fertility, HIV/AIDS survival, HIV and tuberculosis, and data quality. She has led several agency and cross-agency committees working to establish and maintain an environment of scientific integrity and excellence.
Lee is the lead editor of Principles and Practice of Public Health Surveillance, 3d edition (Oxford University Press, 2010). She has authored numerous scientific publications and has served as a peer and guest reviewer for many scientific conferences and scientific journals. She serves on the Board of Advisors and is adjunct faculty at Georgia State University’s Institute of Public Health, where she teaches ethics.

 
Jeffrey Leiden, M.D., Ph.D.
Jeffrey Leiden, M.D., Ph.D., President, CEO and Chairmanjoined Vertex Pharmaceuticals in December 2011 and served on Vertex’s board since 2009. Dr. Leiden brings to Vertex more than 20 years of scientific, commercial and financial experience in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries and clinical experience in academia as a practicing cardiologist and molecular biologist. Dr. Leiden is a Senior Advisor for Clarus Ventures, a life sciences venture capital firm he joined in 2006. In 2000, he joined Abbott Laboratories as President and Chief Operating Officer where he had responsibility for running Abbott’s global pharmaceuticals business. While at Abbott, Dr. Leiden helped launch multiple breakthrough medicines, including Humira for rheumatoid arthritis and other autoimmune diseases and Kaletra for HIV infection, among others. He also served as a member of the Board of Directors of Abbott Laboratories from 2001 to 2006.
Dr. Leiden began his career in academia as a practicing cardiologist and molecular biologist. From 1987 to 2000, Dr. Leiden held several academic appointments, including roles as Chief of Cardiology at the University of Chicago and Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women’s Hospital. During his academic career, Dr. Leiden was also involved in starting several biotechnology companies including Vical and Cardiogene.
Dr. Leiden held a number of board positions for pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, including the role of non-executive Vice Chairman for Shire Pharmaceuticals plc. He was also a member of the Board of Directors of Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc. He is an elected member of both the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences. Dr. Leiden received his M.D., Ph.D. and B.A. degrees from the University of Chicago.
 
Mia Levy, M.D., Ph.D.
Dr. Mia A. Levy is the Director of Cancer Clinical Informatics for the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center and an Assistant Professor of Biomedical Informatics and Medicine.
Dr. Levy received her undergraduate degree in Bioengineering from The University of Pennsylvania in 1997 and her Medical Doctorate from Rush University in 2003. She then spent 6 years at Stanford University completing post-graduate training in Internal Medicine and Medical Oncology while completing her PhD in Biomedical Informatics. She joined the faculty at Vanderbilt as an Assistant Professor in Biomedical Informatics and Medicine in August 2009. She is a practicing medical oncologist specializing in the treatment of breast cancer.
Dr. Levy’s research interests include biomedical informatics methods to support the continuum of cancer care and cancer research. Current research projects include informatics methods for 1) image based cancer treatment response assessment using quantitative imaging, 2) clinical decision support for treatment prioritization of molecular subtypes of cancer, 3) protocol based plan management and 4) learning cancer systems.

 
Alan Mertz
Alan Mertz became President of ACLA in 2003 and since that time he has exponentially grown ACLA’s membership, visibility and advocacy efforts.  ACLA has led a series of successful advocacy campaigns on laboratory reimbursement, regulation, coding, health IT and many other issues, including stopping legislation imposing laboratory co-pays in Medicare and repealing a laboratory Medicare competitive bidding project.  ACLA also led industry efforts to ensure that regulatory changes with respect to genetic and molecular testing do not stifle innovation or harm patient care.  ACLA launched the “Results for Life” educational campaign in 2007 to promote the value of laboratory services and in 2009, ACLA started its Associate Member program for non-laboratory health care companies and organizations.
Prior to his current position, Mertz was Executive Vice President and Acting President of the Healthcare Leadership Council (HLC), and prior to that served in three senior staff positions in the House and Senate over 18 years.  He is a frequent lecturer at American University, and was an adjunct professor at George Washington University (both in Washington, DC).  Mertz holds a Masters Degree in American Politics from American University and a BA in Government from Monmouth College (IL).

 
Amy Miller, Ph.D
Amy Miller, Ph.D. is the Vice President of Public Policy for the Personalized Medicine Coalition (PMC) which represents a broad spectrum of academic, industrial, patient, provider, and payer organizations that seek to advance the understanding and adoption of personalized medicine concepts and products for the benefit of patients. Dr. Miller works with these communities to reach consensus on policy issues impacting personalized medicine and share those views with policy makers.
Before joining the PMC, Dr. Miller worked in the office of the Director of the National Institute of Mental Health where she served as a liaison among the scientific community, the legislative branch, and the consumers of mental health care and their families. A former AAAS fellow, she also served as a domestic policy advisor to Senator Jay Rockefeller. She began her career as a researcher at National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
Dr. Miller received a BA from the University of New Orleans and holds a doctoral degree in Human Development from the University of Connecticut.

D. Holmes Morton, M.D.
D. Holmes Morton M.D. is a pediatrician and was the cofounder with his wife Caroline of the Clinic for Special Children in Strasburg Pennsylvania, which Clinic is a non-profit medical center that provides care for children with complex medical problems arising from inherited predispositions to disease. The Clinic for Special Children is located on an Amish farm near Strasburg in Lancaster County Pennsylvania. Although it is a local pediatric medical center, the Clinic has become recognized internationally for innovative studies in the discovery and treatment of inherited disorders. The Clinic’s publications about the treatment of maple syrup urine disease can be found in Pediatrics, Current Treatment Options in Neurology, Molecular Genetics and Metabolism, Brain, Journal of Pediatrics, Pediatric Transplant, Nature, and Gene Reviews.
Holmes Morton graduated from Trinity College in 1979 with Honors in Biology and Psychology and was elected to Pi Beta Kappa. He studied medicine at Harvard Medical School and completed a 3-year Residency in Pediatrics at Children’s Hospital. In 1986 Dr. Morton moved to Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia to study biochemical genetics under Richard Kelley. In 1988, with the support of Hugo Moser, he moved Dr. Kelley’s new laboratory at Kennedy Krieger Institute at Johns Hopkins to develop methods for diagnosis and treatment of the Amish variant of Glutaric Aciduria Type 1. This work led to the establishment of the Clinic for Special Children in Lancaster County Pennsylvania in 1989.
Dr. Morton is a member of the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Society for Inherited Metabolic Disorders. In 1993, he was given the Albert Schweitzer Prize for Humanitarianism, a prize awarded jointly by the Alexander von Humbolt Foundation of Germany and Johns Hopkins University. In 2006 Dr. Morton was awarded a John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Fellowship

Professor Ola Myklebost, Ph.D.

Ola Myklebost, Ph.D. is Senior Scientist and Group Leader at the Department of Tumor Biology, Institute for Cancer Research, and Professor at the Department for Molecular Biosciences at the University of Oslo. He is also Assistant Director of CAST, the Centre for research-based Innovation (SFI) on Cancer Stem Cells, and previous head of the Norwegian Genomics Consortium. Currently he is heading the Norwegian Cancer Genomics Consortium, with the aim to introduce and investigate the use of tumor genome profiles for therapeutic decisions.

Dr. Myklebost took his MSc under Per Seglen at what is now Dept. of Cell Biology in 1982, then went to St. Mary’s Hospital in London where he worked with recombinant DNA technology under the leadership of Bob Williamson. Returning to Oslo, he worked at the Institute for Internal Medicine at the National Hospital under Hans Prydz until 1987, when he had a research stay in the group of Keith Stanley at EMBL. Since 1988 he has again been employed at the Institute of Cancer Research, now at the Dept. of Tumor Biology. Dr. Myklebost received his Doctor of philosophia from the Medical Faculty, University of Oslo.

Richard Naples
Richard Naples, Senior Vice President of Regulatory Affairs, is responsible for global market access and regulatory compliance functions, including premarket submissions, reimbursement and public policy. He has been with BD for a total of five years.
Mr. Naples has over 30 years experience in medical devices and diagnostics. He has been a chief corporate regulatory officer, an FDA regulator, and a clinical laboratory manager. He is currently co-chair of the AdvaMed Diagnostics Task Force and has been recognized as one of the top regulatory professionals in the industry. His experience includes over 300 successful regulatory submissions and leadership of numerous industry-wide initiatives to ensure more timely patient access to innovative new technologies.
Most recently prior to joining BD, Rick was Roche Diagnostics VP of Regulatory and Government Affairs after serving as a Consumer Safety Officer at FDA HQ Center for Biologics, Evaluation and Research (CBER). He also served on the boards of the New England Healthcare Institute (NEHI) and the Indiana Medical Device Manufacturers Council (IMDMC). Rick holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Chemistry/Medical Technology from Youngstown State University (Ohio).

Ming Qi, Ph.D.
Ming Qi, Ph.D. received his B.S. from South China Normal University in 1982. He received his M.S. from Fudan University, Shanghai in 1985 and was mentored by Dr. C.C. Tan, the “Father of Genetics at China”. He succeeded in the national competition to be a student of the CUSBEA (China-USA Biochemistry / Molecular Biology) Program and received his Ph.D. from the University of Pittsburgh in 1991. Dr. Qi did his postdoctoral training in Dr. Stan McKnight’s Lab, University of Washington from 1991-1994. Dr. Qi had his clinical postdoctoral fellowship in Molecular Genetics with Dr. Peter Byers at the University of Washington from 1994-1998 and was certified in clinical molecular genetics by American Board of Medical Genetics in 1999. He is a Fellow of American College of Medical Genetics. He has been the faculty of University of Rochester Medical School since 1998 as a Assistant Professor, Associate Professor and Professor. Dr. Qi served as a consultant of Harvard Medical School-Partner Center for Genetics and Genomics and Visiting Geneticist of the Laboratory of Molecular Medicine in 2006. His research has been published in numerous peer reviewed scientific journals, including in Nat Genet, PNAS, Cell, Human Mol Genetics, JAMA, Circulation, Am J Med Genet, Human Mutation, etc. He is the Chief Advisor of the Chinese National Gene Health Committee, and the coordinator of the international Human Variome Project Chinese Consortium. He is an editorial board member of several international journals including Human Mutation, Giga-Science and ANE. He also serves as a reviewer for a number of international journals. Dr. Qi has recently been news-report interviewed by Nature and Science (http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110125/full/469455a.html;

Paul Radensky, M.D.
Paul Radensky, M.D. is a partner in the law firm of McDermott Will & Emery LLP and is based in the Firm’s Washington, D.C. and Miami offices. Paul is co-chair of the Firm’s Life Sciences Government Strategies team and a member of the Personalized Medicine team.
Paul is a recognized authority on the full range of legal, regulatory and reimbursement issues pertaining to pharmaceutical, biotechnology, medical device, and clinical laboratory development and marketing. His background as a clinical researcher and medical practitioner informs his practical and scientific understanding of both product manufacturers and clinical laboratories. He advises manufacturers at every stage of product development, including the design and monitoring of clinical trials, positioning and applying for FDA approval, maintaining regulatory compliance, and obtaining coverage, coding and payment for new technologies by Medicare, Medicaid and other third party payors. Paul also advises clinical laboratories on CLIA and state licensure compliance as well as evolving policies on FDA regulation of  laboratory-developed tests.
Paul is ranked in The Best Lawyers in America (2009-2012).
Paul is board certified in internal medicine and is a member of the American College of Physicians and the Alpha Omega Alpha Honor Medical Society. He is a member of the District of Columbia Bar as well as the Florida Bar.

 
Heidi Rehm, Ph.D., FACMG
Heidi Rehm, Ph.D., FACMG is the Chief Laboratory Director for the Laboratory for Molecular Medicine at the Partners Healthcare Center for Personalized Genetic Medicine and Assistant Professor of Pathology at Harvard Medical School. She was recruited in 2001 to build the CLIA lab after completing her graduate degree in Genetics from Harvard University and her postdoctoral and fellowship training at Harvard Medical School. The lab focuses on the rapid translation of new genetic discoveries into clinical tests that can be used to improve patient outcomes, supporting the model of personalized medicine. In addition, the lab focuses on bringing novel technologies and software systems into molecular diagnostics to support the integration of genetics into clinical use. The laboratory has been a leader in translational medicine, launching the first clinical tests for cardiomyopathy and lung cancer treatment among many achievements. In 2012, the lab will launch a CLIA-approved interpretive service for whole genome sequencing. Dr. Rehm is involved in defining standards for the use of next generation sequencing in clinical diagnostics through her committee roles at the American College of Medical Genetics and collaborative efforts with the CDC. Dr. Rehm is also involved in a major effort to develop and curate a universal clinical genomic variant database through collaborative efforts with NCBI and many other groups. Dr. Rehm also conducts research in hearing loss, Usher syndrome, cardiomyopathy, and healthcare IT.

David Resnick, Esq.

David Resnick, Esq. is the co-leader of the Patents practice group at Nixon Peabody. His practice is focused on patent prosecution and overall portfolio management, transactional matters, and associated client counseling. David represents, and manages the portfolios of, some of the leading academic research institutions in the U.S., as well as some of the world’s most recognized life science companies. He has extensive experience in the life sciences and is widely regarded as a thought leader in the area of personalized medicine, particularly with respect to pharmacogenomics, proteomics, and disease biomarkers, and their application in the field of personalized medicine.
Jon Retzlaff
Jon Retzlaff is the Managing Director of Science Policy and Government Affairs. Before joining the AACR in 2010, Mr. Retzlaff worked in government relations for Lewis-Burke Associates, LLC and led the firm’s health and biomedical research practice. Previously, he served as legislative director for the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology from 2004-2007.
Additionally, he worked for the National Institutes of Health, first as a program analyst within the Office of the Director’s legislative office; then as a senior legislative advisor to the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; and finally as the Executive Officer of the National Library of Medicine. Mr. Retzlaff was assigned to the House (1998) and Senate (2000-2001) appropriations subcommittees on labor, health and human services, education and related agencies on health research funding issues, as well as within the Office of the Secretary for Legislation at the Department of Health and Human Services. He entered the Federal Government as a Presidential Management Intern in 1993 and completed a rotation in the Office of Senator Herb Kohl (D-Wis.) during his training.
Mr. Retzlaff earned a Bachelor of Science degree from the University of Minnesota, a master’s degree in public administration from Indiana University and a master’s degree in business administration from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

 
Hakan Sakul, Ph.D.
Hakan Sakul, Ph.D. is a Senior Director in the Translational Oncology Group where he serves as a program manager for Companion Diagnostics. He received his BS and MS degrees from Ankara University in Turkey. He was a recipient of the “Freedom from Hunger Scholarship” from The Rotary Foundation, and completed his PhD degree in Quantitative Genetics from the University of Minnesota (1990) as a Rotary Foundation Scholar. Subsequently, he conducted postdoctoral studies at the University of California-Davis. After spending four years in the biotech industry working in human genetics, pharmacogenomics and statistical genetics fields, Hakan spent a few years at Parke-Davis Pharmaceuticals as the Director of Human Genetics, Statistical Genetics and Pharmacogenetics programs. He then served as Vice President of Statistical Genomics at Ardais Corporation in Boston briefly before returning to Pfizer in 2001 as Director and Site Head for Clinical Pharmacogenomics in Groton/New London Laboratories, with responsibilities across all therapeutic areas. Hakan was promoted to Senior Director in mid-2005 and took on the role of Global Head of Companion Diagnostics for about four years to oversee the companion diagnostics needs across Pfizer’s pharmaceutical portfolio. In 2010, Hakan assumed his current role in the Oncology Business Unit where most of Pfizer’s companion diagnostics needs reside. A member of the Editorial Board of the Personalized Medicine Journal, the Organizing Committee of the annual Personalized Medicine meeting at Harvard, and the author of over 30 scientific refereed articles and several book chapters, Hakan has served as an invited speaker on many scientific meetings and panel discussions. His external representation of Pfizer includes memberships on the Clinical Science and Technology Committee of The Personalized Medicine Coalition, the Research Tools and Molecular Diagnostics Sub Team of BIO, and the California Healthcare Institute’s Diagnostics Working Group. Hakan currently serves as the Co-Chair of Pfizer’s Personalized Medicine team, and is keenly interested in applications of companion diagnostics, pharmacogenomics and related technologies to the pharmaceutical pipeline to advance Personalized Medicine for the improvement of individualized healthcare.

 


 
Randall Scott, Ph.D.
Randall Scott, Ph.D. founded Genomic Health in 2000 and led the company as CEO for 9 years with a focus on improving the quality of treatment decisions for patients with cancer. Genomic Health was one of the first companies to translate genomic information into clinical practice by developing the Oncotype DX series of tests for breast, colon, and prostate cancer, each ofwhich is designed to improve the quality of care and reduce healthcare costs. Under his leadership, Genomic Health led a transformation in medical and business practice to incorporate complex genomic tests into routine medical practice with full reimbursement support by national payers. Dr. Scott has played a role in founding several successful biotech companies in addition to Genomic Health Inc. such as Incyte, a leading biopharmaceutical company as well as his newest enterprise InVitae Corporation where he is focused on expanding beyond cancer to bring the power of the human genome into routine medical practice for every individual at risk for common or rare genetic conditions. He is the author of over 40 scientific publications, 20 patents, and is the recipient of numerous awards.

Norman C. Selby

Norman C. Selby has spent 30 years in the healthcare world in a variety of consulting, managerial, investment and Board roles. He is currently Executive Chairman of two innovative healthcare information businesses: Real Endpoints llc and Physicians Interactive Inc. In addition, Mr. Selby serves as a Senior Advisor to Perseus llc, a private equity firm based in Washington, D.C.

Mr. Selby is currently on the Board of three healthcare product companies: Infinity Pharmaceuticals, a leading public (INFI) oncology biotech company, Metamark Genetics, an oncology diagnostics company, and Merz Group GmbH, a global specialty pharma company based in Frankfurt, Germany. In the decade of the 2000s he was on the Board of three other companies all of which had successful exits: Millennium Pharmaceuticals (MLNM) which was acquired by Takeda; TransForm Pharmaceuticals (where he was also CEO) which was acquired by Johnson & Johnson; and Windhover Information (where he was Executice Chairman) which was acquired by Reed Elsevier.
Mr. Selby spent the bulk of his career at McKinsey & Company where he was Director (Senior Partner) in the firm’s New York office. He held several leadership roles at McKinsey, including head of the firm’s Global Pharmaceuticals and Medical Products Practice. From 1987-1989, Mr. Selby took a leave of absence from McKinsey to serve as Chief Operating Officer of the New York Blood Center, the largest community blood organization in the country, where he led its financial and operational turnaround. After McKinsey he went to Citicorp/Citigroup where he was an Executive Vice President.
Mr. Selby serves on the Board of Trustees of the Central Park Conservancy, the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center and the Ralph Lauren Center for Cancer Care and Prevention, all based in New York City. He is also a member of the advisory board of the Harvard Business School’s Healthcare Initiative, and a Board member of the National Parks Conservation Association in Washington D.C.
Mr. Selby holds a B.A. in Architecture from Yale College and an M.B.A. with Distinction from the Harvard Graduate School of Business Administration.

Lt. Col. Cecili Sessions, M.D., M.P.H., FAAP
Lt Col Cecili K. Sessions, MD, MPH, FAAP is assigned to the United States Air Force Medical Support Agency, Medical Research & Innovations Division, as Chief, Personalized Medicine, and directs the Patient-Centered Precision Care Genomic Medicine Research Program (PC2-Z). Prior to this assignment, she served as the Air Force Liaison to the Armed Forces Health Surveillance Center, the central strategic epidemiological resource for the Armed Forces of the United States. As an active duty pediatrician, she was stationed at Incirlik AB, Turkey, and Kadena AB, Okinawa.
Dr. Sessions received her degree from the Keck School of Medicine at the University of Southern California in 2000, after which she completed a Pediatric Residency at Georgetown University, where she was selected Resident of the Year in her graduating class of 2003.Both her undergraduate degree at Stanford University (AB, 1996) and graduate coursework (MPH, 2007) during the General Preventive Medicine Residency at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences focused on International Health. During her graduate medical education, Dr Sessions completed two externships with the Pan American Health Organization at their headquarters in Washington, D.C.
Michael Snyder, Ph.D.
Michael Snyder, Ph.D. is the Stanford Ascherman Professor and Chair of Genetics and the Director of the Center of Genomics and Personalized Medicine. Dr. Snyder received his Ph.D. training at the California Institute of Technology and carried out postdoctoral training at Stanford University. He is a leader in the field of functional genomics and proteomics. His laboratory study was the first to perform a large-scale functional genomics project in any organism, and has launched many technologies in genomics and proteomics. These including the development of proteome chips, high resolution tiling arrays for the entire human genome, methods for global mapping of transcription factor binding sites (ChIP-chip now replaced by ChIP-seq), paired end sequencing for mapping of structural variation in eukaryotes, and RNA-Seq. These technologies have been used for characterizing genomes, proteomes and regulatory networks. Seminal findings from the Snyder laboratory include the discovery that much more of the human genome is transcribed and contains regulatory information than was previously appreciated, and a high diversity of transcription factor binding occurs between and within species. He is a cofounder of several biotechnology companies, including Protometrix (now part of Life Tehcnologies), Affomix (now part of Illumina), Excelix, and Personalis, and he presently serves on the board of a number of companies.

Risa Stack, Ph.D.
Risa Stack, Ph.D. is a partner at Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers. Since joining the firm in 2003, she has worked to build and support KPCB’s personalized medicine portfolio. Risa has been the founding CEO and a board member of several personalized medicine companies, including CardioDx and Nodality. Risa is a board observer at Tethys, Veracyte and Xdx. In addition to her work directly with portfolio companies, Risa is involved in developing public policy in molecular diagnostics and personalized medicine. Risa is also involved in the development of therapeutics companies, including Corthera and Trius. She was most recently a board member of Corthera (sold to Novartis in 2009), and she is a board observer at Epizyme and Pacific Biosciences.
Risa has 15 years of experience investing in personalized medicine, therapeutics and platform technologies. Her investment career spans from incubations to public companies. Most recently, she has focused on starting companies, often taking operational roles. Before joining KPCB, Risa was a principal at J.P. Morgan Partners in the life science practice for six years. While at J.P. Morgan Partners, she sponsored a series of investments including Acurian, Connetics (acquired by Steifel Laboratories), Diatide (acquired by Berlex), Ilex Oncology (acquired by Genzyme), Illumina, and Triangle Pharmaceuticals (acquired by Gilead). Risa was also involved in JP Morgan Partners’ international investing efforts, which included European life sciences companies and managing a portfolio of Israeli early stage life sciences and IT companies. Before joining the venture capital industry, Risa worked as a derivative specialist on the Chicago Board of Trade, where she traded futures and options on government securities.
Risa received her B.S. degree in genetics and development with distinction from the University of Illinois and her Ph.D. in immunology from the University of Chicago. She was also a member of the second class of Kauffman Fellows. Risa also serves as a member of the advisory board of the National Summit on Personalized Healthcare and GE’s Healthymagination effort. In 2004, Risa was named as one of the 100 Most Influential Women in Business by the San Francisco Business Times.

 


Michael Streit, M.D., M.B.A.
Michael R. Streit, M.D., M.B.A., is Executive Director at GlaxoSmithKline-Oncology and the Program Physician Leader for the small-molecule GSK1120212 (MEK-inhibitor) clinical development program.
Dr. Streit received his MD from the Free University of Berlin (Germany) in 1985 and did postgraduate training at the Benjamin Franklin Medical Center in Berlin and the Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston.  Prior to joining GSK in 2011, Dr. Streit worked in the field of clinical drug research and development for Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer-Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, and Berlex Biosciences.
Katherine Johansen Taber, Ph.D.
Katherine Johansen Taber, PhD has been a Senior Scientist at the American Medical Association since 2006. She leads the AMA’s Program in Genetics and Molecular Medicine, which focuses on educating physicians about the clinical implementation of genetics and on identifying emerging genetic policy issues affecting health care providers. She also advises the AMA Board of Trustees and the House of Delegates on genetics issues such as the oversight of genetic testing, gene patenting, stem cell research, and newborn screening. Dr. Johansen Taber has held a position on the Board of NCHPEG since 2006, and will be Vice Chair beginning in 2012. She also serves as the AMA appointment to the Institute of Medicine’s Roundtable on Genomics, and has served as an Advisory Board member for Genetic Services Policy Project and as an advisor for the Illinois Humanities Council’s community genetics education program Future Perfect. Dr. Johansen Taber earned her PhD in Molecular, Cell, and Developmental Biology at the University of California, Los Angeles, and conducted post-doctoral research at the USDA. She has held teaching appointments at UCLA, California State Polytechnic University, University of Idaho, and Columbia College Chicago.

Robert I. Tepper, M.D.
Robert I. Tepper, M.D. is a distinguished scientist with over 25 years of experience building and operating leading R&D operations. Bob co-founded Third Rock Ventures in 2007 and focuses on the formation, development and scientific strategy of our portfolio companies as well as actively identifying and evaluating new investments. He also assumes active leadership roles in our portfolio companies, functioning as Chief Scientific Officer through the first 12-18 months post launch.
Prior to joining Third Rock Ventures, Bob was President of R&D at Millennium Pharmaceuticals and was vital in its expansion from a drug discovery company to a fully-integrated biopharmaceutical company. Prior to Millennium, Bob co-founded Cell Genesys/Abgenix.
Bob holds an AB in Biochemistry from Princeton University and received his MD degree from Harvard Medical School. Bob serves as an adjunct faculty member at Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital and is an advisory board member of several leading health care institutions including the Partners HealthCare Center for Personalized Genetic Medicine, the Massachusetts General Hospital and Tufts Medical School.

Joe Vockley, Ph.D.
Joe Vockley, Ph.D., is Chief Operating Officer and Chief Scientific Officer of the Inova Translational Medicine Institute. Dr. Vockley brings 25 years of experience in academic, pharmaceutical, biotechnology CROs and government research. He has broad and deep expertise in the fields of genetics, genomics, molecular diagnostics, bioinformatics and large program management.
Dr. Vockley is a results-oriented manager and scientist. He is an inventor on numerous US and international genomic and bioinformatic technology patents in the areas of DNA diagnostics, laboratory methods for microarray analysis, gene discoveries and bioinformatic tool development. His basic research interests are in the fields of cancer and inborn errors of metabolism.
Dr. Vockley has previously held the positions of Chief Scientific Officer, Vice President of Research, Director of Genomics and Director of Bioinformatics. Most recently, he was the director of National Cancer Institute’s Cancer Genome Atlas Project and The Cancer Genome Atlas Program Office.

Scott Weiss, M.D., M.S.
Scott Weiss, M.D., M.S. is currently Scientific Director of the Partners HealthCare Center for Personalized Genetic Medicine (PCPGM) and Associate Director, Channing Laboratory, and Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School. In this latter capacity, he leads a 28 investigator, 120 person research group examining the environmental and genetic origins of asthma and COPD.
He has authored or coauthored over 500 publications and four books in the area of asthma and COPD risk factors, natural history, and genetics. His initial work concerned the role of airways responsiveness and environmental tobacco smoke exposure in asthma and COPD, the effect of allergen exposure and airways responsiveness on markers of inflammation and the combined effect of these factors on the development of COPD. In 1996, he developed a strong interest in the genetics of asthma and his work over the past 14 years has focused on this, and novel environmental exposures such as vitamin D and the bowel flora. His laboratory is the only laboratory in the world that has active NIH research in the areas of asthma genetics, asthma pharmacogenetics, and COPD genetics. He is the principal investigator or co-investigator on a total of six separate NHLBI-funded grant proposals in the area of the genetics of asthma and Asthma Pharmacogenetics, including a MERIT award.

M. Kathleen Behrens Wilsey, Ph.D.
M. Kathleen Behrens Wilsey, Ph.D. served as a Member of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST), from 2001 to 2009, working on multiple national policy matters. She Chaired PCAST’s Subcommittee on Personalized Medicine and led a two year study that culminated in the September 15, 2008 report, Priorities for Personalized Medicine. Kathy was a director of the Board on Science, Technology and Economic Policy (STEP) for the National Research Council from 1997-2005, at which time she participated as a member of the Institute of Medicine Committee on New Approaches to Early Detection and Diagnosis of Breast Cancer. Kathy was a director of the National Venture Capital Association from 1993 to 2000, also serving as President, Chairman and Past Chairman from October of1999 through April of 2000. Dr. Behrens Wilsey currently serves as a member of the Board of Directors of Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc. and KEW Group Inc. Kathy holds a Ph.D. in Microbiology from the University of California, Davis.
Kathy established a career in the financial services industry, working with Robertson Stephens & Co. until 1996, where she became a general partner and managing director. Dr. Behrens Wilsey continued in her capacity as a General Partner for selected venture funds for RS Investments, after management led a buy-out of that firm from Bank of America. Her professional career includes tenures as a public-market life-sciences securities analyst, as well as venture capitalist focusing on healthcare and technology investments. She was instrumental in the founding of several life-sciences companies including Protein Design Labs, Inc. and COR Therapeutics, Inc. and participated in financing a broad range of health care services and products companies.
Dr. Behrens Wilsey served as a director of Abgenix, Inc. in a role that spanned that firm’s early rounds of private financings through the company’s sale in 2006 to Amgen, Inc. and was a director of Amylin Pharmaceuticals, Inc. from 2009 until the company’s recent sale in 2012 to Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. Dr. Behrens Wilsey has worked for the last several years with KEW Group Inc. in developing a personalized medicine oncology management company and currently serves as KEW Group’s President & CEO.

 


Pascale Witz
Pascale Witz is the President and Chief Executive Officer of GE Healthcare’s Medical Diagnostics business (MDx), and an officer of the General Electric Company.
MDx is a $2bn global leader in pharmaceutical and molecular diagnostics which are used by physicians in the early detection, diagnosis, and management of disease.
Since joining MDx in 2009, Pascale has successfully expanded GE Healthcare’s diagnostics capabilities to include molecular diagnostics, broadening the portfolio through acquisition, investment and partnership. Pascale is deeply committed to enabling personalized medicine. She believes that combining in vivo and in vitro diagnostics will drive an integrated solution encompassing risk stratification, early detection, prediction and monitoring, which will enable physicians to diagnose and treat disease more effectively. According to Pascale, precision diagnostics allow us to interrogate the pathways that drive cancer and age-related neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s Disease and Parkinson’s Disease.
Pascale has more than 16 years of leadership at GE Healthcare including heading the Functional Imaging (Nuclear Medicine and PET) and the CT (Computed Tomography) businesses in EMEA. Prior to her current position, she led GEHC’s global Interventional business, developing innovative medical technologies for interventional radiology and cardiology. Prior to joining GE, Pascale spent five years in the pharmaceutical industry, having started her career working in a molecular biology research laboratory.
She is an active leader in the GE Women’s Network and now serves on its executive board. The GE Women’s Network boasts a membership of over 180,000 women globally with a goal of focusing on the professional development of women throughout the company.
Pascale holds a Master’s degree in life sciences/molecular biology from INSA Lyon, and an MBA from INSEAD.

George Yancopoulos, M.D., Ph.D.
George Yancopoulos, M.D., Ph.D. graduated as valedictorian of both the Bronx High School of Science and Columbia College, and earned his advanced degrees at Columbia University’s College of Physicians and Surgeons. Following widely-recognized work in the field of molecular immunology at Columbia with Dr. Fred Alt, Dr. Yancopoulos left academia in 1989 as founding scientist for Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, where he continues to serve as President of the Laboratories and Chief Scientific Officer. He is also adjunct full professor at Columbia University and was awarded Columbia’s Stevens Triennial prize for Research and the University Medal of Excellence for Distinguished Achievement. Dr. Yancopoulos is widely regarded as a world leader in several fields of biology and has authored more than 350 scientific manuscripts. According to a study by the Institute for Scientific Information, Dr. Yancopoulos was the eleventh most highly cited scientist in the world during the 1990’s. In 2004, he was elected to both the National Academy of Sciences and the American Academy of Sciences. Dr. Yancopoulos’ scientific efforts have focused on the discovery of growth factors (such as the neurotrophins, ephrins and angiopoietins), their receptors, and their signaling pathways, as well as on developing new platforms for target and drug discovery such as Trap TechnologyVelociGene and VelocImmune. His research has led to unifying models of molecular and biologic function, as well as new approaches to treating disease. Dr. Yancopoulos and his team have progressed numerous drug candidates to human trials, including the IL1-Trap (ARCALYST®) which has recently been approved for treatment of an orphan inflammatory disease, the VEGF Trap-Eye (EYLEA®) which has recently been approved for age-related macular degeneration (the most common cause of blindness in the elderly), the VEGF Trap-Onc (ZALTRAP®) for cancer, and several fully human monoclonal antibodies derived using VelocImmune technology for various indications including cholesterol-lowering and inflammatory diseases.

 

Register online at www.personalizedmedicineconference.org .
Follow the conversation online at @HarvardPMConf and #PMConf.
BLOG UPDATES

 SOURCE:

http://pcpgm.partners.org/education/pmconference

 

Read Full Post »

Nitric Oxide has a Ubiquitous Role in the Regulation of Glycolysis – with a Concomitant Influence on Mitochondrial Function

 

Reporter, Editor, and Topic Co-Leader: Larry H. Bernstein, MD, FACP, Clinical Pathologist and Biochemist

 

 

Apoptosis signaling pathways

Apoptosis signaling pathways (Photo credit: AJC1)

This discussion is a followup on a series of articles elucidating the importance of NO, eNOS, iNOS, cardiovascular and vascular endothelium effects, and therapeutic targets.

This mechanism of action and signaling actions have been introduced so that we identify endocrine, paracrine, and such effects in the normal, stressed, and dysfunctional state. The size and breadth of this vital adaptive process is now further explored.

The title is short, befitting a subtitle.  The full topic may be considered “Nitric Oxide has a ubiquitous role in the regulation of glycolysis -with a concomitant influence on mitochondrial function that is active in endothelium, platelets, vascular smooth muscle and neural cells and the balance has a role in chronic inflammation, asthma, hypertension, sepsis and cancer”.

Vascular endothelium

Vascular endothelium (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Related articles

 

 

Nitric Oxide Synthase

Nitric Oxide Synthase (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

 

Nitric Oxide has a ubiquitous role in the regulation of glycolysis with a concomitant influence on mitochondrial function that is active in endothelium, platelets, vascular smooth muscle and neural cells and the balance has a role in chronic inflammation, asthma, hypertension, sepsis and cancer.

Uncoupling of aerobic glycolysis
Potential cytotoxic mediators of endothelial cell (EC) apoptosis include increased formation of reactive oxygen and nitrogen species (ROSRNS) during the atherosclerotic process. Nitric oxide (NO) has a biphasic action on oxidative cell killing with low concentrations protecting against cell death, whereas higher concentrations are cytotoxic. High levels of NO can be produced by inducible nitric-oxide synthase in response to cytokine stimulation, primarily from macrophages, and elevated levels of NO is injurious to endothelium.Ccytochrome c release and caspase activation are involved in NO induced apoptosis. ROS also induces mitochondrial DNA damage in ECs, and this damage is accompanied by a decrease in mitochondrial RNA (mtRNA) transcripts, mitochondrial protein synthesis, and cellular ATP levels. Mitochondria have been recognized to play a pivotal role in the signaling cascade of apoptosis leading to atherosclerosis-induced damage in endothelial cells.
The processes involved in the signaling pathways leading to apoptosis are complex but have some degree of convergence between cell types including those in the vasculature. Release of cytochrome c from mitochondria is a proapoptotic signal, which activates several downstream signaling events including formation of the apoptosome and activation of caspases. Ubiquinol cytochrome c reductase (complex III) is a site for ROS formation, and cytochrome c oxidase (complex IV) is a target for the interaction of NO in mitochondria.
The impact of the inhibition of mitochondrial protein synthesis is particularly important in NO-dependent cytotoxicity, and depends also on other factors such as glycolysis. These authors examined whether the inhibition of mitochondrial protein synthesis by chloramphenicol increases the susceptibility of endothelial cells to undergo NO-dependent apoptosis in glucose-free media. Bovine aortic endothelial cells were treated with chloramphenicol, which resulted in a decreased ratio of mitochondrial complex IV to cytochrome c and increased oxidant production in the cell. Inhibition of mitochondrial protein synthesis was associated with a greater susceptibility of the cells to apoptosis induced by NO in glucose-free medium.
Inhibition of mitochondrial protein synthesis results in increased endothelial cell susceptibility to nitric oxide-induced apoptosis. A Ramachandran, DR Moellering, E Ceaser, S Shiva, J Xu, and V Darley-Usmar. PNAS May 14, 2002: 99(10): 6643–6648 http://www.pnas.orgcgidoi10.1073pnas.102019899

Nitric oxide (NO) is a ubiquitous signaling molecule whose physiological roles mediated through the activation of the soluble guanylate cyclase are now clearly recognized. At physiological concentrations, NO also inhibits the mitochondrial enzyme cytochrome c oxidase (complex IV) in competition with oxygen, and recently we have suggested that the interplay between the two gases allows this enzyme to act as an oxygen sensor in cells. In addition, NO plays a variety of patho-physiological roles, some of which also may be the consequence of its action at a mitochondrial level. We have characterized the sequence of events that follow inhibition of complex IV by continuous exposure to NO.
The mitochondrion is a key organelle in the control of cell death. Nitric oxide (NO) inhibits complex IV in the respiratory chain and is reported to possess both proapoptotic and antiapoptotic actions. We investigated the effects of continuous inhibition of respiration by NO on mitochondrial energy status and cell viability. Serum-deprived human T cell leukemia (Jurkat) cells were exposed to NO at a concentration that caused continuous and complete (;85%) inhibition of respiration. Serum deprivation caused progressive loss of mitochondrial membrane potential (Dcm) and apoptotic cell death. In the presence of NO, Dcm was maintained compared to controls, and cells were protected from apoptosis. Similar results were obtained by using staurosporin as the apoptotic stimulus. As exposure of serum-deprived cells to NO progressed (>5 h), however, Dcm fell, correlating with the appearance of early apoptotic features and a decrease in cell viability. Glucose deprivation or iodoacetate treatment of cells in the presence of NO resulted in a collapse of Dcm, demonstrating involvement of glycolytic ATP in its maintenance. Under these conditions cell viability also was decreased. Treatment with oligomycin and or bongkrekic acid indicated that the maintenance of Dcm during exposure to NO is caused by reversal of the ATP synthase and other electrogenic pumps. Thus, blockade of complex IV by NO initiates a protective action in the mitochondrion to maintain Dcm; this results in prevention of apoptosis. It is likely that during cellular stress involving increased generation of NO this compound will trigger a similar sequence of events, depending on its concentration and duration of release. (mitochondrial membrane potential ; apoptosis ; necrosis)

The effect of nitric oxide on cell respiration: A key to understanding its role in cell survival or death. B Beltra, A Mathur, MR Duchen, JD. Erusalimsky, and S Moncada. PNAS Dec 19, 2000; 97(26):4602–14607.

Another study by this group shows that inhibition of respiration by exogenous nitric oxide (NO) in Jurkat cells leads to mitochondrial membrane hyperpolarization dependent on the utilization of glycolytic ATP by the F1Fo-ATPase and other transporters acting in reverse mode. This process also occurs in astrocytes, which are highly glycolytic cells, but not in neurons , which do not invoke glycolysis to maintain ATP concentrations. In addition, this hyperpolarization correlates with protection against apoptotic cell death. Others found an early phase of mitochondrial hyperpolarization after treatment of a variety of cells with different pro-apoptotic stimuli, which precedes the generation of free. At present, no satisfactory explanation has been proposed to explain the mechanism of hyperpolarization, the reasons why free radicals are released from the mitochondrion, or the connection of these phenomena with apoptosis.
The authors surmise that a pro-apoptotic stimulus, anti-Fas Ab, leads to release of endogenous NO from Jurkat cells in sufficient amounts to inhibit cell respiration and cause a hyperpolarization dependent on the reversal of the F1Fo-ATPase. Moreover, the reduction of the mitochondrial electron transport chain, after inhibition of cytochrome oxidase by NO, leads to generation of superoxide anion (O2). They suggest the process is a cellular defense response that may be overcome by pro-apoptotic mechanisms that occur in parallel.

Inhibition of mitochondrial respiration by endogenous nitric oxide: A critical step in Fas signaling. B Beltran, M Quintero, E Garcıa-Zaragoza, E O’Connor, JV. Esplugues, and Salvador Moncada. PNAS June 25, 2002 99(13): 8892–8897. http://www.pnas.orgcgidoi10.1073pnas.092259799

Nitric oxide has been shown to render cells resistant to oxidative stress. Mechanisms proposed for the ability of nitric oxide to protect cells against oxidative stress include reactions of nitric oxide and the induction of adaptive responses that require protein synthesis. Nitric oxide forms iron complexes preventing the formation of strong oxidants. In addition, reactions of nitric oxide with lipid and or organic radicals protect against membrane peroxidation and peroxidative chemistry-induced cell injury. Exposure to low, nonlethal doses of nitric oxide induces adaptive responses that render cells resistant to lethal concentrations of nitric oxide and or peroxides, such as, the induction of hemoxygenase-1 (HO-1) and Mn superoxide dismutase. The up-regulation of HO-1 was accompanied by an increase in ferritin to account for the release of iron from HO-1, indicating a role of both iron heme and nonheme iron for peroxide-mediated cellular injury. Further, nitric oxide, by regulating critical mitochondrial functions such as respiration, membrane potential, and release of cytochrome c, is able to trigger defense mechanisms against cell death induced by pro-apoptotic stimuli.
This study investigates the potential contribution of nitric oxide’s ability to protect cells from oxidative stress, low steady state levels of nitric oxide generated by endothelial nitric oxide synthase (eNOS) and the mechanisms of protection against H2O2. Spontaneously transformed human ECV304 cells, which normally do not express eNOS, were stably transfected with a green fluorescent-tagged eNOS cDNA. The eNOS-transfected cells were found to be resistant to injury and delayed death following a 2-h exposure to H2O2 (50–150 mM). Inhibition of nitric oxide synthesis abolished the protective effect against H2O2 exposure. The ability of nitric oxide to protect cells depended on the presence of respiring mitochondria. ECV3041 eNOS cells with diminished mitochondria respiration are injured to the same extent as non-transfected ECV304 cells, and recovery of mitochondrial respiration restores the ability of nitric oxide to protect against H2O2-induced death. Nitric oxide had a profound effect in cell metabolism, because ECV3041eNOS cells had lower steady state levels of ATP and higher utilization of glucose via the glycolytic pathway than ECV304 cells. However, the protective effect of nitric oxide against H2O2 exposure is not reproduced in ECV304 cells after treatment with azide and oligomycin suggesting that the dynamic regulation of respiration by nitric oxide represent a critical and unrecognized primary line of defense against oxidative stress.

Dynamic regulation of metabolism and respiration by endogenously produced nitric oxide protects against oxidative stress. E Paxinou, M Weisse, Q Chen, JM Souza, et al. PNAS Sept 25, 2001; 98( 20): 11575–11580. http://www.pnas.orgycgiydoiy10.1073ypnas.201293198.

Nitric oxide (NO) mediates a variety of biological effects including relaxation of blood vessels, cytotoxicity of activated macrophages, and formation of cGMP by activation of glutamate receptors of neurons. NO has also been implicated for such pathophysiological conditions as destruction of tumor cells by macrophages, rheumatoid arthritis, and focal brain ischemia. Some of these effects of NO are associated with hypoxic conditions. O2 radicals and ions that result from reactivity of NO are presumed to be involved in NO cytotoxicity. These investigators report that adaptive cellular response controlled by the transcription factor hypoxia-inducible factor 1 (HIF-1) in hypoxia is suppressed by NO. Induction of erythropoietin and glycolytic aldolase A mRNAs in hypoxically cultured Hep3B cells, a human hepatoma cell line, was completely and partially inhibited, respectively, by the addition of sodium nitroprusside (SNP), which spontaneously releases NO. A reporter plasmid carrying four hypoxia-response element sequences connected to the luciferase structural gene was constructed and transfected into Hep3B cells. Inducibly expressed luciferase activity in hypoxia was inhibited by the addition of SNP and two other structurally different NO donors, S-nitroso-Lglutathione and 3-morpholinosydnonimine, giving IC50 values of 7.8, 211, and 490 mM, respectively. Inhibition by SNP was also observed in Neuro 2A and HeLa cells, indicating that the inhibition was not cell-type-specific. The vascular endothelial growth factor promoter activity that is controlled by HIF-1 was also inhibited by SNP (IC50 5 6.6 mM). Induction generated by the addition of cobalt ion (this treatment mimics hypoxia) was also inhibited by SNP (IC50 5 2.5 mM). Increased luciferase activity expressed by cotransfection of effector plasmids for HIF-1a or HIF-1a-like factor in hypoxia was also inhibited by the NO donor. We also showed that the inhibition was performed by blocking an activation step of HIF-1a to a DNA-binding form.
Inhibition of hypoxia-inducible factor 1 activity by nitric oxide donors in hypoxia. K Sogawa, K Numayama-Tsuruta, M Ema, M Abe, et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA (Biochemistry) June 1998; 95:7368–7373. 1998. The National Academy of Sciences 0027-8424.98.957368-6. http:yywww.pnas.org.

The role of nitrogen metabolism in the survival of prolonged periods of waterlogging was investigated in highly flood-tolerant, nodulated Lotus japonicus plants. Alanine production revealed to be a critical hypoxic pathway. Alanine is the only amino acid whose biosynthesis is not inhibited by nitrogen deficiency resulting from RNA interference silencing of nodular leghemoglobin. The metabolic changes that were induced following waterlogging can be best explained by the activation of alanine metabolism in combination with the modular operation of a split tricarboxylic acid pathway. The sum result of this metabolic scenario is the accumulation of alanine and succinate and the production of extra ATP under hypoxia. The importance of alanine metabolism is discussed with respect to its ability to regulate the level of pyruvate, and this and all other changes are discussed in the context of current models concerning the regulation of plant metabolism.
Glycolysis and the Tricarboxylic Acid Cycle Are Linked by Alanine Aminotransferase during Hypoxia Induced by Waterlogging of Lotus japonicus[W][OA]. M Rocha, F Licausi, WL Arau´ jo, A Nunes-Nesi, et al. Plant Physiology Mar 2010; 152: 1501–1513. http://www.plantphysiol.org 2010 Amer Soc Plant Biologists

DNA damage occurs in ischemia, excitotoxicity, inflammation, and other disorders that affect the central nervous system (CNS). Extensive DNA damage triggers cell death and in the mature CNS, this occurs primarily through activation of the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase-1 (PARP-1) cell death pathway. PARP-1 is an abundant nuclear enzyme that, when activated by DNA damage, consumes nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NAD)+ to form poly(ADP-ribose) on acceptor proteins. The PARP-1 activation leads to cell death. We used mouse astrocyte cultures to explore the bioenergetic effects of NAD+ depletion by PARP-1 and the role of NAD+ depletion in this cell death program. PARP-1 activation led to a rapid but incomplete depletion of astrocyte NAD+, a near-complete block in glycolysis, and eventual cell death. Repletion of intracellular NAD restored glycolytic function and prevented cell death. The addition of non-glucose substrates to the medium, pyruvate, glutamate, or glutamine, also prevented astrocyte death after PARP-1 activation.
These findings suggest a sequence of events in which NAD+ depletion is a key event linking DNA damage to metabolic impairment and cell deathm. A similar scenario has been proposed by Zong et al. (2004), based on the finding that cell types that depend on aerobic glycolysis for ATP production exhibit a particularly high sensitivity to DNA damage and PARP-1 activation. In mature brain, glucose is normally the dominant metabolic substrate due to relatively slow transport of other metabolites across the blood– brain barrier. Oncein brain, glucose may be metabolized directly by neurons and glia or may be metabolized to lactate in glia and thelactate subsequently shuttled to neurons for oxidative metabolism (Dringen et al., 1993; Pellerin and Magistretti,1994; Wender et al., 2000; Dienel and Cruz, 2004). In either case, a block in glycolytic flux produced by NAD depletion will block energy metabolism in both neurons and glia in brain. Interestingly, the lactate shuttle hypothesis raises the possibility that activation of PARP-1 selectively in astroglia might also block energy metabolism in neurons.

These studies suggest PARP-1 activation leads to rapid depletion of the cytosolic but not the mitochondrial NAD+ pool. Depletion of the cytosolic NAD+ pool renders the cells unable to utilize glucose as a metabolic substrate. Under conditions where glucose is the only available metabolic substrate, this leads to cell death. This cell death pathway is particularly germane to brain because glucose is normally the only metabolic substrate that is transported rapidly across the blood–brain barrier. © 2004 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
Key words: mitochondria; permeability transition; poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase; ischemia; peroxynitrite
NAD+as a metabolic link between DNA damage and cell death. DNA damage induced by alkylating agents, oxidative stress, or other agents causes PARP-1 activation. PARP-1 activation leads to depletion in cytosolic NAD with, initially, a relative preservation of mitochondrial NAD and mitochondrial function. The depletion in cytosolic NAD+ blocks glycolysis, and in cells in which glucose is the primary energy substrate, this in turn leads to a block in substrate flux to mitochondria. The resulting mitochondrial dysfunction leads to mitochondrial permeability transition (MPT) and subsequent downstream events culminating in cell death.
NAD+ as a Metabolic Link Between DNA Damage and Cell Death. W Ying, CC Alano, P Garnier, and RA Swanson. Journal of Neuroscience Research 2005;79:216–223
Key words: glycolysis, mitochondrial energy production, nitric oxide
Abbreviations: NO, nitric oxide; SNAP, S-nitroso-N-acetylpenicyllamine; SNP, sodium nitroprusside.
The results indicate that: 1) in porcine platelets NO is able to diminish mitochondrial energy production through the inhibition of cytochrome oxidase, 2) the inhibitory effect of NO on platelet secretion (but not aggregation) can be attributed to the reduction of mitochondrial energy production.
Nitric oxide (NO) has been increasingly recognized as an important intra- and intercellular messenger molecule with a physiological role in vascular relaxation, platelet physiology, neurotransmission and immune responses (Moncada et al., 1991; Radomski et al., 1996; Szabó, 1996; Riedel et al., 1999; Titheradge 1999). In vitro NO is a strong inhibitor of platelet adhesion and aggregation (Radomski et al., 1996; Riedel et al., 1999;nSogo et al., 2000). In the blood stream, platelets remain in contact with NO that is permanently released from the endothelial cells and from activated macrophages (Moncada et al., 1991; Riedel et al., 1999; Titheradge 1999). It has been suggested that the activated platelet itself is able to produce NO (Lantoine et al., 1995; Zhou et al., 1995; Radomski et al., 1996). The mechanism responsible for the inhibitory effect of NO on platelet responses is not entirely clear. It is believed that the main intracellular target for NO in platelets is soluble cytosolic guanylate cyclase (Waldman & Walter 1989; Schmidt et al., 1993; Wang et al., 1998). NO activates the enzyme (Schmidt et al., 1993). Thus, elevated intracellular cGMP level inhibits platelet activation. There are suggestions, however, that elevated cGMP may not be the only intracellular factor directly involved in the inhibition of platelet activation (Gordge et al., 1998; Sogo et al., 2000; Beghetti et al., 2003).
Platelets are fairly active metabolically and have a total ATP turnover rate of about 3–8 times that of resting mammalian muscle (Akkerman, 1978; Akkerman et al., 1978; Holmsen, 1981; Niu et al., 1996). Platelets contain mitochondria which enable these cells to produce energy both in the oxidative and anaerobic way (Holmsen, 1981). Under aerobic conditions, ATP is produced by aerobic glycolysis using glucose or glycogen which can account for 30–50% of total ATP production, and by oxidative metabolism using glucose and glycogen (6–11%), amino-acids (7%) or free fatty acids (20–40%) (Holmsen 1981; Guppy et al., 1990; Niu et al., 1996).
The inhibition of mitochondrial respiration by removing oxygen or by respiratory chain blockers (antimycin A, cyanide, rotenone) results in the stimulation of glycolytic flux (Guppy et al., 1990). This phenomenon is known as Pasteur effect and indicates that in platelets glycolysis and mitochondrial respiration are tightly functionally connected (Akkerman, 1978; Holmsen, 1981; Guppy et al., 1995; Niu et al., 1996). It has been reported that the activation of human platelets by high concentration of thrombin is accompanied by an acceleration of lactate production and an increase in oxygen consumption (Akkerman & Holmsen, 1981; Niu et al., 1996).
The results presented here suggest that also porcine blood platelets stimulated by collagen produce more lactate. This indicates that both glycolytic and oxidativeATP production supports platelet responses. This also indicates that blocking of energy production in platelets may decrease their responses. It is well established that platelet responses have different metabolic energy (ATP) requirements increasing in the order: aggregation< dense and alfa granule secretion < acid hydrolase secretion (Holmsen et al., 1982; Verhoeven et al., 1984; Morimoto & Ogihara, 1996).
The present results indicate that exogenously added NO (in the form of NO donors)stimulates glycolysis in intact porcine platelets. Since in platelets glycolysis and mitochondrial respiration are tightly functionally connected, this can be interpreted to mean that the stimulatory effectof NO on glycolysis in intact platelets may be produced by non-functional mitochondria.This can be really the case since NO donors are able to inhibit both mitochondrial respiration and platelet cytochrome oxidase. Interestingly, the concentrations of NO donors inhibiting mitochondrial respiration and cytochrome oxidase were similar to those stimulating glycolysis in intact platelets.
Studies performed on intact J774 cells have shown that mitochondrial complex I is inhibited only after a prolonged (6–18 h) exposure to NO and that this inhibition appears to result from S-nitrosylation of critical thiols in the enzyme complex (Clementi et al., 1998). Further studies are needed to establish whether long term exposure of platelets to NO affects Mitochondrial complexes I and II.
Comparison of the concentrations of SNP and SNAP affecting cytochrome oxidase activityand mitochondrial respiration with those reducing the platelet responses indicates that NO cannot significantly reduce platelet aggregation through the inhibition of oxidative energy production. By contrast, the concentrations of the NO donors inhibiting platelet secretion, mitochondrial respiration and cytochrome oxidase were similar. This and the fact that the platelet release reaction strongly depends on the oxidative energy production may suggest that in porcine platelets NO can affect platelet secretion through the inhibition of mitochondrial energy production at the step of cytochrome oxidase.

Taking into account that platelets may contain NO synthase and are able to produce significant amounts of NO (Berkels et al., 1997)it seems possible that nitric oxide can function in these cells as a physiological regulator of mitochondrial energy production.
Nitric oxide and platelet energy metabolism. M Tomasiak, H Stelmach, T Rusak and J Wysocka. Acta Biochimica Polonica 2004; 51(3):789–803

These authors previously investigated the bioenergetic consequences of activating J774.A1 macrophages (MФ) with interferon (IFN)γ and lipopolysaccharide (LPS) and found that there is a nitric oxide (NO)-dependent mitochondrial impairment and stabilization of hypoxia inducible factor (HIF)-1α, which synergize to activate glycolysis and generate large
quantities of ATP. We now demonstrate, using TMRM fluorescence and time-lapse confocal microscopy, that these cells maintain a high mitochondrial membrane potential (ΔΨm) despite the complete inhibition of respiration. The maintenance of high ΔΨm is due to the utilization of a significant proportion of glycolytically generated ATP as a defence mechanism against cell death. This is achieved by the reverse functioning of FoF1-ATP synthase and adenine nucleotide translocase (ANT). Treatment of activated MФ with inhibitors of either of these enzymes, but not with inhibitors of the respiratory chain complexes I to IV, led to a collapse in ΔΨm and to an immediate increase in intracellular [ATP], due to the prevention of ATP hydrolysis by the FoF1-ATP synthase. This collapse in ΔΨm was followed by translocation of Bax from cytosol to the mitochondria, release of cytochrome c into the cytosol, activation of caspase 3 and 9 and subsequent apoptotic cell death. Our results indicate that during inflammatory activation “glycolytically competent cells” such as MФ utilize significant amounts of the glycolytically-generated ATP to maintain ΔΨm and thereby prevent apoptosis.

Activated macrophages utilize glycolytic ATP to maintain mitochondrial membranepotential and prevent apoptotic cell death. A Garedew, SO Henderson, S Moncada. Cell Death and Differentiation. 2010. DOI : 10.1038/cdd.2010.27
The effects of the sodium nitroprusside (SNP), a nitric oxide (NO) donor clinically used in the treatment of hypertensive emergencies on the energy production of rat reticulocytes were investigated. Rat reticulocyte-rich red blood cell suspensions were aerobically incubated without (control) or in the presence of different concentrations of SNP (0.1, 0.25, 0.5, 1.0 mM). SNP decreased total and coupled, but increased uncoupled oxygen consumption. This was accompanied by the stimulation of glycolysis, as measured by increased glucose consumption and lactate accumulation. Levels of all glycolytic intermediates indicate stimulation of hexokinase-phosphofructo kinase (HK-PFK), glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPD) and pyruvate kinase (PK) activities in the presence of SNP. Due to the decrease of coupled oxygen consumption in the presence of SNP, ATP production via oxidative phosphorylation was significantly diminished. Simultaneous increase of glycolytic ATP production was not enough to provide constant ATP production. In addition, SNP significantly decreased ATP level, which was accompanied with increased ADP and AMP levels. However, the level of total adenine nucleotides was significantly lower, which was the consequence of increased catabolism of adenine nucleotides (increased hypoxanthine level). ATP/ADP ratio and adenylate energy charge level were significantly decreased. In conclusion, SNP induced inhibition of oxidative phosphorylation, stimulation of glycolysis, but depletion of total energy production in rat reticulocytes. These alterations were accompanied with instability of energy status.

Effects of Exogenous Donor of Nitric Oxide – Sodium Nitroprusside on Energy Production of Rat Reticulocytes. SD MALETIĆ, L M DRAGIĆEVIĆ-DJOKOVIĆ, BI OGNJANOVIĆ, RV ŽIKIĆ, AŠ ŠTAJN, MB SPASIĆ.
Physiol. Res. 2004;53: 439-447.

Key points to take from this:
1. The role of NO in regulating cellular death is in many organs and central to this function is the stabilization of mitochondria through sufficient levels of NO. High levels of eNO leads to mitochondrial dysfunction that increases the dependence of ATP generated from glycolysis.
2. This is accompanied by inhibition of oxidative phosphorylation and stimulation of glycolysis, which brings the discussion to a different domain – cancer growth and Warburgh Effect.
3. This is accompanied by PPAR activation, cytoplasmic NAD+ depletion, and inhibition of glycolysis (critical in cells dependent on aerobic glycolysis), depletion of total energy production, and apoptosis.
4. Maintenance of high glycolytic generation of ATP is essential for cellular defense, but the oxygen consumption is uncoupled.
5. NO donors inhibiting mitochondrial respiration and cytochrome oxidase are similar to those stimulating glycolysis

More    (pharmaceuticalintelligence.com)

Read Full Post »

 

Reported by: Dr. Venkat S. Karra, Ph.D.

 

NEW EVIDENCE FOR POLYOMAVIRUS BK ROLE IN PROSTATE CANCER

 

Prostate cancer is the leading cause of cancer morbidity and the third greatest cause of cancer death among men in developed countries.

English: Two-panel drawing shows normal male r...

English: Two-panel drawing shows normal male reproductive and urinary anatomy and benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Panel on the left shows the normal prostate and flow of urine from the bladder through the urethra. Panel on the right shows an enlarged prostate pressing on the bladder and urethra, blocking the flow of urine. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

A major question in cancer research has been whether virus infection plays a role in cancers of the genitourinary tract.

Now there seem to be a new evidence suggesting human polyomavirus BK is involved in maintaining and enhancing an environment suitable for prostate cancer growth. The research results were published in the August Journal of Virology, and the authors hope that these findings could lead to preventive and/or therapeutic prostate cancer vaccines.

(G. Sais, S. Wyler, T. Hudolin, I. Banzola, C. Mengus, L. Bubendorf, P.J. Wild, H.H. Hirsch, T. Sulser, G.C. Spagnoli, and M. Provanzano, 2012. Differential patterns of large tumor antigen-specific immune responsiveness in patients with BK polyomavirus-positive prostate cancer or benign prostatic hyperplasia. J. Virol. 86:8461-8471.)

Download a copy of the article at: http://bit.ly/asm0812b

 

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

Curated and Reported by: Dr. Venkat S. Karra, Ph.D.

After Making Millions, Two 20-Somethings Have Founded A Startup To Help Fight Cancer

Turner and Weinberg aren’t doctors, but they’re engineers with deep pockets. When they were 24, they sold their startup, Invite Media, to Google for $81 million.

Nat Turner and Zach Weinberg have both watched family members suffer from cancer. So when they left Google in June, they started brainstorming ways to help find a cure.

After their June brainstorming session, the two began meeting with dozens of oncologists every week to learn from them and to see where the treatment process could be improved.

They founded Flatiron Health, rounded up a small team of six, and have a pilot going with some big hospital systems. Gil Shklarskiis is VP of Technology and they’re currently hiring engineers.

Turner says they’re still trying to figure out their exact product.

One area they’re working on is clinical trials. Clinical trials are new, innovative cancer treatments. But it’s difficult for physicians to determine which patients are eligible, and Turner wants to improve the process.

Turner realizes his startup is ambitious. But he also knows he’s in a financially better position than most entrepreneurs to tackle such a big problem.

Flatiron Health is either going to be a great success or a horrible failure,” says Turner.

“Hopefully we’ll  do well by doing good.”

Read more at: businessinsider

My beloved beautiful mother who also suffered from this horrible disease Cancer for about six months died in 2005. Since then I have been focusing on Cancer Causes and Possible Cures.

Since I don’t have a pocket at all, I am making an effort to SHARE what I was blessed with via Social Media with a sloganshare the knowledge and save a life: because Health is Prosperity:

Visit:

The Global Innovations

Preventiveoncology  and

Pharmaceutical Intelligence : a Scientific Website – a new venture founded by Dr. Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN – where excellent highly qualified experienced professionals from pharmaceutical and health care sectors are actively contributing.

We wish you both Good Health and Great Contributions to the Health of the Mankind…because Health is Prosperity

With Best Regards

V.S.Karra

Read Full Post »

Positioning a Therapeutic Concept for Endogenous Augmentation of cEPCs — Therapeutic Indications for Macrovascular Disease: Coronary, Cerebrovascular and Peripheral

Author and Investigator Initiated Study: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

 

Macrovascular Disease – Therapeutic Potential of cEPCs: Promise for CV Risk Reduction

  • Introduction
  • Biomarker Discovery – a comprehensive Post on this topic is forthcoming
  • What are our Contributions in the Domain of Macrovascular Disease – Therapeutic Potential of cEPCs: Reduction Methods for CV Risk
  • Postulates of Multiple Indications for the Method Presented: Positioning of a Therapeutic Concept for Endogenous Augmentation of cEPCs — Potential Therapeutic Indications for ElectEagle
  • A Three Component Method for Endogenous Augmentation of cEPCs — Macrovascular Diseases – Therapeutic Potential of cEPCs
  • The Promise of the Proposed Pharmacotherapy as a Method of CVD Risk Reduction
  • Emergence of Clinical Trial Results on Genous R stent — Healthy Endothelial Accelerated Lining Inhibits Neointimal Growth – (HEALING II)
  • Conclusions
  • References

Key words: coronary artery disease, circulating Endothelial Progenitor Cells (cEPCs), Endothelial Progenitor Cells (EPC), genetic engineering, CVD, CAD, CHF, myocardial infarction, neovascularization, vascular repair, “multimarker biomarker”, macrovascular disease, Endogenous Augmentation of cEPCs, Primary Endpoint, Secondary Endpoint.

Abbreviations used: ED, endothelial dysfunction; CAD, coronary artery disease; CVD, cardiovascular disease; cEPCs, circulating Endothelial Progenitor Cells; EPC, Endothelial Progenitor Cells; CHF, congestive heart failure; MI, myocardial infarction; MNC, mononuclear cells; VEGF, vascular endothelial growth factor; BMMNCs, bone marrow-derived mononuclear cells; G-CSF, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor; SDF, stromal derived factor; PB-MNCs, peripheral blood-mononuclear cells; EF, ejection fraction; PO2, partial pressure of oxygen; BMS, bare-metal stent; CABG, coronary artery bypass graft; DES, drug-eluting stent; GP, glycoprotein; LAD, left anterior descending; LCx, left circumflex; MI, myocardial infarction; RCA, right coronary artery; S/P , status-post stent implantation; MACE, Major Adverse Cardiac Events; TLR, target lesion revascularization; TVR, target vessel revascularization; TVF, target lesion vessel failure; eNOS, endothelial Nitric Oxide Synthase 

Introduction

Cardinal to the study of reendothelialization and neovascularization is the mechanism of action (MOA) of EPCs. It requires exact biological phenotype of the true EPC and its MOA on the endothelium. Is the EPC autocrine or paracrine in its functional role? It is critical to understand this biological unknown for planning therapeutic approaches. Patients with unstable angina and no evidence of cardiac necrosis exhibited increased cEPCs. Systemic inflammation and recognized growth factors may play a role in peripheral mobilization of EPCs in patients with unstable anginal syndromes. Proportion of cEPCs in coronary ischemia, acute or chronic and its potential for restoring left ventricular dysfunction is still experimental. EC injury facilitates an accelerated development of atherosclerotic plaque which triggers cardiovascular risk factors where the magnitude of the endothelial dysfunction predicts the level of risk for a macrovascular event (George, 2004).

Diminished level of cEPCs is associated with risk factors for CVD implicating impaired endothelial repair as a contributor to a dynamic state of endothelial dysfunction. cEPCs is further reduced if multiple risk factors for CVD are present. Endothelial dysfunction is associated with cEPCs counts. It is only if cEPCs counts are low then endothelial dysfunction (ED) emerges. In the case of ED, the cells were more senescent compared with an age group without CVD and the risk factors involved with it. Impaired repair capacity due to reduced availability of cEPCs enhances the exposure to risk factors when injury occurs due to endothelial denudation, ischemic tissue, neointima build up and remodeling.

Mobilization and EPC-mediated neovascularization is critically regulated. Statins and physical exercise are stimulatory while risk factors for CAD are inhibitory in the modulation function of the level of cEPCs. Recruitment of cEPCs requires a coordinated sequence of adhesive and signaling events including adhesion and migration by integrins, chemoattraction of SDF-1/CXCR4 and differentiation of EC.

Bone-marrow derived cells in the circulating blood have an endothelial phenotype and peripheral blood can be cultured to generate ECs. cEPCs provide both diagnostic and prognostic information on CVD. EPCs are analyzed by their phenotypic markers, as discerned by fluorescence-activated cell sorting (FACS) analysis as well as by their functional capability to produce colonies in culture conditions.

Kiernan (2006) identifies the two classes of therapeutic applications of cEPCs: (a) induction of angiogenesis and (b) large vessel repair. Transplantation of autologous EPCs over-expressing eNOS in injured vessels enhances the vasculoprotective properties of the reconstituted endothelium, leading to inhibition of neointimal hyperplasia. This cell-based gene therapy strategy may be useful in treatment of vascular disease. Stents coated in CD34 antibody which binds to the CD34 antigen of cEPCs have the capability to promote re-endothelialisation in minutes to hours. This mechanism seeks to restore the normal biology of the vessel wall rather than perpetuate the wall disruption as drug eluting stents are found recently to be implicated to cause both restenosis and thrombosis (Tung et al., 2006). Thus, cEPCs are of cardinal importance in healing cardiovascular injury. Identification of augmentation methods which are endogenous in nature, are systemic rather than local, as cell-based therapy is, and therefore, it will deliver systemic protective measures against atherosclerosis delaying angioplasty and potentially avoiding cell implantation or vascular engrafting.

Biomarker Discovery – a comprehensive Post on this topic is forthcoming

A comprehensive review of “Traditional” vs. “Novel” risk markers for cardiovascular disease was recently undertaken by Folsom et al., (2006) and the Editorial to this article by Lloyd-Jones and Tian (2006). Among the “Traditional” Risk Markers, they list: Age, Race, Sex, Total/HDL levels, Smoking Status, Diabetes, Systolic BP and Use of antihypertensive  drugs. The list of “Novel” Risk Markers is impressively longer and includes: CRP, Lp-PLA2, E-Selectin, Fibrinogen, PAI-1, Vitamin B6, D-dimer, ICAM-1, Homocysteine, IL-6, HSV-1 Antibody, CMV Antibody and Folate.

Only two risk factors make the top five list following the data adjustment to Age and /or All the Traditional Risk Factors, respectively, I would conclude that only the following two are of paramount importance for clinical application and drug therapy design.

Risk Factor RANKING

Risk Factor RANKING if

Data Adjusted to

AGE

Risk Factor RANKING if

Data Adjusted to

All “Traditional” Risk Factors

1 Chlamydia Intracellular adhesion molecule
2 Lp-PLA2 lipoprotein-associatedphospholipase A2 Cytomegalovirus
3 Tisshe Plasminogen Activator D-Dimer
4 Tissue inhibitor of Metalloproteinase1 IL-6
5 Intracellular adhesion molecule Tissue inhibitor of Metalloproteinase1

In light of these results, chiefly edified by Folsom et al., (2006)  conclusion that: “Based on the totality of evidence, however, CRP level does not emerge as a clinically useful addition to basic risk factor assessment for identifying patients at risk of a first CHD event.” (Folsom, 2006, 1372).

What are our Contributions in the Domain of

Macrovascular Disease – Therapeutic Potential of cEPCs: Reduction Methods for CV Risk

(a) This is the first paper to look at cEPCs from two academic schools of thought.  One, represented by the review article of Dzau et al., Hypertension, 2005 with 122 references which treats cEPCs from two perspectives: Vascular Biology and Molecular Cardiology. The other, is the review article by Lapidot & Petit, Experimental Hematology, 2002 with 86 references which treats cEPCs as stem cells and covers the research in Immunology and in Hematology, cEPCs is circulating in our blood, it is a stem cell! The overlap between the references N=122 in Dzau and N=86 in Lapidot & Petit is zero. These two schools do not cite the findings of the other school. That happens when both schools (Vascular Biology/Molecular Cardiology) and (Immunology/Hematology), BOTH schools are researching the same biologic phenomenon, i.e., one circulating EPC. We are the first to put together in one paper the two schools in the context of cEPCs. The pathophysiology of cECs, cEPCs and Trans-Endothelium Cell Migration in one location.

(b) Table of content of Part I yielded a theoretical treatment of cEPCs not in existence anywhere.  We defined for the first time that the Clinical Frontier for cEPCs is of quadruple nature: (Vascular Biology/Molecular Cardiology) PLUS (Immunology/Hematology). We made the statement that the Clinical Frontier has 20 Future Fast Acting Therapy modality currently under research. We cited the limitation of exogenous methods for augmentation of cEPCs as a scientifically derived justification for our selection of an endogenous augmentation method.

Upon selection of the endogenous method, we specified three components:

–   inhibition of ET-1

–   induction of eNOS

–   stimulation of PPAR-gamma

The proposed combination drug therapy yielded a new multimarker biomarker for reduction of CVD risk for macrovascular events, called the ElectEagle Version I. We specified the potential indications for the ElectEagle Version I method in terms of cardiovascular disease and co-morbidity with other endothelial dysfunction derived disease.

Method name:            ElectEagle

E.L.E.C.T.

E – Efficient

L – Ligands of cEPCs

E – Elective and Individualized Diagnosis and Therapy

C – Cardiovascular diseases & secondary sequalea

T – Treatment adjustable by three agents

E.A.G.L.E.

E – Endogenous

A – Augmentation

G – Gamma-PPAReceptor

L – Ligand occupied ETA and ETA-ETB – binding Nitric Oxide

E – EPCs fast generator

ElectEaglestands for an Efficient Ligands of cEPCs Elective and Individualized Diagnosis and Therapy for Cardiovascular diseases & secondary vascular sequalea, using Treatment adjustable by three agents. It is a method for Endogenous Augmentation of circulating EPCs by using Gamma-PPAR agonists, inhibitors of Ligand occupied ETA and ETA-ETB and agonist for binding Nitric Oxide and induce eNOS.

A Three Component Method for Endogenous Augmentation of cEPCs — Macrovascular Diseases – Therapeutic Potential of cEPCs

Observations on Intellectual Property Development For an Unrecognized Future Fast Acting Therapy for Patients at High Risk for Macrovascular events

ElectEagle represents a discovery of a novel “multimarker biomarker” for cardiovascular disease that innovates on four counts.

First, it proposes new therapeutic indications for acceptable drugs.

Second, it defines a specific combination of therapeutic agents, thus, it put forth a proprietary drug combination.

Third, it targets receptor systems that have not been addressed in the context of cEPCs augmentation methods. Chiefly, modulation of the following three-targeted receptor systems: (a) inhibition of ET-1, ETA and ETA-ETB receptors by antagonists (b) induction of eNOS, by agonists and NO stimulation and (c) upregulation of PPAReceptor-gamma by agonists (TZD). While (b) and (c) are implicated as having favorable effects of cEPCs count, each exerting its effect by a different pathway, it is suggested in this project that (a) might be identify to be the more powerful of the three markers. Our method, ElectEagleis the FIRST to postulate the following: (1) time concentration dependence on eNOS reuptake (2) dose concentration dependence on NO production (3) time and dose concentration dependence for ET-1, ETA and ETA-ETB inhibition, and (4) dose concentration dependence on PPAReceptor-gamma. Points First, Second and Third are covered in Part II where a special focus is placed on ET-1, ETA and ETA-ETB receptors.

Fourth, ElectEagle proposes a platform with triple modes of delivery and use of the test, as described in Part III. The triple modes are as follows: (A) an automated platform from a centralized lab with integration to Lab’s information management system. (B) a point-of-care testing device with appropriate display of test results (small benchtop analyzers in PCP office). (C) a device used for home monitoring of analytes (the hand-held device facilitates rapid read of scores and their translation to drug concentration of each of the three therapeutic agents, with computation of the three drug concentrations done by the device. Thus, it offers quicker optimization of treatment.  ElectEagle is the FIRST to propose a CVD patient kit, hand-held device, which calculates on demand an adjustable therapeutic regimen as a function of cEPCs count biomarker. In this regard, a similarity to the pump, in management of blood sugar in DM patients, exists. Since there is a high co-morbidity between DM and CVD, our methods, ElectEagle may eventually become a targeted therapy for the DM Type 2 population.

Postulates of Multiple Indications for the Method Presented: Positioning of a Therapeutic Concept for Endogenous Augmentation of cEPCs — Potential Therapeutic Indications for ElectEagle

ElectEagle can become the drug therapy of choice for the following indications:

  •      CAD patients
  •      Endothelial Dysfunction in DM patients with or without Erectile Dysfunction
  •      Atherosclerosis patients: Arteries and or veins
  •      pre-stenting treatment phase
  •      post-stenting treatment phase
  •      if stent is a Bare Metal stent (BMS)
  •      if stent is Drug Eluting stent (DES)
  •      if stent is EPC antibody coated (the ElectEagle method increase cEPCs generation in vitro) so availability of cEPCs is increased
  •      post CABG patients (the ElectEagle enhances healing by endogenous augmentation of cEPCs)
  •      target sub segments of CVD patients on blood thinner drugs (the ElectEagle does not require treatment with antiplatelet agents, it is suitable for all patients on Coumadin. This population have a counter indication for antiplatelet agents which is a follow up treatment after stent implantation for 30 days, with stent-eluting long term regimen of antiplatelet agents, 6 months and in some cases indefinitely (Tung, 2006).
  •      ElectEagle is based on systemic therapeutics (versus the localized stent solution requiring multiple and even overlapping stents)
  •      ElectEagle will be having potential in three contexts

(a) Coronary disease

(b) Periphery vascular disease

(c) Cerebrovascular

Comparative analysis of endogenous and exogenous cEPCs augmentation methods:

A. Endogenous augmentation method properties:

  •         temporal – while drug therapy in use – drug action is interruptible
  •         time concentration on eNOS reuptake
  •         dose concentration on NO production
  •         time and dose concentration manner for ETB inhibition
  •         dose concentration on PPAR-gamma

B.  Cell-based and other exogenous methods

  • permanent colonization till apoptosis if no repeated attempts of re-transfer,
  • re-implantation as the protocol usually has several stages

The Promise of the Proposed Pharmacotherapy as a Method of CVD Risk Reduction

It is expected that ElectEagle will be resulting in potential delay of stenting implantation. Patients that are target for stenting may benefit form ElectEagle that will facilitate and accelerate healing after the stent is in place. EPC antibody coated stents will work if and only if the patient has more that just low cEPCs, most patient undergoing stenting tend to have low level of cEPC. The ElectEagle method can be coupled with that type of new stents, called Genous, now in clinical trials (HEALING II, III). These stents enhance the body ability in mobilization of cEPCs, only. However, if the initial population of cEPCs is low, an endogenous fast acting cell augmentation method is needed for pretreatment before the PCI procedure with Genous is scheduled.

Emergence of Clinical Trial Results on Genous R stent — Healthy Endothelial Accelerated Lining Inhibits Neointimal Growth – (HEALING II)

Latest publications on HEALING II – Clinical Trial of EPC coated stent

Genous R stent
n=63
Healthy Endothelial Accelerated Lining Inhibits Neointimal Growth – II

S Silber et al; 12 Month Outcomes of the e-HEALING (Healthy Endothelial Accelerated Lining Inhibits Neointimal Growth) Worldwide Registry; EuroIntervention 2011;6:819-825

P Damman et al; Coronary Stenting With the Genous Bio-engineered R stent in Elderly Patients – 12-month Outcomes From the e-HEALING Registry; Circulation Journal 2011;75(11):2590-2597

P Damman et al; Twelve-month Outcomes After Coronary Stenting With the Genous Bio-Engineered R Stent in Diabetic Patients from the e-HEALING Registry; Journal of Interventional Cardiology 2011;24(4):285-94 

J Aoki et al; Endothelial progenitor cell capture by stents coated with antibody against CD34: the HEALING-FIM (Healthy Endothelial Accelerated Lining Inhibits Neointimal Growth-First In Man) Registry.J.Am.Coll.Cardiol. 2005 May 17;45(10):1574-9

REFERENCES

Aicher A, Heeschen C, Mildner-Rihm C, Urbich C, Ihling C, Technau- Ihling K, Zeiher AM, Dimmeler S, (2003). Essential role of endothelial nitric oxide synthase for mobilization of stem cell and progenitor cells. Nat Med., 9:1370-1376.

Anderson T. (1999). Assessment of treatment of endothelial dysfunction. J Am Coll of Cardiology, 34: 631- 8.

Andrew C. Li, Binder, CJ, Gutierrez, A, Brown, KK, Plotkin, CR, Pattison, JW, Valledor, AF, Davis, RA, Willson, TM, Witztum, JL, Palinski, W, Glass, CK. (2004). Differential inhibition of macrophage foam-cell formation and atherosclerosis in mice by PPAR-alpha, Beta/delta, and gamma. J. Clin. Invest. 114:1564-1576

http://www.jci.org/articles/view/18730

Aoki, J., Serruys, P.W., van Beusekom, H., Ong, A.T., McFadden, E.P., Sianos, G., et al. (2005). Endothelial progenitor cell capture by stents coated with antibody against CD34: the HEALING-FIM (Healthy Endothelial Accelerated Lining Inhibits Neointimal Growth-First In Man) Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol 45 (10), 1574–1579.

Asahara T, Murohara T, Sullivan A, Silver M, van der Zee R, Li T, Witzenbichler B, Schatterman G, and Isner JM (1997). Isolation of putative progenitor endothelial cells for angiogenesis. Science 275: 964–967.

Asahara T, Masuda H, Takahashi T, Kalka C, Pastore C, Silver M, Kearne M, Magner M, Isner JM. (1999). Bone marrow origin of endothelial progenitor cells responsible for postnatal vasculogenesis in physiological and pathological neovascularization. Circ Res. 85:221–228.

Askari AT, Unzek S, Popovic ZB, Goldman CK, Forudi F, Kiedrowski M, Rovner A, Ellis SG, Thomas JD, DiCorleto PE, Topol EJ, Penn MS.(2003). Effect of stromal cell-derived factor 1 on stem cell homing and tissue regeneration in ischemic cardiomyopathy. Lancet, 362:697–703.

Assmus B, Schachlinger V, Teupe C, Britten M, Lehmann R, Dobert N, Grunwald F, Aicher A, Urbich C, Martin H, Hoelzer D, Dimmeler S, Zeiher AM, (2002). Transplantation of progenitor cells and regeneration enhancement in acute myocardial infarction (TOPCARE-AMI). Circulation, 106:3009 –3017

Bennett MR, O’Sullivan MO (2001). Mechanisms of angioplasty and stent restenosis: implications for design of rational therapy. Pharmacol Ther., 91:149 –166.

Ben-Shoshan, J and George, J. (2006). Endothelial progenitor cells as therapeutic vectors in cardiovascular disorders: from experimental models to human trials  Pharmacology Therapeutics (impact factor: 8.9). 08/2007; 115(1):25-36.

Bhattacharya V, Shi Q, Ishida A, Sauvage LR, Hammond WP, Wu MH.(2000). Administration of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor enhances endothelialization and microvessel formation in small caliber synthetic vascular grafts. J Vasc Surg., 32:116 –123.

Bonetti PO, et al. (2002). Reactive hyperemia peripheral arterial tonometry, a novel non-invasive index of peripheral vascular function, is attenuated in patients with coronary endothelial dysfunction. Circulation, 106:Suppl II:579.

Bonetti PO, et al. (2003). Enhanced external counterpulsation improves endothelial function in patients with symptomatic coronary artery disease. J Am Coll of Cardiology, 41:1761-8.

Britten MB, Abolmaali ND, Assmus B, Lehman R, Honold J, Schmitt J, Vogl TJ, Martin H, Schachinger V, Dimmeler S, Zeiher AM, (2003). Infarct remodeling after intracoronary progenitor cell treatment in patients with acute myocardial infarction (TOPCARE-AMI): mechanistic insights from serial contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Circulation, 108:2212–2218.

Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation in Type 2 Diabetics (BARI 2D) ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00006305, 2000-2007

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa0805796

Caplice NM, Bunch TJ, Stalboerger PG, Wang S, Simper D, Miller DV, Russell SJ, Litzow MR, Edwards WD. (2003). Smooth muscle cells in human coronary atherosclerosis can originate from cells administered at marrow transplantation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 100: 4754–4759.

Chadwick , D.(2006) OrbusNeich’s Genous Bioengineered R-stent . Cath Lab Digest, 14 (1), 20-26

Cho H-J, Kim H-S, Lee M-M, Kim D-H, Yang H-J, Hur J, Hwang K-K, Oh S, Choi Y-J, Chae I-H, Oh, B-H, Choi Y-S, Walsh K, Park Y-B. (2003).  Mobilized endothelial progenitor cells by granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor accelerate reendothelialization and reduce vascular inflammation after intravascular radiation. Circulation, 108:2918 –2925.

Choi J-H, Kim KL, Huh W, Kim B, Byun J, Suh W, Sung J, Jeon E-S, Oh H-Y, Kim D-K, (2004). Decreased number and impaired angiogenic function of endothelial progenitors in patients with chronic renal failure. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol.,24:1246 –1252.

Cinamon G, Shinder V, Alon R (2001) Shear forces promote lymphocyte migration across vascular endothelium bearing apical chemokines. Nature Immunology, 2:515

Dimmeler S, Aicher A, Vasa M, Mildner-Rihm C, Adler K, Tiemann M, Rutten H, Fichtlscherer S, Martin H, Zeiher AM, (2001). HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) increase endothelial progenitor cells via the PI3-kinase/Akt pathway. J Clin Invest., 108:391–397.

Dimmeler S and Zeiher AM, (2004). Vascular repair by circulating endothelial progenitor cells: the missing link in atherosclerosis. J Mol Med. 82:671– 677.

Drexler H and Hornig B, (1999). Endothelial dysfunction in human disease. J Mol Cell Cardiol., 31:51– 60.

Dzau VJ, Braun-Dullaeus RC, Sedding DG. (2002). Vascular proliferation and atherosclerosis: new perspectives and therapeutic strategies. Nat Med.,  8:1249 –1256.

Dzau, VJ, Gnecchi, M, Pachori, AS, Morello F, Melo, LG.(2005).Therapeutic Potential of Endothelial Progenitor Cells in Cardiovascular Diseases.Hypertension,246:7-18.

Edelberg JM, Tang L, Hattori K, Lyden D, Rafii. (2002). Young adult bone marrow-derived endothelial precursor cells restore aging-impaired cardiac angiogenic function. Circ Res., 90:e89–e93.

Endemann DH and Schiffrin EL, (2004). Endothelial dysfunction. J Am Soc Nephrol., 15:1983–1992.

Fadini, G, Avogaro A, Agostini C. (2004), Unambiguous Definition of Endothelial Progenitor Cells. Electronic Letter to the Editor of Heart in reference to article by Eizawa, T, Ikeda U, et al. Decreasing in circulating endothelial progenitor cells in patients with stable CAD, Heart, 2004; 90: 685-686,

http://heart.bmjjournals.com/cgi/eletters/90/6/685#310  retrieved on 6/26/2006 Link not found 5/1/2013

Fernandez-Aviles F, San Roman JA, Garcıa-Frade J, Fernandez ME, Penarrubia MJ, de la Fuente Luis, Gomez-Bueno M, Cantalapiedra A, Fernandez J, Gutierrez O, Sanchez PL, Hernandez C, Sanz R, Garcıa- Sancho J, Sa´nchez A, (2004). Experimental and clinical regenerative capability of human bone marrow cells after myocardial infarction. Circ Res., 95:742–748.

Folsom, A.R. Chambless, L.E. Ballantyne, C.M. Coresh, J. Heiss, G. Wu, K.K. Boerwinkle, E. Mosley, T.H. Sorlie, P. Diao, G. Sharrett, A.R. (2006). An Assessment of Incremental Coronary Risk Prediction Using C-Reactive Protein and Other Novel Risk Markers – The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study. Arch Intern. Med. 166, 1368-1373.

Fuujiyama S, Amano K, Uehira K, Yoshida N, Nishiwaki Y, Nozawa Y,  Jin D, Takai S, Miyazaki M, Egashira K, Imada T, Iwasaka T, Matsubara H, (2003). Bone marrow monocyte lineage cells adhere on injured endothelium in a monocyte chemoattractant protein-1-dependent manner and accelerate reendothelialization as endothelial progenitor cells. Circ Res., 93:980-989.

George F, Brisson C, Poncelet P, Laurent JC, Massot O, Arnoux D, Ambrosi P, Klein-Soyer C, Cazenave JP, and Sampol J (1992). Rapid isolation of human endothelial cells from whole blood using S-Endo 1 monoclonal antibody coupled to immunomagnetic beads: demonstration of endothelial injury after angioplasty.Thromb Haemost, 67:147–153.

George J, Herz I, Goldstein E, Abashidze S, Deutch V, Finkelstein A, Michowitz Y, Miller H, Keren G.(2003). Number and adhesive properties of circulating endothelial progenitor cells in patients with in-stent restenosis. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol., 23:e57– e60.

George J, Goldstein E, Abashidze S, Deutsch V, Shmilovich H, Finkelstein A, Herz I, Miller H, Keren G., (2004). Circulating endothelial progenitor cells in patients with unstable angina: association with systemic inflammation. Eur Heart J., 25:1003–1008.

George, J., Goldstein, E., Abashidze, S., Wexler, D., Hamed, S., Shmilovich, H., et al. (2005). Erythropoietin promotes endothelial progenitor cell proliferative and adhesive properties in a PI 3-kinase-dependent manner. Cardiovasc Res 68(2), 299-306.

George J, Shmilovich H, Deutsch V, Miller H, Keren G, Roth A. (2006). Comparative Analysis of Methods for Assessment of Circulating Endothelial Progenitor Cells, Tissue Engineering 12 (2) 331-335

Gerhard-Herman M, et al. (2002). Assessment of endothelial function (nitric oxide) at the tip of a finger. Circulation, 106:Suppl II:170.

Gill M, Dias S, Hattori K, Rivera ML, Hicklin D, Witte L, Girardi L, Yurt R, Himel H, Rafii S, (2001). Vascular trauma induces rapid but transient mobilization of VEGFR2/AC133 endothelial precursor cells. Circ Res., 88:167–174.

Goon, P.K.Y. Lip G.Y.H, Boos, CJ, Stonelake, PS, Blann, AD. (2006). Circulating Endothelial Cells, Endothelial Progenitor Cells, and Endothelial Microparticles in Cancer, Neoplasia, 8:79-88.

Griese DP, Ehsan A, Melo LG, Kong D, Zhang L, Mann MJ, Pratt RE, Mulligan RC, Dzau VJ, (2003). Isolation and transplantation of autologous circulating endothelial cells into denuded vessels and prosthetic grafts: implications for cell-based vascular therapy. Circulation, 108: 2710–2715.

Heeschen C, Aicher A, Lehmann R, Fichtlscherer S, Vasa M, Urbich C, Mildner-Rihm C, Martin H, Zeiher AM, Dimmeler, (2003). Erythropoietin is a potent physiological stimulus for endothelial progenitor cell mobilization. Blood, 102:1340 –1346.

Heeschen C, Lehman R, Honold J, Assmus B, Aicher A, Walter DH, Martin H, Zeiher AM, Dimmeler S. (2004). Profoundly reduced neovascularization capacity of bone marrow mononuclear cells derived from patients with chronic ischemic heart disease.Circulation, 109:1615–1622.

Heissig B, Hattori K, Dias S, Friedrich M, Ferris B, Hackett NR, Crystal RG, Besmer P, Lyden D, Moore MA, Werb Z, Rafii S., (2002). Recruitment of stem and progenitor cells from the bone marrow niche requires MMP-9 mediated release of kit-ligand. Cell;109: 625-637.

Hiasa K, Ishibashi M, Ohtani K, Inoue S, Zhao Q, Kitamoto S, Sata M, Ichiki T, Takeshita A, Egashira K. Gene transfer of stromal cell-derived factor 1 enhances ischemic vasculogenesis and angiogenesis via vascular endothelial growth factor/endothelial nitric oxide synthaserelated pathway: next generation chemokine therapy for therapeutic neovascularization. Circulation, 109:2454 –2461.

Hill JM, Zalos G, Halcox JPG, Schenke WH, Waclawin MA, Quyyumi A, Finkel T. (2003). Circulating endothelial progenitor cells, vascular function and cardiovascular risk. N Engl J Med., 348:593– 600.

Hillebrands J-L, Klatter FA, van DijK WD, Rozing J. (2003). Bone marrow does not contribute substantially to endothelial-cell replacement in transplant arteriosclerosis.Nat Med., 8:194 –195.

Hu Y, Davison F, Zhan Z, Xu Q. (2003). Endothelial replacement and angiogenesis in arteriosclerotic lesions of allografts are contributed by circulating progenitor cells.Circulation, 108:3122–3127.

Hur, J., Yoon, C.H., Kim, H.S., Choi, J.H., Kang, H.J., Hwang, K.K., et al. (2004). Characterization of two types of endothelial progenitor cells and their different contributions to neovasculogenesis. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 24(2), 288–293.

Imanishi, T., Hano, T. & Nishio, I. (2005) Estrogen reduces endothelial progenitor cell senescence through augmentation of telomerase activity. J Hypertens 23(9):1699-1706.

Iwaguro H, Yamaguchi J, Kalka C, Murasawa S, Masuda H, Hayashi S, Silver M, Li T, Isner JM, Asahara T, (2002). Endothelial progenitor cell vascular endothelial growth factor gene transfer for vascular regeneration. Circulation, 105:732–738.

Kalka C, Tehrani H, Laudernberg B, Vale P, Isner JM, Asahara T, Symes JF, (2000a). Mobilization of endothelial progenitor cells following gene therapy with VEGF165 in patients with inoperable coronary disease. Ann Thorac Surg., 70:829–834.

Kalka C, Masuda H, Takahashi T, Gordon R, Tepper O, Gravereaux E, Pieczek A, Iwaguro H, Hayashi S-I, Isner JM, Asahara T (2000b). Vascular endothelial growth factor165 gene transfer augments circulating endothelial progenitor cells in human subjects. Circ Res., 86:1198 –1202.

Kalka C, Masuda H, Takahashi T, Kalka-Moll WM, Silver M, Kearney M, Li T, Isner JM, Asahara T, (2000c). Transplantation of ex vivo expanded endothelial progenitor cells for therapeutic neovascularization. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 97:3422–3427.

Kang H-J, Kim H-S, Zhang S-Y, Park K-W, Cho H-J, Koo B-K, Kim Y-J, Lee DS, Sohn D-W, Han K-S, Oh B-H, Lee M-M, Park Y-B, (2004). Effects of intracoronary infusion of peripheral blood stem cells mobilized with granulocyte-colony stimulating factor on left ventrricular systolic function and restenosis after coronary stenting in myocardial infarction: the MAGIC cell randomized clinical trial. Lancet, 363:751–756.

Kawamoto A, Gwon H-C, Iwaguro H, Yamaguchi J, Uchida S, Masuda H, Silver M, Ma H, Kearney M, Isner JM, Asahara T, (2001). Therapeutic potential of ex vivo expanded endothelial progenitor cells for myocardial ischemia. Circulation, 103:634–637.

Khan SS, Solomon MA, and McCoy JP Jr, (2005). Detection of circulating-  endothelial cells and endothelial progenitor cells by flow cytometry. Cytometry B Clin Cytom64:1–8.

Kiernan, T.(2006). Endothelial progenitor cells in 2006 – Where are we now? http://www.irishheart.ie/iopen24/catalog/pub/Heartwise/2006/Spring/endothelial.pdf retrieved 6/22/2006. Link not found 5/1/2013

Kim, DH, Leu, HB, Ott, HC & Taylor, DO, Bertolini, F, Mancuso, P & Kerbel, RS, Boos, CJ, Goon, PKY, Lip, GYH, (2005). Multiple comments – Correspondence to the Editor on Circulating Endothelial Progenitor Cells. NEJM, 353:24, 2613-2616

Kleinman, ME, Blei, F, Gurtner, GC, (2005). Circulating Endothelial Progenitor Cells and Vascular Anomalies, Lymphatic Research and Biology, 3;4: 234-239.

Kocher AA, Schuster MD, Szabolcs MJ, Burkhoff D, Wang J, Homma S, Edwards NM, Itescu S. (2001). Neovascularization of ischemic myocardium by human bone-marrow-derived angioblasts prevents cardiomyocyte apoptosis, reduces remodeling and improves cardiac function. Nat Med., 7:430–436.

Kong D, Melo LG, Gnecchi M, Zhang L, Mostoslavski G, Liew CC, Pratt RE, Dzau VJ. (2004a). Cytokine-induced mobilization of circulating endothelial progenitor cells enhances repair of injured arteries. Circulation, 110:2039 –2046.

Kong D, Melo LG, Mangi AA, Zhang L, Lopez-Ilasaca M, Perrella MA, Liew CC, Pratt RE, Dzau VJ, (2004b). Enhanced inhibition of neointimal hyperplasia by genetically engineered endothelial progenitor cells. Circulation, 109:1769 –1775.

Kuvin JT, et al. (2003a). Assessment of peripheral vascular endothelial function with finger arterial pulse wave amplitude. Am Heart J, 146:168-74.

Kuvin JT, et al. (2003b). Peripheral arterial tonometry during hyperemia is blunted in patients with coronary artery disease. J Am Coll of Cardiology, 41:Suppl:269A.

Lapidot T, and Petit, I (2002) Current understanding of stem cell mobilization: The roles of chemokines, proteolytic enzymes, adhesion molecules, cytokines, and stromal cells. Experimental Hematology, 30:973–98

Laufs U, Werner N, Link A, Endres M, Wassmann S, Jurgens K, Miche E, Bohm M, and Nickenig G (2004). Physical training increases endothelial progenitor cells, inhibits neointima formation, and enhances angiogenesis. Circulation 109: 220–226.

Llevadot J, Murasawa S, Kureishi Y, Uchida S, Masuda H, Kawamoto A, Walsh K, Isner JM, Asahara T, (2001). HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor mobilizes bone marrow-derived endothelial progenitor cells. J Clin Invest., 108:399–405.

Lloyd-Jones, D. and Tian, L. (2006). Predicting Cardiovascular Risk, So What Do We Do Now?. Arch Intern. Med, 166, 1342-1343.

Loomans CJM, de Koening EJP, Staal FJT, Rookmaaker MB, Verseyden C, de Boer HC, Verhaar MC, Braam B, Rebelink TJ, van Zonneveld A-J. (2004). Endothelial progenitor cell dysfunction. A novel concept in the pathogenesis of vascular complications of type I diabetes. Diabetes, 53:195–199.

Losordo DW, Isner JM, Diaz-Sandoval LJ, (2003). Endothelial Recovery. The next target in restenosis prevention. Circulation, 107:2635–2637.

Lusis, A.J. (2000). Atherosclerosis. Nature 407(6801), 233–241. DIGITAL LINK N/A

Massa M, Rosti V, Ferrario M, Campanelli R, Ramajoli, Rosso R, De Ferrari GM, Ferlini M, Goffredo L, Bertoletti A, Klersy C, Pecci A, Moratti R, Tavazzi, (2005). Increased circulating hematopoietic and endothelial progenitor cells in the early phase of acute myocardial infarction. Blood,105:199 –206.

Orlic D, Kajstura J, Chimenti S, Limana F, Jakoniuk I, Quaini F, Nadal-Ginard B, Bodine DM, Leri A, Anversa P. (2001). Mobilized bone marrow cells repair the infarcted heart, improving function and survival. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 98:10344 –10349.

Peichev M, Naiyer AJ, Pereira D, Zhu Z, Lane WJ, Williams M, Oz MC, Hicklin DJ, Witte L, Moore MA, and Rafii S (2000). Expression of VEGFR-2 and AC133 by circulating human CD34+ cells identifies a population of functional endothelial precursors. Blood 95: 952–958.

Perin EC, Dohmann HFR, Borojevic R, Silva SA, Sousa AL, Mesquita CT, Rossi MI, Carvalho AC, Dutra HS, Dohmann HJ, Silva GV, Belem L, Vivacqua R, Rangel FO, Esporcatte R, Geng YJ, Vaughn WK, Assad JA, Mesquita ET, Willerson JT, (2003). Transendocardial, autologous bone marrow cell transplantation for severe, chronic ischemic heart failure. Circulation, 107:2294 –2302.

Powell TM, Paul JD, Hill JM, Thompson M, Benjamin M, Rodrigo M, McCoy JP, Read EJ, Khuu HM, (2005). Leitman SF, Finkel T, Cannon RO III. Granulocyte colony stimulating factor mobilizes functional endothelial progenitor cells in patients with coronary artery disease. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol., 25:1– 6.

Rafii S, Lyden D (2003). Therapeutic stem and progenitor cell transplantation for organ vascularisation and regeneration. Nat Med 9: 702–712.

Rauscher FM, Goldschmidt-Clermont PJ, Davis BH, Wang T, Gregg D, Ramaswami P, Pippen AM, Annex BH, Dong C, Taylor DA, (2003). Aging, progenitor cell exhaustion, and atherosclerosis. Circulation, 108:457–463.

Ross R. (1999). Atherosclerosis – An inflammatory disease. N Engl J Med., 340:115–126.

Rubanyi GM. (1993). The role of endothelium in cardiovascular homeostasis and diseases. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol., 22(Suppl):S1–S4.

Sata M, Saiura A, Kunisato A, Tojo A, Okada S, Tokuhisa T, Hirai H, Makuuchi M, Hirata Y, Nagai R. (2002). Hematopoietic stem cells differentiate into vascular cells that participate in the pathogenesis of atherosclerosis. Nat Med., 8:403– 409.

Schachinger V, Assmus B, Britten MB, Honold J, Lehman R, Teupe C, Abolmaali ND, Vogt TJ, Hofmann WK, Martin H, Dimmeler S, Zeiher AM, (2004). Transplantation of progenitor cells and regeneration enhancement in acute myocardial infarction: final one-year results of the TOPCARE-AMI trial. J Am Coll Cardiol., 44:1690 –1699.

Schatteman GC, Hanlon HD, Jiao C, Dodds SG, Christy BA. (2000). Blood derived angioblasts accelerate blood flow restoration in diabetic mice. J Clin Invest., 106:571–578.

Scheubel RJ, Zorn H, Rolf-Edgar S, Kuss O, Morawietz, Holtz J, Simm A. (2003). Age-dependent depression in circulating endothelial progenitor cells in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting. J Am Col Cardiol., 42:2073–2080.

Segal, M.S., Shah, R., Afzal, A., Perrault, C.M., Chang, K., Schuler, A., et al. (2006). Nitric oxide cytoskeletal-induced alterations reverse the endothelial progenitor cell migratory defect associated with diabetes. Diabetes 55(1), 102-109

Shi Q, Raffi, Wu MH, Wijelath ES, Yu C, Ishida A, Fujita Y, Kothari S, Mohle R, Sauvage LR, Moore MAS, Storb RF, Hammond WP. (1998). Evidence of circulating bone-marrow derived endothelial cells. Blood, 92:362–367.

Shi Q, Bhattacharya V, Hong-De Wu M, Sauvage LR. (2002). Utilizing granulocyte colony-stimulating factor to enhance vascular graft endothelialization from circulating blood cells. Ann Vasc Surg., 16:314 –320.

Shintani S, Murohara T, Ikeda H, Ueni T, Honma T, Katoh A, Sasaki K, Shimada T, Oike Y, Imaizumi T, (2001). Mobilization of endothelial progenitor cells in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Circulation, 103:2776 –2779.

Shirota, T., Yasui, H., Shimokawa, H. & Matsuda, T. (2003). Fabrication of endothelial progenitor cell (EPC)-seeded intravascular stent devices and in vitro endothelialization on hybrid vascular tissue. Biomaterials 24(13), 2295–2302.

Simper D, Wang S, Deb A, Holmes D, McGregor C, Frantz R, Kushawa SS, Caplice NM, (2003). Endothelial progenitor cells are decreased in blood of cardiac allograft patients with vasculopathy and endothelial cells of non cardiac origin are enriched in transplant atherosclerosis. Circulation, 107:143–149.

Spyridopoulos I, Haendeler J, Urbich C, Brummendorf TH, Oh H, Schneider MD, Zeiher AM, Dimmeler S, (2004). Statins enhance migratory capacity by upregulation of the telomere repeat-binding factor TRF2 in endothelial progenitor cells. Circulation, 110:3136 –3142.

Stamm C, Westphal B, Kleine H-D, Petzsch M, Kittner C, Klinge H, Schumichen C, Nienaber CA, Freund M, Steinhoff G, (2003). Autologous bonemarrow transplantation for myocardial regeneration. Lancet, 361:45–46.

Strauer BE, Brehm M, Zeus T, Kostering M, Hernandez A, Sorg RV, Kogler G, Wernet P, (2002). Repair of infarcted myocardium by autologous intracoronary mononuclear bone marrow cell transplantation in humans. Circulation, 106:1913–1918.

Strehlow K, Werner N, Berweiler J, Link A, Dirnagl U, Priller J, Laufs K, Ghaeni L, Milosevic M, Bohm M, Nickenig G, (2003). Estrogen increases bone-marrow derived endothelial progenitor cell production and diminishes neointima formation.Circulation, 107:3059 –3065.

Takahashi T, Kalka C, Masuda H, Chen D, Silver M, Kearney M, Magner M, Isner JM, Asahara T, (1999). Ischemia- and cytokine-induced mobilization of bone-marrow-derived endothelial progenitor cells for neovascularization. Nat Med., 5:434–438.

Tepper OM, Galiano RD, Capla JM, Kalka C, Gagne PJ, Jacobwotiz GR, Levine JP, Gurtner GC. (2002). Human endothelial progenitor cells from type II diabetes exhibit impaired proliferation, adhesion, and incorporation into vascular structures.Circulation, 106:2781–2786.

Tse HF, Kwong YL, Chan JK, Lo G, Ho CL, and Lau CP (2003). Angiogenesis in ischaemic myocardium by intramyocardial autologous bone genesis marrow mononuclear cell implantation. Lancet 361: 47–49.

Tung, R, Kaul, S, Diamond, GA, Shah, PK (2006). Drug-Eluting Stents for the Management of Restenosis: A Critical Appraisal of the Evidence. Annals of Internal Medicine, 144;12: 913-919.

Valenzuela-Fernandez A, Planchenault T, Baleux F, et al. (2002) Leukocyte elastase negatively regulates stromal cell-derived factor-1 (SDF)/CXCR4 binding and functions by amino-terminal processing of SDF-1 and CXCR4.  J Biol Chem 277:156

Valgimigli M, Rigolin GM, Fucili A, Della Porta M, Soukhomovskaia O, Malagutti P, Bugli AM, Bragottu LZ, Francolini G, Mauro E, Castoldi G, Ferrari R, (2004). CD34 and endothelial progenitor cells in patients with various degrees of congestive heart failure. Circulation, 110:1209–1212.

Vasa M, Fichtlscherer S, Adler K, Aicher A, Martin H, Zeiher AM, Dimmeler S. (2001a). Increase in circulating endothelial progenitor cells by statin therapy in patients with stable coronary artery disease. Circulation, 103:2885–2890.

Vasa M, Fichtlscherer S, Aicher A, Adler K, Urbich C, Martin H, Zeiher AM, Dimmeler S. (2001b). Number and migratory activity of circulating endothelial progenitor cells inversely correlates with risk factors for coronary artery disease. Circ Res., 89:e1– e7.

Vasan, RS, (2006). Biomarkers of Cardiovascular Disease: Molecular Basis and Practical Considerations, Circulation, 113:2335-2362.

Verma S, Kukiszewski MA, Li S-H, Szmitko PE, Zucco L, Wang C-H, Badiwala MV, Mickle DAG, Weisel RD, Fedak PWM, Stewart DJ, Kutrik MJB, (2004). C-reactive protein attenuates endothelial progenitor cell survival, differentiation, and function.Circulation, 109:r91–r100.

Verma, S. and Marsden, P.A. (2005). Nitric Oxide-Eluting Polyurethanes – Vascular Grafts of the Future? New England Journal Medicine, 353 (7), 730-731.

Verma S, Szmitko, PE, (2006). The vascular biology of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors: Modulation of atherosclerosis. Can J Cardiol, 22 (Suppl B):12B-17B.

Walter DH, Rittig K, Bahlmann FH, Kirchmair R, Silver M, Murayama T, Nishimura H, Losordo DW, Asahara T, Isner JM, (2002). Statin therapy accelerates reendothelialization: a novel effect involving mobilization and incorporation of bone marrow-derived endothelial progenitor cells. Circulation, 105:3017–3024.

Werner N, Junk S, Laufs L, Link A, Walenta K, Bohm M, Nickenig G., (2003).  Intravenous transfusion of endothelial progenitor cells reduces neointima formation after vascular injury. Circ Res., 93:e17– e24.

Werner N, Kosiol S, Schiegl T, Ahlers P, Walenta K, Link A, Böhm M, Nickenig G. (2005a). Circulating Endothelial Progenitor Cells and Cardiovascular Outcomes,NEJM, 353: 999-1007

Werner, N & Nickenig, G. (2005b). Authors Reply to Correspondence to the Editor on Circulating Endothelial Progenitor Cells. NEJM, 353:24, 2613-2616

Widlansky ME, et al. (2003). The clinical implications of endothelial dysfunction. J Am Coll of Cardiology, 42:1149-60.

Wollert KC, Meyer GP, Latz J, Ringes-Lichtenberg S, Lippolt P, Breindenbach C, Fichtner S, Korte T, Hornig B, Messinger D, Arseniev L, Hartenstein B, Ganser A, Drexler H (2004). Intracoronary autologous bonemarrow cell transfer after myocardial infarction: the BOOST randomised controlled clinical trial. Lancet, 364:141–148.

Yamaguchi J, Kusano KF, Masuo O, Kawamoto A, Silver M, Murasawa S, Bosch-Marce M, Masuda H, Losordo DW, Isner JM, Asahara T. (2003).  Stromal cell-derived factor-1 effects on ex vivo expanded endothelial progenitor cell recruitment for ischemic neovascularization. Circulation, 107:1322–1328.

Yoon YS, Park JS, Tkebuchava T, Luedeman C, Losordo DW. (2004). Unexpected severe calcification after transplantation of bone marrow cells in acute myocardial infarction. Circulation, 109:3154 –3157.

 

 

Read Full Post »

Updated Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI): risk for stroke and suitability for surgery

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD,RN

 

UPDATED on 5/27/2014

Survival After TAVI: Longest Follow-up Data Yet Yield Some Surprises

May 23, 2014

PARIS, FRANCE — Some of the longest follow-up for the first transcatheter aortic-valve implantations (TAVI) ever performed confirm earlier observations that the biggest threat to survival in TAVI-implanted patients remains their comorbidities and not problems related to their valves, regardless of valve type. More surprising, some of the procedural issues that preoccupy interventionalists and surgeons today did not emerge as important in this longer-term follow-up.

Presenting three- and five-year data from the UK TAVI registry in a press conference here at EuroPCR 2014 , Dr Neil Moat (Royal Brompton Hospital, London, UK) pointed to what he called “biphasic” survival curves. In the first few months after valve implantation, there is a steep drop in survival, he noted. Thereafter, the curve becomes significantly less steep, mirroring the survival curves typically seen in older patients who have undergone surgical valve replacement.

“In the first six months, you have quite a dramatic attrition of patients, then mortality falls to about 6% of patients per year,” he said. “What this is telling us is that patients undergoing TAVI are not dying of TAVI-related factors.”

The UK TAVI registry contains prospectively collected data from 100% of all consecutive transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) patients treated since January 1, 2007. The current analysis includes 870 early patients whose mortality status was ascertained in July 2013.

In all, 62% of TAVR-treated patients were alive at three years, while just under half—48.4%—were still alive at five years.

Dr Neil Moat [Source: EuroPCR]

In multivariable analyses, the strongest baseline predictor of mortality at three years was

  • creatinine >200 µg/mmol, followed by
  • presence of atrial fibrillation,
  • chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), or a
  • high EuroSCORE (>18.5).

Of note, device- or procedure-related characteristics that typically get a lot of attention at interventional meetings were not significant predictors of late survival. For example,

  • 12.7% of patients still alive at three years had had moderate/severe aortic regurgitation at the time of their procedure, compared with
  • 14.9% of patients who’d died, but the difference was not statistically significant. Likewise,
  • permanent pacemaker implantation had been performed in 16.2% of patients still alive at follow-up and in
  • 19.3% of patients who died, again a nonsignificant difference.

Not surprisingly,

  • more transfemorally treated patients were alive at three years than
  • patients treated via a nontransfemoral procedure (64.3% vs 55.7%, p=0.017).

Roughly the same number of patients received the

  • Edwards Sapien device in the early days of the TAVI registry (410) as received the
  • Medtronic CoreValve (452).

By three years,

  • 40.7% of Sapien-treated patients had died, compared with
  • 35.4% of CoreValve-treated patients (p=0.078).
“CoreValve had a trend toward better survival, but I wouldn’t want to overinterpret that,” Moat cautioned. These are preliminary data, he stressed, but added, “There is a trend there that needs looking at” when the registry has more patients, with more follow-up.

One of the theories put forward in other sessions at EuroPCR is that the higher pacemaker-implantation rate with CoreValve might, in fact, help bump up survival rates with this device.

“It’s an interesting hypothesis,” Moat said. “But I don’t think we have any data to support that hypothesis, either here or in any other study. I think if there were an effect of early pacemaker implantation it would be in this first [six-month] phase. Some people are concerned that the early attrition is sudden death because of late heart block occurring two, three, or four months after the procedure. So if you are having pacemakers implanted more frequently, you are being protected from that, but I think our data strongly suggest that pacemaker implant does not affect long-term survival.”

Moat disclosed being a consultant for Medtronic.

 

UPDATED on 2/9/2014

Transcatheter Technologies Completes Durability Testing of Its Prosthetic Aortic Heart Valve, Intrinsic to World’s First ‘Truly Repositionable’ TAVI Device, TRINITY

January 28, 2014 6:29 AM 

Business Wire

“This 3rd-generation TRINITY technology could be a game-changer for TAVI.” Prof. Dr. Christian Hengstenberg, MD, German Heart Center, Munich (Note: Prof. Dr. med Hengstenberg has no financial ties to Transcatheter Technologies.)

REGENSBURG, Germany–(BUSINESS WIRE)–January 28, 2014–

Transcatheter Technologies GmbH, an emerging medical device company that is developing a third-generation transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) system-TRINITY-announced today that an independent laboratory has completed ‘advanced wear testing’ (AWT) of the company’s TRINITY valve prosthesis, far exceeding minimum testing standards. Indeed, AWT of the TRINITY heart valve has already completed 600 million cycles, or an estimated 15 years of durability testing.

Transcatheter Technologies has previously announced the successful 30-day follow-up results of a pilot study of its TRINITY TAVI system that is designed to be the world’s first ‘truly repositionable’ and, therefore, best TAVI system.

“Unlike second-generation TAVI systems, the Trinity aortic valve is designed to be positioned precisely or repositioned, even after full implantation, in a safe and simple manner,” said principal investigator Prof. Dr. Christian Hengstenberg, a cardiologist at the German Heart Center, Munich, Germany, with no financial interest or arrangement or affiliation with Transcatheter Technologies. “In our study, Trinity’s novel sealing cuff continues to provide outstanding follow-up results without PVL (paravalvular leak), a frequent complication of TAVI. Equally important, the TRINITY aortic valve is designed to reduce the risk of atrio-ventricular (AV) block significantly through supra-annular positioning of the TRINITY valve.”

“We are extremely pleased that our TRINITY valve has already demonstrated three times the minimum standard for advanced wear testing of a tissue heart valve,” said Wolfgang Goetz, M.D., Ph.D., CEO, a cardiac surgeon by training. We also are extremely pleased with the continuing excellent results of our third-generation TRINITY System in the follow-up of our first patient.

“The big issue with the second-generation TAVI systems is that they cannot be truly repositioned once fully implanted. TRINITY, however, is designed to solve this critically important issue and thereby potentially reduce the undesirable side consequences of PVL,” added Dr. Goetz. “With TRINITY, once our valve is completely expanded and anchored above the annulus, a cardiologist can fully evaluate the valve’s function to determine whether it needs to be repositioned, retrieved, or kept in the same position. This feature and its supra-annular anchoring are absolutely unique to TRINITY, which is why we have positioned TRINITY as a Third-Generation TAVI System.”

CAUTION: TRINITY is not approved for use in the United States

Ronald Trahan Associates Inc.
Ronald Trahan, APR, +1-508-359-4005, x108

SOURCE

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI): risk for stroke and suitability for surgery

For additional discussion go to 

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI): Risky and Costly

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/08/02/transcatheter-aortic-valve-implantation-tavi-risky-and-costly/

BMJ 2012; 345 doi: 10.1136/bmj.e4710 (Published 31 July 2012) Cite this as: BMJ 2012;345:e4710

Evidence for TAVI Questioned

By Chris Kaiser, Cardiology Editor, MedPage Today

Published: July 31, 2012

The tens of thousands of transcatheter aortic valve implantations (TAVI) performed worldwide may not have solid evidence behind them, European researchers suggested.

To begin with, a health technology assessment commissioned by the Belgian government suggested that only patients who are “deemed inoperable for technical reasons such as a series of previous operations or irradiation of the chest wall” be reimbursed for TAVI, according to Mattias Neyt, PhD, of the Belgian Health Care Knowledge Centre in Brussels, and colleagues.

That’s about 10% of patients currently being considered for the procedure, they wrote online in an analysis article in BMJ.

Why is there such a big disconnect between the growing number of patients undergoing TAVI and the findings of the Belgian technology assessment? Neyt and colleagues said there are several factors that have resulted in more enthusiasm than evidence for TAVI.

One of those factors is the process by which medical devices receive marketing approval in the E.U., which, they said, puts medical devices “on the same footing as domestic appliances such as toasters.”

As a consequence of what the authors referred to as “Europe’s lax licensing laws,” the two TAVI devices in common use today – Medtronic’s CoreValve and Edward Lifescience’s Sapien – were approved in 2007, “long before any substantial clinical trial evidence was available.”

Even the U.K.’s National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) concluded that the evidence was “adequate from a clinical point of view” for the use of TAVI in those unsuitable for surgery, but when surgery is an option — even a high-risk one — the evidence for TAVI was inadequate.

However, the British analysis did not consider costs associated with the procedure, Neyt and colleagues pointed out.

In the U.S., the FDA approval process is more rigorous than that of the E.U., but Neyt and colleagues were “far from convinced” that the results from the PARTNER trials (Cohort A andCohort B) were adequate to justify approval of the Sapien valve.

Although the cost-effectiveness of TAVI for inoperable patients (cohort B) is “equivocal,” they wrote, the clinical evidence seems to suggest that TAVI can be justified. However, they pointed out some problems that they said were not considered within the overall evidence, such as a higher rate of comorbidities and a higher rate of previous MIs among the inoperable control patients.

In PARTNER cohort A, where TAVI was compared with high-risk surgical patients, the authors noted a concern for a higher rate of stroke or transient ischemic attack among the TAVI patients.

Nevertheless, an FDA panel in June recommended expanding the indication for the Sapien valve to include high-risk surgical candidates. One of the panelists said that stroke is “just an accepted risk of the procedure.”

But Neyt and colleagues don’t accept that. They concluded that based on the evidence, as well as the concern for efficient use of limited resources, “it is difficult to see how healthcare payers can justify reimbursing TAVI for patients suitable for surgery, given that the risk of stroke is twice as high after TAVI.”

Another issue that could undermine the integrity of the evidence, Neyt and colleagues said, was the absence of full disclosure on the part of principal investigator Martin B. Leon, MD, from Columbia University.

According to the Belgian researchers, part of the deal involving the sale of Leon’s valve company to Edwards included future payments from Edwards “on the achievement of three milestones: successful treatment of 50 patients, regulatory approval in Europe, and limited approval in the U.S.”

These three milestones were not disclosed in the original paper published in the New England Journal of Medicinethey said.

Neyt and colleagues also complained that the FDA and Edwards Lifesciences are holding on to negative findings from an FDA-authorized follow-on study of 90 inoperable patients. Some of the data released at an FDA meeting in 2011 showed a higher 1-year mortality rate among those receiving TAVI (34.3% versus 21.6%), they said, but efforts to obtain any of those data have been rebuffed by both the FDA and Edwards.

They brought this concern to the editors of the NEJM, but the editors didn’t think the concern invalidated the overall PARTNER findings.

Tying all this together, Neyt and colleagues called for “a major improvement in transparency of information” that would “allow clinicians to practice evidence-based medicine, patients to make informed decisions, and health technology assessment agencies to make the right judgments.”

The authors reported they had no relationships to disclose.

Primary source: BMJ

Read Full Post »

 

Reported by: Dr. Venkat S. Karra, Ph.D.

A new proof-of-concept study shows that plasma concentrations of precursor fragments of the neuropeptide enkephalin (proenkephalin A, or PENK-A) are elevated in patients with acute stroke compared with those with TIA and nonischemic events.

Researchers are making efforts to investigate neuropeptides in patients presenting with symptoms of acute cerebrovascular disease.

Although the mature neuropeptides are degraded within minutes, their precursor fragments are much more stable and represent neuropeptide synthesis in stoichiometric relations. “They are therefore well suited as biomarkers and may be suitable for measurement in clinical settings,” said Dr. Doehner.

The precursor neuropeptides proenkephalin A (PENK-A) and protachykinin (PTA) are markers of blood-brain barrier integrity and have been recently discussed in vascular dementia and neuroinflammatory disorders.

{Ernst  A., Kohrle  J., Bergmann  A.;  Proenkephalin A 119—159, a stable proenkephalin. A precursor fragment identified in human circulation, Peptides 27 2006 1835-1840
Ernst  A., Suhr  J., Kohrle  J., Bergmann  A.;  Detection of stable N-terminal protachykinin A immunoreactivity in human plasma and cerebrospinal fluid, Peptides 29 2008 1201-1206}

Researchers are making efforts to use these precursor fragments as markers to distinguish an ischemic stroke from a transient ischemic attack (TIA) or an intracerebral hemorrhage.

The authors strongly hope that it may help to advance the use of biomarkers in the clinical evaluation of stroke patients.

Despite the limitations, elevated PENK-A levels correlated with stroke severity and with brain lesion size, and they predicted mortality and more functional disability.

“There is clearly an unmet need to establish biomarker-guided prognostic and functional evaluations for patients with stroke, said the lead author Wolfram Doehner, MD, PhD, from the Center for Stroke Research, in Berlin, Germany

The new report was published in Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

http://content.onlinejacc.org/article.aspx?articleid=1217869

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/768457?src=nldne

 

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

This post addresses related issues On the Career of the Life Sciences Scientist and compliments the following two posts on this Scientific Web Site:

August 1, 2012 — Introducing Career Streams into Academic Research

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/08/01/introducing-career-streams-into-academic-research/

June 27, 2012 — Picturing US-Trained PhDs’ Paths and Pharmaceutical Industry’s Crisis of Productivity: Partnerships between Industry and Academia

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/06/27/picturing-us-trained-phds-paths-pharmaceutical-industrys-crisis-of-productivity-partnerships-between-industry-and-academia/

BEYOND THE “MALE MODEL”: AN ALTERNATIVE FEMALE MODEL OF SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION

THE TRIPLE HELIX ASSOCIATION NEWSLETTER, VOLUME 1 ISSUE 3 JULY 2012

Hélice www.triplehelixassociation.org  Triple Helix X, 2012, Bandung, Indonesia . . . www.th2012.org

by Professor Henry Etzkowitz, President of the Triple Helix Association,  Senior Researcher, H-STAR Institute, Stanford University, Visiting Professor, Birkbeck, London University and Edinburgh University Business School

henry.etzkowitz@stanford.edu

Professor Henry Etzkowitz paper is based on his Keynote Address to the FemTalent Conference, Barcelona, Spain 2011

I am often asked: why is a man studying women in science? The answer to that question is: my mother. She graduated with high honors in Geology from Hunter College, a public women’s college in New York City during the 1930’s depression. I had long thought that the reason why she didn’t pursue a career in geology was

because of the depression, that there were simply no jobs. However, on a research trip to the University of Texas at Austin, I visited the Engineering School which had a “wall of recognition” at the main entrance, including the names of many distinguished professors and practitioners, all of them men, who had graduated during the 1930’s depression and pursued careers in Geology. Perhaps the reason why a woman did not pursue a career in geological science at the time, might be found in the gender dynamics of science and technology. The broader question is how the best results may be attained from societal investment in human capital formation.

Firstly, we will consider the implications of findings from a study done in the 1990s, in the United States, sponsored by the National Science Foundation, of women’s experience in academic science (Etzkowitz, Kemelgor and Uzzi, 2000) including over 400 in-depth qualitative interviews conducted in a dozen leading research universities in five disciplines: biology, physics, chemistry and computer science:

1. One of the lessons from this study is that in Europe and other countries, there is a move to introduce the American system of higher education, including tenure procedures, which put a very strong emphasis on early achievement which, as we shall see, has deleterious consequences for women. Higher education policy makers in Europe and other parts of the world may want to look more closely at its effects before introducing this system, which is now taken as the gold standard in higher education. The introduction of the tenure system is driven by

international ranking procedures which drive movement from a system of relatively equal universities. Before abandoning values of equality, it should be seriously asked if introducing extreme inequalities will overall advance or inhibit quality academic research, teaching, and innovation.

2. Secondly, I discuss the Vanish Box model, derived from a four country study, sponsored by the European Union, DG Research, on Women and Technology Transfer (Ranga, et. al. 2008). During interviews with women in US academic science on Athena Unbound study, some of them would talk about colleagues who were no longer in the department, they were now in jobs elsewhere. I interviewed some of these women leaving academic science, and found that they were taking up careers in science-related professions such as science journalism, technology transfer, museology. etc. They were using their scientific training in translating science into use and spreading the results of science to a broader public. Rather than being “lost to science” as presumed by the “Leaky pipeline” thesis of science career loss; they were pursuing work-life balance in their new careers. This finding inspired the study sponsored by the European Union on Women and Technology Transfer.

3. Third, I outline a four phase model of women’s experience in science, technology, and innovation, “the Vanish Box”: after the magic trick of the “disappearance of re-appearance of a woman”. “The vanish box” model shows the dynamics of the historical experience of women in science, and questions the taken for granted “male model” of science that does not work for women or men who seek work-life balance.

4. Finally, we address the question of whether the Gender Revolution in science and technology is stalled or moving forward.

Gender Inequalities in Academic Careers

The historical relationship between status and gender provides a clue to understanding the underlying dynamics of women and men’s careers in science. Typically, there is strong participation of women in the early stages of development of a new discipline, but as the new area becomes prestigious and rewards increase, women disappear. As fields attain recognition and fruition, and the Nobel and other prizes are awarded, it is men who are there to receive them. There were a significant number of women working in “the fly room,” the drosophila genetics lab headed by Thomas Hunt Morgan at Colombia University, but as the field became prestigious, women virtually disappeared from classical genetics (Kohler, 1994).

Does this historical relationship between gender and science still hold today or has it changed? The most important finding from all the specific instances that we came across was that the most important thing holding back women’s advance in academic science was “inflexibility” of rules and procedures. It didn’t matter what the specific procedure was. For example, in the US it’s expected that that you should pursue your PhD at a different University than your undergraduate degree. This is the highest route to achievement. If a woman has a relationship, and the man moves will she leave the relationship to seek her competitive advantage?

On the other hand, if the man in the relationship moves, and the woman goes along, she may then have to move to a school that is not as good as the one which she otherwise might have gotten into with a broader range of selection. Thus, this informal rule of exogamy, mandating leaving the previous school or worksite at each point of progression, from undergraduate degree to PhD to entry level position, works against women’s advancement.

On the other hand, in Sweden the rule is the opposite. Instead of saying that you should move from one university to another, the rule is that you should stay at your own University; that if you are a highly successful junior scholar you will be kept within that University. A Swedish professor said, “why would I send my best

graduate student away? He is going to replace me when I retire.” So the rule in Sweden is endogamy that you stay within one university. Again, if a woman’s partner moves, and she moves with him, it will hurt her career, because she has left her university of origin. So which ever way the rule is, it is an inflexible rule, it has more negative consequences for women than for men. The gender policy implication is to increase flexibility in the system.

A female model of science, balancing work and family life, has been invented but it is a subsidiary and undervalued format that needs to be brought to the forefront and institutionalized. However, this would necessitate re-thinking aspects of the academic system, especially the US model, that unintentionally yet systematically works against women’s inclusion in the higher level of academic science. The US model of academic hierarchy, front loading in the academic career with a strong emphasis on youth and achievement

in the early years, is partly based on a mistaken idea that youth are more productive in science than people who are of an older age. That finding was documented in a study done by Merton and Zuckerman of “Aging and Age Structure” (1973). They found that “productivity was as high or even higher at the later stages of a scientific career”, and that makes sense. When you are more advanced in your career you have more access to resources, more

graduate students, more research associates, more people working with you. Co-authorship arises from having members of your research group being highly productive. Nevertheless, there is a strong belief that youth makes disproportionate scientific advances, and this has been the basis of a system in which there is a strong emphasis on early achievement during the first years of your career. There is a race to accumulate publications and research grants in order to be given a permanent position in a high status American University.

In Europe, the tradition has been once you are hired there is a probationary period and then you continue to be promoted or not. But in the United States there is a very sharp dividing line: an “up or out” system. The implications for women’s advancement in science, includes the contradiction between the “tenure clock”, typically of seven years, and the “biological clock”, the time when is possible to have children, and these coincide. Thus, women have to make the choice to postpone having children to after tenure, which then becomes their middle or late 30s. There were some women who didn’t want to postpone, and some of them rethought

their commitment to academic science and left for that reason. Occasionally, in some universities there has been some reform of these procedures to try to accommodate women by extending the clock. i.e. you can apply for a year extension to reduce your time in the workplace and/or take a break in order to have more time for one’s young children. Even this attempt to ameliorate the male model of science and make it more amenable to women’s

participation contains a contradiction: women are concerned that if they apply for this privilege that it will be held against them in the final review. The academic system requires a demonstration of full commitment to racing the clock, otherwise you will be viewed as insufficiently competitive. Moderating the conditions will be held against you, or at least that is the fear. The attempted reform has its dangers since many women feel that they may be given points off for taking advantage of the attempt to change the rules. The contradiction between the tenure clock and the biological clock encourages some women in academic science to seek an alternative career path.

An American professor talked about a leading female student who stayed in the same city and took a job at a local teaching college. But an exception was made for her because she was such an outstanding scholar that she was then brought back to the leading University in the same city where she had received her PhD and allowed to pursue a career at that university. The rule was counterproductive to the best use of talent, but this case was an

unusual exception. However, it is one that can be more regularly made if we are thinking of how to revise the system that works against women by following an implicit male model of science. Another negative factor is the “two out of three” time bind. In interviews in the US and Mexico, it was found that if you are trying to do three things, most women usually find it was too much, they could do advanced research in a highly productive way, and manage their family relationship, but that didn’t leave time for spending time in local politicking and talking with people, which is the way towards advancing within the academic system. So they could advance in their research career, but not in the career that would lead to becoming a chair person or administrator within academia. So this is the two out of three time bind.

Traditionally there has been a gendered division of labor where men worked with men and women with women, in gendered occupations. Some think that this occurred as a basis of naturally occurring gender divisions. But historically we can see that these gendered occupations change over time. I did my masters thesis on the male nurse, titled “the Precarious Identity of the Male Nurse” (Etzkowitz, 1971). The nursing profession in the

nineteenth century was entirely male, and began to change over to a female profession by the end of the nineteenth century, and by the middle of the twentieth century it was virtually entirely female. Thus, gendered professions can change over time and are subject to revision.

From “Leaky Pipeline” to the “Vanish Box”

The pipeline model has been based upon the movement from schooling into higher education and into careers; the premise that there should be an unimpeded flow. Over a period of twenty years, at maximum, women should be at the highest level of any occupation. Recruitment has taken place: young women now make up equal numbers in bachelor’s degrees, and the numbers are moving up in the PhDs. But they have not moved up at the same rate to the associate and full professor levels. The pipeline has not worked by filling it at one end, and expecting a changed result at the other. We need to make changes in the system to make the pipeline work. A gender neutral occupation would be one with flexibility in the role, and with balance between on-site and off-site work, and the possibility of equal participation of both genders in the occupation. What happens to women who, for one reason or another, don’t continue in an academic career in science? This was the question that we posed in: “Women in Science and Technology”(WIST) sponsored by the European Union. We identified that women who had left academic science, were reappearing in science related professions, using their scientific, networking and social skills in these new professions. In the UK, when opportunities opened up in the mid 1990s, female PhDs entered this career, following the States where women had risen to the top of their profession as heads of offices at major universities. From this study of women disappearing and reappearing from academia to science related professions, we developed a concept that we called the “vanish box” model (Etzkowitz and Ranga, 2011), that takes place in four stages:

1. The first is the disappearance of women: the disappearance that we found in the Athena Unbound study, the exclusionary practices, or the taken for granted male model of science which did not take account of women’s needs, of women’s life chances and lifestyles. They weren’t found at the highest levels of academic science to the extent that would be expected if the pipeline was working as it was supposed to, with women flowing in and being promoted up over a period of time. So disappearance.

2. The disappeared women are in the reserve army: at home or in part time positions unemployed or underemployed. The reserve army is called back when there is an emergency or a shortage. For example, during World War ll women PhD’s who had been unemployed or working as volunteers in their husband’s laboratory were called into full-time positions in the Manhattan Project and other Labs. After the War, some began to get academic positions and rose to the highest level after having been in the reserve army for many years.

3. The third phase of the model is the creation of new opportunities; either by emergency situations, or by the creation of new professions that require people with scientific training. An example of this was the Technology Transfer profession that we studied: a new profession that required people with scientific training and background and business training, and typically people with a scientific background would learn the business skills, take courses or even a master’s degrees in business. This provided opportunities, but there are still limitations: the new profession wasn’t as prestigious as the old one, and it had both advantages and disadvantages: working in a technology transfer office gives more of an opportunity for a work life balance, but the prestige of the profession isn’t that high and the opportunities for advancement are limited.

4. On the other hand, as the knowledge society advances, professions that translate knowledge into use become more prestigious and the profession also rises in status and prestige over time. That is what has been happening with technology transfer. The question that arises is, will it follow the same model of classical genetics, or will it lead to a new model of a gender neutral profession, with men and women working at the highest levels in a situation that allows for work-life balance? There is some evidence that this may be happening in small biotech firms. A recent study found that women recruited into these firms were taken seriously in their work, they were being promoted, and so the start-up biotechnology firm has offered evidence that there may be a changing relationship between gender and career advancement and new possibilities available in this area.

Beyond the “Male Model”: An Alternative Female Model

The American sociologist Cecilia Ridgeway has set forth the thesis of a stalled revolution, in the 1970’s large numbers of women entered professions in law and medicine but more recently advancement of women has halted. Pay differentials continue to exist. Women have not risen to positions in board of directors of firms to the same extent that might be expected. On the other hand, women now make up a majority of bachelor’s degrees recipients – over fifty percent in some places and as high as sixty percent in others. Forty years ago the percentage of women at MIT could be counted on the fingers of one hand. Today half of the undergraduate students at MIT are female. Once you get to the level of twenty percent social relations within organizations start to change; but they really transform at the fifty percent level. Typically in women’s entrepreneurship the service occupations make up the majority; but in Catalonia, there is a major change going on as the majority of the women in a program to support

entrepreneurship were in science and technology related occupations. The woman running this program said that the key issue is working with these entrepreneurs is how to grow their firms and still retain a work life balance. So the revolution is moving here. Academia is still resistant to change, but business has been moving faster, and Academia has to learn from industry. That is the next stage in making the gender revolution in science and technology.

To this end, the relationship between career structure and life cycle needs to be rethought (Etzkowitz and Stein, 1978). The current taken-for-granted career path is based on implicit male assumptions that do not take into account women’s greater responsibilities for family maintenance and societal reproduction that persist, even given good faith efforts on the part of men to play a greater role in child care (Kayyem, 2012). In the male model,

imposed on women as well, significant early achievement, typically involving a high time commitment, is the prerequisite for subsequent high-level positions. It is hypothesized that women’s difficulties in conforming to this model explains at least part of the variance in the paucity of women in high-level positions even as their participation rates increase.

An alternative female model, with a higher time commitment after child-rearing years, may be discerned. A Rockefeller University Professor, who started on her PhD at a later than usual age, and US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, exemplify this alternative model that needs to be legitimized as an alternative path to high achievement. The current offering of a relaxed early career path in law firms is stigmatized as a “mommy track”

and reified into a permanent blockage to later high flying. When an alternative “female model” is available for women and men, gender democracy in science, technology and innovation, as well as in the larger society, will be a reality.

REFERENCES

Etzkowitz, H (1971), The Male Nurse: Sexual Separation of Labor in Society, Journal of Marriage and the Family.

Etzkowitz, H, and P. Stein. (1978) The Life Spiral: Human Needs and Adult Roles Journal of Economic and Family Issues. 1:4: 434-446

Etzkowitz, H, Kemelgor, C and Uzzi, B (2000), Athena Unbound: The Advancement of Women in Science and Technology Cambridge University Press.

Etzkowitz, H and Ranga, M (2011), Gender Dynamics in Science and Technology: From the “Leaky Pipeline” to the Vanish Box, Brussels Economic Review, 54:2/3.

Kayyem, J. (2012) The working moms debate International Herald Tribune June 27 Wednesday p.8.

Kohler, R. (1994) Lords of the Fly: Drosophila Genetics and the Experimental Life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press

Ranga, M et al (2008), Gender Patterns in Technology Transfer: Social innovation in the making?, Research Global, 4-5.

Ridgeway, C (2011), Framed by Gender: How Gender Inequality Persists in the Modern World, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Zuckerman, H and Merton R (1972), Age, Ageing and Age Structure in Science. In Ageing and Society, Riley, M, Johnson, M and Foner, A, eds, Vol 3. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

 

 

Read Full Post »

Macrovascular Disease – Therapeutic Potential of cEPCs: Reduction Methods for CV Risk

Curator: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

An Investigation of the Potential of circulating Endothelial Progenitor Cells (cEPCs) as a Therapeutic Target for Pharmacological Therapy Design for Cardiovascular Risk Reduction: A New Multimarker Biomarker Discovery

Research Sources

Aicher A, Heeschen C, Mildner-Rihm C, Urbich C, Ihling C, Technau- Ihling K, Zeiher AM, Dimmeler S, (2003). Essential role of endothelial nitric oxide synthase for mobilization of stem cell and progenitor cells. Nat Med., 9:1370-1376.

Anderson T. (1999). Assessment of treatment of endothelial dysfunction. J Am Coll of Cardiology, 34: 631- 8.

Andrew C. Li, Binder, CJ, Gutierrez, A, Brown, KK, Plotkin, CR, Pattison, JW, Valledor, AF, Davis, RA, Willson, TM, Witztum, JL, Palinski, W, Glass, CK. (2004). Differential inhibition of macrophage foam-cell formation and atherosclerosis in mice by PPAR-alpha, Beta/delta, and gamma. J. Clin. Invest. 114:1564-1576

Aoki, J., Serruys, P.W., van Beusekom, H., Ong, A.T., McFadden, E.P., Sianos, G., et al. (2005). Endothelial progenitor cell capture by stents coated with antibody against CD34: the HEALING-FIM (Healthy Endothelial Accelerated Lining Inhibits Neointimal Growth-First In Man) Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol 45 (10), 1574–1579.

Asahara T, Murohara T, Sullivan A, Silver M, van der Zee R, Li T, Witzenbichler B, Schatterman G, and Isner JM (1997). Isolation of putative progenitor endothelial cells for angiogenesis. Science 275: 964–967.

Asahara T, Murohara T, Sullivan A, Silver M, van der Zee R, Li T, Witzenbichler B, Schatteman G, Isner JM, (1997). Isolation of putatitve progenitor endothelial cells for angiogenesis. Science, 275:964 –967.

Asahara T, Masuda H, Takahashi T, Kalka C, Pastore C, Silver M, Kearne M, Magner M, Isner JM. (1999). Bone marrow origin of endothelial progenitor cells responsible for postnatal vasculogenesis in physiological and pathological neovascularization. Circ Res. 85:221–228.

Askari AT, Unzek S, Popovic ZB, Goldman CK, Forudi F, Kiedrowski M, Rovner A, Ellis SG, Thomas JD, DiCorleto PE, Topol EJ, Penn MS.(2003). Effect of stromal cell-derived factor 1 on stem cell homing and tissue regeneration in ischemic cardiomyopathy. Lancet, 362:697–703.

Assmus B, Schachlinger V, Teupe C, Britten M, Lehmann R, Dobert N, Grunwald F, Aicher A, Urbich C, Martin H, Hoelzer D, Dimmeler S, Zeiher AM, (2002). Transplantation of progenitor cells and regeneration enhancement in acute myocardial infarction (TOPCARE-AMI). Circulation, 106:3009 –3017

Bennett MR, O’Sullivan MO (2001). Mechanisms of angioplasty and stent restenosis: implications for design of rational therapy. Pharmacol Ther., 91:149 –166.

Ben-Shoshan, J and George, J. (2006). Endothelial progenitor cells as therapeutic vectors in cardiovascular disorders: from experimental models to human trials  Pharmacology Therapeutics (impact factor: 8.9). 08/2007; 115(1):25-36.

Bhattacharya V, Shi Q, Ishida A, Sauvage LR, Hammond WP, Wu MH.(2000). Administration of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor enhances endothelialization and microvessel formation in small caliber synthetic vascular grafts. J Vasc Surg., 32:116 –123.

Bonetti PO, et al. (2002). Reactive hyperemia peripheral arterial tonometry, a novel non-invasive index of peripheral vascular function, is attenuated in patients with coronary endothelial dysfunction. Circulation, 106:Suppl II:579.

Bonetti PO, et al. (2003). Enhanced external counterpulsation improves endothelial function in patients with symptomatic coronary artery disease. J Am Coll of Cardiology, 41:1761-8.

Britten MB, Abolmaali ND, Assmus B, Lehman R, Honold J, Schmitt J, Vogl TJ, Martin H, Schachinger V, Dimmeler S, Zeiher AM, (2003). Infarct remodeling after intracoronary progenitor cell treatment in patients with acute myocardial infarction (TOPCARE-AMI): mechanistic insights from serial contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Circulation, 108:2212–2218.

Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation in Type 2 Diabetics (BARI 2D) ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00006305, 2000-2007

http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct/show/NCT00006305   retrieved on 6/20/2006

Caplice NM, Bunch TJ, Stalboerger PG, Wang S, Simper D, Miller DV, Russell SJ, Litzow MR, Edwards WD. (2003). Smooth muscle cells in human coronary atherosclerosis can originate from cells administered at marrow transplantation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 100: 4754–4759.

Chadwick , D.(2006) OrbusNeich’s Genous Bioengineered R-stent . Cath Lab Digest, 14 (1), 20-26

Cho H-J, Kim H-S, Lee M-M, Kim D-H, Yang H-J, Hur J, Hwang K-K, Oh S, Choi Y-J, Chae I-H, Oh, B-H, Choi Y-S, Walsh K, Park Y-B. (2003).  Mobilized endothelial progenitor cells by granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor accelerate reendothelialization and reduce vascular inflammation after intravascular radiation. Circulation, 108:2918 –2925.

Choi J-H, Kim KL, Huh W, Kim B, Byun J, Suh W, Sung J, Jeon E-S, Oh H-Y, Kim D-K, (2004). Decreased number and impaired angiogenic function of endothelial progenitors in patients with chronic renal failure. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol., 24:1246 –1252.

Cinamon G, Shinder V, Alon R (2001) Shear forces promote lymphocyte migration across vascular endothelium bearing apical chemokines. Nature Immunology, 2:515

Dimmeler S, Aicher A, Vasa M, Mildner-Rihm C, Adler K, Tiemann M, Rutten H, Fichtlscherer S, Martin H, Zeiher AM, (2001). HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) increase endothelial progenitor cells via the PI3-kinase/Akt pathway. J Clin Invest., 108:391–397.

Dimmeler S and Zeiher AM, (2004). Vascular repair by circulating endothelial progenitor cells: the missing link in atherosclerosis. J Mol Med. 82:671– 677.

Drexler H and Hornig B, (1999). Endothelial dysfunction in human disease. J Mol Cell Cardiol., 31:51– 60.

Dzau VJ, Braun-Dullaeus RC, Sedding DG. (2002). Vascular proliferation and atherosclerosis: new perspectives and therapeutic strategies. Nat Med.,  8:1249 –1256.

Dzau, VJ, Gnecchi, M, Pachori, AS, Morello F, Melo, LG.(2005).Therapeutic Potential of Endothelial Progenitor Cells in Cardiovascular Diseases.Hypertension,246:7-18.

Edelberg JM, Tang L, Hattori K, Lyden D, Rafii. (2002). Young adult bone marrow-derived endothelial precursor cells restore aging-impaired cardiac angiogenic function. Circ Res., 90:e89–e93.

Endemann DH and Schiffrin EL, (2004). Endothelial dysfunction. J Am Soc Nephrol., 15:1983–1992.

Fadini, G, Avogaro A, Agostini C. (2004), Unambiguous Definition of Endothelial Progenitor Cells. Electronic Letter to the Editor of Heart in reference to article by Eizawa, T, Ikeda U, et al. Decreasing in circulating endothelial progenitor cells in patients with stable CAD, Heart, 2004; 90: 685-686,

http://heart.bmjjournals.com/cgi/eletters/90/6/685#310  retrieved on 6/26/2006

Fernandez-Aviles F, San Roman JA, Garcıa-Frade J, Fernandez ME, Penarrubia MJ, de la Fuente Luis, Gomez-Bueno M, Cantalapiedra A, Fernandez J, Gutierrez O, Sanchez PL, Hernandez C, Sanz R, Garcıa- Sancho J, Sa´nchez A, (2004). Experimental and clinical regenerative capability of human bone marrow cells after myocardial infarction. Circ Res., 95:742–748.

Folsom, A.R. Chambless, L.E. Ballantyne, C.M. Coresh, J. Heiss, G. Wu, K.K. Boerwinkle, E. Mosley, T.H. Sorlie, P. Diao, G. Sharrett, A.R. (2006). An Assessment of Incremental Coronary Risk Prediction Using C-Reactive Protein and Other Novel Risk Markers – The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study. Arch Intern. Med. 166, 1368-1373.

Fuujiyama S, Amano K, Uehira K, Yoshida N, Nishiwaki Y, Nozawa Y,  Jin D, Takai S, Miyazaki M, Egashira K, Imada T, Iwasaka T, Matsubara H, (2003). Bone marrow monocyte lineage cells adhere on injured endothelium in a monocyte chemoattractant protein-1-dependent manner and accelerate reendothelialization as endothelial progenitor cells. Circ Res., 93:980-989.

George F, Brisson C, Poncelet P, Laurent JC, Massot O, Arnoux D, Ambrosi P, Klein-Soyer C, Cazenave JP, and Sampol J (1992). Rapid isolation of human endothelial cells from whole blood using S-Endo 1 monoclonal antibody coupled to immunomagnetic beads: demonstration of endothelial injury after angioplasty. Thromb Haemost, 67:147–153.

George J, Herz I, Goldstein E, Abashidze S, Deutch V, Finkelstein A, Michowitz Y, Miller H, Keren G.(2003). Number and adhesive properties of circulating endothelial progenitor cells in patients with in-stent restenosis. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol., 23:e57– e60.

George J, Goldstein E, Abashidze S, Deutsch V, Shmilovich H, Finkelstein A, Herz I, Miller H, Keren G., (2004). Circulating endothelial progenitor cells in patients with unstable angina: association with systemic inflammation. Eur Heart J., 25:1003–1008.

George, J., Goldstein, E., Abashidze, S., Wexler, D., Hamed, S., Shmilovich, H., et al. (2005). Erythropoietin promotes endothelial progenitor cell proliferative and adhesive properties in a PI 3-kinase-dependent manner. Cardiovasc Res 68(2), 299-306.

George J, Shmilovich H, Deutsch V, Miller H, Keren G, Roth A. (2006). Comparative Analysis of Methods for Assessment of Circulating Endothelial Progenitor Cells, Tissue Engineering 12 (2) 331-335

Gerhard-Herman M, et al. (2002). Assessment of endothelial function (nitric oxide) at the tip of a finger. Circulation, 106:Suppl II:170.

Gill M, Dias S, Hattori K, Rivera ML, Hicklin D, Witte L, Girardi L, Yurt R, Himel H, Rafii S, (2001). Vascular trauma induces rapid but transient mobilization of VEGFR2/AC133 endothelial precursor cells. Circ Res., 88:167–174.

Goon, P.K.Y. Lip G.Y.H, Boos, CJ, Stonelake, PS, Blann, AD. (2006). Circulating Endothelial Cells, Endothelial Progenitor Cells, and Endothelial Microparticles in Cancer, Neoplasia, 8:79-88.

Griese DP, Ehsan A, Melo LG, Kong D, Zhang L, Mann MJ, Pratt RE, Mulligan RC, Dzau VJ, (2003). Isolation and transplantation of autologous circulating endothelial cells into denuded vessels and prosthetic grafts: implications for cell-based vascular therapy. Circulation, 108: 2710–2715.

Heeschen C, Aicher A, Lehmann R, Fichtlscherer S, Vasa M, Urbich C, Mildner-Rihm C, Martin H, Zeiher AM, Dimmeler, (2003). Erythropoietin is a potent physiological stimulus for endothelial progenitor cell mobilization. Blood, 102:1340 –1346.

Heeschen C, Lehman R, Honold J, Assmus B, Aicher A, Walter DH, Martin H, Zeiher AM, Dimmeler S. (2004). Profoundly reduced neovascularization capacity of bone marrow mononuclear cells derived from patients with chronic ischemic heart disease. Circulation, 109:1615–1622.

Heissig B, Hattori K, Dias S, Friedrich M, Ferris B, Hackett NR, Crystal RG, Besmer P, Lyden D, Moore MA, Werb Z, Rafii S., (2002). Recruitment of stem and progenitor cells from the bone marrow niche requires MMP-9 mediated release of kit-ligand. Cell ;109: 625-637.

Hiasa K, Ishibashi M, Ohtani K, Inoue S, Zhao Q, Kitamoto S, Sata M, Ichiki T, Takeshita A, Egashira K. Gene transfer of stromal cell-derived factor 1 enhances ischemic vasculogenesis and angiogenesis via vascular endothelial growth factor/endothelial nitric oxide synthaserelated pathway: next generation chemokine therapy for therapeutic neovascularization. Circulation, 109:2454 –2461.

Hill JM, Zalos G, Halcox JPG, Schenke WH, Waclawin MA, Quyyumi A, Finkel T. (2003). Circulating endothelial progenitor cells, vascular function and cardiovascular risk. N Engl J Med., 348:593– 600.

Hillebrands J-L, Klatter FA, van DijK WD, Rozing J. (2003). Bone marrow does not contribute substantially to endothelial-cell replacement in transplant arteriosclerosis. Nat Med., 8:194 –195.

Hu Y, Davison F, Zhan Z, Xu Q. (2003). Endothelial replacement and angiogenesis in arteriosclerotic lesions of allografts are contributed by circulating progenitor cells. Circulation, 108:3122–3127.

Hur, J., Yoon, C.H., Kim, H.S., Choi, J.H., Kang, H.J., Hwang, K.K., et al. (2004). Characterization of two types of endothelial progenitor cells and their different contributions to neovasculogenesis. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 24(2), 288–293.

Imanishi, T., Hano, T. & Nishio, I. (2005) Estrogen reduces endothelial progenitor cell senescence through augmentation of telomerase activity. J Hypertens 23(9):1699-1706.

Iwaguro H, Yamaguchi J, Kalka C, Murasawa S, Masuda H, Hayashi S, Silver M, Li T, Isner JM, Asahara T, (2002). Endothelial progenitor cell vascular endothelial growth factor gene transfer for vascular regeneration. Circulation, 105:732–738.

Kalka C, Tehrani H, Laudernberg B, Vale P, Isner JM, Asahara T, Symes JF, (2000a). Mobilization of endothelial progenitor cells following gene therapy with VEGF165 in patients with inoperable coronary disease. Ann Thorac Surg., 70:829–834.

Kalka C, Masuda H, Takahashi T, Gordon R, Tepper O, Gravereaux E, Pieczek A, Iwaguro H, Hayashi S-I, Isner JM, Asahara T (2000b). Vascular endothelial growth factor165 gene transfer augments circulating endothelial progenitor cells in human subjects. Circ Res., 86:1198 –1202.

Kalka C, Masuda H, Takahashi T, Kalka-Moll WM, Silver M, Kearney M, Li T, Isner JM, Asahara T, (2000c). Transplantation of ex vivo expanded endothelial progenitor cells for therapeutic neovascularization. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 97:3422–3427.

Kang H-J, Kim H-S, Zhang S-Y, Park K-W, Cho H-J, Koo B-K, Kim Y-J, Lee DS, Sohn D-W, Han K-S, Oh B-H, Lee M-M, Park Y-B, (2004). Effects of intracoronary infusion of peripheral blood stem cells mobilized with granulocyte-colony stimulating factor on left ventrricular systolic function and restenosis after coronary stenting in myocardial infarction: the MAGIC cell randomized clinical trial. Lancet, 363:751–756.

Kawamoto A, Gwon H-C, Iwaguro H, Yamaguchi J, Uchida S, Masuda H, Silver M, Ma H, Kearney M, Isner JM, Asahara T, (2001). Therapeutic potential of ex vivo expanded endothelial progenitor cells for myocardial ischemia. Circulation, 103:634–637.

Khan SS, Solomon MA, and McCoy JP Jr, (2005). Detection of circulating-  endothelial cells and endothelial progenitor cells by flow cytometry. Cytometry B Clin Cytom 64:1–8.

Kiernan, T.(2006). Endothelial progenitor cells in 2006 – Where are we now? http://www.irishheart.ie/iopen24/catalog/pub/Heartwise/2006/Spring/endothelial.pdf retrieved 6/22/2006.

Kim, DH, Leu, HB, Ott, HC & Taylor, DO, Bertolini, F, Mancuso, P & Kerbel, RS, Boos, CJ, Goon, PKY, Lip, GYH, (2005). Multiple comments – Correspondence to the Editor on Circulating Endothelial Progenitor Cells. NEJM, 353:24, 2613-2616

Kleinman, ME, Blei, F, Gurtner, GC, (2005). Circulating Endothelial Progenitor Cells and Vascular Anomalies, Lymphatic Research and Biology, 3;4: 234-239.

Kocher AA, Schuster MD, Szabolcs MJ, Burkhoff D, Wang J, Homma S, Edwards NM, Itescu S. (2001). Neovascularization of ischemic myocardium by human bone-marrow-derived angioblasts prevents cardiomyocyte apoptosis, reduces remodeling and improves cardiac function. Nat Med., 7:430–436.

Kong D, Melo LG, Gnecchi M, Zhang L, Mostoslavski G, Liew CC, Pratt RE, Dzau VJ. (2004a). Cytokine-induced mobilization of circulating endothelial progenitor cells enhances repair of injured arteries. Circulation, 110:2039 –2046.

Kong D, Melo LG, Mangi AA, Zhang L, Lopez-Ilasaca M, Perrella MA, Liew CC, Pratt RE, Dzau VJ, (2004b). Enhanced inhibition of neointimal hyperplasia by genetically engineered endothelial progenitor cells. Circulation, 109:1769 –1775.

Kuvin JT, et al. (2003a). Assessment of peripheral vascular endothelial function with finger arterial pulse wave amplitude. Am Heart J, 146:168-74.

Kuvin JT, et al. (2003b). Peripheral arterial tonometry during hyperemia is blunted in patients with coronary artery disease. J Am Coll of Cardiology, 41:Suppl:269A.

Lapidot T, and Petit, I (2002) Current understanding of stem cell mobilization: The roles of chemokines, proteolytic enzymes, adhesion molecules, cytokines, and stromal cells. Experimental Hematology, 30:973–98

Laufs U, Werner N, Link A, Endres M, Wassmann S, Jurgens K, Miche E, Bohm M, Nickenig G, (2003). Physical training increases endothelial progenitor cells, inhibits neointima formation, and enhances angiogenesis. Circulation, 109:220 –226.

Laufs U, Werner N, Link A, Endres M, Wassmann S, Jurgens K, Miche E, Bohm M, and Nickenig G (2004). Physical training increases endothelial progenitor cells, inhibits neointima formation, and enhances angiogenesis. Circulation 109: 220–226.

Llevadot J, Murasawa S, Kureishi Y, Uchida S, Masuda H, Kawamoto A, Walsh K, Isner JM, Asahara T, (2001). HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor mobilizes bone marrow-derived endothelial progenitor cells. J Clin Invest., 108:399–405.

Lloyd-Jones, D. and Tian, L. (2006). Predicting Cardiovascular Risk, So What Do We Do Now?. Arch Intern. Med, 166, 1342-1343.

Loomans CJM, de Koening EJP, Staal FJT, Rookmaaker MB, Verseyden C, de Boer HC, Verhaar MC, Braam B, Rebelink TJ, van Zonneveld A-J. (2004). Endothelial progenitor cell dysfunction. A novel concept in the pathogenesis of vascular complications of type I diabetes. Diabetes, 53:195–199.

Losordo DW, Isner JM, Diaz-Sandoval LJ, (2003). Endothelial Recovery. The next target in restenosis prevention. Circulation, 107:2635–2637.

Lusis, A.J. (2000). Atherosclerosis. Nature 407(6801), 233–241.

Massa M, Rosti V, Ferrario M, Campanelli R, Ramajoli, Rosso R, De Ferrari GM, Ferlini M, Goffredo L, Bertoletti A, Klersy C, Pecci A, Moratti R, Tavazzi, (2005). Increased circulating hematopoietic and endothelial progenitor cells in the early phase of acute myocardial infarction. Blood,105:199 –206.

Orlic D, Kajstura J, Chimenti S, Limana F, Jakoniuk I, Quaini F, Nadal-Ginard B, Bodine DM, Leri A, Anversa P. (2001). Mobilized bone marrow cells repair the infarcted heart, improving function and survival. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 98:10344 –10349.

Peichev M, Naiyer AJ, Pereira D, Zhu Z, Lane WJ, Williams M, Oz MC, Hicklin DJ, Witte L, Moore MA, and Rafii S (2000). Expression of VEGFR-2 and AC133 by circulating human CD34+ cells identifies a population of functional endothelial precursors. Blood 95: 952–958.

Perin EC, Dohmann HFR, Borojevic R, Silva SA, Sousa AL, Mesquita CT, Rossi MI, Carvalho AC, Dutra HS, Dohmann HJ, Silva GV, Belem L, Vivacqua R, Rangel FO, Esporcatte R, Geng YJ, Vaughn WK, Assad JA, Mesquita ET, Willerson JT, (2003). Transendocardial, autologous bone marrow cell transplantation for severe, chronic ischemic heart failure. Circulation, 107:2294 –2302.

Powell TM, Paul JD, Hill JM, Thompson M, Benjamin M, Rodrigo M, McCoy JP, Read EJ, Khuu HM, (2005). Leitman SF, Finkel T, Cannon RO III. Granulocyte colony stimulating factor mobilizes functional endothelial progenitor cells in patients with coronary artery disease. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol., 25:1– 6.

Rafii S, Lyden D (2003). Therapeutic stem and progenitor cell transplantation for organ vascularisation and regeneration. Nat Med 9: 702–712.

Rauscher FM, Goldschmidt-Clermont PJ, Davis BH, Wang T, Gregg D, Ramaswami P, Pippen AM, Annex BH, Dong C, Taylor DA, (2003). Aging, progenitor cell exhaustion, and atherosclerosis. Circulation, 108:457–463.

Ross R. (1999). Atherosclerosis – An inflammatory disease. N Engl J Med., 340:115–126.

Rubanyi GM. (1993). The role of endothelium in cardiovascular homeostasis and diseases. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol., 22(Suppl):S1–S4.

Sata M, Saiura A, Kunisato A, Tojo A, Okada S, Tokuhisa T, Hirai H, Makuuchi M, Hirata Y, Nagai R. (2002). Hematopoietic stem cells differentiate into vascular cells that participate in the pathogenesis of atherosclerosis. Nat Med., 8:403– 409.

Schachinger V, Assmus B, Britten MB, Honold J, Lehman R, Teupe C, Abolmaali ND, Vogt TJ, Hofmann WK, Martin H, Dimmeler S, Zeiher AM, (2004). Transplantation of progenitor cells and regeneration enhancement in acute myocardial infarction: final one-year results of the TOPCARE-AMI trial. J Am Coll Cardiol., 44:1690 –1699.

Schatteman GC, Hanlon HD, Jiao C, Dodds SG, Christy BA. (2000). Blood derived angioblasts accelerate blood flow restoration in diabetic mice. J Clin Invest., 106:571–578.

Scheubel RJ, Zorn H, Rolf-Edgar S, Kuss O, Morawietz, Holtz J, Simm A. (2003). Age-dependent depression in circulating endothelial progenitor cells in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting. J Am Col Cardiol., 42:2073–2080.

Segal, M.S., Shah, R., Afzal, A., Perrault, C.M., Chang, K., Schuler, A., et al. (2006). Nitric oxide cytoskeletal-induced alterations reverse the endothelial progenitor cell migratory defect associated with diabetes. Diabetes 55(1), 102-109

Shi Q, Raffi, Wu MH, Wijelath ES, Yu C, Ishida A, Fujita Y, Kothari S, Mohle R, Sauvage LR, Moore MAS, Storb RF, Hammond WP. (1998). Evidence of circulating bone-marrow derived endothelial cells. Blood, 92:362–367.

Shi Q, Bhattacharya V, Hong-De Wu M, Sauvage LR. (2002). Utilizing granulocyte colony-stimulating factor to enhance vascular graft endothelialization from circulating blood cells. Ann Vasc Surg., 16:314 –320.

Shintani S, Murohara T, Ikeda H, Ueni T, Honma T, Katoh A, Sasaki K, Shimada T, Oike Y, Imaizumi T, (2001). Mobilization of endothelial progenitor cells in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Circulation, 103:2776 –2779.

Shirota, T., Yasui, H., Shimokawa, H. & Matsuda, T. (2003). Fabrication of endothelial progenitor cell (EPC)-seeded intravascular stent devices and in vitro endothelialization on hybrid vascular tissue. Biomaterials 24(13), 2295–2302.

Simper D, Wang S, Deb A, Holmes D, McGregor C, Frantz R, Kushawa SS, Caplice NM, (2003). Endothelial progenitor cells are decreased in blood of cardiac allograft patients with vasculopathy and endothelial cells of non cardiac origin are enriched in transplant atherosclerosis. Circulation, 107:143–149.

Spyridopoulos I, Haendeler J, Urbich C, Brummendorf TH, Oh H, Schneider MD, Zeiher AM, Dimmeler S, (2004). Statins enhance migratory capacity by upregulation of the telomere repeat-binding factor TRF2 in endothelial progenitor cells. Circulation, 110:3136 –3142.

Stamm C, Westphal B, Kleine H-D, Petzsch M, Kittner C, Klinge H, Schumichen C, Nienaber CA, Freund M, Steinhoff G, (2003). Autologous bonemarrow transplantation for myocardial regeneration. Lancet, 361:45–46.

Strauer BE, Brehm M, Zeus T, Kostering M, Hernandez A, Sorg RV, Kogler G, Wernet P, (2002). Repair of infarcted myocardium by autologous intracoronary mononuclear bone marrow cell transplantation in humans. Circulation, 106:1913–1918.

Strehlow K, Werner N, Berweiler J, Link A, Dirnagl U, Priller J, Laufs K, Ghaeni L, Milosevic M, Bohm M, Nickenig G, (2003). Estrogen increases bone-marrow derived endothelial progenitor cell production and diminishes neointima formation. Circulation, 107:3059 –3065.

Takahashi T, Kalka C, Masuda H, Chen D, Silver M, Kearney M, Magner M, Isner JM, Asahara T, (1999). Ischemia- and cytokine-induced mobilization of bone-marrow-derived endothelial progenitor cells for neovascularization. Nat Med., 5:434–438.

Tepper OM, Galiano RD, Capla JM, Kalka C, Gagne PJ, Jacobwotiz GR, Levine JP, Gurtner GC. (2002). Human endothelial progenitor cells from type II diabetes exhibit impaired proliferation, adhesion, and incorporation into vascular structures. Circulation, 106:2781–2786.

Tse HF, Kwong YL, Chan JK, Lo G, Ho CL, and Lau CP (2003). Angiogenesis in ischaemic myocardium by intramyocardial autologous bone genesis marrow mononuclear cell implantation. Lancet 361: 47–49.

Tung, R, Kaul, S, Diamond, GA, Shah, PK (2006). Drug-Eluting Stents for the Management of Restenosis: A Critical Appraisal of the Evidence. Annals of Internal Medicine, 144;12: 913-919.

Valenzuela-Fernandez A, Planchenault T, Baleux F, et al. (2002) Leukocyte elastase negatively regulates stromal cell-derived factor-1 (SDF)/CXCR4 binding and functions by amino-terminal processing of SDF-1 and CXCR4.  J Biol Chem 277:156

Valgimigli M, Rigolin GM, Fucili A, Della Porta M, Soukhomovskaia O, Malagutti P, Bugli AM, Bragottu LZ, Francolini G, Mauro E, Castoldi G, Ferrari R, (2004). CD34 and endothelial progenitor cells in patients with various degrees of congestive heart failure. Circulation, 110:1209–1212.

Vasa M, Fichtlscherer S, Adler K, Aicher A, Martin H, Zeiher AM, Dimmeler S. (2001a). Increase in circulating endothelial progenitor cells by statin therapy in patients with stable coronary artery disease. Circulation, 103:2885–2890.

Vasa M, Fichtlscherer S, Aicher A, Adler K, Urbich C, Martin H, Zeiher AM, Dimmeler S. (2001b). Number and migratory activity of circulating endothelial progenitor cells inversely correlates with risk factors for coronary artery disease. Circ Res., 89:e1– e7.

Vasan, RS, (2006). Biomarkers of Cardiovascular Disease: Molecular Basis and Practical Considerations, Circulation, 113:2335-2362.

Verma S, Kukiszewski MA, Li S-H, Szmitko PE, Zucco L, Wang C-H, Badiwala MV, Mickle DAG, Weisel RD, Fedak PWM, Stewart DJ, Kutrik MJB, (2004). C-reactive protein attenuates endothelial progenitor cell survival, differentiation, and function. Circulation, 109:r91–r100.

Verma, S. and Marsden, P.A. (2005). Nitric Oxide-Eluting Polyurethanes – Vascular Grafts of the Future? New England Journal Medicine, 353 (7), 730-731.

Verma S, Szmitko, PE, (2006). The vascular biology of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors: Modulation of atherosclerosis. Can J Cardiol, 22 (Suppl B):12B-17B.

Walter DH, Rittig K, Bahlmann FH, Kirchmair R, Silver M, Murayama T, Nishimura H, Losordo DW, Asahara T, Isner JM, (2002). Statin therapy accelerates reendothelialization: a novel effect involving mobilization and incorporation of bone marrow-derived endothelial progenitor cells. Circulation, 105:3017–3024.

Werner N, Junk S, Laufs L, Link A, Walenta K, Bohm M, Nickenig G., (2003).  Intravenous transfusion of endothelial progenitor cells reduces neointima formation after vascular injury. Circ Res., 93:e17– e24.

Werner N, Kosiol S, Schiegl T, Ahlers P, Walenta K, Link A, Böhm M, Nickenig G. (2005a). Circulating Endothelial Progenitor Cells and Cardiovascular Outcomes, NEJM, 353: 999-1007

Werner, N & Nickenig, G. (2005b). Authors Reply to Correspondence to the Editor on Circulating Endothelial Progenitor Cells. NEJM, 353:24, 2613-2616

Widlansky ME, et al. (2003). The clinical implications of endothelial dysfunction. J Am Coll of Cardiology, 42:1149-60.

Wollert KC, Meyer GP, Latz J, Ringes-Lichtenberg S, Lippolt P, Breindenbach C, Fichtner S, Korte T, Hornig B, Messinger D, Arseniev L, Hartenstein B, Ganser A, Drexler H (2004). Intracoronary autologous bonemarrow cell transfer after myocardial infarction: the BOOST randomised controlled clinical trial. Lancet, 364:141–148.

Yamaguchi J, Kusano KF, Masuo O, Kawamoto A, Silver M, Murasawa S, Bosch-Marce M, Masuda H, Losordo DW, Isner JM, Asahara T. (2003).  Stromal cell-derived factor-1 effects on ex vivo expanded endothelial progenitor cell recruitment for ischemic neovascularization. Circulation, 107:1322–1328.

Yoon YS, Park JS, Tkebuchava T, Luedeman C, Losordo DW. (2004). Unexpected severe calcification after transplantation of bone marrow cells in acute myocardial infarction. Circulation, 109:3154 –3157.

Read Full Post »

Reporter: Prabodh Kandala, PhD

Scientists know that Vitamin D deficiency is not healthy. However, new research from the University of Copenhagen now indicates that too high a level of the essential vitamin is not good either. The study is based on blood samples from 247,574 Copenhageners. The results have just been published in the reputed scientific Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism.

Vitamin D is instrumental in helping calcium reach our bones, thus lessening the risk from falls and the risk of broken hips. Research suggests that vitamin D is also beneficial in combating cardiac disease, depression and certain types of cancers. The results from a study conducted by the Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences now support the benefits of vitamin D in terms of mortality risk. However, the research results also show higher mortality in people with too high levels of vitamin D in their bloodstream:

“We have had access to blood tests from a quarter of a million Copenhageners. We found higher mortality in people with a low level of vitamin D in their blood, but to our surprise, we also found it in people with a high level of vitamin D. We can draw a graph showing that perhaps it is harmful with too little and too much vitamin D,” explains Darshana Durup, PhD student.

If the blood contains less than 10 nanomol (nmol) of vitamin per liter of serum, mortality is 2.31 times higher. However, if the blood contains more than 140 nmol of vitamin per liter of serum, mortality is higher by a factor of 1.42. Both values are compared to 50 nmol of vitamin per liter of serum, where the scientists see the lowest mortality rate.

More studies are needed

Darshana Durup emphasises that while scientists do not know the cause of the higher mortality, she believes that the new results can be used to question the wisdom of those people who claim that you can never get too much vitamin D:

“It is important to conduct further studies in order to understand the relationship. A lot of research has been conducted on the risk of vitamin D deficiency. However, there is no scientific evidence for a ‘more is better’ argument for vitamin D, and our study does not support the argument either. We hope that our study will inspire others to study the cause of higher mortality with a high level of vitamin D,” says Darshana Durup. She adds:

“We have moved into a controversial area that stirs up strong feelings just like debates on global warming and research on nutrition. But our results are based on a quarter of a million blood tests and provide an interesting starting point for further research.”

The largest study of its kind

The study is the largest of its kind — and it was only possible to conduct it because of Denmark’s civil registration system, which is unique in the Nordic countries. The 247,574 blood samples come from the Copenhagen General Practitioners Laboratory:

“Our data material covers a wide age range. The people who participated had approached their own general practitioners for a variety of reasons and had had the vitamin D level in their bloodstream measured in that context. This means that while the study can show a possible association between mortality and a high level of vitamin D, we cannot as yet explain the higher risk,” explains Darshana Durup.

Therefore in future research project scientists would like to compare the results with information from disease registers such as the cancer register. Financial support is currently being sought for such projects.

Ref:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/05/120529102346.htm

http://jcem.endojournals.org/content/early/2012/05/09/jc.2012-1176

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts