Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘National Institutes of Health’

Rewriting the Mathematics of Tumor Growth[1]; Teams Use Math Models to Sort Drivers from Passengers[2]:  Two JNCI Reviews by Mike Martin Regarding Genomics, Cancer, and Mutation

Curator: Stephen J. Williams, Ph.D.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is ArticleID-22.png

WordCloud Image Produced by Adam Tubman

Screen Shot 2021-07-19 at 6.29.41 PM

Word Cloud By Danielle Smolyar

Recently, there has been extensive interest in the cancer research and oncology community on detecting those mutations responsible for the initiation and propagation of a neoplastic cell (driver mutations) versus those mutations that are randomly (or by selective pressures) acquired due to the genetic instability of the transformed cell.  The impact of either type of mutation has been a topic for debate, with a recent article showing that some passenger mutations may actually be responsible for tumor survival.  In addition many articles, highlighted on this site (and referenced below) in recent years have described the importance of classifying driver and passenger mutations for the purposes of more effective personalized medicine strategies directed against tumors. Two review articles by Mike Martin in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute (JCNI) shed light on the current efforts and successes to discriminate between these passenger and driver mutations and determine impact of each type of mutation to tumor growth.  However, as described in the associated article, the picture is not as clear cut as previously thought and highlights some revolutionary findings. In Rewriting the Mathematics of Tumor Growth, researchers discovered that driver mutations may confer such a small growth advantage that, multiple mutations, including the so called passenger mutations are necessary in order to sustain tumor growth. In fact, much experimental evidence has suggested at least six defined genetic events may be necessary for the in-vitro transformation of human cells.  The following table shows some of the genetic events required for in-vitro transformation in cell culture systems.

Genetic events required for transformation

 Species  Cell type  # of genes required for tumor formation*  Genes used  Reference Events required for priming
Human FibroblastsEmbryonic kidney 3 hTERTH-rasLarge T (a)Hahn(Weinberg) 2LT+hTERT
Mammary epithelialMyoblastsEmbryonic kidney 6 hTERTH-rasP53DDc-myccyclin D1CDK4 (b)Kendall(Counter) Hras required for tumorigenesis so probably 5 events needed
Fibroblasts 4 Large TSmall TH-rashTERT (c)Sun(Hornsby) 2Large T + H-ras
Fibroblasts 4 Large TSmall ThTERTRas (d)Rangarajan(Weinberg) 3hTERT, Ras and either small or largeT
Keratinocytes 4 CyclinD1dnp53EGFR

c-myc

(e)Goessel(Opitz) 3 for anchorage independence (cyclin D1, dnp53, EGFR),Cyclin D1+dnp53 for immortalization
HOSE 6 CDK4, cyclin D, hTERT plus combination of either P53DD, myrAkt, and H-ras or P53DD, H-ras, c-myc Bcl2 (f)Sasaki(Kiyono) 5
HOSE 3 hTERTSV40 earlyH-ras orK-ras (g)Liu(Bast) 2hTERT+ SV40 early
HOSE 3 Large ThTERTH-ras orc-erB-2 (h)Kusakari(Fujii) 2hTERT+large T
Rat Fibroblasts 2 Large TH-ras (i)Hirakawa Did not analyze
Fibroblasts 2 Large TH-ras (d)Rangarajan(Weinberg) Large T
Mouse MOSEIn p53-/- background 3 c-mycK-rasAkt (j)Orsulic
Pig Fibroblasts 6 p53DDhTERTCDK4H-ras c-myccyclin D1 (k)Adam(Counter) 5 need all butp53DD

Note: priming means events required to immortalize but not fully transform.  * Note that both ability to form colonies in soft agarose and subsequently tested for tumor formation in immunocompromised mice.

a.         Hahn, W. C., Counter, C. M., Lundberg, A. S., Beijersbergen, R. L., Brooks, M. W., and Weinberg, R. A. (1999) Creation of human tumour cells with defined genetic elements, Nature 400, 464-468.

b.         Kendall, S. D., Linardic, C. M., Adam, S. J., and Counter, C. M. (2005) A network of genetic events sufficient to convert normal human cells to a tumorigenic state, Cancer Res 65, 9824-9828.

c.         Sun, B., Chen, M., Hawks, C. L., Pereira-Smith, O. M., and Hornsby, P. J. (2005) The minimal set of genetic alterations required for conversion of primary human fibroblasts to cancer cells in the subrenal capsule assay, Neoplasia 7, 585-593.

d.         Rangarajan, A., Hong, S. J., Gifford, A., and Weinberg, R. A. (2004) Species- and cell type-specific requirements for cellular transformation, Cancer Cell 6, 171-183.

e.         Goessel, G., Quante, M., Hahn, W. C., Harada, H., Heeg, S., Suliman, Y., Doebele, M., von Werder, A., Fulda, C., Nakagawa, H., Rustgi, A. K., Blum, H. E., and Opitz, O. G. (2005) Creating oral squamous cancer cells: a cellular model of oral-esophageal carcinogenesis, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 102, 15599-15604.

f.          Sasaki, R., Narisawa-Saito, M., Yugawa, T., Fujita, M., Tashiro, H., Katabuchi, H., and Kiyono, T. (2009) Oncogenic transformation of human ovarian surface epithelial cells with defined cellular oncogenes, Carcinogenesis 30, 423-431.

g.         Liu, J., Yang, G., Thompson-Lanza, J. A., Glassman, A., Hayes, K., Patterson, A., Marquez, R. T., Auersperg, N., Yu, Y., Hahn, W. C., Mills, G. B., and Bast, R. C., Jr. (2004) A genetically defined model for human ovarian cancer, Cancer Res 64, 1655-1663.

h.         Kusakari, T., Kariya, M., Mandai, M., Tsuruta, Y., Hamid, A. A., Fukuhara, K., Nanbu, K., Takakura, K., and Fujii, S. (2003) C-erbB-2 or mutant Ha-ras induced malignant transformation of immortalized human ovarian surface epithelial cells in vitro, Br J Cancer 89, 2293-2298.

i.          Hirakawa, T., and Ruley, H. E. (1988) Rescue of cells from ras oncogene-induced growth arrest by a second, complementing, oncogene, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 85, 1519-1523.

j.          Orsulic, S., Li, Y., Soslow, R. A., Vitale-Cross, L. A., Gutkind, J. S., and Varmus, H. E. (2002) Induction of ovarian cancer by defined multiple genetic changes in a mouse model system, Cancer Cell 1, 53-62.

k.         Adam, S. J., Rund, L. A., Kuzmuk, K. N., Zachary, J. F., Schook, L. B., and Counter, C. M. (2007) Genetic induction of tumorigenesis in swine, Oncogene 26, 1038-1045.

However it may be argued that the aforementioned experimental examples were produced in cell lines with a more stable genome than that which is seen in most tumors and had used traditional assays of transformation, such as growth in soft agarose and tumorigenicity in immunocompromised mice, as endpoints of transformation, and not representative of the tumor growth seen in the clinical setting.

Therefore Bert Vogelstein, M.D., along with collaborators around the world developed a model they termed the “sequential driver mutation theory”, in which they describe that driver mutations multiply over time with each mutation “slightly increasing the tumor growth rate through a process that depends on three factors”:

  1. Driver mutation rate
  2. The 0.4% selective growth advantage
  3. Cell division time

This model was based on a combination of experimental data and computer simulations of gliobastoma multiforme and pancreatic adenocarcinoma.  Most tumor models follow a Gompertz kinetics, which show how tumor growth is exponential but eventually levels off over time.

This new theory shows though that a tumor cell with only one driver mutation can only grow so much, until a second driver mutation is required.  Using data for the COSMIC database (Catalog of Somatic Mutations in Cancer) together with analysis software CHASM (Cancer-specific High-throughput Annotation of Somatic Mutations) the researchers analyzed 713 mutations sequenced from 14 glioma patients and 562 mutations in nine pancreatic adenocarcinomas, revealing at least 100 tumor suppressor genes and 100 oncogenes altered.  Therefore, the authors suggested these may be possible driver mutations, or at least mutations required for the sustained growth of these tumors.  Applying this new model to data obtained from Dr. Giardiello’s publication concerning familial adenopolypsis in New England Journal of medicine in 19993 and 2000, the sequential driver mutation model predicted age distribution of FAP patients, number and size of polyps, and polyp growth rate than previous models.  This surprising number of required driver mutations for full transformation was also verified in a study led by University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center biologist Jerry Shay, Ph.D., who noted “this team’s surprise nearly 45% of all colorectal candidate oncogenes (65 mutations) drove malignant proliferation”[3].

However, some investigators do not believe the model is complex enough to account for other factors involved in oncogenesis, such as epigenetic factors like methylation and acetylation.  In addition the review also discusses host and tissue factors which may complicate the models, such as location where a tumor develops.  However, most of the investigators interviewed for this review agreed that focusing on this long-term progression of the disease may give us clues to other potential druggable targets.

Teams Use Math Models to Sort Drivers From Passengers

A related review from Mike Martin in JNCI [2] describes a statistical method, published in 2009 Cancer Informatics[4], which distinguishes chromosomal abnormalities that can drive oncogenesis from passenger abnormalities.  Chromosomal abnormalities, such as deletions, additions, and translocations are common in cancer.  For instance, the well-known Philadelphia chromosome, a translocation between chromosome 9 and 22 which results in the BCR-ABL tyrosine kinase fusion protein is the molecular basis of chronic myelogenous leukemia.

In the report, Eytan Domany, Ph.D., from Weizmann Institute and several colleagues from University of Lausanne, University of Haifa and the Broad Institute were analyzing chromosomal aberrations in a subset of medulloblastoma, which had more gain and losses in chromosomes than had been attributed to the disease.  Using a statistical method they termed a “volumetric sieve”, the investigators were able to identify driver versus passenger aberrations based on three filters:

  • Fraction of patients with the abnormality
  • Length of DNA involved in the aberrant chromosome
  • Abnormality’s copy number

Another method to sort the most “important” chromosomal aberrations from less relevant alterations is termed GISTIC[5], as the website describes is: a tool to identify genes targeted by somatic copy-number alterations (SCNAs) that drive cancer growth (at the Broad Institute website http://www.broadinstitute.org/software/cprg/?q=node/31).  The method allows for comparison across multiple tumors so noise is eliminated and improves consistency of analysis.  This method had been successfully used to determine driver aberrations is mesotheliomas, leukemias, and identify new oncogenes in adenocarcinomas of the lung and squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus.

Main references for the two Mike Martin articles are as follows:

1.         Martin M: Rewriting the mathematics of tumor growth. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2011, 103(21):1564-1565.

2.         Martin M: Aberrant chromosomes: teams use math models to sort drivers from passengers. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2010, 102(6):369-371.

3.         Eskiocak U, Kim SB, Ly P, Roig AI, Biglione S, Komurov K, Cornelius C, Wright WE, White MA, Shay JW: Functional parsing of driver mutations in the colorectal cancer genome reveals numerous suppressors of anchorage-independent growth. Cancer research 2011, 71(13):4359-4365.

4.         Shay T, Lambiv WL, Reiner-Benaim A, Hegi ME, Domany E: Combining chromosomal arm status and significantly aberrant genomic locations reveals new cancer subtypes. Cancer informatics 2009, 7:91-104.

5.         Beroukhim R, Getz G, Nghiemphu L, Barretina J, Hsueh T, Linhart D, Vivanco I, Lee JC, Huang JH, Alexander S et al: Assessing the significance of chromosomal aberrations in cancer: methodology and application to glioma. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2007, 104(50):20007-20012.

Further posts on CANCER and GENOMICS and Sequencing published on the site include:

The Initiation and Growth of Molecular Biology and Genomics

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

LEADERS in Genome Sequencing of Genetic Mutations for Therapeutic Drug Selection in Cancer Personalized Treatment: Part 2

Paradigm Shift in Human Genomics – Predictive Biomarkers and Personalized Medicine – Part 1

Breast Cancer: Genomic profiling to predict Survival: Combination of Histopathology and Gene Expression Analysis

Computational Genomics Center: New Unification of Computational Technologies at Stanford

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

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

Comprehensive Genomic Characterization of Squamous Cell Lung Cancers

Mosaicism’ is Associated with Aging and Chronic Diseases like Cancer: detection of genetic mosaicism could be an early marker for detecting cancer.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1755-148X.2011.00905.x/full

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/02/05/winning-over-cancer-progression-new-oncology-drugs-to-suppress-driver-mutations-vs-passengers-mutations/

Additional references:

[1] Michor F, Iwasa Y, and Nowak MA (2004) Dynamics of cancer

progression. Nature Reviews Cancer 4, 197-205.

[2] Crespi B and Summers K (2005) Evolutionary biology of cancer.

Trends in Ecology and Evolution 20, 545-552.

[3] Merlo LMF, et al. (2006) Cancer as an evolutionary and ecological

process. Nature Reviews Cancer 6, 924-935.

[4] McFarland C, et al. “Accumulation of deleterious passenger mutations

in cancer,” in preparation.

[5] Birkbak NJ, et al. (2011) Paradoxical relationship between

chromosomal instability and survival outcome in cancer. Cancer

Research 71,3447-3452.

Read Full Post »

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

 

“Scientist: Career considerations” Research Category on this Open Access Online Scientific Journal, includes the following articles:

AAAS February 14-18, 2013, Boston: Symposia Cultivating the Science and Scientists for 21st Century Drug Discovery and Development

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/?s=AAAS

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

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/08/01/beyond-the-male-model-an-alternative-female-model-of-science-technology-and-innovation/

Introducing Career Streams into Academic Research

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

GenomeWeb Feature: Careers for Researchers Beyond Academia

January 30, 2013

NEW YORK (GenomeWeb News) – There comes a time for many researchers — and it can be during graduate school, while a postdoc, or even later in their careers — when they realize that academia is not quite for them. It might be because they have a broad interest in science that they want to embrace or because competing for increasingly smaller slices of the grant pie has become wearisome.

According to a report put together by the Biomedical Research Workforce Working Group at the National Institutes of Health last June, fewer than half of the biomedical PhDs who trained in the US enter academia. Much of the other 57 percent still work, though, in science or science-related fields. About 30 percent of US-trained PhDs work in industry, both in research and non-research capacities, and, while about 18 percent of US-trained PhDs are no longer researchers, many of them have jobs where such a background is necessary.

“There are a lot of different ways to be successful,” Sara Cullinan, the deputy editor of the American Journal of Human Genetics, said. “If you are not happy running a research program, you are not going to be successful, so you should find something that will make you happy.”

There are a number of career options for PhD scientists, even outside of academia — industry, academic journals, patent law, or government could all beckon, among scores of others. While people working in these fields apply their scientific background in different ways, certain traits are common, including being able to work in teams as well as having good communication skills, and, of course, it helps to be highly motivated.

Industrial Approach

Many researchers looking to move on from academia turn to see what industry has to offer. Tina Hambuch, a staff scientist at Illumina who directs their professional service group, said she was not necessarily looking to leave academia, she was just curious about the opportunities in industry.

“It wasn’t something that I was planning on, leaving academia, but I certainly recognized that there weren’t necessarily the kinds of opportunities to be successful in academia that would allow everybody to stay in it,” she said. “And there definitely were also some things about academia that were less attractive to me. Industry offered some opportunities to … work in a more collaborative, team-oriented environment, rather than having to be on your own, running a lab, getting your grants, all by yourself.”
To make the switch, she said she searched for companies that were in line with her focus, finding positions first at Ambry Genetics and then at Illumina. Hambuch added that her manager helped ease her transition by clearly laying out what was expected of her and where she fit into the company. Paul Bianchi, the senior vice president of human resources at Illumina, adds that the company offers an orientation process to acclimate new hires to company life and their place in it.

Life in industry, Hambuch said, has many parallels to life in academia. There is a process to develop projects that she said is strikingly like applying for a grant; it just goes by a different name, in this case, project development process. “I’d say the biggest difference in terms of what my normal day looks like is that I have lot more interaction with other people these days,” she said.

And because of that, she added, communication skills are important for people looking to work in industry, as is being able to see the big picture. Additionally, she said, being motivated and “being able to actually take a project from start to finish — ‘finish’ can look a little different in industry than it does in academia, but there still is a finish and it is defined and so being able to get to that point is important.”

Marshaling Manuscripts

Another place to which PhD scientists head, to put their scientific skills to use outside of research, is to a journal.

Cullinan, from AJHG, recalled reading once in Science about alternative careers as a journal editor, and it just stuck in her head, even as she pursued a postdoc. “Instead of narrowing my interests onto one thing that I thought I was going to develop a research program on, I actually became even more interested in everything,” she said of her postdoc time.

Cullinan was doing her postdoc in Boston, where Cell Press and a Nature editorial office are located, and she kept a look out for any openings there. She adds that she didn’t know too much about being a journal editor when she did interview for a position, though she had spoken to a few editors at meetings. Nevertheless, she said she felt confident it was a job she could do and would like.

“The idea that someone would pay me to sit around and think about science and not do it was kind of cool,” she said.

And most of her day is now spent thinking about science. Cullinan reads and evaluates manuscripts as they come in, determining if they are a good fit with her journal and whether or not they should go out for peer review. If the manuscript is going to go out for review, she finds reviewers and organizes that process.

“At some point, you make a decision, and if [the manuscript] is going to be revised, you tell the authors: here are the reviewer’s comments, here are also things that I would like you to do or things that production would like you to do, ” she said. “And then you wait and sometime later the manuscript comes back and although you may remember it, you have to re-read it again, probably a couple of times, to see what they’ve done, and maybe it needs to be reviewed again.”

With so many moving parts, organization and time management are key skills for journal editors to have, she said, adding that the day can quickly become long if the editor isn’t focused.

At the same time, being able to communicate well is also important. “I don’t think you have to be an extrovert, but you do have to able to speak with and enjoy speaking with other people,” Cullinan said, adding that “in addition to the day-to-day email and phone calls with authors and reviewers, we do go to meetings, and you are there not only to learn about the science, but to represent the journal.”

The Legal Path

After a little more schooling, researchers with PhDs could go into patent law.

When Janis Fraser, now a principal attorney at Fish & Richardson in Boston, was working on her dissertation, she realized that she liked doing the literature research and writing about the science. Later, a friend suggested that she might be interested in patent law, which she then pursued.

“I get to use my science every day, and I am still a science geek — it’s still my soul — but I am not hunched over a bench dripping things into tubes and having experiments sometimes work and sometimes not work,” Fraser said. “Instead, I get to learn about the science, which is really the exciting thing for me.”

But to be an attorney, law school is a must. David Lu, who has a PhD, is taking the technology specialist path. By day, he works at Lando & Anastasi, also a Boston law firm, helping to draft patent applications. At night, though, he attends law school classes. This way, the firms have attorneys with backgrounds in science and the scientists become trained in the law.

“It’s a horrible amount of work,” adds Fraser, who went to law school full-time, adding that it is “a very attractive route to someone who has the stomach for all that work.” But, she adds, people who have already taken seven or so years to receive their PhD may not want to put off a career, and a salary, for another three years.

Patent attorneys early in their careers, like Lu, draft patent applications as well as responses to the United States Patent and Trademark Office and possibly even foreign patent offices. He works with clients in the personalized medicine and genomics areas. “The learning curve at the beginning is really steep, so you have to learn a lot of things very quickly,” he said.

Fraser, who is further along in her career, oversees newer attorneys who draft patent applications, advises clients, and argues with the patent office.

“Once the patent office gets hold of [the application] and comes back with this rejection, saying, ‘Here’s why your invention isn’t patentable,’ and gives all the reasons, then that’s the real challenge,” Fraser said.

Her role then is to convince the patent examiner that the invention is patentable. “So there’s delving into the scientific literature to find factual evidence that shows that the examiners’ assumptions are wrong and using legal arguments to say the examiner is misinterpreting the law and should be applying the law in this way instead of that way,” she added. “That’s a lot of fun and a big challenge, too.”

As patent lawyers spend a lot of time drafting applications and responses as well as working with clients, being a good writer and having good interpersonal skills is important, both Fraser and Lu said.

“You don’t have to know anything about law before you get started — you get trained in the law — but you do have to already come to it as an excellent writer and have a deep understanding of science and scientific principles and logic,” Fraser said. “You have to be able to craft persuasive arguments that go from A to B to C to D in logical way, inexorably leading the reader to the conclusion you want them to come to.”

Directing Funding

Researchers who are a little further along in their careers could consider becoming a program director at a funding agency. At the US National Science Foundation, most program directors have spent about six years running their own research program, though there are other positions at such agencies for people with different levels of experience.

Jane Silverthorne became a program director at NSF — she is now the director of the Division of Integrative Organismal Systems — after serving on a review panel, though not without a little prodding.

After the panel, that division director came up to her and said that she thought that Silverthorne would make a good program director and asked if she would be interested. “And I said what everybody always says when we ask them that, which is: ‘I’d love to, but just not right now,'” Silverthorne said.

That director then asked her the following year as well, and when Silverthorne put her off again, the director said she would continue to call her. “That’s exactly what she did, and one day I said yes,” Silverthorne added. “I came here for a year and I never left.”

Many program directors at NSF are academic researchers that are on loan from their home institution for a period of time, but others are in permanent positions. That reliance on academia and that “structure also gives NSF a unique feel from other government agencies,” noted Lily Whiteman, the senior public affairs officer at NSF.

When Silverthorne moved into a permanent position, she oversaw the plant genome research program. “I came to NSF for the opportunity to run that program and get a better sense of how NSF works,” she said. As a permanent program director she gave up the opportunity to run her own research program, “but what you get in return is the opportunity to help shape a whole field and help support other people’s research and help their programs thrive,” she added.

Panels at NSF are advisory; it’s the program director that makes funding recommendations in conjunction with the division director. “It ensures that the scientific expert is actually recommending the funding, and then the division director will look at some of the other issues along with the program director, for example, ensuring that we have a balance in the awards that we are making with regards to science and demographics and geographical area, and so on,” Silverthorne said.

As program directors work with division directors and panels, the ability to work as part of a team is an important trait for a program director to have, as is being a good listener and not being afraid to take risks.

“A very important role a program director can play is in looking at scientific opportunities and recognizing an area that is nascent, potentially transformative … and being willing to make some kind of investment in that, to give it a chance to demonstrate whether in fact it can do that,” Silverthorne added.

If leaving academia and going into a new field seems a bit daunting, keep in mind that many people in those fields have been through a similar process.

“When you are in the lab and you are having these thoughts, your colleagues are not, and so it is kind of this semi-private thing going on in your head,” AJHG’s Cullinan said. “You go and you work and, if you are some place like Nature or Science or Cell Press, everyone else that you work with went through the same thing, and you find people that you have a lot in common with even beyond the fact that you all have science training.”

Ciara Curtin is GenomeWeb’s science features editor as well as the editor of the Daily Scan and Careers blogs. E-mail Ciara Curtinand follow @DailyScan, and @CareersGW on Twitter.

Read Full Post »

State of the art in oncologic imaging of lungs.

Author and Curator: Dror Nir, PhD

This is the second post in a series in which I will address the state of the art in oncologic imaging based on a review paper; Advances in oncologic imaging that provides updates on the latest approaches to imaging of 5 common cancers: breast, lung, prostate, colorectal cancers, and lymphoma. This paper is published at CA Cancer J Clin 2012. © 2012 American Cancer Society.

The paper gives a fair description of the use of imaging in interventional oncology based on literature review of more than 200 peer-reviewed publications.

In this post I summaries the chapter on lung cancer imaging.

Lung Cancer Imaging

“Lung cancer remains the most common cause of death from cancer worldwide, having resulted in 1.38 million deaths (18.2% of all cancer deaths) in 2008.48 It also represents the leading cause of death in smokers and the leading cause of cancer mortality in men and women in the United States. In 2012, it was estimated that 226,160 new cases of lung cancer would be diagnosed (accounting for about 14% of cancer diagnoses) and that lung cancer would cause 160,340 deaths (about 29% of cancer deaths in men and 26% of cancer deaths in women) in the United States.1 The 1-year relative survival rate for the disease increased from 35% to 43% from 1975 through 1979 to 2003 through 2006.49 The 5-year survival rate is 53% for disease that is localized when first detected, but only 15% of lung cancers are diagnosed at this early stage.”

For cancer with such poor survival rates removal of the primary lesion by surgery at an early-stage disease is the best option. The current perception in regards to lung cancr is that patients may have subclinical disease for years before presentation. It is also known that early lung cancer lesions; adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) and minimally invasive adenocarcinoma (MIA) are slow-growing, doubling time which can exceed 2 years.52 But, since at present, no lung cancer early-detection biomarker is clinically available, the diagnosis of this disease is primarily based on symptoms, and detection often occurs after curative intervention and when it’s already too late – see: Update on biomarkers for the detection of lung cancer and also Diagnosing lung cancer in exhaled breath using gold nanoparticles. Until biomarker is found, the burden of screening for this disease is on imaging.

“AIS and MIA generally appear as a single peripheral ground-glass nodule on CT. A small solid component may be present if areas of alveolar collapse or fibroblastic proliferation are present,5051 but any solid component should raise concern for a more invasive lesion (Fig. 8). Growth over time on imaging can often be difficult to assess due to the long doubling time of these AIS and MIA, which can exceed 2 years.52 However, indicators other than growth, such as air bronchograms, increasing density, and pleural retraction within a ground-glass nodule are suggestive of AIS or MIA.

CT image shows a ground glass nodule, which is the typical appearance of AIS, in the right upper lobe.

CT image shows a ground glass nodule, which is the typical appearance of AIS, in the right upper lobe.

 

CT (A) demonstrated extensive consolidation with air bronchograms in the left upper lobe, which at surgical resection were found to represent adenocarcinoma of mixed subtype with predominate (70%) mucinous bronchioloalveolar subtype. PET imaging in the same patient (B) demonstrated uptake in the lingula higher than expected for bronchioloalveolar carcinoma and probably due to secondary inflammation/infection. CT (C) obtained 3 years after images (A) and (B) demonstrated biopsy-proven recurrent soft-tissue mass near surgical site. Fused FDG/PET images (D) demonstrate no uptake in the area. This finding is consistent with the decreased uptake usually seen in tumors of bronchioloalveolar histology (new terminology of MIA).

CT (A) demonstrated extensive consolidation with air bronchograms in the left upper lobe, which at surgical resection were found to represent adenocarcinoma of mixed subtype with predominate (70%) mucinous bronchioloalveolar subtype. PET imaging in the same patient (B) demonstrated uptake in the lingula higher than expected for bronchioloalveolar carcinoma and probably due to secondary inflammation/infection. CT (C) obtained 3 years after images (A) and (B) demonstrated biopsy-proven recurrent soft-tissue mass near surgical site. Fused FDG/PET images (D) demonstrate no uptake in the area. This finding is consistent with the decreased uptake usually seen in tumors of bronchioloalveolar histology (new terminology of MIA).

In August 2011 the results of the “National Lung Screening Trial “ which was funded by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) were published in NEJM; Reduced Lung-Cancer Mortality with Low-Dose Computed Tomographic Screening. This randomized study results showed that with low-dose CT screening of high-risk persons, there was a significant reduction of 20% in the mortality rate from lung cancer as compared to chest radiographs screening.

Based on these results one can find the following information regarding Lung Cancer Screening on the NCI web-site:

Three screening tests have been studied to see if they decrease the risk of dying from lung cancer.

The following screening tests have been studied to see if they decrease the risk of dying from lung cancer:

  • Chest x-ray: An x-ray of the organs and bones inside the chest. An x-ray is a type of energy beam that can go through the body and onto film, making a picture of areas inside the body.
  • Sputum cytology: Sputum cytology is a procedure in which a sample of sputum (mucus that is coughed up from the lungs) is viewed under a microscope to check for cancer cells.
  • Low-dose spiral CT scan (LDCT scan): A procedure that uses low-dose radiation to make a series of very detailed pictures of areas inside the body. It uses an x-ray machine that scans the body in a spiral path. The pictures are made by a computer linked to the x-ray machine. This procedure is also called a low-dose helical CT scan.

Screening with low-dose spiral CT scans has been shown to decrease the risk of dying from lung cancer in heavy smokers.

A lung cancer screening trial studied people aged 55 years to 74 years who had smoked at least 1 pack of cigarettes per day for 30 years or more. Heavy smokers who had quit smoking within the past 15 years were also studied. The trial used chest x-rays or low-dose spiral CT scans (LDCT) scans to check for signs of lung cancer.

LDCT scans were better than chest x-rays at finding early-stage lung cancer. Screening with LDCT also decreased the risk of dying from lung cancer in current and former heavy smokers.

Guide is available for patients and doctors to learn more about the benefits and harms of low-dose helical CT screening for lung cancer.

Screening with chest x-rays or sputum cytology does not decrease the risk of dying from lung cancer.

Chest x-ray and sputum cytology are two screening tests that have been used to check for signs of lung cancer. Screening with chest x-ray, sputum cytology, or both of these tests does not decrease the risk of dying from lung cancer.

The authors of Advances in oncologic imaging found out that for pre-treatment staging and post treatment follow-up of lung cancer patients mainly involves CT (preferably contrast enhanced, FDG PET and PET/CT. “Integrated PET/CT has been found to be more accurate than PET alone, CT alone, or visual correlation of PET and CT for staging NSCLC (Non-small-cell lung carcinoma).59 “

The standard treatment of choice for localized disease remains surgical resection with or without chemo-radiation therapy (stage dependant). “The current recommendations for routine follow-up after complete resection of NSCLC are as follows: for 2 years following surgery a contrast-enhanced chest CT scan every 4 to 6 months and then yearly non-contrast chest CT scans.62 Detection of recurrence on CT is the primary goal in the initial years, and therefore, optimally, a contrast-enhanced scan should be obtained to evaluate the mediastinum. In subsequent years, when identifying an early second primary lung cancer becomes of more clinical importance, a non-contrast CT chest scan suffices to evaluate the lung parenchyma.

CT (A) of 78-year-old male who was status post–left lobe lobectomy and left upper lobe wedge resection shows recurrent nodule at the surgical resection site. Fused PET/CT (B) demonstrates increased [18F]FDG uptake in the corresponding nodule at the surgical resection site consistent with recurrent tumor.

CT (A) of 78-year-old male who was status post–left lobe lobectomy and left upper lobe wedge resection shows recurrent nodule at the surgical resection site. Fused PET/CT (B) demonstrates increased [18F]FDG uptake in the corresponding nodule at the surgical resection site consistent with recurrent tumor.

In patients undergoing chemotherapies: “ [18F]FDG PET response correlates with histologic response.63 [18F]FDG PET scan data can provide an early readout of response to chemotherapy in patients with advanced-stage lung cancer.64

In patients treated by recently developed “Targeted Therapies” such as Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) the authors found out that PET/CT is the preferred imaging modality for post treatment follow-up.

“ Most patients treated with pulmonary ablation will have had a pre-procedure CT or a fusion PET/CT scan, which allows more precise anatomic localization of abnormalities seen on PET. Generally, either CT or PET/CT is performed within a few weeks of the procedure to provide a new baseline to which future images can be compared to assess for changes in size, degree of enhancement or [18F]FDG avidity.67

CT (A) demonstrates new left upper lobe mass representing new primary NSCLC in a patient who had a status post–right pneumonectomy for a prior NSCLC. CT (B) obtained in the same patient 2 weeks after radiofrequency ablation (RFA) demonstrates the postablation density in the left upper lobe. Fused PET/CT (C) obtained 4 months after RFA demonstrates mild [18F]FDG uptake at RFA site in the left upper lobe consistent with posttreatment inflammation. Fused PET/CT (D) obtained 7 months after RFA demonstrates new focal [18F]FDG uptake at post-RFA-opacity consistent with recurrent tumor.

CT (A) demonstrates new left upper lobe mass representing new primary NSCLC in a patient who had a status post–right pneumonectomy for a prior NSCLC. CT (B) obtained in the same patient 2 weeks after radiofrequency ablation (RFA) demonstrates the postablation density in the left upper lobe. Fused PET/CT (C) obtained 4 months after RFA demonstrates mild [18F]FDG uptake at RFA site in the left upper lobe consistent with posttreatment inflammation. Fused PET/CT (D) obtained 7 months after RFA demonstrates new focal [18F]FDG uptake at post-RFA-opacity consistent with recurrent tumor.

Prostate Cancer Imaging

To be followed…

Other research papers related to the management of Lung cancer were published on this Scientific Web site:

Diagnosing lung cancer in exhaled breath using gold nanoparticles

Lung Cancer (NSCLC), drug administration and nanotechnology

Non-small Cell Lung Cancer drugs – where does the Future lie?

Comprehensive Genomic Characterization of Squamous Cell Lung Cancers

Read Full Post »

State of the art in oncologic imaging of breast.

Author-Writer: Dror Nir, PhD

Screen Shot 2021-07-19 at 7.28.07 PM

Word Cloud By Danielle Smolyar

In the coming posts I will address the state of the art in oncologic imaging based on a review paper; Advances in oncologic imaging that provides updates on the latest approaches to imaging of 5 common cancers: breast, lung, prostate, colorectal cancers, and lymphoma. This paper is published at CA Cancer J Clin 2012. © 2012 American Cancer Society.

The paper gives a fair description of the use of imaging in interventional oncology based on literature review of more than 200 peer-reviewed publications.

In this post I summaries the chapter on breast cancer imaging.

Breast Cancer Imaging

As a start the authors describes the evolution in the ACS imaging guidelines for breast cancer screening. Most interesting to learn is how age limits are changing. The most recent: “In 2010, the Society of Breast Imaging and the Breast Imaging Commission of the ACS issued recommendations for breast cancer screening to provide guidance in light of the controversies and emerging technologies.5 These recommendations were based on multiple prospective randomized trials as well as population-based experience.

Recommendations for screening with non-mammographic imaging are based not on evidence showing mortality reduction but largely on surrogate indicators, i.e., tumor size and nodal status, suggesting improved survival compared with women who are not screened.” I have referred to these guidelines in my recent post: Not applying evidence-based medicine drives up the costs of screening for breast-cancer in the USA.

As long as imaging interpretation is based mainly on observations related to lesion morphology:

“The imaging characteristics of malignant lesions are nonspecific and usually do not allow a definitive diagnosis. When a biopsy is recommended based on mammography, it has a 25% to 45% likelihood of resulting in a diagnosis of carcinoma.11 Similar positive predictive values are reported for biopsies recommended based on MRI.”

It is worthwhile noting that these results do not reflect purely the specificity of the imaging device but rather the specificity of the whole workflow; i.e imaging, biopsy and histopathology. All imaging techniques have false negatives: Mammography screening of general population misses approximately 20% of the cancers. This rate increases as breast density increases. MRI is not applied to general population. When applied to highly suspicious cases MRI misses ~10% of the invasive cancers. Although ultrasound has proven to be useful in detecting cancer especially in women with dense breasts: Automated Breast Ultrasound System (‘ABUS’) for full breast scanning: The beginning of structuring a solution for an acute need! Based on the literature reviewed by the authors of this paper they do not recommend routine sonography for these women.

For women with locally advanced breast cancer (Fig. 2) who undergo neoadjuvant therapy before breast surgery, the authors recommends post-treatment staging using MRI, which has been found to predict complete response with sensitivity above 60% and specificity as high as 90%.26

A 27-year-old female with locally advanced poorly differentiated invasive ductal carcinoma underwent evaluation of extent of disease before starting neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Sagittal fat-suppressed T1-weighted postcontrast MR images demonstrate an almost 6-cm heterogeneously enhancing mass (A) involving the skin of the lower breast (arrow) with (B) right axillary (arrow) and (C) right internal mammary adenopathy (arrow).

A 27-year-old female with locally advanced poorly differentiated invasive ductal carcinoma underwent evaluation of extent of disease before starting neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Sagittal fat-suppressed T1-weighted postcontrast MR images demonstrate an almost 6-cm heterogeneously enhancing mass (A) involving the skin of the lower breast (arrow) with (B) right axillary (arrow) and (C) right internal mammary adenopathy (arrow).

Same is recommended for women who have undergone lumpectomy if the surgical margins are positive. As post therapy follow-up, a new baseline mammogram of the treated breast is recommended followed by annual mammography.

In regards to emerging technology the following are discussed: Mammographic tomosynthesis – see also Improving Mammography-based imaging for better treatment planning

Contrast-enhanced digital mammography – “involves the injection of iodinated contrast material, as is done for computed tomography (CT); this enables hypervascular lesions to be seen with modified mammography technology, potentially providing the same information obtained through MRI. Little has been published on the clinical application of this technology, but diagnostic accuracy better than that of mammography and approaching that of MRI has been reported.3132

MR choline spectroscopy – has been shown to improve the positive predictive value of breast MRI and may be useful in reducing the number of lesions that require biopsy (Fig. 4).33 Studies of spectroscopy have reported sensitivities of 70% to 100% and specificities of 67% to 100% in the detection of breast cancer. Decreasing choline concentrations may also be a useful indication of tumor response to treatment before any change in tumor volume can be detected.3435 Technical factors have limited the use of spectroscopy to lesions 1 cm in size or larger.”

Sagittal fat-suppressed T1-weighted postcontrast MR image is shown (A) of the right breast of a 48-year-old female who was status post–contralateral mastectomy for DCIS with the spectroscopy voxel placed over an enhancing mass (arrow). The magnified spectrum (B) demonstrated no choline peak. Biopsy yielded fibroadenoma.

Sagittal fat-suppressed T1-weighted postcontrast MR image is shown (A) of the right breast of a 48-year-old female who was status post–contralateral mastectomy for DCIS with the spectroscopy voxel placed over an enhancing mass (arrow). The magnified spectrum (B) demonstrated no choline peak. Biopsy yielded fibroadenoma.

Diffusion-weighted MRI (DW-MRI) – “adding DW-MRI data to other imaging characteristics of lesions on breast MRI may increase the positive predictive value of the examination, in turn decreasing the number of benign lesions requiring biopsy for diagnosis.” See also Imaging: seeing or imagining? (Part 2).

Axial T1-weighted fat-suppressed postcontrast MR image is shown (A) of the left breast of a 42-year-old female with biopsy-proven contralateral cancer undergoing evaluation of disease extent. An enhancing mass (arrow) was seen in the left breast. This mass (arrow) was also demonstrated on the axial diffusion-weighted MR image (B). Biopsy yielded fibroadenoma with atypical ductal hyperplasia and lobular carcinoma in situ.

Axial T1-weighted fat-suppressed postcontrast MR image is shown (A) of the left breast of a 42-year-old female with biopsy-proven contralateral cancer undergoing evaluation of disease extent. An enhancing mass (arrow) was seen in the left breast. This mass (arrow) was also demonstrated on the axial diffusion-weighted MR image (B). Biopsy yielded fibroadenoma with atypical ductal hyperplasia and lobular carcinoma in situ.

Ultrasound-elastography – “Ultrasound elastography has been reported to differentiate benign from malignant breast lesions with sensitivities of 78% to 100% and specificities of 21% to 98%.39 When added to other US techniques, it may improve radiologists’ performance in distinguishing malignant breast lesions.”

Positron emission tomography (PET) – “alone or combined with CT, allows noninvasive, quantitative assessment of biochemical and functional processes at the molecular level in the body. It is most often performed with the radiolabeled glucose analogue [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose ([18F]FDG) to detect the elevated glucose metabolism that is a hallmark of cancer. In breast cancer, its utility depends on the pretest probability for advanced disease, and thus the clinical stage.” The authors found that the use of [18F] FDG PET to patients with stage I and II disease is “limited”. Specifically, they claim that it is not sufficiently accurate for axillary nodal staging in this subset of patients.40 The did find enough evidence to recommend the use of FDG PET in patients with advanced disease: “where it accurately defines disease extent,41 and frequently eliminates the need for other imaging tests, and provides an early readout of treatment response as well as prognostic information.”

Combined PET/MRI is mentioned as a promising technology for predicting response to therapy “but this remains to be proven”.

Positron emission mammography (PEM) – “adapts full-body PET imaging to the breast. In a multicenter study, the interpretation of PEM in conjunction with mammographic and clinical findings yielded a sensitivity of 91% and a specificity of 93% for breast cancer.47 “. However, the authors mention that its use for screening (applying to healthy women) has been criticized because of the need to administer a radioactive tracer.

Lung Cancer Imaging

To be followed…

Other research papers related to the management of breast cancer were published on this Scientific Web site:

The unfortunate ending of the Tower of Babel construction project and its effect on modern imaging-based cancer patients’ management

 Automated Breast Ultrasound System (‘ABUS’) for full breast scanning: The beginning of structuring a solution for an acute need!

Introducing smart-imaging into radiologists’ daily practice.

Will Bio-Tech make Medical Imaging redundant?

Improving Mammography-based imaging for better treatment planning

Not applying evidence-based medicine drives up the costs of screening for breast-cancer in the USA.

New Imaging device bears a promise for better quality control of breast-cancer lumpectomies – considering the cost impact

Harnessing Personalized Medicine for Cancer Management, Prospects of Prevention and Cure: Opinions of Cancer Scientific Leaders @ http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com

Predicting Tumor Response, Progression, and Time to Recurrence

“The Molecular pathology of Breast Cancer Progression”

Personalized medicine gearing up to tackle cancer

Whole-body imaging as cancer screening tool; answering an unmet clinical need?

What could transform an underdog into a winner?

Mechanism involved in Breast Cancer Cell Growth: Function in Early Detection & Treatment

Nanotech Therapy for Breast Cancer

A Strategy to Handle the Most Aggressive Breast Cancer: Triple-negative Tumors

Optical Coherent Tomography – emerging technology in cancer patient management

Breakthrough Technique Images Breast Tumors in 3-D With Great Clarity, Reduced Radiation

Closing the Mammography gap

Imaging: seeing or imagining? (Part 1)

Imaging: seeing or imagining? (Part 2)

 

Read Full Post »

Improving Mammography-based imaging for better treatment planning

Author and Curator: Dror Nir, PhD

Many of the comments made on my last posts: New Imaging device bears a promise for better quality control of breast-cancer lumpectomies – considering the cost impact , Not applying evidence-based medicine drives up the costs of screening for breast-cancer in the USA, Optical Coherent Tomography – emerging technology in cancer patient management

Were related to the benefit of better planning lumpectomies based on priory knowledge of the lesions’ size and location. The main challenge in using imaging as a tool for treatment planning is the devices’ specificity; i.e. the probability of identifying healthy tissue as malignant. The reason is the wish to avoid unnecessarily large excisions. When discussing the use of “popular” non-ionizing devises such as MRI in breast-imaging; e.g. my post introducing smart-imaging into radiologists’ daily practice I mentioned the low specificity of MRI in that respect. So, if one is reluctant to use ultrasound, for example due to its large inter observer variability and want to rely on the Mammography based work-flow, what new modalities are available?

Stereoscopic digital mammography

Stereoscopic digital mammography (SDM) uses a pair of digital mammograms, taken from slightly different angles and a stereo display workstation loaded with image-analysis software, to create a three-dimensional image of the internal structure of each breast. The resulting stereo image reveals more detail within the breast tissue than a standard two-dimensional mammogram.

Stero-mammography

Radiologist interacting with a stereo digital mammography workstation. (Credit: Image courtesy of Radiological Society of North America)

Recently published materials:

Abstract

Stereoscopic Digital Mammography: Improved Specificity and Reduced Rate of Recall in a Prospective Clinical Trial

Carl J. D’Orsi, MDDavid J. Getty, PhDIoannis Sechopoulos, PhDMary S. Newell, MDKathleen R. Gundry, MD, Sandra R. Bates, MDRobert M. Nishikawa, PhDEdward A. Sickles, MD, Andrew Karellas, PhD and Ellen M. D’Orsi, RT(R)(M)

Purpose: To compare stereoscopic digital mammography (DM) with standard DM for the rate of patient recall and the detection of cancer in a screening population at elevated risk for breast cancer.

 Materials and Methods: Starting in September 2004 and ending in December 2007, this prospective HIPAA-compliant, institutional review board–approved screening trial, with written informed consent, recruited female patients at elevated risk for breast cancer (eg, personal history of breast cancer or breast cancer in a close relative). A total of 1298 examinations from 779 patients (mean age, 58.6 years; range, 32–91 years) comprised the analyzable data set. A paired study design was used, with each enrolled patient serving as her own control. Patients underwent both DM and stereoscopic DM examinations in a single visit, findings of which were interpreted independently by two experienced radiologists, each using a Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) assessment (BI-RADS category 0, 1, or 2). All patients determined to have one or more findings with either or both modalities were recalled for standard diagnostic evaluation. The results of 1-year follow-up or biopsy were used to determine case truth.

 Results: Compared with DM, stereoscopic DM showed significantly higher specificity (91.2% [1167 of 1279] vs 87.8% [1123 of 1279]; P = .0024) and accuracy (90.9% [1180 of 1298] vs 87.4% [1135 of 1298]; P = .0023) for detection of cancer. Sensitivity for detection of cancer was not significantly different for stereoscopic DM (68.4% [13 of 19]) compared with DM (63.2% [12 of 19], P .99). The recall rate for stereoscopic DM was 9.6% (125 of 1298) and that for DM was 12.9% (168 of 1298) (P = .0018).

Conclusion: Compared with DM, stereoscopic DM significantly improved specificity for detection of cancer, while maintaining comparable sensitivity. The recall rate was significantly reduced with stereoscopic DM compared with DM.

 

Digital Breast Tomosynthesis

Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT) entered the Breast-Imaging field few years ago. Early 2011, a digital mammography device by Hologic aimed at improving the specificity of mammography was approved by the FDA as a tool that may improve cancer detection while reducing the number of patient recalls.

The DBT device takes 15 successive images, each at a slightly different angle along an arc across the breast. The concept is simple: What is hidden behind fibroglandular tissue in one image might be visible in another if the angle is slightly different (Figure bellow).

Figure. (a) A suspicious lesion seen on standard 2D digital mammography (far left). (b) After examining multiple slices generated using breast tomosynthesis (5 images), the lesion seen on 2D (far left) is determined to be a false positive. (Images courtesy of Hologic. Used with permission.)

Figure. (a) A suspicious lesion seen on standard 2D digital mammography (far left). (b) After examining multiple slices generated using breast tomosynthesis (5 images), the lesion seen on 2D (far left) is determined to be a false positive. (Images courtesy of Hologic. Used with permission.)

Out of recent publications related to the incorporation of DBT in breast-cancer management I picked up the following two:

Abstract

Comparison of Digital Mammography Alone and Digital Mammography Plus Tomosynthesis in a Population-based Screening Program

Per Skaane, MD, PhD, Andriy I. Bandos, PhD, Randi Gullien, RT, Ellen B. Eben, MD, Ulrika Ekseth, MD, Unni Haakenaasen, MD, Mina Izadi, MD, Ingvild N. Jebsen, MD, Gunnar Jahr, MD, Mona Krager, MD, Loren T. Niklason, PhD, Solveig Hofvind, PhD and David Gur, ScD

 

Purpose: To assess cancer detection rates, false-positive rates before arbitration, positive predictive values for women recalled after arbitration, and the type of cancers detected with use of digital mammography alone and combined with tomosynthesis in a large prospective screening trial.

 Materials and Methods: A prospective, reader- and modality-balanced screening study of participants undergoing combined mammography plus tomosynthesis, the results of which were read independently by four different radiologists, is under way. The study was approved by a regional ethics committee, and all participants provided written informed consent. The authors performed a preplanned interim analysis of results from 12631 examinations interpreted by using mammography alone and mammography plus tomosynthesis from November 22, 2010, to December 31, 2011. Analyses were based on marginal log-linear models for binary data, accounting for correlated interpretations and adjusting for reader-specific performance levels by using a two-sided significance level of .0294.

 Results: Detection rates, including those for invasive and in situ cancers, were 6.1 per 1000 examinations for mammography alone and 8.0 per 1000 examinations for mammography plus tomosynthesis (27% increase, adjusted for reader; P = .001). False-positive rates before arbitration were 61.1 per 1000 examinations with mammography alone and 53.1 per 1000 examinations with mammography plus tomosynthesis (15% decrease, adjusted for reader; P < .001). After arbitration, positive predictive values for recalled patients with cancers verified later were comparable (29.1% and 28.5%, respectively, with mammography alone and mammography plus tomosynthesis; P = .72). Twenty-five additional invasive cancers were detected with mammography plus tomosynthesis (40% increase, adjusted for reader; P < .001). The mean interpretation time was 45 seconds for mammography alone and 91 seconds for mammography plus tomosynthesis (P < .001).

 Conclusion: The use of mammography plus tomosynthesis in a screening environment resulted in a significantly higher cancer detection rate and enabled the detection of more invasive cancers.

©RSNA, 2013, Clinical trial registration no. NCT01248546

Summary of the results:

  • Twenty-five additional invasive cancers were detected with mammography plus tomosynthesis — a 40% increase.
  • Detection rates, including those for invasive and in situ can­cers, were 6.1 per 1,000 examinations for mammography alone and eight per 1,000 examinations for mammography plus tomosynthesis — a 27% increase.
  • False-positive rates before arbitration were 61.1 per 1,000 examinations with mammography alone and 53.1 per 1,000 examinations with mammography plus tomosynthe­sis — a 15% decrease.
  • After arbitration, positive predictive values for recalled patients with cancers verified later were comparable (29.1% with mammography alone and 28.5% with mam­mography plus tomosynthesis).
  • Mean interpretation time was 45 seconds for mammography alone and 91 seconds for mammography plus tomosynthesis.

 

 

Abstract

Digital Breast Tomosynthesis versus Supplemental Diagnostic Mammographic Views for Evaluation of Noncalcified Breast Lesions

Margarita L. Zuley, MD, Andriy I. Bandos, PhD,  Marie A. Ganott, MD, Jules H. Sumkin, DO, Amy E. Kelly, MD, Victor J. Catullo, MD, Grace Y. Rathfon, MD, Amy H. Lu, MD and David Gur, ScD

Purpose: To compare the diagnostic performance of breast tomosynthesis versus supplemental mammography views in classification of masses, distortions, and asymmetries.

 Materials and Methods: Eight radiologists who specialized in breast imaging retrospectively reviewed 217 consecutively accrued lesions by using protocols that were HIPAA compliant and institutional review board approved in 182 patients aged 31–60 years (mean, 50 years) who underwent diagnostic mammography and tomosynthesis. The lesions in the cohort included 33% (72 of 217) cancers and 67% (145 of 217) benign lesions. Eighty-four percent (182 of 217) of the lesions were masses, 11% (25 of 217) were asymmetries, and 5% (10 of 217) were distortions that were initially detected at clinical examination in 8% (17 of 217), at mammography in 80% (173 of 217), at ultrasonography (US) in 11% (25 of 217), or at magnetic resonance imaging in 1% (2 of 217). Histopathologic examination established truth in 191 lesions, US revealed a cyst in 12 lesions, and 14 lesions had a normal follow-up. Each lesion was interpreted once with tomosynthesis and once with supplemental mammographic views; both modes included the mediolateral oblique and craniocaudal views in a fully crossed and balanced design by using a five-category Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) assessment and a probability-of-malignancy score. Differences between modes were analyzed with a generalized linear mixed model for BI-RADS–based sensitivity and specificity and with modified Obuchowski-Rockette approach for probability-of-malignancy–based area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.

 Results: Average probability-of-malignancy–based area under the ROC curve was 0.87 for tomosynthesis versus 0.83 for supplemental views (P < .001). With tomosynthesis, the false-positive rate decreased from 85% (989 of 1160) to 74% (864 of 1160) (P < .01) for cases that were rated BI-RADS category 3 or higher and from 57% (663 of 1160) to 48% (559 of 1160) for cases rated BI-RADS category 4 or 5 (P < .01), without a meaningful change in sensitivity. With tomosynthesis, more cancers were classified as BI-RADS category 5 (39% [226 of 576] vs 33% [188 of 576]; P = .017) without a decrease in specificity.

 Conclusion: Tomosynthesis significantly improved diagnostic accuracy for noncalcified lesions compared with supplemental 

 Additional reading

Diagnostic Mammography: Identifying Minimally Acceptable Interpretive Performance Criteria

Breast Cancer: Assessing Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy by Using US-guided Near-Infrared Tomography

Bilateral Contrast-enhanced Dual-Energy Digital Mammography: Feasibility and Comparison with Conventional Digital Mammography and MR Imaging in Women with Known Breast Carcinoma

Other research papers on imaging in cancer patients’ management and cancer-therapeutics were published on this Scientific Web site as follows:

 

The unfortunate ending of the Tower of Babel construction project and its effect on modern imaging-based cancer patients’ management

 

Closing the gap towards real-time, imaging-guided treatment of cancer patients.

 

The unfortunate ending of the Tower of Babel construction project and its effect on modern imaging-based cancer patients’ management

 

Closing the gap towards real-time, imaging-guided treatment of cancer patients.

 

Tumor Imaging and Targeting: Predicting Tumor Response to Treatment: Where we stand?

 

Automated Breast Ultrasound System (‘ABUS’) for full breast scanning: The beginning of structuring a solution for an acute need!

 

Introducing smart-imaging into radiologists’ daily practice.

 

Will Bio-Tech make Medical Imaging redundant?

 

Optical Coherent Tomography – emerging technology in cancer patient management

 

Personalized Pancreatic Cancer Treatment Option

 

Understand how DNA damage is repaired—knowledge that could result in the development of new and more effective drugs for cancer treatment

 

LEADERS in Genome Sequencing of Genetic Mutations for Therapeutic Drug Selection in Cancer Personalized Treatment: Part 2

 

Scientists use natural agents for prostate cancer bone metastasis treatment

 

Harnessing Personalized Medicine for Cancer Management, Prospects of Prevention and Cure: Opinions of Cancer Scientific Leaders @ http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com

 

Predicting Tumor Response, Progression, and Time to Recurrence

 

“The Molecular pathology of Breast Cancer Progression”

 

Personalized medicine gearing up to tackle cancer

 

Whole-body imaging as cancer screening tool; answering an unmet clinical need?

 

Read Full Post »

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

Cancer Diagnostics by Genomic Sequencing: ‘No’ to Sequencing Patient’s DNA, ‘No’ to Sequencing Patient’s Tumor, ‘Yes’ to focus on Gene Mutation Aberration & Analysis of Gene Abnormalities

How to Tailor Cancer Therapy to the particular Genetics of a patient’s Cancer

THIS IS A SERIES OF FOUR POINTS OF VIEW IN SUPPORT OF the Paradigm Shift in Human Genomics

‘No’ to Sequencing Patient’s DNA, ‘No’ to Sequencing Patient’s Tumor, ‘Yes’ to focus on Gene Mutation Aberration & Analysis of Gene Abnormalities

PRESENTED in the following FOUR PARTS. Recommended to be read in its entirety for completeness and arrival to the End Point of Present and Future Frontier of Research in Genomics

Part 1:

Research Paradigm Shift in Human Genomics – Predictive Biomarkers and Personalized Medicine

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/01/13/paradigm-shift-in-human-genomics-predictive-biomarkers-and-personalized-medicine-part-1/

Part 2:

LEADERS in the Competitive Space of Genome Sequencing of Genetic Mutations for Therapeutic Drug Selection in Cancer Personalized Treatment

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/01/13/leaders-in-genome-sequencing-of-genetic-mutations-for-therapeutic-drug-selection-in-cancer-personalized-treatment-part-2/

Part 3:

Personalized Medicine: An Institute Profile – Coriell Institute for Medical Research

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/01/13/personalized-medicine-an-institute-profile-coriell-institute-for-medical-research-part-3/

Part 4:

The Consumer Market for Personal DNA Sequencing

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/01/13/consumer-market-for-personal-dna-sequencing-part-4/

 

Part 3:

Personalized Medicine: Institute Profile – Coriell Institute for Medical Research

Coriell Institute for Medical Research, founded in 1953 and based in Camden, New Jersey, is an independent non-profit research center dedicated to the study of the human genome. Expert staff and pioneering programs in the fields of personalized medicine, cell biology, cytogenetics, genotyping, and biobanking drive our mission.

The emerging field of personalized medicine draws upon a person’s genomic information to tailor treatments and prescription drug dosing to optimize health outcomes. The Coriell Personalized Medicine Collaborative® (CPMC®) research study is seeking to understand the usefulness of genetic risk and pharmacogenomics in clinical decision-making and healthcare management.

Coriell has a distinguished history in cell biology. We are building upon this expertise by playing an important role in induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cell research. Induced pluripotent stem cells are powerful cells which can be made from skin or blood cells, and they are revolutionizing the way human disease is studied and how drugs are developed. Skin cells from a patient diagnosed with heart disease are being genetically reprogrammed into stem cells, and then transformed into beating cardiac cells. Researchers can now examine the heart-diseased cells to better understand the progression of heart disease and develop treatments and cures. Drug efficacy and safety can also be tested in this laboratory environment, providing an efficient model of drug discovery that delivers drugs to patients sooner. This technology, called “disease in a dish,” offers researchers the potential to study the myriad of human diseases, including Alzheimer’s disease, muscular dystrophy, and diabetes.

In addition to pioneering cutting-edge research initiatives, Coriell offers custom research services – including cell culture, cytogenetic analyses, and molecular biology – to the scientific community. Furthermore, Coriell’s Genotyping and Microarray Center is one of the nation’s largest centers, with high-throughput DNA analysis, CLIA-certified genotyping platforms systems from Illumina and Affymetrix.

Essential to the Institute’s support of international scientific research is the Coriell Biobank. From this renowned cell bank, we manage and distribute the world’s most diverse collection of cell lines, DNA, and other biological resources. The Coriell Biobank provided support to the Human Genome Project, a worldwide program to map the entire human genome, and to the International HapMap Project, a project providing an efficient tool to identify disease-causing genes.

The Coriell Cell Repositories provide essential research reagents to the scientific community by establishing, verifying, maintaining, and distributing cell cultures and DNA derived from cell cultures. These collections, supported by funds from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and several foundations, are extensively utilized by research scientists around the world.

The Business Aspects of the Institute

  • Personalized Medicine

DNA, Genes, and SNPs

What is the CPMC Study?

CPMC Technology

CPMC FAQs

CPMC Advisors and Partners

Stem Cells

Induced Pluripotent Stem (iPS) Cells

iPS Cell Research at Coriell

Biobank Catalog

Working with Coriell

  • Research Services

Overview

Biobanking

Cell Culture

Cytogenetics

Genotyping & Microarray

Molecular Biology

Research Design & Expertise

Stem Cells

Quality at Coriell

  • BioBanking

Overview

What is a Biobank?

How Coriell Banks Cells

Biobank Technology

Biobank Catalog

Working with Coriell

http://www.coriell.org/

http://www.coriell.org/assets/pdfs/discover-winter2012.pdf

http://www.ccr.coriell.org/

http://www.coriell.org/about/coriell-faqs

 

What is the Coriell Institute of Medical Research?

Founded in 1953, Coriell Institute for Medical Research is an independent, non-profit research organization dedicated to the study of the human genome and to supporting national and international research by providing biomaterials from its renowned biobank.

How did the Coriell Institute start?

Lewis L. Coriell, MD, PhD, a virology researcher and pediatrician, recognized the need for scientific research that would translate into better patient care. After seeing how his research helped to bring the Salk vaccine to polio patients across our nation, Dr. Coriell founded the South Jersey Medical Research Foundation. It was renamed the Institute for Medical Research in 1966 to recognize its broader reach, and, in 1985, to honor Dr. Coriell’s retirement, his name was added. For a look at our history, visit our timeline.

http://www.coriell.org/about/our-history

About the Founder

“You set up an experiment to test the theory, and most of the time it’s not the way you thought it would be. But that’s the way you learn. You go from hypothesis to hypothesis. And it’s exciting because that’s the way we learn to treat, to diagnose, and to prevent illness.”

Lewis L. Coriell, MD, PhD
Virologist and Pediatrician
June 19, 1911 – June 19, 2001

Lewis L. Coriell was born in the farming community of Sciotoville, in southern Ohio. While he was still a young child, his family moved to Montana toward more promising agricultural opportunities. It has been written that “the aspects of character, personality, temperament, and intellect that marked Dr. Coriell’s exceptional professional life… can easily be traced to his Montana upbringing.”i

Education and Early Career

Beginning his academic journey at the University of Montana, Lewis Coriell completed undergraduate studies in biology and subsequently earned a master’s degree in bacteriology and immunology in 1936. That same year, he married fellow student Ester Lentz; they would remain by each other’s side for the next 60 years. The newlyweds moved to the University of Kansas so he could pursue doctoral studies in immunology. While there, Dr. Coriell published his first article on an aspect of science he would revolutionize: The storage of cells by freezing them. Lewis Coriell earned his doctorate in 1940 and was awarded his medical degree in 1942. The young researcher was drawn to the field of virology – the study of viruses as they evolve and infect. At this time, bacterial infections presented themselves most often in children. This combination led Dr. Coriell to seek out a residency in pediatrics. As none were immediately available, he chose a cardiology residency at Henry Ford Hospital in Detroit. MI. As it happens, the Coriells’ time in Detroit was brief.

By 1943, World War II was raging and Dr. Coriell was called to service with the United States Army Medical Command’s Biological Research Division at Fort Detrick, MD. It was here that his research in cell cultivation began. After the war, Dr. Coriell began his ideal pediatric residency under Dr. Joseph Stokes, Jr., physician-in-chief at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP).  To his delight, Dr. Stokes placed great emphasis on research and was instrumental in attracting federal funds to research childhood disease at his institution.  The ability to translate research into patient care inspired Dr. Coriell.  He saw how research was essential to the treatment of his patients suffering the devastating effects of viruses like small pox, mumps, and polio.

Adventures in Cell Culture

By the time Dr. Coriell arrived in Philadelphia, virologists knew they had to grow viruses in cell culture to prepare purified viruses for the manufacture of vaccines. However, contamination was rife in the laboratory and proving to be a major obstacle. At CHOP, along with his colleagues, Dr. Coriell perfected the technique to culture human tissue in a sterile host that does not produce its own antibodies. The ability to sustain living human cells in culture, and keep them from being contaminated, led to a key breakthrough in polio research – it enabled scientists to grow the polio virus and work toward the first vaccine.

Moving to Camden and Taking on Polio

By the early 1950’s, an acute infectious disease called polio was spreading from person to person very quickly across the United States, striking fear into citizens, costing children their lives and crippling those who survived. In 1949, Dr. Coriell arrived in Camden, NJ, as medical director of Camden Municipal Hospital, one of the country’s last infectious disease hospitals and home to the majority of the region’s polio patients. In 1951, Dr. Coriell was appointed field director of the Polio Prevention Study and directed the successful gamma globulin field trials.

By 1954, the Salk polio vaccine could be made in large quantities and was ready for human clinical trials. Based on his success shepherding the gamma globulin field trials, Dr. Coriell was chosen by the National Poliomyelitis Foundation to evaluate the Salk polio virus vaccine clinical trials in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Virginia. The success of the evaluation program led to the release of the Salk vaccine on the national level. Before the trials began in 1955, approximately 20,000 new polio cases were being reported each year. By 1960, cases were reduced to 3,000 per year. By 1979, that number was just 10 each year. Recognizing his contribution, Dr. Coriell received the 1957 International Poliomyelitis Congress Presidential Medal. Soon after, he became chairman of the Committee on the Control of Infectious Diseases of the American Academy of Pediatrics which formulated the vaccination procedures for all children in this critical period.

In 1953, Dr. Coriell initiated a campaign to build the first non-profit academic medical research institute in South Jersey. Under his guidance, the Institute for Medical Research began research in cancer, human cytogenetics, infectious diseases, and methods to improve cell culture techniques. The history of the Institute’s accomplishments included Dr. Coriell’s foresight in calling for the establishment of a central tissue culture bank and cell registry to certify and maintain cell cultures. It began with a partnership with the National Institutes of Health to create the first standardized cell repository. Today, the Institute is home to the world’s most diverse collection of cell lines and DNA samples available to researchers.

Working with his colleague, Dr. Gary McGarrity, Dr. Coriell applied infection control technology – specifically laminar flow – to create the laminar flow hood that is vital to infection control in laboratories, operating rooms, and hospital rooms around the world.

Dr. Coriell’s pioneering techniques for characterizing, freezing, and storing non-contaminated cell cultures in liquid nitrogen constitute one of the greatest contributions to modern human genetics.

Retirement

Dr. Coriell retired in 1985. To honor the occasion, the institute he founded was renamed the Coriell Institute for Medical Research. He remained involved in several ways, as a member of the board and often speaking with groups about the Institute’s history. Following his retirement, Dr. Coriell was elected president of the prestigious College of Physicians of Philadelphia, the oldest medical society in America. Dr. Coriell is the only New Jersey physician to receive this honor.

Dr. Coriell, a pioneering researcher and physician, died on June 19, 2001, in Southern New Jersey. It was his 90th birthday.

A Legacy in Science

Dr. Coriell’s accomplishments in science are indeed many. Perhaps Dr. Coriell’s most enduring legacy was his generosity in knowledge and his ability to bring scientists together to explore research questions and collaborate on solutions. Several important names in science were drawn to join or spend time at the Institute; they included Warren W. Nichols, Ray Dutcher, Richard Mulivor, Etienne Lasfargues, Jesse Charney, Arthur Greene, Daniel Moore, and collaboration with Drs. Albert Levan and Joe Hin Tijo, who first discovered that humans have 46 chromosomes.

Dr. Coriell also created an institute that is a well-respected resident of the Greater Philadelphia region and known as a leader in research worldwide.

Coriell Today

Dr. Coriell’s vision is now our vision. Today, Coriell staff and scientists collaborate on scientific ideas and programs to improve human health.

The Coriell Personalized Medicine Collaborative® research study is studying the utility of using your genetic information to tailor treatments and medications for you. And building on Dr. Coriell’s innovations in cell biology, we are playing an important role in cutting-edge stem cell research to unlock the code of human disease, including Parkinson’s and heart disease. Coriell offers a range of custom research services that have long supported national and international science. In the field of biobanking, Coriell supports research all over the world from its renowned and diverse cell collections.

Our innovation today is a testament to Dr. Coriell’s pioneering past. More importantly, our innovation is a commitment to your future.

i O’Donnell, John. Coriell; The Coriell Institute for Medical Research and a Half Century of Science. Massachusetts: SHP, 2002.

Where is the Coriell Institute located?

Coriell is located at 403 Haddon Avenue, Camden, NJ 08103. For directions, click here
We recommend that you park at 3 Cooper Plaza, a parking garage associated with the hospital, located directly across the street from Coriell. There is also a second hospital parking lot located on Benson Street, which is a block from the Institute.

For what is the Coriell Institute known?

Coriell Institute is a leader in the emerging field of personalized medicine – often called genome-informed medicine – which is the practice of using genetic information to better understand a patient’s risk for disease and response to medications. The Coriell Personalized Medicine Collaborative is a research study designed to study the utility of genetic information in clinical decision-making and patient care.

Coriell is also playing an important role in exploring the promise of induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cell  biotechnologies. [Pluripotent refers to how cells can grow into many different types of cells.] We can take skin cells and reprogram them – essentially turn back time – to behave like a stem cell. These cells can then be triggered, using specific proteins, to become cardiac cells, neurons (brain cells), or insulin-producing pancreatic cells, amongst others. Over the years, Coriell has developed an extraordinary expertise in the culture of human cells, and much of the standard practices in cell culture were developed at Coriell. This includes the techniques for freezing and thawing cells, and sterile handling of cultures. As a result of our cell biology expertise, scientists from every major research center in the world draw upon the Coriell Cell Repositories, maintained in the world’s leading biobank, which contains cell lines and DNA representing approximately 650 diseases.

Who is on the Coriell Institute staff?

Coriell is home to approximately 120 scientific and operational staff. Michael Christman, PhD, is Coriell’s President and CEO; he is an expert in genomics and genetics.  Joseph L. Mintzer is Coriell’s Executive Vice President and COO and manages the fiscal and operational aspect of the institute. Meet the rest of the Coriell leadership team here.

Who is on the Coriell Institute Board of Trustees?

Coriell is guided by a diverse Board of Trustees that includes corporate, medical, financial, and philanthropic leaders. Chairman of the Coriell Board is Robert P. Kiep III. Learn more about the Coriell Board of Trustees here.

How is Coriell Institute funded?

Coriell Institute has an annual operating budget of $17 million, about $11 million of which comes from federally- and state-funded grants and contracts. Private and corporate philanthropy provides the seed money to initiate new programs in science at Coriell – science that has the opportunity to advance discoveries in research which may not be occurring at other research institutes.

How can I support the research mission of Coriell Institute?

While the majority of Coriell’s operating revenue is derived from federally- and state-funded grants and contracts, the Institute also relies on private, foundation, and corporate philanthropy. Your support can advance the emerging field of personalized medicine to improve the practice of medicine. Your support also allows Coriell to pursue and support research in adult stem cell biology and genomics seeking to unlock the code of human disease. 
There are many ways to give to Coriell: Outrights gifts, through your workplace giving programs, planned giving, volunteering your time and expertise, or attending or hosting a Coriell event. Visit our fund development page to learn more about how you can support scientific research.

How does Coriell Institute support international research?

The Coriell Cell Repositories offers essential research materials to the scientific community by establishing, verifying, maintaining, and distributing cell cultures and DNA. Since the first NIH-sponsored repository was established in 1964 – Coriell has distributed hundreds of thousands of cell lines and DNA samples to researchers in 64 countries. More than 7,000 peer-reviewed papers have been published citing almost 12,000 Coriell Repository samples.

What research services does Coriell Institute provide? 
Coriell offers several best-in-class custom research services.

Coriell’s Genotyping and Microarray Center – one of the nation’s largest centers and CLIA-certified in 48 states – is a high-capacity facility with high-throughput systems from Affymetrix and Illumina.

The Coriell Institute Cytogenetics Laboratory is a state-of-the-art facility that combines conventional and molecular cytogenetic analyses with copy number and loss of heterozygosity (LOH) analyses by microarray. The laboratory is equipped with a network of five Applied Spectral Imaging work-stations that are used to perform G-banded karyotyping, and Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization (FISH).

Coriell also offers many preparative and diagnostic nucleic acid and molecular biology services, all subject to extensive quality controls.

And, the Coriell biobank is regarded as the most diverse collection of cell lines and DNA available to the international research community.

Does Coriell Institute engage in gene therapy or stem cell clinical trials?

Coriell Institute does not pursue research using human embryonic stem cells, nor do we conduct clinical trials on stem cell technologies. If you are interested in gene therapy or stem cell-related clinical trials, please visit http://www.clinicaltrials.gov.

What education does Coriell offer?

Coriell offers a course in cell culture: Advanced biology coupled with the history, theory, and techniques of maintaining live cells in long-term culture is offered to students.

Coriell also invites a limited number of motivated students into the Institute to participate in a Summer Experience program to gain insight into the workings of an independent research institute

How can I stay informed on what is happening at Coriell Institute?

Sign up for our email updates and you’ll receive periodic research news, notable donations, and upcoming events. Visit our Media Center regularly to read the latest news articles and Coriell press releases.

How can I get a quick overview of Coriell Institute?

Read our Coriell Fast Facts for a basic introduction to the Institute. For more information, explore the About section of our website.

Are Coriell Institute scientists and staff available for speaking engagements?

As their schedules permit, Coriell’s scientific and operational staffs enjoy the opportunity to highlight the work occurring at Coriell. Many hold joint faculty appointments at our region’s universities and teach an array of topics from business management and healthcare policy to the science of cell culture and stem cell research.

Coriell also participates in several outreach programs each year, including science festivals and conferences. We also host tours of our laboratories for business and governmental leaders and middle school and high school students.

16. Is Coriell Institute affiliated with Cooper Medical School of Rowan University?
Yes; Coriell is looking forward to welcoming the new medical school and will be integral in teaching genetics and genomics to the next generation of healthcare providers.

Fig3a-200

The Power of Stem Cell Science

The promise of stem cell research lays in its application in understanding the progression of human disease, the ability to cure disease and reverse injury, and to better target therapies to optimize our health outcomes. Induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cell technology has the ability to revolutionize the way human disease is studied. Creating iPS cell lines from various rare and common disease states, as well as from various populations, will open the doors for pre-clinical research studies.

Fig3b-200

Let Our Expertise Make Your Research a Success

Coriell offers a range of custom research services that have long supported national and international science. Whether you are requesting a cell line for your research studies or submitting DNA samples for genotyping analysis, Coriell is committed to providing you with flexible, innovative, and results-oriented research services. Our laboratories are built to foster scientific collaboration, and your research will benefit from this collaborative environment.

Coriell’s Biobank and Cell Culture Laboratory have established the gold standard in the cryopreservation of biomaterials and the capacity to support varied research worldwide. The diverse collections of biological specimens managed by Coriell offer the scientific community the highest quality specimens, which are necessary for successful research endeavors. Since the first repository – a National Institutes of Health collection – was established at Coriell in 1964, hundreds of thousands of cell lines and DNA samples have been distributed to researchers in 64 countries; more than 7,000 peer-reviewed papers have been published citing almost 12,000 biospecimens from the Coriell Biobank.

Fig3c-200

Making Medicine Personalized for You

Our health is determined by many factors: the genetics we inherit; our innate personal traits of race, age and gender; our individual behavior; our family and community networks; and at the macro level, our economic, cultural, and environmental conditions. These factors are different for every person and will change over their lifespan. So too is a person’s experience with disease and how they respond to drugs or other medical interventions. Personalized medicine intends to make medical treatment as individual as the biology of one’s disease.

Personalized medicine has the potential to offer patients and their doctors several advantages, including:

The ability to make better informed clinical decisions.

A higher probability of desired health outcomes by using better-targeted therapies.

The reduced probability of adverse reactions from medications and treatments.

A focus on prevention and prediction of disease, rather than reaction to it.

Earlier disease intervention.

Reduced healthcare costs.

Fig3d-200

Preserving cells today for research tomorrow

Dr. Lewis Coriell’s pioneering techniques for characterizing, freezing, and storing cell cultures in liquid nitrogen constitute one of the greatest contributions to modern human research. Today, the Coriell Biobank is regarded as the most diverse collection of cell lines and DNA available to the international research community. In addition to these high-quality biospecimens, Coriell also maintains tissue, plasma, serum, urine, and cerebrospinal fluid.

Few organizations have the history of innovations in repository science that have been developed and implemented at Coriell. For nearly 60 years, Coriell has set the standard in biobanking services, including the experimental design, collection, processing, distribution, cryogenic preservation, and information management of human biomaterials used in research. By developing and maintaining biorepositories as national and international resources for the study of human diseases, aging, and neurological disease, Coriell is committed to providing the scientific community with well-characterized, cell cultures and DNA preparations, annotated with rich phenotypic data.

Catalog Collections

NIGMS Human Genetic Repository 
The Human Genetic Cell Repository, sponsored by the National Institute of General Medical Sciences, provides scientists around the world with resources for cell and genetic research. The samples include highly characterized cell lines and high quality DNA. Repository samples represent a variety of disease states, chromosomal abnormalities, apparently healthy individuals and many distinct human populations.

NINDS Human Genetics DNA and Cell Line Repository 
The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke is committed to gene discovery, as a strategy for identifying the genetic causes and correlates of nervous system disorders. The NINDS Human Genetics DNA and Cell Line Repository banks samples from subjects with cerebrovascular disease, epilepsy, motor neuron disease, Parkinsonism, and Tourette Syndrome, as well as controls.

NIA Aging Cell Repository 
Sponsored by the National Institute on Aging (NIA), the AGING CELL REPOSITORY, is a resource facilitating cellular and molecular research studies on the mechanisms of aging and the degenerative processes associated with it. The cells in this resource have been collected over the past three decades using strict diagnostic criteria and banked under the highest quality standards of cell culture. Scientists use the highly-characterized, viable, and contaminant-free cell cultures from this collection for research on such diseases as Alzheimer disease, progeria, Parkinsonism, Werner syndrome, and Cockayne syndrome.

NHGRI Sample Repository for Human Genetic Research 
The National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) led the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) contribution to the International Human Genome Project, which had as its primary goal the sequencing of the human genome. This project was successfully completed in April 2003. Now, the NHGRI’s mission has expanded to encompass a broad range of studies aimed at understanding the structure and function of the human genome and its role in health and disease.

American Diabetes Association, GENNID Study 
The purpose of the American Diabetes Association (ADA), GENNID Study (Genetics of non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus, NIDDM) is to establish a national database and cell repository consisting of information and genetic material from families with well-documented NIDDM. The GENNID Study will provide investigators with the information and samples necessary to conduct genetic linkage studies and locate the genes for NIDDM.

The Autism Research Resource 
The State of New Jersey funded the initiation of a genetic resource to support the study of autism in families where more than one child is affected or where one child is affected and one demonstrates another significant and related developmental disorder. This resource now receives continuing support from the Coriell Institute for Medical Research. An open bank of anonymously collected materials documented by a detailed clinical diagnosis forms the basis of this growing database of information about the disease.

IPBIR Repository 
The purpose of the IPBIR – Integrated Primate Biomaterials and Information Resource is to assemble, characterize, and distribute high-quality DNA samples of known provenance with accompanying demographic, geographic, and behavioral information in order to stimulate and facilitate research in primate genetic diversity and evolution, comparative genomics, and population genetics.

HD Community BioRepository 
HD Community BioRepository is a secure, centralized repository that stores and distributes quality-controlled, reliable research reagents. Huntingtin DNAs are now available and antibodies, antigenic peptides, cell lines, and hybridomas will be added soon.

USIDNET Repository 
The USIDNET DNA and Cell Repository has been established as part of an NIH-funded program – the US Immunodeficiency Network (www.usidnet.org) – to provide a resource of DNA and functional lymphoid cells obtained from patients with various primary immunodeficiency diseases. These uncommon disorders include patients with defects in T cell, B cell and/or granulocyte function as well as patients with abnormalities in antibodies/immunoglobulins, complement and other host defense mechanisms.

CDC Cell and DNA Repository 
The Genetic Testing Reference Material Coordination Program of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Coriell Institute for Medical Research announce the availability of samples derived from transformed cell lines for use in molecular genetic testing. The DNA samples prepared from these reference cell lines are available through the Coriell Cell Repositories. Diseases include cystic fibrosis (CF), 5′ 10′ methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase deficiency (MTHFR), HFE-associated hereditary hemochromatosis, Huntington disease (HD), fragile X syndrome, Muenke syndrome, connexin 26-associated deafness, and alpha-thalassemia.

Leiomyosarcoma Cell and DNA Repository 
The Leiomyosarcoma Cell and DNA Repository has been established with an award from the National Leiomyosarcoma Foundation. This foundation provides leadership in supporting research of Leiomyosarcoma, improving treatment outcomes of those affected by this disease as well as fostering awareness in the medical community and general public.

COHORT Project 
The Cooperative Huntington’s Observational Trial Repository has been established as a resource for the discovery of information related to Huntington’s disease and its causes, progressioin, treatments, and possible cures. This is a growing bank for DATA and SPECIMENS to accelerate research on Huntington’s disease.

YERKES Repository 
The Yerkes National Primate Research Center of Emory University is an international leader in biomedical and behavioral research. For more than seven decades, the Yerkes Research Center has been dedicated to advancing scientific understanding of primate biology, behavior, veterinary care and conservation, and to improving human health and well-being.

NEI-AREDS Genetic Repository 
The Age-Related Eye Disease Study was designed to learn about macular degeneration and cataract, two leading causes of vision loss in older adults. The study looked at how these two diseases progress and what their causes may be. In addition, the study tested certain vitamins and minerals to find out if they can help to prevent or slow these diseases. Participants in the study did not have to have either disease. (Enrollment was completed in January 1998.) Eleven medical centers in the United States took part in the study, and more than 4,700 people across the country were enrolled in AREDS. The study was supported by the National Eye Institute, part of the Federal government’s National Institutes of Health. The clinical trial portion of the study also received support from Bausch & Lomb Pharmaceuticals and was completed in October 2001. Learn about the results of the clinical trial on the National Eye Institute’s website: http://www.nei.nih.gov/amd/.

The Wistar Institute 
The Wistar Institute collection at Coriell contains cell lines that have been developed by Wistar scientists. These materials are offered for non-commercial research conducted by universities, government agencies and academic research centers. The Wistar Institute collection currently contains a group of hybridomas that produce monoclonal antibodies that are useful in influenza research and vaccine development. Melanoma cell lines, derived from patients with a wide range of disease ranging from mild dysplasia to advanced metastatic cancer, will be added shortly. More information on The Wistar Institute, its research and scientists can be found at www.wistar.org.

J. Craig Venter Institute Human Reference Genome (HuRef) 
The Human Reference Genetic Material Repository makes available DNA from a single individual, J. Craig Venter, whose genome has been sequenced and assembled. The DNA samples are prepared from a lymphoblastoid cell line established at Coriell Cell Repositories from a sample of peripheral blood. The DNA samples are available in 50 microgram aliquots. The lymphoblastoid cell line is not available for distribution..

Read Full Post »

Nanotechnology, personalized medicine and DNA sequencing

Author, reporter, Curator: Tilda Barliya PhD

Dr. Ritu Saxena’s exciting report on the fascinating work of Dr. Apostolia M. Tsimberidou “personalized medicine gearing up to tackle cancer”, inspired me to go back and review this topic and see how nanotechnology can be applied in personalized medicine.

To read the Dr. Saxena’s post, please see http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/01/07/personalized-medicine-gearing-up-to-tackle-cancer/

It is based on an interview with Dr. A. M. Tsimberidou based on her paper:

Personalized medicine in a phase I clinical trials program: the MD Anderson Cancer Center initiative.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=22966018

In March 2011 Nature Reviews issued a special issue features discussions of the advances, challenges and progress in the field of personalized cancer medicine by key opinion leaders who presented at the Worldwide Innovative Networking (WIN) symposium (**).

So what is personalized medicine?

Personalized medicine is a huge movement in the modern medical world. It aims to move away from the traditional practice of prescribing standard doses of standard drugs for a condition to every patient, and shifts the focus onto targeting the precise drug and dose required according to the patient’s physiology.

This is achieved by detecting and tracking molecular biomarkers, which indicate the presence and level of activity of a particular biological system in a patient’s body, whether inherent or foreign.

Another major part of the emerging field of personalized medicine is pharmacogenomics – analyzing the genetic makeup of the patient to determine whether a particular medication will be successful, or if it will have any adverse effects. (1). This is particularly important in cancer treatment, where the chemotherapy drugs used can be very damaging to healthy cells as well as cancerous ones, and the exact genetics of the tumor cells can vary widely between patients, and even between locations in one patient’s body.

Personalized medicine involves:

  • Detection (DNA polymorphism, RNA and protein expression, metabolits, Lipids etc)
  • Diagnosis (imaging)
  • Prognosis and
  • Treatment (targeted-therapy)

Given the size symmetry, nanomaterials offer unprecedented sensitivity, capable of sensing  biological markers and processes at the single-molecule or  single-cell level either in vitro or in vivo.  Techniques are being developed for high-throughput DNA sequencing using nanopores, to obtain genetic information from a patient so that targeted medication can be selected as rapidly as possible.

Cancer, a very complex disease, is propagated by various types of molecular aberrations which drive the development and progression of malignancies. Large-scale screenings of multiple types of molecular aberrations (e.g., mutations, copy number variations, DNA methylations, gene expressions) become increasingly important in the prognosis and study of cancer. Consequently, a computational model integrating multiple types of information is essential for the analysis of the comprehensive data.

One of the greatest promises of near-term nanotechnoloogy is cheaper DNA sequencing to speed the development of personalized medicine. (3)

Nanotechnology and DNA sequencing

Tumors are known to be highly heterogenetic, due to the many acquired aberration in the cancer cells. Therefore,  there are not only genetic differences between different patients, but also genetic differences within the same patient; for example from different locations in the same patient, that can greatly affect the success of a therapy.  Therefore, sensitive and extensive yet inexpensive whole-genome sequencing is of major medical need to enable the application personalized medicine.  A review of the potential of this emerging nanotechnology “Nanopore sensors for nucleic acid analysis ” was published recently in Nature Nanotechnology (4).

The growing need for cheaper and faster genome sequencing has prompted the development of new technologies that surpass conventional Sanger chain-termination methods in terms of speed and cost.  These second- and third-generation sequencing  technologies — inspired by the $1,000 genome challenge proposed by the National Institutes of Health in 2004 (ref. 5) — are expected to revolutionize genomic medicine. Nanopore sensors are one of a number of DNA sequencing technologies that are currently poised to meet this challenge.

Nanopore Sequencing:

Nanopore-based sensing is attractive for DNA sequencing applications because it is a

  • label-free,
  • amplification-free,
  • single-molecule
  • requires low reagent volumes

approach that can be scaled for high-throughput DNA analysis.

This approach can be scaled up for high-throughput DNA analysis, it typically requires low reagent volumes, benefits from
relatively low cost and supports long read lengths, so it could potentially enable de novo sequencing and long-range haplotype mapping. Although, nanopore technology is not conceptually new and raised many skeptical opinions it has made major progress in the past few years and are thus worth sharing.

The principle of nanopore sensing is analogous to that of a Coulter counter. A nanoscale aperture (the nanopore) is formed in an insulating membrane separating two chambers filled with conductive electrolyte. Charged molecules (A,G,C,T) are driven through the pore under an applied electric potential (a process known as electrophoresis), thereby modulating the ionic current through the nanopore. This current reveals useful information about the structure and dynamic motion of the molecule.

Here’s an example for  a nanopore-based sequencing device is a Graphene- chip that is used as trans-electrode membrane (5).

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.Object name is nihms-225875-f0001.jpg Object name is nihms-225875-f0001.jpg

Electrical measurements on graphene membranes in which a single nanopore has been drilled show that the membrane’s effective insulating thickness is less than one nanometer. This small effective thickness makes graphene an ideal substrate for very high-resolution, high throughput nanopore-based single molecule detectors. The sensitivity of graphene’s in-plane electronic conductivity to its immediate surface environment, as influenced by trans-electrode potential, will offer new insights into atomic surface processes and sensor development opportunities. (4-6).

A nanopore-based diagnostic tool could offer various advantages:

  • it could detect target molecules at very low concentrations from very small sample volumes;
  • it could simultaneously screen panels of biomarkers or genes (which is important in disease diagnosis,
  • monitoring progression and prognosis);
  • it could provide rapid analysis at relatively low cost; and
  • it could eliminate cumbersome amplification and conversion steps such as PCR, bisulphite conversion and Sanger sequencing

Nanopores are likely to have an increasing role in medical diagnostics and DNA sequencing in years to come, but they will face competition from a number of other techniques. These include

  • single-molecule evanescent field detection of sequencing-by-synthesis in arrays of nanochambers (Pacific Biosciences),
  • sequencing by ligation on self-assembled DNA nanoarrays (Complete Genomics), and the
  • detection of H+ ions released during sequencing-by-synthesis on silicon field-effect transistors from multiple polymerase-template reactions (Ion Torrent).

However, the possibility of using nanopore-based sensors to perform long base reads on unlabelled ssDNA molecules in a rapid and costeffective manner could revolutionize genomics and personalized medicine.

Current trends suggest that many challenges in sequencing with biological nanopores

  • the high translocation velocity and the
  • lack of nucleotide specificity

have been resolved. Similarly, given the progress with solid-state nanopores, if the

  • translocation velocity could be reduced to a single nucleotide (which is ~3Å long) per millisecond, and if
  • nucleotides could be identified uniquely with an electronic signature (an area of intense research),

it would be possible to sequence a molecule containing one million bases in less than 20 minutes. Furthermore, if this technology could be scaled to an array of 100,000 individually addressed nanopores operating in parallel, it would be possible to sequence an entire human genome (some three billion base pairs) with 50-fold coverage in less than one hour.

Although, none of the nanopore-solid base sequencing technique have been used as a tool in a clinical trial, one UK-based biotechnology company has its way, nanopore sequencing may soon be available to the public. Earlier this year 2012 Oxford Nanopore Technologies (ONT) announced that it was on the verge of manufacturing a commercial nanopore sensor. [The company said that by year’s end it would release a $900 handheld model, which it claims can sequence a virus genome 48 000 bases long, and a larger, scalable model that could decode a human genome in as little as 15 minutes. In contrast, conventional systems cost upward of $500 000 and take weeks to sequence a human genome (7).]

REFERENCES

** http://www.nature.com/nrclinonc/focus/personalized-medicine/index.html

1. http://www.azonano.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=3078

2. G.E. Marchant. Small is Beautiful: What Can Nanotechnology Do for Personalized Medicine?. Current Pharmacogenomics and Personalized Medicine, 2009, 7, 231-237http://www.benthamscience.com/cppm/Sample/cppm7-4/002AF.pdf

3. http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=4992

4. Venkatesan BM and Bashi R. Nanopore sensors for nucleic acid analysis. Nature Nanotechnology 2011; 18: http://libna.mntl.illinois.edu/pdf/publications/127_venkatesan.pdf

5. Garaj S., Hubbard W., Reina A., King J., Branton D and Golovchenko JA. Graphene as a sub-nanometer trans-electrode membrane. Nature 2010 (9) 467(7312): 190-193. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2956266/

6. Min SK., Kim WY., Cho Y and Kim KS. Fast DNA sequencing with a graphene-based nanochannel device. Nature Nanotechnology 2011; 6: 162-165.  http://biophy.nju.edu.cn/lablog/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Fast-DNA-sequencing-with-a-graphene-based.pdf

7. http://www.physicstoday.org/resource/1/phtoad/v65/i11/p29_s1?bypassSSO=1

Read Full Post »

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

Engineers work to help biologists cope with big data

Tue, 01/08/2013 – 10:15am

Liang Dong is developing an instrument that will allow plant scientists to simultaneously study thousands of plants grown in precisely controlled condition. Photo: Bob ElbertLiang Dong is developing an instrument that will allow plant scientists to simultaneously study thousands of plants grown in precisely controlled condition. Photo: Bob ElbertLiang Dong held up a clear plastic cube, an inch or so across, just big enough to hold 10 to 20 tiny seeds.

Using sophisticated sensors and software, researchers can precisely control the light, temperature, humidity, and carbon dioxide inside that cube.

Dong—an Iowa State University assistant professor of electrical and computer engineering and of chemical and biological engineering—calls it a “microsystem instrument.” Put hundreds of those cubes together and researchers can simultaneously grow thousands of seeds and seedlings in different conditions and see what happens. How, for example, do the plants react when it is hot and dry? Or carbon dioxide levels change? Or light intensity is adjusted very slightly?

The instrument designed and built by Dong’s research group will keep track of all that by using a robotic arm to run a camera over the cubes and take thousands of images of the growing seeds and seedlings.

Plant scientists will use the images to analyze the plants’ observable characteristics—the leaf color, the root development, the shoot size. All those observations are considered a plant’s phenotype. And while plant scientists understand plant genetics very well, Dong says they don’t have a lot of data about how genetics and environment combine to influence phenotype.

Dong’s instrument will provide researchers with lots of data—too much for scientists to easily sort and analyze. That’s a problem known as big data. And it’s increasingly common in the biological sciences.

“We’re seeing a proliferation of new instruments in the biological sciences,” says Srinivas Aluru, the Ross Martin Mehl and Marylyne Munas Mehl Professor of Computer Engineering at Iowa State. “And the rate of data collection is increasing. So we have to have a solution to analyze all this data.”

Aluru is leading a College of Engineering initiative to build research teams capable of solving big data problems in next-generation DNA sequencing, systems biology, and phenomics. The researchers are developing computing solutions that take advantage of emerging technologies such as cloud computing and high-performance computers. They’re also building partnerships with technology companies such as IBM, Micron, NVIDIA, Illumina Inc., Life Technologies Corp., Monsanto Co., and Roche.

The project is one of the three Dean’s Research Initiatives launched by Jonathan Wickert, former dean of the College of Engineering and currently Iowa State’s senior vice president and provost. The initiatives in high-throughput computational biology, wind energy, and a carbon-negative economy were launched in March 2011 with $500,000 each over three years. That money is to build interdisciplinary, public-private research teams ready to compete for multi-million dollar grants and projects.

Patrick Schnable, Iowa State’s Baker Professor of Agronomy and director of the centers for Plant Genomics and Carbon Capturing Crops, remembers when biologists had no interest in working with computer specialists. That was before they tried to work with billions of data points to, say, accurately predict harvests based on plant genotype, soil type and weather conditions.

“Now we’re getting huge, absolutely huge, data sets,” Schnable says. “There is no way to analyze these data sets without extraordinary computer resources. There’s no way we could do this without the collaboration of engineers.”

To date, the computational biology initiative has attracted $5.5 million for four major research projects. One of the latest grants is a three-year, $2 million award from the BIGDATA program of the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health. The grant will allow Aluru and researchers from Iowa State, Stanford University, Virginia Tech, and the University of Michigan to work together to develop a computing toolbox that helps scientists manage all the data from today’s DNA sequencing instruments.

Aluru says the research initiative helped prepare Iowa State researchers to go after that grant.

“When the BIGDATA call came in, we had the credibility to compete,” he says. “We were already working on leading edge problems and had established relationships with companies.”

The initiative, the grants and the industry partnerships are helping Iowa State faculty and students move to the front of the developing field.

“One computing company wanted to set up a life science research group and it came here for advice,” Aluru says. “Iowa State is known as a big data leader in the biosciences.”

Source: Iowa State University

SOURCE:

http://www.rdmag.com/news/2013/01/engineers-work-help-biologists-cope-big-data?et_cid=3031227&et_rid=461755519&linkid=http%3a%2f%2fwww.rdmag.com%2fnews%2f2013%2f01%2fengineers-work-help-biologists-cope-big-data

 

Read Full Post »

Recurrent somatic mutations in chromatin-remodeling and ubiquitin ligase complex genes in serous endometrial tumors

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

Endometrial cancer is the sixth most commonly diagnosed cancer in women worldwide, causing ~74,000 deaths annually1. Serous endometrial cancers are a clinically aggressive subtype with a poorly defined genetic etiology2–4.

Whole-exome sequencing was used to comprehensively search for somatic mutations within ~22,000 protein-encoding genes in 1 13 primary serous endometrial tumors. Subsequently 18 genes were resequenced, which were mutated in more than 1 1 1 tumor and/or were components of an enriched functional grouping, from 40 additional serous tumors. High frequencies of somatic mutations in CHD4 (17%), EP300 (8%), ARID1A (6%), TSPYL2 (6%), FBXW7 (29%), SPOP (8%), MAP3K4 (6%) and ABCC9 (6%) were identified. Overall, 36.5% of serous tumors had a mutated chromatin-remodeling gene, and 35% had a mutated ubiquitin ligase complex gene, implicating frequent mutational disruption of these processes in the molecular pathogenesis of one of the deadliest forms of endometrial cancer.

The study provides new insights into the somatic mutations present in serous endometrial cancer exomes. However, it is important to acknowledge that this discovery screen is underpowered to detect all somatically mutated genes that drive serous tumors. For example, PIK3R1, which was previously found to be somatically mutated in 8% of serous endometrial tumors58, was not somatically mutated in the tumors that formed this discovery screen.

It was estimated that, for genes that are mutated in 8% of all serous endometrial cancers, a discovery screen of 12 tumors has 25% power to detect 2 mutated tumors and 63% power to detect 1 mutated tumor; for genes that are mutated in 20% of all serous endometrial cancers, the discovery screen had an estimated 72.5% power to detect 2 mutated tumors and 93% power to detect 1 mutated tumor.

Massively parallel sequencing of additional cases will undoubtedly yield deeper insights into the mutational landscape of serous endometrial cancer. Here, it was reported one of the first exome sequencing analyses of serous endometrial cancers, which are clinically aggressive tumors that have been poorly characterized genomically.

The findings implicate the disruption of chromatin-remodeling and ubiquitin ligase complex genes in

  • 50% of serous endometrial tumors and
  • 35% of clear-cell endometrial tumors.

The high frequency and specific distributions of mutations in CHD4, FBXW7 and SPOP strongly suggest that these are likely to be driver events in serous endometrial cancer.

Source References:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=Exome%20sequencing%20of%20serous%20endometrial%20tumors%20identifies%20recurrent%20somatic%20mutations%20in%20chromatin-remodeling%20and%20ubiquitin%20ligase%20complex%20genes

 

Read Full Post »

Larry H Bernstein, MD, FACP, Reporter

Clinical Trials
Dr. Eric Topol, Director of the Scripps Translational Science Institute and Editor-in-Chief of Medscape Genomic Medicine and the heart.org.
In our series The Creative Destruction of Medicine, I’m trying to get into critical aspects of how we can Schumpeter or reboot the future of healthcare by leveraging the big innovations that are occurring in the digital world, including digital medicine.

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

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

Would we even do that kind of trial in the future when we now have such elegant matching of the biological defect and the specific drug intervention? A remarkable example of a trial of the future was announced in May.[1] For this trial, the National Institutes of Health is working with [Banner Alzheimer’s Institute] in Arizona, the University of Antioquia in Colombia, and Genentech to have a specific mutation studied in a large extended family living in the country of Colombia in South America. There is a family of 8000 individuals who have the so-called Paisa mutation, a presenilin gene mutation, which results in every member of this family developing dementia in their 40s.

Clinical Trials (journal)

Clinical Trials (journal) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »