Thanks for installing the Bottom of every post plugin by Corey Salzano. Contact me if you need custom WordPress plugins or website design.
Stressful Jobs Linked to Heart Woes in Women
(HealthDay News) — Women with demanding jobs that provide few opportunities to make decisions or use their creativity are at increased risk for heart attacks, according to new research.
For the study, researchers analyzed data provided by 22,000 women over 10 years regarding their job strain, job insecurity and other health and lifestyle information. Most participants were white health professionals. The women, whose average age was 57, answered questions about the pace of their workday, how hard they worked and to what extent they had to juggle competing demands.
After taking into account factors such as age, race and income, the investigators found that women with high job strain were 38 percent more likely to have heart-related events, such as stroke, heart surgery to clear blockages, or death. Heart attack risk was 70 percent higher, according to the report published July 18 in PLoS ONE.
Women who had highly stressful jobs but who also had a lot of control over their work — such as physicians, executives, nurses, teachers and managers — also had higher risk of cardiovascular events, according to the researchers from Brigham and Women’s Hospital.
“Previous long-term studies of job strain, defined by the combination of psychological demand and job control, and heart disease risk have mainly focused on men and a more restricted set of cardiovascular conditions,” said Dr. Michelle Albert, a cardiologist and researcher at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and associate professor at Harvard Medical School in Boston.
“Our study indicates that high job strain can negatively affect your health. There are immediate and definite long-term, clinically documented cardiovascular health effects of job strain in women, and it is important for women and their health care providers to pay attention to the stresses of their job,” Albert explained in a news release from Partners HealthCare.
While the researchers found an association between stress at work and heart attacks, they did not prove that there is a direct cause-and-effect relationship between job strain and heart attacks or other cardiovascular problems.
SOURCE: Partners HealthCare, news release, July 18, 2012
HealthDay
Thanks for installing the Bottom of every post plugin by Corey Salzano. Contact me if you need custom WordPress plugins or website design.
Diabetes Care Critical in Heat, Emergencies
If you have diabetes, you need to take extra care in summer, when heat waves, strong storms, and hurricanes can strike. It’s important to make a plan and be prepared.
If you have diabetes, you know how important it is to have a care routine. Yet summer weather, with its high temperatures and extreme storms, can cause problems with that routine and make it more difficult to manage diabetes.
If you have diabetes, it is harder for your body to handle high heat and humidity. You may need to make changes in your medication and what you eat and drink when temperatures heat up. During emergencies and natural disasters such as hurricanes or tornadoes, you may have other needs related to diabetes. You should identify yourself as a person with diabetes so you can get appropriate care. If you are a family member, caregiver, or health care provider for someone with diabetes, please share this information with them.
Read on to learn more about taking care of yourself during emergencies and high temperatures.
High Heat
Hot weather – temperatures of 80°F (about 27°C) or above, especially with high humidity – can affect medication, testing supplies and your health. The heat index, which measures how hot it really feels by combining temperature and humidity readings, advises caution starting at 80°F with 40% humidity.Extreme heat is especially dangerous to people age 65 and older, children younger than 4, people with mental illnesses, and people with chronic diseases such as diabetes.
- Heat can affect your blood sugar (glucose) levels and also increase the absorption of some fast-acting insulin, meaning you will need to test your blood sugar more often and perhaps adjust your intake of insulin, food, and liquids.
- Drink plenty of fluids, especially water, to avoid dehydration. Don’t wait until you get thirsty; it’s a sign you’re already dehydrated. Avoid sugar-sweetened drinks such as sweet tea and sodas.
- If your doctor has limited how much liquid you can drink, ask what to do during times of high heat.
- Know the signs of heat-related illness and how to respond to symptoms of heat exhaustion and heat stroke. Heat stroke can cause death or permanent disability if emergency treatment is not provided.
- Wear sunscreen and use a lip balm with sunscreen.
- Wear loose-fitting, lightweight, and light-colored clothing.
- Check package inserts with medications to learn when high temperatures can affect them. Take medications with you if you will need to take them while you’re away from home, and protect them from the heat.
- If you’re traveling with insulin, don’t store it in direct sunlight or in a hot car. Keep it in a cooler, but do not place it directly on ice or on a gel pack.
- Check glucose meter and test strip packages for information on use during times of high heat and humidity. Do not leave them in a hot car, by a pool, or on the beach.
- Heat can damage insulin pumps and other equipment. Do not leave the disconnected pump or supplies in the direct sun or in a hot car.
- Get physical activity in air-conditioned areas, or exercise outside early or late in the day, during cooler temperatures.
- Use your air conditioner or go to air-conditioned buildings in your community.
What to Do During Emergencies
People with diabetes face extra challenges during emergencies and natural disasters such as hurricanes, earthquakes, and tornadoes. If you are evacuating—leaving your home to get away from a threat—or staying in an emergency shelter, it is important to let others know that you have diabetes so that you can take care of your health needs. If you have any other health problems, such as chronic kidney disease or heart disease, make sure you let others know about those, too.
Here are other important steps to take:
- Drink plenty of fluids, especially water. Safe drinking water may be hard to find in emergencies, but if you do not take in enough water, you could develop serious medical problems. Heat, stress, high blood sugar, and some diabetes medicines such as metformin can cause you to lose fluid, which increases the chances you will become dehydrated.
- Keep something containing sugar with you at all times, in case you develop dangerously low blood sugar (hypoglycemia). You may not be able to check blood sugar levels, so know the warning signs of low blood sugar.
- Pay special attention to your feet. Stay out of contaminated water, wear shoes, and examine feet carefully for any sign of infection or injury. Get medical treatment quickly for any injuries.
Planning for Emergencies
- Make an emergency plan for you and your family. To learn how, visit Ready.gov.
- Always wear identification that says you have diabetes.
- If you take insulin, ask your doctor during a regular visit what to do in an emergency if you do not have your insulin and cannot get more.
- If you take other medicines for diabetes, check with your doctor on a routine visit about what to do during an emergency if you do not have your medicine.
- Prepare an emergency supply of food and water.
- Include an adequate supply of medicine and medical supplies in your emergency kit, enough to last at least three days and possibly more, depending on your needs. Ask your doctor or pharmacist about storing prescription medicines such as heart and high blood pressure medicine, insulin, and other prescription drugs. Make a plan for how you will handle medicine that normally requires refrigeration, such as insulin.
- Make sure you change medicine and medical supplies in your emergency kit regularly, to make sure they stay up to date. Check expiration dates on all medicine and supplies often.
- Keep copies of prescriptions and other important medical information, including the phone number for your health care provider, in your emergency kit.
- Keep a list of the type and model number of medical devices you use, such as an insulin pump, in the emergency kit.
- If you have a child with diabetes who is in school or daycare, make sure you know the school’s emergency plan. Work with them to make sure your child will have needed diabetes supplies in an emergency.
- If you need regular medical treatments, such as dialysis, talk to your service provider about their emergency plans.
Thanks for installing the Bottom of every post plugin by Corey Salzano. Contact me if you need custom WordPress plugins or website design.
Clinical Biomarkers: Novel Tools for Pharmacodynamic Applications
Beena Punnamoottil*
Summery
Biomarkers are currently changing the way we diagnose and treat diseases. Today pharmacodynamic biomarkers are widely used in the industry elaborating optimal dosing of new drugs and predictive biomarkers have an enormous potential for companion diagnostics (1).
Background
Fig.1 In a given population, the prognostic biomarker sorts the individuals with a likely course of a disease if untreated (blue and green). Predictive biomarkers identify subpopulations of patients who are likely to respond to a given therapy (blue). The drug dosage for responsive individuals is optimized by analysis of pharmacodynamic biomarkers.
Strategic consideration for biomarker quantification:
o For many inflammatory biomarkers base levels of healthy control groups have not yet been described. For regulatory approval of companion diagnostic tests, understanding of base levels is essential.
o Drugs affecting disease biomarkers can be very efficient. Only sensitive biomarker quantification platform allows monitoring the full PD-profile of these drugs.
o In early phases of companion diagnostic development little is know about physiological levels of biomarker candidates in different patient sub-groups and disease states. Sensitive biomarker quantification enables studying even ultra-low biomarker levels.
Results 1
Low fg/ml concentration limits of TNF-alpha in human serum was shown with Imperacer® in comparison to other standard ligand inding technology (4).
Challenge 1: How to study base levels?
While elevated cytokine marker concentrations in patients are well documented, limited data are available for endogenous baseline concentrations for
Fig. 2 Comparison of ligand binding technologies
Results 2
(5)
the majority of biomarkers (2). In clinically relevant study set ups several cytokine markers specific for inflammatory diseases were quantified in human biological matrix. The aim was to determine baseline cytokine concentrations in individual healthy human individuals.
The ultra sensitive Imperacer® technology, quantifies
fg/ml concentrations of several clinically relevant
cytokines in human serum matrix. This low level
quantification enables the detection of endogenous
baseline concentrations as well as biomarker
surveillance throughout several phases of a clinical
study (5).
| Cytokine | LOD Imperacer® | Matrix |
| IL-2 | 0,1 pg/ml | Serum |
| IL-6 | 0,1 pg/ml | Serum |
| IL-8 | 0,1 pg/ml | Serum |
| IL-11 | 0,8 pg/ml | Serum |
| IL-12 | 0,05 pg/ml | Serum |
| IL-17 | 0,02 pg/ml | Tissue culture |
| IL-23 | 0,17 pg/ml | Serum |
| INF-gamma | 0,3 pg/ml | Cell lysate |
| TNF-alpha | 0,01 pg/ml | Serum |
Tab.1 Ultra low quantification of several predictive and pharmacodynamic biomarkers (5)
Challenge 2: How to study pharmacodynamic profiles?
Blocking of the myostatin (MSTN) signaling pathway by inhibitors, e.g. MSTN neutralizing antibodies, result in drastic increase of skeletal muscle mass. Clinical studies focusing on diseases interfering muscle growth, e.g. muscle dystrophy, mostly generate data by muscle biopsies to analyze increase or decrease of muscle mass and muscle fiber diameter after treatment (6). A less invasive strategy is to exploit molecular biomarkers for muscle growth e.g. myostatin propeptide (MYO-P) or follistatin to generate reliable clinical data on molecular basis from biomarker concentration in blood (3).
Results 3
Based on clinical studies on MSTN inhibitors like neutralizing antibodies, further analysis has been reported by detection MSTN inhibitor concentrations in serum. MYO-P as well as follistatin is here detected in pg/ml concentration levels in blood serum (3).
Fig.3 Response in muscle fiber diameter increase after treatment in individual patients (6).
Fig.4A, 4B Broad dynamic range and sub pg/ml levels of MSTN inhibitors in blood serum compared to standard ELISA(3).
Conclusion:
Imperacer® as prime technology in clinical studies enabled specific biomarker quantification in sub pg/ml detection limits and broad dynamic range.
Literatur:
1. Wieland et al., 2011, Therap Drug Monit; 33(3), 341-349
2. Tarrant, J. 2010, Tox Sci 117(1), 4-16
3. Diel et al., 2010, Molec & Cellul Endocr 330(2010)1-9
4. Adler&Spengler 2009, Curr Pharm Anal; 5(4),1-10
5. Adler et al., 2008, Cytok quant in drug dev (Case Study)
6. Wagner et al., 2008 Ann Neurol;63(5), 561-571
*Contact:
Beena Punnamoottil, Project Manager
Chimera Biotec GmbH
Tel Europe: +49-231-9742840, Tel US: +1-617-8616018
Download free pdf from http://www.genengnews.com/application-notes/clinical-biomarkers-novel-tools-for-pharmacodynamic-applications/15/
Thanks for installing the Bottom of every post plugin by Corey Salzano. Contact me if you need custom WordPress plugins or website design.
Enabling High-Throughput Glycomics
Quantitative Glycan Analysis for Biomarker Discovery and Characterization of Biotherapeutics
Glycomics is defined as the study of both free sugars and of the complex sugar chains (glycans) that reside in glycoconjugates such as glycoproteins and glycolipids. Given the effects of post-translational glycosylation on protein function, a major focus of glycomics is to characterize the glycosylation patterns on glycoproteins. This glycan analysishas direct relevance to healthcare, both as a source of novel biomarkers and as a means to characterize glycoprotein therapeutics.
The field of investigation for glycan biomarkers is wide open. Only a few glycan markers, the cancer markers CA19-9 and AFP-L3, for example, have so far entered into routine clinical use. Over 50% of proteins in the human body, including most secreted proteins, are glycosylated. The glycans in these conjugates play a role in a wide range of biologic processes including cell adhesion and signaling, and changes in glycoforms have been observed across a wide range of diseases including cancer and neurological, immunological, and metabolic disorders.
Because glycans affect protein stability, binding, and immunogenicity, they are also of critical importance for glycoprotein therapeutics such as monoclonal antibodies. Glycan analysis discriminates among therapies that, on the basis of their peptide constituents alone, might otherwise be considered identical. The extent, type, and location of glycan structures can impact the mechanism of action of these therapies, their clearance rate, their immunogenicity, and their efficacy.
For all the promise of glycomics, this research has traditionally been laborious and time-consuming and thus lagged behind the rapid adoption of genomics and proteomics. Unlike genes and proteins, glycans are not template-determined and adopt a branched, rather than linear, design. And there is no applicable method like PCR or in vitro protein expression systems to amplify glycans.
Recognizing the need to accelerate glycomics research, Ezose Sciences is using its GlycanMap® technology in collaborations with academic institutions and pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and diagnostics companies. The GlycanMap platform is a high-throughput method to deliver glycan data from either purified glycoproteins or crude biological materials. With a current capacity of two 96-well plates per day, which is fully scalable with the addition of more robotics platforms, the GlycanMap platform provides both the throughput and repeatability required for robust biomarker studies and glycoprotein-therapeutics analysis.
Automating Glycan Analysis
|
Click Image To Enlarge +
|
 |
|
Figure 1. GlycanMap workflow
|
Figure 1 illustrates the GlycanMap workflow. Crude biological samples (serum, cerebrospinal fluid, tissue lysates, cell culture media, etc.) or glycoprotein preparations are denatured, digested with trypsin, and heat-inactivated. The resulting mixture is enzymatically or chemically treated to release the glycans, which are then captured through a bead-based method called glycoblotting. After on-bead washing to remove nonglycan components (peptides, lipids, salts, etc.), labile sialic acid residues are stabilized by methylesterification. Glycans are labeled and released from the beads prior to spotting on a MALDI target plate.
|
Click Image To Enlarge +
|
 |
|
Figure 2. Glycan profiles of biological fluids (Panel A) and biotherapeutics (Panel B). Selected glycan peaks are annotated using the nomenclature of the Consortium for Functional Glycomics. When a glycan was detected in more than one sample type, a red dashed line extends from the annotation to so indicate.
|
The GlycanMap platform has been applied to various biological samples and glycoprotein therapeutics.
In Figure 2, Panel A shows the N-glycan profiles of rat brain lysate, human serum, and human cerebrospinal fluid. Panel B shows the N-glycan profile of three biotherapeutics: the Fc fusion protein Enbrel®, the monoclonal antibody Erbitux®, and the complex glycoprotein Epogen®, which were purchased commercially from a pharmacy for this study.
Connecting Glycan Biomarkers to the Underlying Biology
|
Click Image To Enlarge +
|
 |
|
Figure 3. Treatment-induced glycan changes in a human colon cancer cell line: A heat map (Panel A) illustrates relative concentrations of the 34 glycans detected, with blue indicating lower concentrations and red higher concentrations. Panel B shows the projection of glycan changes against the compartments in which each glycan is synthesized: the endoplasmic reticulum and the cis-, medial-, and trans-compartments of the Golgi apparatus. Glycans are identified using a four-digit code, which represents the number of hexoses (Gal, Man, or Glc), N-acetylhexosamines (GlcNAc or GalNAc), deoxyhexoses (Fuc), and N-acetylneuraminic acid (Neu5Ac). [Data shown was generated in collaboration with the National University of Ireland, Galway.]
|
Glycan changes can also be analyzed with respect to structural classes and biosynthetic pathways. Figure 3 shows data from a feasibility study where the GlycanMap platform was used to investigate changes in N-glycosylation of cellular proteins accompanying endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress. Severe ER stress has been implicated in cancer, myocardial infarction, and such neurodegenerative disorders as Parkinson and Alzheimer disease.
A colon cancer cell line (HCT116) was treated for 12 or 36 hours with 0.5 μg/mL Brefeldin A (BFA), a fungal derivative used to study protein transport. An untreated cell line served as the control. The heat map in Panel A compares the relative concentrations of each of the 34 glycans detected in this study in untreated cells and after BFA-treatment.
Panel B projects the BFA-induced glycan changes onto a pathway map of the endoplasmic reticulum and the Golgi apparatus. Each node on the map represents a glycan. The most pronounced concentration changes, indicated by the bright red nodes, were in glycans normally synthesized in the medial-compartment of the Golgi apparatus, suggesting impaired transport between the medial- and trans-Golgi. This observation is consistent with the known BFA-induced fusion of the ER with the cis- and medial-Golgi, but not trans-Golgi, compartments.
Moving Forward
The introduction of a practical, high-throughput method of glycan analysis opens many avenues of research—it facilitates an OMICS that until now has been difficult to apply to large-scale studies.
In collaborations with pharmaceutical companies, Ezose has put the GlycanMap platform to use in efforts to discover biomarkers relevant to profiling disease and disease progression and to measuring response to therapeutic interventions. Glycan biomarkers may thus serve as companion diagnostics, too.
Ezose is also partnering with biopharmaceutical companies to apply the GlycanMap platform to characterization of glycan heterogeneity in glycoprotein therapeutic agents. This application of glycan analysis is expanding with the growing interest in biologics, including not only first-generation products but also biosimilars and biobetters.
The glycome remains largely uncharted, and the size of the territory affords many opportunities for exploration.
Yoshiaki Miura, Ph.D., is senior director, research and development, Taku Nakahara, Ph.D., is director, bioinformatics, and Diane McCarthy, Ph.D. ([email protected]), is director, scientific affairs at Ezose Sciences.
Thanks for installing the Bottom of every post plugin by Corey Salzano. Contact me if you need custom WordPress plugins or website design.
What the Top 10 Biopharma CEOs Are Making
#10. Merck & Co.
Kenneth C. Frazier, Chairman, President, and CEO
2011 Compensation: $13,347,652
2010 Compensation: $9,439,632
% Change: 41.1%
#9. Baxter International
Robert L. Parkinson Jr., Chairman and CEO
2011 Compensation: $14,065,479
2010 Compensation: $11,500,268
% Change: 22.3%
#8. Bristol-Myers Squibb
Lamberto Andreotti, CEO
2011 Compensation: $14,911,947
2010 Compensation: $11,770,880
% Change: 26.7%
#7. Gilead Sciences
John C. Martin, Chairman and CEO
2011 Compensation: $15,615,645
2010 Compensation: $14,244,388
% Change: 9.6%
#6. Novartis
Joseph Jimenez, CEO
2011 Compensation1: $15,881,621
2010 Compensation1: $11,828,828
% Change: 34.3%
#5. Eli Lilly
John C. Lechleiter, Ph.D., Chairman, President, and CEO
2011 Compensation: $16,370,094
2010 Compensation: $16,504,545
% Change: -0.8%
#4. Amgen
Kevin W. Sharer, Chairman and CEO
2011 Compensation: $18,850,311
2010 Compensation: $21,138,133
% Change: -10.8%
#3. Abbott
Miles D. White, Chairman, CEO, and Director
2011 Compensation: $24,010,902
2010 Compensation: $25,564,283
% Change: -6.1%
#2. Pfizer
Ian Read, Chairman and CEO
2011 Compensation: $25,013,348
2010 Compensation: $17,396,112
% Change: 43.8%
#1. Johnson & Johnson
William C. Weldon, Chairman/CEO
2011 Compensation: $26,797,939
2010 Compensation: $28,720,491
% Change: -6.7%
1
Thanks for installing the Bottom of every post plugin by Corey Salzano. Contact me if you need custom WordPress plugins or website design.
Obama Recognizes Nearly 100 Outstanding Scientists
The US federal government has bestowed its highest honor on 96 outstanding scientists and engineers beginning their independent careers.
Check list below
President Barack Obama has named the 96 as this year’s recipients of the Presidential Early Career Awards for Scientists and Engineers (PECASE). Awardees are selected for their pursuit of innovative research at the frontiers of science and technology and their commitment to community service as demonstrated through scientific leadership, public education, or community outreach.
Honorees have only recently started research in their fields, and have, according to NIH, shown potential for assuring the nation’s preeminence in science and engineering, and contributing to the missions of the departments and agencies that nominated them.
The Department of Health and Human Services led among federal agencies with 22 PECASE winners—all but two from NIH—followed by NSF with 20 and the Department of Defense with 16. Other PECASE recipients are employed or funded by the US departments of agriculture, commerce, education, energy, interior, and veterans’ affairs; as well as the Environmental Protection Agency, and National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
“These individuals have only recently started research in their fields, and they have the potential for long and productive careers working on discoveries to improve the health of our nation,” NIH Director Francis S. Collins, M.D., Ph.D., said in a statement.
The PECASE awards, established by President Clinton in 1996, are coordinated by the Office of Science and Technology Policy within the Executive Office of the President.
A complete list of winners is available by clicking http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/07/23/president-obama-honors-outstanding-early-career-scientists
President Obama Honors Outstanding Early-Career Scientists
President Obama today named 96 researchers as recipients of the Presidential Early Career Awards for Scientists and Engineers, the highest honor bestowed by the United States Government on science and engineering professionals in the early stages of their independent research careers.
“Discoveries in science and technology not only strengthen our economy, they inspire us as a people.” President Obama said. “The impressive accomplishments of today’s awardees so early in their careers promise even greater advances in the years ahead.”
The Presidential early career awards embody the high priority the Obama Administration places on producing outstanding scientists and engineers to advance the Nation’s goals, tackle grand challenges, and contribute to the American economy. The recipients are employed or funded by the following departments and agencies: Department of Agriculture, Department of Commerce, Department of Defense, Department of Education, Department of Energy, Department of Health and Human Services, Department of the Interior, Department of Veteran Affairs, Environmental Protection Agency, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the National Science Foundation, which join together annually to nominate the most meritorious scientists and engineers whose early accomplishments show the greatest promise for assuring America’s preeminence in science and engineering and contributing to the awarding agencies’ missions.
The awards, established by President Clinton in 1996, are coordinated by the Office of Science and Technology Policy within the Executive Office of the President. Awardees are selected for their pursuit of innovative research at the frontiers of science and technology and their commitment to community service as demonstrated through scientific leadership, public education, or community outreach.
This year’s recipients are:
Department of Agriculture
Joseph E. Jakes, U.S. Forest Service
Ian Kaplan, Purdue University
Christina L. Swaggerty, Agricultural Research Service
Department of Commerce
Anthony Arguez, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Ian Coddington, National Institute of Standards and Technology
Frank W. DelRio, National Institute of Standards and Technology
Jayne Billmayer Morrow, National Institute of Standards and Technology
Kyle S. Van Houtan, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Rebecca Washenfelder, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Department of Defense
David M. Blei, Princeton University
Ania Bleszynski Jayich, University of California, Santa Barbara
Alejandro L. Briseno, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Lee R. Cambrea, Naval Air Research Intelligence
Vincent Conitzer, Duke University
Chiara Daraio, California Institute of Technology
Craig J. Fennie, Cornell University
Keith Edward Knipling, Naval Research Laboratory, Department of the Navy
Wen Li, Wayne State University
Timothy K. Lu, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Cindy Regal, University of Colorado Boulder
Matthew B. Squires, Air Force Research Laboratory, Department of the Air Force
Joseph E. Subotnik, University of Pennsylvania
Ao Tang, Cornell University
C. Shad Thaxton, Northwestern University
Maria Laina Urso, U.S. Army Research Institute for Environmental Medicine
Department of Education
Li Cai, University of California, Los Angeles
Department of Energy
Stanley Atcitty, Sandia National Laboratories
Jeffrey W. Banks, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Amy J. Clarke, Los Alamos National Laboratory
Derek R. Gaston, Idaho National Laboratory
Christopher Hirata, California Institute of Technology
Heileen Hsu-Kim, Duke University
Thomas Francisco Jaramillo, Stanford University
Pablo Jarillo-Herrero, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
John R. Kitchin, Carnegie Mellon University
Peter Mueller, Argonne National Laboratory
Daniel B. Sinars, Sandia National Laboratories
Jesse Thaler, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Heather Whitley, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Department of Health and Human Services
Erez Lieberman Aiden, Harvard University
Nihal Altan-Bonnet, Rutgers University
Peter D. Crompton, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
Margherita R. Fontana, University of Michigan School of Dentistry
Ervin Ray Fox, University of Mississippi Medical Center
Valerie Horsley, Yale University
Steven T. Kosak, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine
Erica N. Larschan, Brown University
Daniel R. Larson, National Cancer Institute
Krista M. Lisdahl, University of Wisconsin – Milwaukee
Emanual M. Maverakis, University of California, Davis
Biju Parekkadan, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School
Jay Zachary Parrish, University of Washington
Peter Philip Reese, University of Pennsylvania
Niels Ringstad, Skirball Institute, New York University School of Medicine
Pawan Sinha, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Georgios Skiniotis, University of Michigan
Beth Stevens, F.M. Kirby Neurobiology Center, Boston Children’s Hospital
Justin Taraska, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
Jennifer Rabke Verani, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases
Brendan M. Walker, Washington State University
Lauren Bailey Zapata, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion
Department of the Interior
Joseph P. Colgan, U.S. Geological Survey
Karen R. Felzer, U.S. Geological Survey
Justin J. Hagerty, U.S. Geological Survey
Department of Veterans Affairs
Jeffrey R. Capadona, Louis Stokes Cleveland Veteran Affairs Medical Center
Charlesnika T. Evans, Edward Hines Jr. Veterans Affairs Hospital
Amy M. Kilbourne, Veterans Affairs Ann Arbor Healthcare System
Kinh Luan Phan, Jesse Brown Veterans Affairs Medical Center
Environmental Protection Agency
Adam P. Eisele, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Mehdi Saeed Hazari, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Morgan B. Abney, Marshall Space Flight Center
Ian Gauld Clark, Jet Propulsion Laboratory and California Institute of Technology
Temilola Fatoyinbo-Agueh, Goddard Space Flight Center
Jessica E. Koehne, Ames Research Center
Francis M. McCubbin, Institute of Meteoritics, University of New Mexico
Yuri Y. Shprits, University of California, Los Angeles
National Science Foundation
Baratunde Aole Cola, Georgia Institute of Technology
Brady R. Cox, University of Arkansas
Meghan A. Duffy, Georgia Institute of Technology
Joshua S. Figueroa, University of California, San Diego
Michael J. Freedman, Princeton University
Erin Marie Furtak, University of Colorado Boulder
B. Scott Gaudi, The Ohio State University
Curtis Huttenhower, Harvard University
Christopher A. Mattson, Brigham Young University
David C. Noone, University of Colorado Boulder
Parag A. Pathak, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Alice Louise Pawley, Purdue University
Amy Lucía Prieto, Colorado State University
Mayly C. Sanchez, Iowa State University and Argonne National Laboratory
Sridevi Vedula Sarma, Johns Hopkins University
Suzanne M. Shontz, Pennsylvania State University
Mariel Vázquez, San Francisco State University
Luis von Ahn, Carnegie Mellon University
Brent R. Waters, University of Texas, Austin
Jennifer Wortman Vaughan, University of California, Los Angeles
Thanks for installing the Bottom of every post plugin by Corey Salzano. Contact me if you need custom WordPress plugins or website design.
Job Squeeze Vexes Postdocs
Postdocs are finding it harder to land academic positions, forcing them to take multiple postdocs, or leave academia for just-as-hard-to-find industry jobs.
You’ve studied. You’ve written. You’ve defended. You’ve celebrated. Now what? [© Tom Wang – Fotolia.com]
Every six months, Cara Altimus, Ph.D., asks herself: Am I making progress? Is what I’m doing relevant? Am I likely to get a job one day?
Eighteen months into a five-year postdoctoral position in the lab of David Foster, Ph.D., assistant professor of neuroscience at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Dr. Altimus has reason for concern. Postdocs are finding it harder to land academic positions, forcing them to take multiple postdocs, or leave academia for just-as-hard-to-find industry jobs.
Dr. Altimus’ research examines reactivation of previous spatial experience, believed to be a memory trace, by recording large populations of neurons in the rodent brain. She isn’t actively seeking an industry job and isn’t open to doing a second postdoc.
“I try to keep myself open to other opportunities and continue networking, so that I at least know what jobs other Ph.D.s are getting, and keeping up with these people,” Dr. Altimus told GEN.
Dr. Altimus is among thousands of biopharma postdocs uneasy about their post-postdoc futures—35,000 as of 2009, according to NSF. Data is often several years old, as NIH’s Biomedical Research Workforce Working Group found to its frustration.
In a report issued June 14, the panel called in part for NIH-funded institutions to collect data on the career outcomes of grad students and postdocs. The task force also recommended shifting NIH postdoc funding from research project grants to training grants and fellowships, and allowing institutions to provide additional training and career development while testing ways to shorten the Ph.D. training period. Funding for those and other recommendations will likely prove elusive. NIH is facing a flat budget for FY 2013. Whoever wins the presidential election will be scrambling to fulfill promises to contain spending.
“The system has strong incentives to train people, particularly when the amount of grant funding grows, because faculty have strong incentives to staff their labs with postdocs and graduate students,” Paula E. Stephan, Ph.D., professor of economics at Georgia State University and a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research, told GEN. “One, they’re young, and they’re full of good ideas, we think. Two, they’re very flexible, and they’re willing to work real long hours. And three, they’re cheap.”
Dr. Stephan said she’d like more research shifted to research institutes from universities: “You cannot train people without doing research, but you can do research without producing a lot more postdocs and graduate students.”
While the number of life-sci doctorates more than doubled between 1978 and 2008 (from 5,086 to 11,088), so too did the percentage of life sciences doctorates awarded to non-U.S. citizens or permanent residents (from 15.6% to 34.4%). There’s not enough research to say how much that may have squeezed the job supply for U.S.-born postdocs, along with the move of R&D to China and India.
Cathee Johnson Phillips, executive director of the National Postdoctoral Association, said several factors explain the job squeeze: Universities are producing more Ph.D.s, more of whom are taking postdoc positions—often two or more. The number of Ph.D.s landing tenure-track jobs has held steady or dipped. And grad students traditionally shun nonacademic employment.
One nonacademic career option is Washington policy work, for agencies like NIH or FDA, or groups like AAAS. Another option is consulting. Firms like McKinsey, BCG, and Bain recruit at top-tier schools. The pay well exceeds the $41,000 median annual salary of life-sci academic postdocs, or the $47,000 median of nonacademic postdocs, according to 2008 NSF data.
“They pay you $120,000, $130,000 right off the bat,” Thihan R. Padukkavidana, Ph.D., co-founder and president of the Career Network for Science Ph.D.s at Yale, told GEN. “Why do they want these Ph.D.s? They can sell this. They say, ‘We’ve got 20 Ph.D.s working on your project.’”
Connecting postdocs with nonacademic careers is also a focus of the Johns Hopkins Postdoctoral Association’s “80/20” program—while 80% pursue academic careers, only 20% land jobs.
“What postdocs don’t realize is that by applying online, they will never get the job. It’s the networking that will get them the job. We hear about postdocs that have been applying for even three years and they haven’t heard anything back,” Maria Sevdali, Ph.D., who runs 80/20 and is a postdoctoral fellow in Hopkins’ Department of Molecular Biology and Genetics, told GEN.
Yet few postdocs, Dr. Sevdali said, attend association networking events: “Where are the postdocs? They’re not there networking. Then their contract is going to run out, and they’re going to freak out if they cannot find a job.”
Dr. Altimus, the association’s incoming co-president, said the job squeeze has lowered expectations among postdocs since she began Ph.D. studies in 2005.
“When you talk to postdocs, it’s always like, ‘If I get a job this year,’ ‘If this were published,’ and ‘I sure need to get an academic job,’” she said. “It’s not fair to say that’s just an academic problem. The whole country—the whole world—seems to be in a recession.”
Thanks for installing the Bottom of every post plugin by Corey Salzano. Contact me if you need custom WordPress plugins or website design.
Drug Delivery Technologies Show Promise of Improving Clinical Outcomes
Drug Delivery Technologies Show Promise of Improving Clinical Outcomes for Patients at PODD: Partnership Opportunities in Drug Delivery Conference
New York, NY — In an effort to remove barriers and embrace collaborations to get therapeutics to patients faster, pharmaceutical and biotech companies will listen to more than 25 drug delivery technology presentations, ranging from novel delivery devices to formulation technologies at the 2nd Annual PODD: Partnership Opportunities in Drug Delivery conference, October 1-2, 2012, at the Boston Park Plaza hotel in Boston, MA.
The PODD program is designed to introduce emerging and enabling drug delivery technologies to help pharmaceutical and biotech drug formulators obtain better clinical outcomes for patients. The PODD event features keynote addresses by two leading scientists in drug delivery, Dr. Robert Langer, the David H. Koch Institute Professor, MIT, and Dr. Stephen Oesterle, Senior Vice President for Medicine and Technology, Medtronic.
Dr Barbara Lueckel Global Business Development Director, Roche returns as the PODD Chairperson. Dr. Lueckel found the inaugural PODD event served as a platform to facilitate innovative collaborations, noting that, “The panels provided an opportunity to gain further insights into companies’ thinking on drug delivery partnering and to engage panelists into additional discussions.” She also said, “I am glad we will see more panel discussions in 2012.”
Additional industry experts speaking at PODD include:
- Dr. Sesha Neervannan, Vice President, Pharmaceutical Development, Allergan
- Dr. Julia Rashba-Step, Senior Director, Novel Delivery Technologies, Pfizer
- Dr. Anand Subramony, Head of Novel Delivery Technologies & Therapeutics, Novartis
- Dr. Keith Horspool, Vice President, Pharmaceutical Development, Boehringer Ingelheim
Further highlights of the PODD program include pre-arranged one-on-one partnering meetings, a drug delivery exhibit hall, numerous networking breaks and a reception. Over 250 attendees are anticipated. Companies participating in the 2012 PODD event include Allergan, Aptalis, Becton Dickinson, Boehringer Ingelheim, CIMA Labs, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, 3M Drug Delivery Systems, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, Patheon, Pfizer, Roche and Shire.
For more information, please visit www.theconferenceforum.org or call 646-350-2580.
About The Conference Forum
The Conference Forum focuses on developing specialized events for the public and private sector, as well as research groups and advisory boards for professionals in the life science industry. Our mission is to create the best content in an ideal forum for the exchange of ideas among peers and networking opportunities for pharmaceutical and biotech professionals.
Thanks for installing the Bottom of every post plugin by Corey Salzano. Contact me if you need custom WordPress plugins or website design.
Harvard Study Finds Fluoride Lowers IQ – Published in Federal Gov’t Journal
NEW YORK, July 24, 2012 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Harvard University researchers’ review of fluoride/brain studies concludes “our results support the possibility of adverse effects of fluoride exposures on children’s neurodevelopment.” It was published online July 20 in Environmental Health Perspectives, a US National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences’ journal (1), reports the NYS Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, Inc. (NYSCOF)
“The children in high fluoride areas had significantly lower IQ than those who lived in low fluoride areas,” write Choi et al.
Further, the EPA says fluoride is a chemical “with substantial evidence of developmental neurotoxicity.”
Fluoride (fluosilicic acid) is added to US water supplies at approximately 1 part per million attempting to reduce tooth decay.
Water was the only fluoride source in the studies reviewed and was based on high water fluoride levels. However, they point out research by Ding (2011) suggested that low water fluoride levels had significant negative associations with children’s intelligence.
Choi et al. write, “Although fluoride may cause neurotoxicity in animal models and acute fluoride poisoning causes neurotoxicity in adults, very little is known of its effects on children’s neurodevelopment. They recommend more brain/fluoride research on children and at individual-level doses.
“It’s senseless to keep subjecting our children to this ongoing fluoridation experiment to satisfy the political agenda of special-interest groups,” says attorney Paul Beeber, NYSCOF President. “Even if fluoridation reduced cavities, is tooth health more important than brain health? It’s time to put politics aside and stop artificial fluoridation everywhere,” says Beeber.
After reviewing fluoride toxicological data, the NRC reported in 2006, “It’s apparent that fluorides have the ability to interfere with the functions of the brain.”
Choi’s team writes, “Fluoride readily crosses the placenta. Fluoride exposure to the developing brain, which is much more susceptible to injury caused by toxicants than is the mature brain, may possibly lead to damage of a permanent nature.”
Fluoride accumulates in the body. Even low doses are harmful to babies, the thyroid, kidney patients and heavy water-drinkers. There are even doubts about fluoridation’s effectiveness (2). New York City Legislationis pending to stop fluoridation. Many communities have already stopped.
Infant formula when mixed with fluoridated water delivers 100-200 times more fluoride than breastmilk. (3)
Thanks for installing the Bottom of every post plugin by Corey Salzano. Contact me if you need custom WordPress plugins or website design.
Prescribe drugs via your iPhone
iApp Creative has released a new update to its iPrescribe app for iPhones and iPads. The tool makes it intuitive and quick to prescribe your favorite pills to your favorite patients.
Features from the product page:
- Transmit and receive electronic prescriptions.
- iPrescribe is Surescripts™ certified for New Prescriptions and Refills.
- After writing a prescription you can save the drug and the specific way you prescribe it to your Favorites list for faster future prescribing.
- Send prescriptions and receive refill notices without annoying and time consuming phone calls and faxes.
- Pre loaded with over 3,500 FDA approved medications including all available dosages.
- Supported by our iPrescribe website for fast, easy and secure patient data entry. Patient ID, name, phone number, address, birth date, gender, and notes can be entered into the database and wirelessly synced to your iPhone at any time. Patient data can also be entered manually into the iPhone.
via MedGadget
Thanks for installing the Bottom of every post plugin by Corey Salzano. Contact me if you need custom WordPress plugins or website design.
Withings & iHealth enable slick blood pressure monitoring with your iPhone
It was only a matter of time until the first (usable) hardware attachments for the iPhone and iPad pop up to breach the gap between consumer goods and traditional medical devices. Now, two startups have entered this field at the same time. One of them already has a proven track record of manufacturing the geekyWithings scale – a scale that is hooked up with your Wi-Fi network and transmits your weight to wireless devices of your choice. While nerds around the world hooray for it, it will actually be interesting to see if anybody will ever conduct a good scientific study that measures the outcome over time (weight loss) compared to ordinary scales. The company behind it, Withings, now announced that they’ll soon be shipping their tensiometre.
iHealth, the other company that clearly is targeted towards Apple users, released the BP3, the “first ever, blood pressure monitoring system for iPod touch, iPhone, and iPad.”
Apart from being more beautiful than existing devices, the real benefit of these products lie in the detail. Data that is being collected (in this case blood pressure and pulse) is transmitted to the respective app and allows seemless integration with third party health data providers, such as Google Health or Microsoft Health Vault.
The iHealth BP3 costs $99,95 and can be bought here. The Withings tensiometre is not yet available.
Thanks for installing the Bottom of every post plugin by Corey Salzano. Contact me if you need custom WordPress plugins or website design.