My Photo

Wisconsin Technology Network - Biotech

News

July 15, 2008

Minnesotta gets green light for $300M biomedical research facility

Officials in Minnesota are touting the potential of the planned $300 million Minnesota Biomedical Research Program, a project that already has earned legislative approval for $220 million in state funds. The University of Minnesota says the program will provide space for 100 primary researchers and 500 support staff. And the university believes it can attract $100 million a year in new research funds once the program is up and running. The state has blueprinted 400,000 square feet of research space in four buildings to be completed in 2013. The university will start by expanding the Center for Magnetic Resonance Research and follow up with facilities that will focus on cancer, cardiovascular and infectious diseases.  Read the online StarTribune article here.

In Wisconsin, ground was recently broken at the UW-Madison for the Wisconsin Institute for Discovery, a $150M public/private research facility that will be completed in 2010.

July 02, 2008

The brave new world of stem cells and human cloning

One of the great promises of embryonic stem cell research is being able to use human cloning to derive stem cells that carry genetic defects associated with myriad maladies. These cells can be used to study the development of tissues that are affected by genetic abnormalities and used as tools for testing new therapies for intractable genetic diseases.

The way that this works is that a researcher derives an embryonic stem cell line from someone with, say Parkinson’s disease. These stem cells can be coaxed into developing into the dopamine-producing neurons that are defective in patients with the disease. Then, a number of different things can be done. For instance, the development of these diseased neurons can be compared to the development of normal neurons in well controlled environments and, hopefully, yield new information on the origins and progression of the disease. Alternatively, the Parkinsonian neurons can be used to test new approaches for treating the disease.

Thus, cloning and derivation of disease-specific stem cells promises to be a powerful and novel tool for studying certain types of cardiovascular disease, certain cancers such as neuroblastoma, Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS or Lou Gehrig’s disease), metabolic problems such as diabetes, and so on.   

Ethical concerns of cloning human embryos notwithstanding (I am working on a column on this topic that will be posted at a later date), a confounding technical problem is where will researchers find the eggs necessary for the nuclear transfer cloning procedure (the procedure used to clone Dolly, the sheep)? Obtaining human eggs is done routinely at in vitro fertilization clinics, but it does involve hormonal manipulation of young women and a somewhat invasive procedure to harvest the eggs. Who would volunteer for this just so a scientist can do lab research? How many eggs will we need to all the research scientists want to do and are there enough women donors to supply the research needs?

Researchers in England are taking a new approach to deal with the problem of egg supply. They propose to undertake nuclear transfer cloning using eggs from pigs and chromosomes from a human with the desired disease in order to create animal-human hybrid stem cells. A UK regulatory agency recently licensed a laboratory to create human-pig embryos in order to study heart disease.

In fact this is the third animal-human hybrid embryo license to be issued by the British Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. In an article just published in the British newspaper, The Telegraph, an HFEA spokesman said it had just approved an application from the Clinical Sciences Research Institute, University of Warwick, for the creation of hybrid embryos. This effort at the University of Warwick is led by Professor Justin St John. "This new license allows us to attempt to make human pig clones to produce embryonic stem cells," he said.

"We will take skin cells from patients who have a mutation for certain kinds of heart disease (cardiomyopathy, which makes the heart lose its pumping strength) and put them into pig eggs after their chromosomes have been removed. We will then make embryos so that we can attempt to derive embryonic stem cells which will allow us to study some of the molecular mechanisms associated with these heart diseases.

"Ultimately they will help us to understand where some of the problems associated with these diseases arise and they could also provide models for the pharmaceutical industry to test new drugs. We will effectively be creating and studying these diseases in a dish.

"But it's important to say that we're at the very early stages of this research and it will take a considerable amount of time. There is still a great deal to learn about these techniques and much of our early work will involve understanding how we can make the hybrid cloning process as efficient as possible."

The study is aimed at understanding the way the cell’s power-producing structures, called mitochondria, are passed from egg to embryo. Mitochondria contain their own small genetic program that produces many of the proteins these organelles need to power cells. Therefore, in the hybrid stem cell, the mitochondria will mostly come from the pig egg, and the researchers will do experiments in order to ensure that the trace of human mitochondria takes over, not least because it is designed to work with human nuclear DNA.

"The key thing we are doing is trying to create stem cells without any animal mitochondria in them. So even though these hybrid embryos normally have…animal mitochondria, we are hoping to create hybrid embryo cells that would have human chromosomes as well human mitochondrial DNA." The reason is that, as the team puts it, "mixing of these two diverse populations of mitochondria can be detrimental to cellular function."

Other research teams in Newcastle and London are also creating human-animal hybrid stem cells. The former have already created hybrids with cow eggs to study genetic regulation in early development, the latter made hybrids with a range of species to generate stem cells from people with neurodegenerative disorders.  Meanwhile, Chinese researchers in Shanghai have reported success in creating human-rabbit hybrid stem cells.

Such research is not allowed in the US, at least in federally-funded labs. But, this does not seem to stop this field from going forward world-wide. Are we in a brave new world, or are we making a Faustian bargain?

Read more on human-hybrid stem cells:

Hybrids: separating hope from the hype

Questions answered on animal-human embryos

Embryo research: a source of hope or horror?

July 01, 2008

Treating stroke, Parkinson's and other brain diseases with stem cells

Brain repair using genetically engineered embryonic stem cells could offer novel treatments for stroke, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and other neurological conditions, after encouraging preliminary tests.

Scientists at the Burnham Institute for Medical Research in La Jolla, California, have, for the first time, genetically programmed embryonic stem cells, which have the potential to turn into any type, to become nerve cells when transplanted into the brain, according to a study in The Journal of Neuroscience.

The research showed that mice afflicted by stroke showed "tangible therapeutic improvement" following transplantation and none developed tumors, which had been a major setback in prior transplants.

The team was led by Prof Stuart Lipton, who treats patients with these disorders. "We found that we could create new nerve cells from stem cells, transplant them effectively and make a positive difference in the behavior of the mice," said Prof Lipton.

"These findings could potentially lead to new treatments for stroke and neurodegenerative diseases such as Parkinson's disease."

Prior to this research, creating nerve cells from embryonic cells in a reliable way had been problematic and sometimes cells would seed tumors. Prof Lipton tackled these problems by inducing the stem cells to make a protein called myocyte enhancer factor 2C (MEF2C), which turns on specific genes that drive stem cells to develop into nerve cells.

"We need to have a reliable source of nerve cells that can be easily grown, differentiate in the way that we want them to and remain viable after transplantation," said Prof Lipton.

"MEF2C helps this process first by turning on the genes that, when expressed, make stem cells into nerve cells. It then turns on other genes that keep those new nerve cells from dying. As a result, we were able to produce neuronal progenitor cells that differentiate into a virtually pure population of neurons and survive inside the brain."

The next step was to show whether the transplanted "progenitor" cells became nerve cells that integrated into the existing network of nerve cells in the brain. Performing intricate electrical studies, the team showed that the new nerve cells, derived from the stem cells, could send and receive proper electrical signals to the rest of the brain. The team found that mice which received the transplants showed significant behavioral improvements, although their performance did not reach that of normal control mice.
______________________________________________________________________________________

Excerpted from an online article by Roger Highfield in the Telegraph on 6/24/08.

June 27, 2008

New stem cell database is launched to steer scientists through the stem cell maze

Have you ever wondered where a cardiac muscle stem cell comes from and how it is related to a skeletal muscle stem cell?  Or, can a neural stem cell also differentiate into a glial cell?

If you were to drive from San Francisco to New York without any street signs or a road map, you would spend a lot of time going down wrong paths and may never get to the Big Apple. Similarly, as a stem cell is going from its initial, basic level to a complex ear cell, for example, it needs to be steered through a specific path. This map gives scientists not only the knowledge of where they're going, but key "markers" that need to be crossed along the way. Ultimately this will save stem cell companies time and money. 

Read the news article from the San Jose Mercury News, here.  The new stem cell database can be accessed here, www.embryome.com.

June 24, 2008

Listening to ritalin--literally: UW study uncovers how ritalin works to boost cognition

MADISON - Stimulant medications such as Ritalin have been prescribed for decades to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and their popularity as "cognition enhancers" has recently surged among the healthy, as well.

What's now starting to catch up is knowledge of what these drugs actually do in the brain. In a paper publishing online this week in Biological Psychiatry, University of Wisconsin-Madison psychology researchers David Devilbiss and Craig Berridge report that Ritalin fine-tunes the functioning of neurons in the prefrontal cortex (PFC) - a brain region involved in attention, decision-making and impulse control - while having few effects outside it.

Because of the potential for addiction and abuse, controversy has swirled for years around the use of stimulants to treat ADHD, especially in children. By helping pinpoint Ritalin's action in the brain, the study should give drug developers a better road map to follow as they search for safer alternatives.

At the same time, the results support the idea that today's ADHD drugs may be safer than people think, says Berridge. Mounting behavioral and neurochemical evidence suggests that clinically relevant doses of Ritalin primarily target the PFC, without affecting brain centers linked to over-arousal and addiction. In other words, Ritalin at low doses doesn't appear to act like a stimulant at all.

"It's the higher doses of these drugs that are normally associated with their effects as stimulants, those that increase locomotor activity, impair cognition and target neurotransmitters all over the brain," says Berridge. "These lower doses are diametrically opposed to that. Instead, they help the PFC better do what it's supposed to do."

A behavioral disorder marked by hyperactivity, impulsivity and the inability to concentrate, ADHD has been treated for more than a half-century with Ritalin, Adderall and other stimulant drugs. New reports also indicate these meds have lately been embraced by healthy Americans of all ages as a means to boost mental performance.

Yet, despite their prevalence, we know remarkably little about how these drugs work, especially at lower doses that have been proven clinically to calm behavior and focus attention in ADHD patients, says Berridge. In 2006, his team reported that therapeutic doses of Ritalin boosted neurotransmitter levels primarily in the PFC, suggesting a selective targeting of this region of the brain. Since then, he and Devilbiss have focused on how Ritalin acts on PFC neurons to enhance cognition.

To answer this, the pair studied PFC neurons in rats under a variety of Ritalin doses, including one that improved the animals' performance in a working memory task of the type that ADHD patients have trouble completing. Using a sophisticated new system for monitoring many neurons at once through a set of microelectrodes, the scientists observed both the random, spontaneous firings of PFC neurons and their response to stimulation of an important pathway into the PFC, the hippocampus.

Much like tiny microphones, the electrodes record a pop every time a neuron fires, Devilbiss explains. Analyzing the complex patterns of "voices" that emerge is challenging but also powerful, because it allows study of neurons on many levels.

"Similar to listening to a choir, you can understand the music by listening to individual voices," says Devilbiss, "or you can listen to the interplay between the voices of the ensemble and how the different voices combine."

When they listened to individual PFC neurons, the scientists found that while cognition-enhancing doses of Ritalin had little effect on spontaneous activity, the neurons' sensitivity to signals coming from the hippocampus increased dramatically. Under higher, stimulatory doses, on the other hand, PFC neurons stopped responding to incoming information.

"This suggests that the therapeutic effects of Ritalin likely stem from this fine-tuning of PFC sensitivity," says Berridge. "You're improving the ability of these neurons to respond to behaviorally relevant signals, and that translates into better cognition, attention and working memory." Higher doses associated with drug abuse and cognitive impairment, in contrast, impair functioning of the PFC.

More intriguing still were the results that came from tuning into the entire chorus of neurons at once. When groups of neurons were already "singing" together strongly, Ritalin reinforced this coordinated activity. At the same time, the drug weakened activity that wasn't well coordinated to begin with. All of this suggests that Ritalin strengthens dominant and important signals within the PFC, while lessening weaker signals that may act as distractors, says Berridge.

"These results show a new level of action for cognition-enhancing doses of Ritalin that couldn't have been predicted from single neuron analyses," he says. "So, if you're searching for drugs that might replace Ritalin, this is one effect you could potentially look for."

He and Devilbiss also hope the research will help unravel an even deeper mystery: exactly how neurons encode complex behavior and cognition.

"Most studies look at how something that impairs cognition affects PFC neurons. But to really understand how neurons encode cognitive function, you want to see what neurons do when cognition is improved," says Berridge. "So this work sets the stage for examining the interplay among PFC neurons, higher cognition, and the action of therapeutic drugs."

The work was funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, the National Institute of Mental Health and the UW-Madison Discovery Seed Grant Program.

June 18, 2008

Biotech drug sales post 12.5% increase in 2007

Pharmaceuticals may be struggling, but biotech drugs are on fire. According to an IMS Health study, global sales of biotech drugs increased 12.5 percent in 2007 to more than $75 billion; that's twice as fast as the pharmaceutical market, which increased 6.4 percent in 2007. The growth is the result of several factors, including additional indications for existing products, recent innovations, and the growth of biologic drug sales outside the U.S. Oncology, auto-immune agents, diabetes drugs and vaccines accounted for most of the growth. Last year, 22 biotech products exceeded $1 billion in sales, compared with just six products in 2002.

The forecast isn't entirely positive, however. Growth was down in 2007 compared to 2006. "Loss of exclusivity and competition from biosimilars, crowded therapy areas with weaker sales growth, payers showing more reluctance to fund innovative drugs without compelling value propositions, and safety concerns for some therapies will all contribute to a more moderate growth environment through 2012," warned Murray Aitken, the study's author. "[C]ompanies with biotech products in their portfolios will succeed only if they meet increasingly demanding regulatory standards, deploy effective commercial models that are accompanied by compelling evidence of their products' value, and develop pricing and market access strategies that ensure that patients have access to the benefits that these new products deliver."

June 06, 2008

Is drinking red wine the same as going on a diet?

Research says maybe so.

When considering factors that affect health, most people think about fatty diets, sun exposure, smoking, alcohol consumption, etc. But, research clearly indicates that one of the most important factors in quality of health is the simple calorie, which seems to one of the last health factors that people mention.

Everyone knows that obesity is associated with myriad health problems from cardiovascular disease, diabetes and stroke. Recent studies also link obesity to neurological problems such as Alzheimer’s disease. Obesity is caused by several factors including poor diet, sedentary lifestyle as well as genetic and metabolic issues. Certainly, caloric intake is a factor in obesity, but compelling research in rodents has shown that even a diet that does not lead to obesity may play an amazing role in age-related loss of function in the skeletal muscle, brain and especially the heart. When animals are restricted in caloric intake, but allowed normal levels of nutrients, vitamins, etc, their lives are significantly prolonged and their bodies retain a youthful physiology much longer than animals fed a regular diet.

I’ve seen the research data of caloric restriction on the musculature of the heart and the results almost gave me chest pains thinking about what my heart must look like in middle age.

Studies in several labs, including one recently reported by UW-Madison’s Tomas Prolla and Richard Weindruch, show that mice that are fed a component of red wine called reservatrol, along with a regular diet, showed healthier physiologies than mice who were not fed reservatrol. Significantly, the mice fed reservatrol and a regular diet, were as healthy as the mice on the calorie-restricted diet. In other words, feeding reservatrol to mice mimicked the beneficial effects of caloric restriction.

Both, Weindruch and Prolla, admitted to taking reservatrol supplements. But is this a good idea? Read more about this line of research here.

June 03, 2008

Quintessence moving forward despite discouraging data from competitor

A few weeks ago, I wrote that folks at Madison-based Quintessence Bioscience eagerly anticipated the outcome of a Phase IIIb clinical trial that Alfacell, a major East Coast competitor, would soon release on an anti-cancer therapeutic compound, Onconase™. Quintessence’s lead drug candidate, QBI-139, is very similar to Onconase™ and has not yet been clinically tested.

The results of the Onconase™ trial were just released and Quintessence Chairman and CEO, Ralph Kauten, said that he is “…disappointed that the results of the Onconase™ clinical trial were not an overwhelming success.”

Kauten shared with me a communication that Quintessence sent to its shareholders about the Alfacell trial. In it, they had this to say:

“Alfacell has released data indicating that their first-in-class drug, Onconase, failed to meet the primary endpoint in the Phase IIIb confirmatory trial in malignant mesothelioma. The trial compared the combination of Onconase plus doxorubicin to doxorubicin alone. The primary endpoint was an increase in overall patient survival. Alfacell’s initial analysis of the data showed no statistically significant improvement for evaluable patients receiving the combination of Onconase and doxorubicin.”

In other words, Alfacell tested the combination of Onconase™ plus the standard chemotherapy drug, doxorubicin, to doxorubicin alone in order to test whether Onconase™ would increase the survival of patients with mesothelioma, an extremely difficult to treat cancer that usually is associated with asbestos exposure. After the data were analyzed, there was no consistent difference in the two therapeutic regimens, which means that adding Onconase™ made no significant difference in the survival of the patients.

However, when the data were more closely examined, it appeared that a subset of patients who had failed the standard chemotherapy regimen for mesothelioma, showed a small, but statistically, increase in survival when treated with Onconase™. On this basis, Alfacell plans to submit an application to the FDA for using Onconase™ as a “second-line” therapy for mesothelioma patients who fail the standard chemotherapy. It is unclear how the FDA will respond to this parsing of the data. In the past, they have been averse to such sub-group analysis, but there are indications that this attitude may be changing, so Alfacell is forging ahead with the New Drug Approval process.

As I asked before, should there be cause for concern at Quintessence over these less than encouraging results from a competitor? As before, folks at Quintessence remain very committed to moving QBI-139 into clinical trials, probably sometime this summer. In their communiqué to shareholders, Quintessence went on to explain the following:

“Failing to meet the primary endpoints in the Alfacell Phase IIIb trial certainly makes approval of Onconase more challenging. However, Onconase still has significant potential to be approved as a second line treatment for malignant mesothelioma. While this change would mean a smaller market for the drug, our opinion has been and continues to be that any successful FDA approval of Onconase paves the way for general acceptance of RNases as cancer therapeutics.”

“Quintessence continues to make progress toward filing an IND and initiating a Phase I clinical trial for QBI-139. The majority of the data supporting the IND has been collected and analyzed and GMP manufacturing is underway. We are currently negotiating contracts with the clinical trial site as well as a contract monitoring group. We look forward to demonstrating the clinical benefit of QBI-139 in patients with cancer.”

The FDA’s response to Alfacell will be critical for the future of RNase-based therapies that Alfacell and Quintessence are developing. As I wrote in an earlier article, it is an unfortunate fact that if a drug is tested on the wrong disease and fails, it can be very difficult to resurrect its reputation in order to test it on another, more appropriate, disease. When a drug gets a bad reputation, it becomes much harder to garner enthusiasm from those who would fund the new study—investors and NIH grant reviewers.

Although, it may turn out that that testing Onconase™ on mesothelioma was a bad decision on the part of Alfacell, it was an interesting strategic decision that they made. Mesothelioma was chosen for the initial clinical trials because of its intractability to therapy, which allowed Onconase™ to be granted fast track status and orphan-drug designation by the FDA. This means that Alfacell was able to get Onconase™ into advanced clinical trials much sooner than it would have via conventional investigational drug approval procedures.

Mediocre therapeutic results against a cancer that no other therapy has shown much success against, does not mean that RNase-based therapies will not be effective against other types of cancers. As I pointed out earlier, there is good reason to believe that Quintessence’s lead RNase therapy, QBI-139, is superior to Onconase™.

For these reasons, Quintessence should and will continue to move forward with QBI-139 and focus on more common and easier to treat cancers than mesothelioma.

May 18, 2008

FDA increases new drug approvals, but take a closer look

The FDA has approved 29 new drug applications (NDAs) through April, 2008.  This represents the highest NDA approval rate since 2000.   Last year, the FDA approved only 16 NDAs and the 10-year average is 24.  Good news for the pharma industry?

Maybe not.  10 of the 29 new approvals come from new manufacturers for existing drugs, approvals of drugs already marketed or new formulations of existing drugs.  In other words, only 19 new pharmaceutical drugs made it to to the market last year, compared to 13 a year ago.

New Molecular Entities (NMEs), or compounds that are not related to any existing drug, is a better measure than NDAs of new classes of therapeutics entering the marketplace.  NMEs represent entirely new drugs and treatment opportunities.  In the past year, only three NMEs were approved, matching the previous low mark reached in 2002.  Over the last ten years, the average NME approval rate was six per year.

Read more on this in the Genetic Engineering News.

May 15, 2008

FDA delays embryonic stem cell clinical trial

 Geron Corporation, the Menlo Park, California-based company had sought permission from the U.S. Food and Drug administration to begin a human trial to test its GRNOPC1 stem-cell compound in patients with spinal cord injuries. In a press release dated yesterday, Geron anounced that they received oral notice from the FDA had delayed the Investigational New Drug application the company filed in order to begin clinical trials.  This delay does not mean that the IND was rejected, but until Geron receives the official letter, it will not known why the application was delayed or how long it will take to rectify the issues the FDA has.

Geron worked with the FDA over the last four years leading up the filing of a 21,000-page IND application.  Read the full press release here.