Category Archives: Immunology

Long COVID Research Is a Bit of a Mess – Technology Networks

Back in March 2020, as the COVID-19 pandemic descended over the world, Naima was a busy tech worker, zipping around London, speaking to clients and jogging on the weekends.

I was very, very busy, she says. I did triathlons and [was] running 10Ks all the time. I was living a normal life, a full life.

Then, like every other person in the UK, her life came to a standstill as the countrys first lockdown began. Only, Naima was even more sedentary than most; she was ill with COVID-19.

I had quite a few symptoms: headache, fever, full-body soreness, sore throat, a bit of a cough and I felt very weak, she explains. That lasted a couple of weeks.

It would have been easy to panic, contracting the very virus that had just shut down the world, but Naima was relatively calm. Because I was so fit, I wasnt too worried, she says. The only real story that was happening was the hospitalizations. The line was: Unless you have underlying conditions or youre much older, youll be fine.

And for a while she was, mostly.

I had this niggling sensation in my chest that would pop up every couple of days, just for a few seconds. And in those few seconds, I couldnt breathe properly. But that didnt develop into anything else for several months.

When it did, Naima wasnt just troubled with a tight chest; she was debilitated with palpitations and crippling fatigue. She could barely walk. My world was turned upside down from that point in October, when those severe symptoms kicked in. I spoke to general practitioners; I said, I cant move at all. It feels like there are bricks on my chest and shooting pains that come whenever I get up. They said, You know, youre so young and fit, but this sounds like a heart attack.

It wasnt. It was long COVID. Naima was part of the first batch of people in the world to develop ongoing, disabling complications following an un-hospitalized COVID-19 infection. And shes still ill, more than three years later.

How could a fit and healthy 26-year-old go from running triathlons to being bed-bound for months, just from a passing viral infection? Why were she and people like her left with life-altering symptoms, while others could move on from their infections, seemingly unchanged? Back in 2020, no one had answers to these questions. No one really knew how to help those struggling with the illness. Research was desperately needed.

And, as 2021 dawned, research arrived. The UK government awarded 18.5 million to four studies that set out to define long COVID. The European Union gave 27.9 million to a larger research initiative, known as ORCHESTRA, to study how COVID-19 was impacting peoples health. And in February 2021, the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) raised the bar and allocated $1.15 billion to research the causes of long COVID and its possible treatments.

So, nearly three years later, what has been learned? Perhaps more importantly, have any treatments been produced?

The short answers: a lot. And not quite.

To begin with, researchers set about defining long COVID as a starting point. Many understood the condition to involve persisting symptoms after a SARS-CoV-2 infection, but that was about it. They didnt know exactly what these symptoms were or who they were affecting. To gather insights, they began profiling patients.

A lot of these patients were actually young and healthy, in their 20s and 30s, says Dr. Ziyad Al-Aly, a clinical epidemiologist at Washington University. And everybody at the time [in March 2020] was telling them that, If youre young and healthy, then SARS-CoV-2, its not a big deal; youll recover. But weeks later, these people were not recovering. So we decided to research long COVID to try to understand what it is.

Al-Aly and his colleagues began by looking at patient medical records. They recently published two years worth of observations in Nature, comparing the medical data of 138,818 individuals who had had a SARS-CoV-2 infection and 5,985,227 who hadnt. There were some stark differences.

Among the non-hospitalized, long COVID took away 80.4 disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), a standard measure of disease burden, per 1,000 people. For comparison, others studies have estimated that chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, for instance, costs between 3.6 and 6.7 DALYs per 1,000 people.

Disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) summarizes the burden of healthy years of life lost due to premature mortality and disability.

Long COVIDs high disease burden is partly explained by its sheer number of possible symptoms; Al-Aly and his colleagues observed more than 80 within the medical records. These included atrial fibrillation, cardiac arrest, anemia, diabetes, fatigue, acute gastritis, myalgia, memory problems and peripheral neuropathy. Just over 30% of these sequalae remained significant in non-hospitalized patients for two years.

Long COVID is literally the long-lasting legacy of this pandemic, Al-Aly says.

Al-Alys study documented, in unprecedented detail, just how wide-ranging the effects of long COVID-19 can be. But what exactly is causing these symptoms? Parallel research has shed some light.

One study found that long COVID patients had 100 times the levels of SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells normally seen in people who recovered from the virus a finding that suggests the virus is still active in the bodies of people with long COVID, surviving in reservoirs, plaguing sufferers for months. Tiny blood clots have been found in patients clots that could be blocking oxygen from reaching cells, starving patients of their energy. The brains of people with long COVID are also more active in certain areas than the brains of those without the post-viral illness an observation that could explain the memory loss and confusion experienced by many with the condition.

Theres a lot going on under the skin of long COVID patients, multiple etiologies affecting multiple organ systems.

And this is where the field of long COVID research gets sticky, because highly variable diseases are difficult to study further. What kind of clinical researcher is best suited to the job? A cardiologist? A neurologist? An infectious disease specialist? Based off the mounting data, it seems like long COVID is a job for all three.

This issue is partly why, more than three years on from when the illness was identified, long COVID research is still stuck in its characterization phase. Have a Google of long COVID research these days and one will still come across new papers decrying how blurry the definition of the disease is and arguing for more thorough studies to detail it better.

But people with this condition cant wait any longer for such preliminary studies. Theyre desperate for interventional clinical trials now. People are hanging their hopes on these trials, says Al-Aly. They want them to be done yesterday. And yet were moving forward at a turtles pace.

Ironically, its the same kind of characterization research that demonstrates this desperation best. Almost one in five UK doctors responding to a recent BMJ survey said that they had lost their ability to work due to their post-COVID ill-health. A US study, published last year, estimated that long COVID potentially accounted for 15% of the countrys whole labor shortage.

Even those who have managed to keep working through their illness report life-altering levels of fatigue (the most common symptom of long COVID), enough to rob them of their prior quality of life. One survey of patients at a long COVID clinic, published in BMJ Open this year, found that, on average, the patients fatigue scores were worse or similar to those of people with severe kidney disease. The respondents quality of life scores were also lower than those of people with stage four lung cancer.

Most concerning of all, due to the toll of the illness, people with long COVID seem to be at a higher risk of suicide. One US patient-led survey found that 45% of respondents had experienced recent suicidal thoughts more than 11 times the national average (4%). Sadly, these data are supported by a growing number of anecdotal reports within the long COVID patient community from grieving loved ones.

So, with no approved treatments for the illness or standardized care plan and a disease duration that can span over three years in certain cases its perhaps no wonder people with long COVID are crying out for trials. Fortunately, a few have been greenlit.

In August 2023, there were 386 trials underway around the world relating to long COVID, according to the ClinicalTrials.govdatabase. A promising figure, one might think. Only 94 of those studies, however, were classed as interventional and were recruiting, and only 12 trials were testing pharmacological interventions; the rest were testing the effects of food supplements, psychological support, acupuncture and other non-drugs.

What are the 12 drug trials testing, though? Well, one led by Yale University is studying whether Paxlovid (a COVID-19 antiviral made by Pfizer) could benefit people with long COVID, perhaps by eliminating any rogue remnants of SARS-CoV-2 that may still be lingering in their bodies. Another led by a private US company is seeing whether a novel drug designed to remove pro-inflammatory nucleic acids could reduce the levels of vascular inflammation observed in long COVID patients, thereby reducing their fatigue.

But perhaps the most highly anticipated trial within the long COVID community is that undertaken by the relatively small biotech company Berlin Cures. The German start-up made headlines back in 2021 when it announced that it had effectively treated four people with long COVID with just a single infusion (per person) of its proprietary drug, BC007. Encouraged by these initial results, the company has since launched a Phase 2 clinical trial of its neutralizing functional auto-antibody formula, which recently completed a Phase 2 open study for heart failure.

We know, and others have shown, that these functional auto-antibodies play a key role in the pathogenesis of various debilitating diseases, says Oliver von Stein, Berlin Cures CEO. Long COVID, we believe, is one of them, heart failure is potentially another.

To be included as a participant in the companys trial, potential patients have to test positive for these pernicious auto-antibodies, so the Berlin Cures team can later test if a reduction in auto-antibody levels correlates with a reduction in fatigue (the prime symptom assessed by the study).

Thanks to this level of rigor built into the trial, and the early results of BC 007, von Stein and his colleagues are expecting promising results by the second half of next year results that they hope will attract a new wave of investment for a Phase 3 trial and, beyond that, other trials for other maladies.

We are optimistic and expect good data from our ongoing Phase 2 study, von Stein says. And, if this is the case, this will provide a lot of momentum to tackle other diseases, similar conditions for example, chronic fatigue syndrome.

Chronic fatigue syndrome or myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME) is the elephant in the long COVID room. For the past three years, much of the media and discussion around long COVID has treated the post-viral condition as an entirely new illness, a view that has been reflected in its research; scientists from around the world have scrambled to study the disease from scratch.

But if ME had been studied more thoroughly or even just believed years ago, much of the foundational work of long COVID research may already have been achieved. Thats certainly the belief of many of those suffering from ME, who often live exceptionally stationary lives due to their condition. Some are bed-bound, quite literally, for decades.

Half of long COVID symptoms are basically equivalent to ME symptoms, says Chris Ponting, a professor at the University of Edinburghs Medical Research Council Human Genetics Unit and lead investigator of its Decode ME project.

If anyone is compensating for these lost years of ME research, its Ponting; he and his colleagues are currently conducting the largest study of ME ever undertaken. By analyzing the DNA samples of 25,000 patients, they hope to identify genetic markers that could underpin a persons susceptibility to the disease. With that information in hand, they could then both validate the existence of the malady and identify targets for future drugs to treat it.

We anticipate that well be able to find a bunch of places in our genomes that scream at us: immunology, or mitochondria or some neurological phenotype in the genome, says Ponting. Then, through joining up the dots, we can make an evidence-based, cogent explanation for what is going wrong.

It all sounds quite promising. But theres an obstacle to follow-up studies, the same one that prevented ME research for decades: funding. Our study was funded prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, Ponting says. There has not been further funding since then.

Contrary to the hopes of many in the ME community, the relative surge of interest in long COVID has not translated into a research boon for other fatigue-inducing, likely post-viral conditions, according to Ponting. There has been a shift in the dial in acceptance of ME, he notes, which has not translated to substantial research funding that this disease deserves.

And unfortunately, at the tail end of 2023, its not just ME thats being starved of vital research. The funding well for long COVID is drying up, too.

All of these scientists, theyre back in the usual hurdles that scientists go through to try and get research up and running in this country. There is no sense of urgency at all, says Margaret OHara, founder trustee of Long Covid Support, a UK-based charity supporting people with long COVID.

OHara liaises with researchers on behalf of the charity. Two years ago, many of the scientists she spoke to were getting their funding from the UKs National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR), which launched rounds of commissioned calls that were worth millions in 2021. Now those funding rounds are a distant memory.

Then NIHR said, Right, no more commission calls, says OHara. Long COVIDs not special anymore, and if you want money to research it, you [must] go through the usual channels for example, RFPB [Research for Patient Benefit] and you compete with all the other diseases.' So, what we find now is that [research grant applications] are just getting knocked back.

The situation seems much the same across the Atlantic. Remember that $1.15 billion the US NIH allocated to long COVID research? Well, its pretty much all been spent, largely on observational, characterization research, according to an analysis by STAT, and theres been no announcement of any follow-up funding, despite calls from US researchers. Some long COVID studies in the country have since relied on charitable donations to keep going.

Why has the money dried up? Fittingly, one could blame fatigue. There is a bitter feeling within the long COVID community that the rest of the world has grown tired of all things COVID and no longer wants to hear from or fund studies affecting those damaged by the virus.

We think theres a bit of a message coming from the top to say, Yeah, lets downplay long COVID because, you know, COVIDs over, says OHara.

Whether accurate or not, this sentiment that the top has lost interest in long COVID is a doubly frustrating one for those researching the disease because, right now, the field could really do with some leadership.

[There is] no coherent approach to studying long COVID. No coherent strategy, says Al-Aly. I liken it to if you have a bunch of musicians, and everybody is singing their own tune, and theres no conductor harmonizing all of this.

Al-Alys exasperation is shared by many of his fellow researchers. At a time of disappearing grants, many say the field needs a conductor some governing body with a comprehensive, coordinated plan of action.

We think there should be a coordinated effort by UKRI [UK Research and Innovation] to say, OK, long COVID is a disease of great interest and we need to coordinate responses, says OHara.

We need to put these scientists together so that theyre not all repeating the same thing.

OHara and her colleagues at Long Covid Support have been calling for this kind of managed response since 2020. The charity recently wrote to the UK government, recommending that it declare long COVID a public health emergency and prioritize research into treatments. These pleas have so far gone unheeded, which may be unsurprising given recent political revelations. In October 2020, when presented with the health departments first guidance on long COVID, the then prime minister Boris Johnson scrawled bo***cks, in capitals, on the document.

But this offensive dismissiveness from the top doesnt mean a top-down research strategy, if coordinated by health departments and research funders, is an impractical suggestion, researchers insist.

The funders will say thats up to the scientists to coordinate, says Ponting. And they would have a point; it has to be from the ground-up mostly rather than from the top-down. But top-down does work.

The response to mad cow disease did come from the top, he adds. There have been international efforts on many different diseases going back decades, including polio. So, the answer that it is up to the scientists to organize ourselves in a competitive world, where we compete for funding because theres so little of it, is missing part of what should happen, which is that we need coordination.

While all this disarray between researchers, funders and governments plays out, long COVID patients watch on, many despondent. Some are relatively new to the illness. Some have been coping with it for over three years with little improvement. Others have improved over time, gaining back enough physical capability to return to work. But this remission is fragile. According to a Long Covid Support survey of people who had recovered from the illness, 60% got long COVID again following a reinfection of COVID-19. This happened to Naima, twice.

To protect herself from worsening symptoms, Naima still practices strict infection protocols. She restricts her socializing. She wears a mask on public transport. She routinely tests for COVID-19 and asks others she sees to do the same. Shes still behaving like many people did in 2020. Without long COVID treatments, she cant afford to change her habits.

Ive been lucky in terms of my life beforehand, she says. I no longer feel that way. I live with fear every day of reinfection.

What does she make of the state of long COVID research, then? Does it give her hope for a return to a normal, fear-free future? Not quite. While she is part of a characterization study being conducted at Imperial College London, and is optimistic that such research will one day bear useful results, she says those who have been struggling with their long COVID for years need better outcomes now.

A lot of studies are moving on to: who is getting this? Im part of a study now with Imperial taking blood samples. Its just [about] understanding: why are we so greatly impacted by this? Is there a specific gene that we have? I think that [answer] would really go a long way to understanding this. And then, of course, treatments for people who have been suffering now for years

She pauses.

I think, because Ive had improvement, she adds. I have more hope because I know that I do have better points and worse points. But some people have not had any good moments; theyve been around for three years and had no improvement. I think we really need to be able to offer something to those people, to all of us.

Those interested in following Naimas journey of long COVID recovery can subscribe to her Substack journal.

For those living with long COVID, links to support groups and symptom management guides can be found at Long Covid Support.

Those with ME can find similar support resources at ME Association.

For those struggling with suicidal ideation in the UK, Papyrus and Samaritans offer 24/7 support. Those living in the US can call the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline.

Read the original:
Long COVID Research Is a Bit of a Mess - Technology Networks

Research Assistant/Research Associate in Immunology job with … – Times Higher Education

Job description

We are looking for a dynamic and motivated Research Assistant/Research Associate to join a team working on the links between the Immune System, Clonal Haematopoiesis and Ageing.

ARCH is an age-related phenomenon where individuals acquire mutations in their bone marrow and blood cells. In most cases, these mutations are not associated with clinically apparent haematological disease, but their presence correlates with an increased risk of developing chronic inflammatory diseases and blood cancers such as Myeloid Dysplastic Syndrome and Acute Myeloid Leukemia.

The post-holder will be based in the Immunohaematology-oncology Lab led by Dr. Giorgio Napolitani, and will apply Mass Cytometry and state-of-the-art immunological techniques to define the immune landscape in the Bone Marrow and the Peripheral Blood of individuals with or without ARCH. The aim of this project will to characterize abnormalities in immune cell populations which might underlie the increased risk of developing chronic inflammatory diseases and blood cancers in individual with ARCH. The successful applicant will be embedded in a team including immunologists, haematologists and bioinformaticians working at the interface between basic and translational immune-haematology.

The applicant will be expected to be a keen Immunologist with hands-on experience in immunological techniques (i.e. Flow Cytometry, isolation and culture of immune cells from patients samples) and will receive training in Mass Cytometry and single-cell RNA sequencing.

Both postgraduate (pre-doctoral) and post-doctoral candidates are welcome to apply. A successful postdoctoral candidate can expect to be paid at Grade 6.

Dr Napolitani is committed to helping promising researchers in developing their careers, and potential applicants are encouraged to contact him (giorgio.napolitani@kcl.ac.uk).

This post will be offered on a fixed-term contract initially until 30th June 2024, with the possibility of extension until 30th June 2025.

Relevant publications:

This post will be offered on an a fixed-term contract until 30th June 2024 with possibility of extension.

This is a full-time post 100% full time equivalent

Key responsibilities

The above list of responsibilities may not be exhaustive, and the post holder will be required to undertake such tasks and responsibilities as may reasonably be expected within the scope and grading of the post.

Skills, knowledge, and experience

Research Assistant (Grade 5)

Essential criteria

1.BSc/MSc in relevant biomedical or biological sciences.

2. At least 3 years of experience in immunology-focussed laboratory research

3. Experience in analysis of immune cells isolated from patients samples (e.g. flow cytometry, RNA-sequencing, imaging)

4. Ability to use initiative to efficiently plan, optimise and progress project and communicate findings

5. Extensive IT skills (including experience with flow cytometry analysis software and general data analysis software such as GraphPad Prism or Excel)

6. Excellent interpersonal and communication skills and ability to work with colleagues at all levels

7. Good written and spoken English

8. A willingness to contribute to the work of others by offering practical and intellectual help

Desirable criteria

1. Experience in multidimensional analysisof cytometry data

2. Experience in bioinformatics, good programming skills, including in R and python.

Research Associate (Grade 6)

Essential Criteria

1. PhD/Dphil (for Grade 6) in relevant biomedical or biological sciences.

2. At least 3 years of experience in immunology-focussed laboratory research

3. Experience in analysis of immune cells isolated from patients samples (e.g. flow cytometry, RNA-sequencing, imaging)

4. Ability to use initiative to efficiently plan, optimise and progress project and communicate findings

5. Extensive IT skills (including experience with flow cytometry analysis software and general data analysis software such as GraphPad Prism or Excel)

6. Excellent interpersonal and communication skills and ability to work with colleagues at all levels

7. Good written and spoken English

8. A willingness to contribute to the work of others by offering practical and intellectual help

Desirable criteria

1. Experience in multidimensional analysisof cytometry data

2. Experience in bioinformatics, good programming skills, including in R and python.

Further information

We would like the successful candidate to start as soon as possible after the job offer (latest 1/8/2023).

Planned interview dates: early June.

See the rest here:
Research Assistant/Research Associate in Immunology job with ... - Times Higher Education

Pioneering learning resource helps academic win top teaching award – Swansea University

Academic Tom Wilkinson has been honoured for helping to develop inspirational ways of teaching immunology to students during Covid.

Besides introducing immunology across all years and programmes, he was also part of the team which created a special set of resources for remote learning. This led to him being recognised at the British Society for Immunology (BSI) inaugural awards and named one of the two joint winners of the Teaching Excellence Award.

Dr Wilkinson, from Swansea University Medical School, played a key role in the development of the Wales Immunology Teaching Toolkit, a suite of resources designed to ensure students could learn the key immunology techniques and experimental procedures even when they were unable to be in the lab due to Covid.

One of these resources, a virtual flow cytometer, was so successful that it became a permanent feature of the course and is now available to be adopted across the UK and Ireland at other institutions.

Dr Wilkinson, who also leads the Universitys microbiology and infectious disease group, described his award as a great honour.

He said: I am really glad that the BSI recognised the importance of developing new simulation materials for improved immunology teaching at undergraduate level.

As with any award I am part of a team and would like to acknowledge the support of Dr Nigel Francis, from Cardiff University, and our gifted learning technologist Dave Ruckley at Swansea. Going forward we hope to further refine our teaching simulations whichwe published last year.

This would involve the use of the simulations at other universities in the UK, so that we can further learn about their role in undergraduate teaching.

While I enjoy the live interaction in lectures and practicals with the students, the pandemic meant we needed to find other ways to engage and encourage learning and these laboratory research-inspired simulations and resources will be useful aids to support students before they enter wet labs for the first time.

The BSI Immunology Awards celebrated the remarkable achievements of individuals and teams currently shaping the future of immunology with eleven winners revealed at a special ceremony.

BSI Chief Executive Doug Brown said: We are thrilled to recognise the achievements of these extraordinary individuals. Each of them dedicates their time and expertise to shaping the future of immunology, in many cases away from the limelight. Their efforts will ensure a brighter future for our field.

Read more here:
Pioneering learning resource helps academic win top teaching award - Swansea University

12 Months of Treatment with EPIT Superior to Placebo in … – UNC Health and UNC School of Medicine

The study, called EPITOPE, led by senior author A. Wesley Burks, MD, CEO of UNC Health and dean of the UNC School of Medicine, and contributing author Edwin Kim, MD, MS, associate professor of pediatrics in the Division of Pediatric Allergy and Immunology at the UNC School of Medicine, shows superior results in desensitizing children to peanuts. Results were recently published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

Peanut allergy affects approximately two percent of children in the United States, Canada, and other westernized countries, with a rapidly rising prevalence over the past 20 years. Currently there are no FDA approved treatment options for peanut-allergic children under the age of 4 years, but further research into the safety, efficacy, and tolerability of epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT) could play a significant role in novel options for immunotherapy. The EPITOPE trial, led by senior author A. Wesley Burks, MD, CEO of UNC Health and dean of the UNC School of Medicine, evaluating the safety profile of Viaskin, a novel form of EPIT, among peanut-allergic toddlers shows that after 12 months of treatment in children aged 1-3 years, the treatment was found to be statistically superior to placebo in desensitizing participants to peanuts, increasing the peanut dose triggering allergic symptoms. Edwin Kim, MD, MS, associate professor of pediatrics in the Division of Pediatric Allergy and Immunology at the UNC School of Medicine is also a contributing author to the paper.

These are very encouraging results and move us closer to a treatment option for this increasingly prevalent and serious allergic condition, said Burks. We hope this will be available to patients in the not too distant future.

With feeding guidelines now recommending the introduction of peanut in the first year of life, we are diagnosing peanut allergy earlier and earlier, said Kim. The EPITOPE trial shows that the Viaskin peanut patch may not only be an effective treatment option but importantly a simple and safe option in this very young age group.

Published in the New England Journal of Medicine, results showed that more than one-third (37-percent) of Viaskin Peanut-treated participants in the EPITOPE trial, sponsored by DBV Technologies, a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company, reached a cumulative reactive dose 3444 mg. Viaskin, a patch-based non-oral immunotherapy, is a potential new class of treatment that harnesses the immune properties of the skin. It has the potential to help modify individuals underlying food allergy by desensitizing the immune system to an allergen.Viaskin Peanut is currently under clinical investigation and is not yet approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration or any other regulatory agencies. If approved, Viaskin Peanut would provide an additional treatment option to offer patients and families for whom the standard of care aloneallergen avoidance and use of rescue medicationmay not be enough.

EPITOPE was a Phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial designed to allow participants to go about their normal daily activities without restrictions. After one year of treatment, Viaskin Peanut resulted in statistically superior desensitization compared with placebo, with treatment responder rates of 67.0% and 33.5%, respectively. Additionally, a shift towards less severe food challenge reactions was seen following 12 months of treatment. Similar to previous studies of Viaskin Peanut in children, the most common adverse events (AEs) were local application site reactions, which decreased in frequency and severity over time. Low rates of treatment-related anaphylaxis and epinephrine use were observed. This study demonstrated that 12 months of daily EPIT with a patch containing 250 g peanut protein (1/1000th of one peanut) was sufficient to decrease the likelihood of experiencing an allergic reaction following accidental peanut exposure. Viaskin Peanut was well-tolerated by a majority of participants and had low discontinuations due to AEs and high compliance rates.

UNC School of Medicine contact: Brittany Phillips

See the rest here:
12 Months of Treatment with EPIT Superior to Placebo in ... - UNC Health and UNC School of Medicine

Absci, The Kennedy Institute for immunotherapies development – Pharmaceutical Technology

Absci has collaborated with the University of Oxfords Kennedy Institute of Rheumatology to expedite the development of AI-driven immunotherapies.

The collaboration will use the integrated drug creation platform of Absci and the clinical immunology datasets from the Kennedy Institute to identify antibodies to immune-mediated inflammatory diseases and autoimmune conditions with unprecedented speed.

Absci will utilise the generative AI models with genomics datasets from the Kennedy Institute to identify new antibodies from patients with immune responses to inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), ulcerative colitis and Crohns disease.

The company will then reassemble the antigen-antibody pairs, using its reverse immunology approach, as starting points for the development of drugs.

Absci founder and CEO Sean McClain stated: The Kennedy Institutes vast, high-quality biorepository data expand Abscis strategic research and development portfolio and aim to unlock major advances for a range of immune-mediated conditions that millions suffer from.

Together with our established data partnerships with St. Johns Cancer Institute and Aster Insights, this partnership gives Absci a robust data pipeline that enables our AI platform across a wide range of therapeutic areas as we build our internal therapeutic pipeline.

The companys integrated drug creation platform combines data, AI and wet-lab capabilities for screening several cells per week.

This allows the platform to move from AI-designed antibodies to lab-validated candidates in as little as six weeks.

The Kennedy Institute clinical research director Christopher Buckley stated: Abscis reverse immunology approach promises to turn clinical data into pharmaceutical drugs.

We are excited about the potential for generative AI to accelerate the discovery of promising drug candidates and better understand their potential efficacy and safety profiles.

This partnership will help accelerate our findings in the clinic into new immunotherapies for patients.

Continue reading here:
Absci, The Kennedy Institute for immunotherapies development - Pharmaceutical Technology

Customizing T Cell-Based Immunotherapies in a ‘SNAP’ – UPMC

5/9/2023

PITTSBURGH University of Pittsburgh researchers have developed a universal receptor system that allows T cells to recognize any cell surface target, enabling highly customizable CAR T cell and other immunotherapies for treating cancer and other diseases. The discovery could extend into solid tumors and give more patients access to the game-changing results CAR T cell therapy has produced in certain blood cancers.

Described in a Nature Communications study published today, the new approach involves engineering T cells with receptors bearing a universal SNAPtag" that fuses with antibodies targeting different proteins. By tweaking the type or dose of these antibodies, treatments could be tailored for optimal immune responses.

The researchers showed that their SNAP approach works in two important receptors: CAR receptors, a synthetic T cell receptor that coordinates a suite of immune responses, and SynNotch, a synthetic receptor that can be programmed to activate just about any gene. With the addition of SNAP, the possibilities for customized therapies become almost endless.

We showed for the first time that we can make a universal SynNotch receptor. This SNAP-SynNotch system is super programmable because you can have both designer input and designer gene output, said senior author Jason Lohmueller, Ph.D., assistant professor of surgery and immunology in the division of surgical oncology at the Pitt School of Medicine and investigator at UPMC Hillman Cancer Center. Our hope is that we can use this approach to make cell therapies and deliver genes for cancer, autoimmune disorders, organ transplantation tolerance and more.

CAR T cell immunotherapy involves engineering a patients own cells so that the T cell receptor recognizes a specific protein on cancer cells before infusing them back into the patient.

One of the big problems with CAR T therapy is that youre targeting just one protein, explained Lohmueller. If the tumor evolves to lose that protein or downregulate it, you need to re-engineer the T cells a second time, which is a highly involved and expensive process.

To overcome this problem, Lohmueller, first author Elisa Ruffo, Ph.D., postdoctoral associate at Pitt, Alexander Deiters, Ph.D., professor of chemistry at Pitt and their colleagues developed universal SNAP-CAR T cells by adding a SNAPtag enzyme to the CAR receptor. These cells are administered along with cancer-targeting antibodies that are labeled with a molecule called benzylguanine.

Via a bio-orthogonal chemistry a type of reaction that occurs in living systems without interfering with natural processes the SNAPtag reacts with benzylguanine, fusing the antibody to the receptor. Adding different antibodies, at the same time or one after another, allows the receptor to recognize different tumor features.

Whats unique about our approach is how the T cell interacts with the antibody. Its not just binding, but fusing via covalent attachment the strongest form of chemical bond, explained Lohmueller. This type of bio-orthogonal approach has been shown to work in animals for imaging purposes, but were among the first to use it therapeutically, so were really pushing the boundaries of covalent technology.

An advantage of this tight bond means that activation of the receptor can be achieved with lower doses of antibody, said Lohmueller. Using mathematical modeling, graduate student Adam Butchy and Natasa Miskov-Zivanov, Ph.D., assistant professor of electrical and computer engineering at Pitts Swanson School of Engineering, showed that it may also be possible to get activity from weaker interactions between antibodies and tumor cells, giving greater flexibility to the types of cancer proteins that can be targeted.

The covalent bond was also the secret ingredient for creating SNAP-SynNotch cells. When a SynNotch receptor is activated, mechanical pulling forces stretch the receptor to expose part of the protein, which is then cut to release a transcription factor that travels to the cells nucleus to turn on expression of a chosen gene.

We found that we needed the strength of a covalent bond to tolerate that pulling force, explained Lohmueller. If we just had binding between receptor and antibody, the receptor would come apart and we wouldnt get signaling.

The researchers showed that their universal SNAP-CAR and SNAP-SynNotch receptors could be activated in response to different targets by adding the corresponding antibodies. SNAP-CAR T cells were also able to simultaneously target multiple proteins on different types of cells, suggesting that they could help avoid cancer relapse due to variation in tumor targets or loss of those targets.

In a mouse model of cancer, treatment with SNAP-CAR T cells shrunk tumors and greatly prolonged survival, an important proof-of-concept that sets the stage to test this approach in clinical trials in partnership with Coeptis Therapeutics, which has licensed the SNAP-CAR technology from Pitt.

Other authors on the study were Yaniv Tivon, Victor So, Michael Kvorjak, Avani Parikh, M.S., Eric L. Adams, M.D., and Olivera J. Finn, Ph.D., all of Pitt or UPMC.

This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health (R01 GM142007, R35 CA210039, R21 AI130815, 1S10OD011925-01 and P3 0CA047904), the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (W911NF-17-1-0135), the Italian Foundation for Cancer Research (22321), and the Michael G Wells Prize.

PHOTO DETAILS: (click image for high-res version)

CREDIT: Jason LohmuellerCAPTION: Jason Lohmueller, Ph.D., assistant professor of surgery and immunology in the division of surgical oncology at the Pitt School of Medicine and investigator at UPMC Hillman Cancer Center

Originally posted here:
Customizing T Cell-Based Immunotherapies in a 'SNAP' - UPMC

Understanding Lupus: an interview with the Garvan Institute – News-Medical.Net

To commemorate World Lupus Day, we spoke to Elissa Deenick, co-lead of the Precision Immunology Program at the Garvan Institute, about the current state of lupus understanding and what needs to happen to make lupus visible.

My name is Elissa Deenick, Im a lab head and co-lead of the Precision Immunology Program at the Garvan Institute of Medical Research in Sydney, Australia, and a Scientia A/Prof at UNSW Sydney. I have 20 years of experience studying the signals that control immune cells. My research asks how we can ensure these cells make a protective immune response while avoiding harmful responses such as autoimmunity (where the immune system attacks our own bodies) and allergy. I do this by studying patients with rare genetic diseases that disrupt the immune system and applying what we learn there to understand how the immune system goes wrong in other diseases like lupus.

The exact pathophysiology of lupus and what drives it is very complicated and there are likely many factors involved. We do know that in lupus, B cells, which usually make antibodies that protect us from infection, end up making antibodies against normal parts of the body like DNA. These antibodies then bind to their targets like DNA, forming what is called immune complexes. These can build up in different parts of the body like the kidney, joints or the skin where they induce inflammation and cause the damage that we know is associated with lupus.

The incidence of lupus seems to be increasing and thats true of many autoimmune diseases so lupus is part of that trend. That increase is probably, in part, an increase in awareness and diagnosis, but theres almost certainly a real increase in incidence there as well. However, it is not clear why these diseases are increasing thats something we really need more research to understand.

Weve discovered different ways in which the immune system can become dysregulated and cause inappropriate production of antibodies.

For example, poor clearance of dead or dying cells (which means there are dead bits of cells in places they shouldnt be, containing things like DNA that can activate B cells), dysregulation of B cells, and inappropriate production of cytokines such as interferons.

But despite the fact that our understanding of lupus has increased, we still dont have a cure for lupus and patients are largely dependent on immunosuppressive drugs that can put them at risk of side effects such as infections.

One of the biggest issues in lupus is that its almost certainly not one disease, but instead a cluster of diseases with similar symptoms but completely different drivers of disease in different people. And of course, if the underlying cause of disease is different from patient to patient, then the most effective treatment is also likely going to differ too. This heterogeneity amongst patients probably partly explains why many clinical trials of new drugs have failed in the past: you may have 10% of people in the lupus population who may respond well to that drug, but thats going to be obscured by the other 90% of people who respond poorly because thats the wrong drug for them. The focus for research then needs to be on ways to identify the driver of disease in each patient so we can match the drug to the disease.

One of the ways that Im approaching that question is by studying rare patients who have what are called inborn errors of immunity. These are caused by rare genetic variants in key genes that are important for the immune system. These genetic variants disrupt the function of those pathways and make the immune system go wrong. And in some cases, part of the way they make it go wrong is that B cells produce these pathogenic antibodies that cause autoimmunity and lupus. The significance of this for us is that it identifies pathways that can be drivers of disease. So what were doing is studying those pathways and then seeing if they might also be drivers in other patients with lupus (even if they dont have the genetic variant).

Image Credit: adike/Shutterstock.com

Another question were interested in is the infections in lupus patients. People with lupus have a higher risk of severe infections, which can require time in hospital to get them under control. The problem is, though, that were not good at predicting which people with lupus are at the highest risk of infection. Were trying to work out ways of predicting who is at greatest risk and whether thats because of the immunosuppressive drugs theyre on or whether its something thats intrinsic to the dysregulation of their immune system.

Recent advances in single-cell sequencing techniques, such as single-cell RNA sequencing, have enabled us to analyse immune cell populations in patients at an unprecedented level of detail. These technologies are illuminating how immune responses differ between people and vary under different conditions, such as in lupus patients or in individuals with COVID-19 infections. With new insight into these granular differences, we can achieve a much deeper understanding of how the immune system functions in both health and disease. This has enabled a deeper dive into human immunology, including lupus pathology.

I think there is increasing awareness about lupus and that may be in part from celebrities coming out but also I think the COVID-19 pandemic has driven a greater understanding of the immune system in general. The general public is now much more familiar with talking about B cells and T cells and antibodies, so when people ask me about my work theres already a much greater level of understanding of these concepts. I think that helps with understanding and awareness of immune-mediated disease as well.

Image Credit: Rito Succeed/Shutterstock.com

Again, I think the idea that lupus is one disease with one solution is quite commonplace, unfortunately. The reality is that the experience of lupus is very different from person to person and not all lupus can be treated in the same way.

I think we need to keep hearing stories directly from the people who are affected by lupus how it affects their lives and health. Many people still have misconceptions about what lupus is and how serious and life-altering it can be, but sharing real stories is a powerful way to raise awareness and build empathy.

A/Prof Elissa Deenick is head of the Lymphocyte Signalling and Activation Lab and co-leads the Precision Immunology Program at the Garvan Institute of Medical Research. She is a Scientia A/Prof at the Faculty of Medicine and Health, UNSW Sydney.

A/Prof Deenick undertook her PhD with Dr Phil Hodgkin at the Centenary Institute/University of Sydney. Following her PhD she moved to Canada to take up a postdoctoral position in the lab of Dr Pam Ohashi at the University of Toronto, looking at the signalling pathways controlling T cell activation and tolerance.

She returned to Sydney to work at the Garvan Institute of Medical Research, where she continues to uncover the signals controlling lymphocyte activation and differentiation and how this is controlled to ensure protection against infection while avoiding harmful immune responses like allergy and autoimmunity.

Written by

Danielle graduated with a 2:1 in Biological Sciences with Professional Training Year from Cardiff University. During her Professional Training Year, Danielle worked with registered charity the Frozen Ark Project, creating and promoting various forms of content within their brand guidelines. Danielle has a great appreciation and passion for science communication and enjoys reading non-fiction and fiction in her spare time. Her other interests include doing yoga, collecting vinyl, and visiting museums.

Please use one of the following formats to cite this article in your essay, paper or report:

APA

Ellis, Danielle. (2023, May 09). Understanding Lupus: an interview with the Garvan Institute. News-Medical. Retrieved on May 13, 2023 from https://www.news-medical.net/news/20230509/Understanding-Lupus-an-interview-with-the-Garvan-Institute.aspx.

MLA

Ellis, Danielle. "Understanding Lupus: an interview with the Garvan Institute". News-Medical. 13 May 2023. <https://www.news-medical.net/news/20230509/Understanding-Lupus-an-interview-with-the-Garvan-Institute.aspx>.

Chicago

Ellis, Danielle. "Understanding Lupus: an interview with the Garvan Institute". News-Medical. https://www.news-medical.net/news/20230509/Understanding-Lupus-an-interview-with-the-Garvan-Institute.aspx. (accessed May 13, 2023).

Harvard

Ellis, Danielle. 2023. Understanding Lupus: an interview with the Garvan Institute. News-Medical, viewed 13 May 2023, https://www.news-medical.net/news/20230509/Understanding-Lupus-an-interview-with-the-Garvan-Institute.aspx.

Continued here:
Understanding Lupus: an interview with the Garvan Institute - News-Medical.Net

Professor Laura Mackay wins LEO Foundation Award in Region … – The Peter Doherty Institute for Infection and Immunity

Professor Laura Mackay, Laboratory Head and Immunology Theme Leader at the Doherty Institute, and National Health and Media Research Council (NHMRC) Leadership Fellow at the University of Melbourne, has been awarded the LEO Foundation Award in Region Asia-Pacific for her contributions to our understanding of T cells and their relevance for immunology memory.

The prestigious honour, which was announced at the International Societies for Investigative Dermatology (ISID) in Japan earlier this week, aims to highlight outstanding young researchers and scientists from around the world whose work represents an extraordinary contribution to skin research.

Professor Mackay praised the support of the LEO Foundation for early- and mid-career researchers, like herself, and said she was honoured to receive the recognition.

The LEO Foundations work to highlight young skin researchers will greatly support our teams pursuit to understand the role of memory T cells in the skin, Professor Mackay said.

It is an honour to be recognised for this award among the talented pool of researchers across the Asia-Pacific region and to be afforded the opportunity to champion skin immunology research.

Based in Denmark, the LEO Foundation 's philanthropic awards and grants aim to support the best international research in skin diseases.

Three times a year, three outstanding scientists from the Americas, Europe, Middle East and Africa (EMEA) and Asia-Pacific receive a LEO Foundation Award to support their promising research in skin health. The Awards are granted in open competition with all award applications being evaluated by an independent and international global review panel.

See the rest here:
Professor Laura Mackay wins LEO Foundation Award in Region ... - The Peter Doherty Institute for Infection and Immunity