Where Does Kiora Pharmaceuticals Inc (KPRX) Stock Fall in the Biotechnology Field After It Has Risen 33.24% This Week?  InvestorsObserver

Read more:
Where Does Kiora Pharmaceuticals Inc (KPRX) Stock Fall in the Biotechnology Field After It Has Risen 33.24% This Week? - InvestorsObserver

[ Click the lower right icon to view fullscreen with transcript ^ ]

During the recent biotechnology financing boom, investors pumped billions of dollars into startups across specialties ranging from cell and gene therapy to cancer immunotherapy and CRISPR genome editing. But that boom has given way to a bear market in the past year.

Simon Barnett and Ali Urman are senior analysts with ARK Invest, an investment management firm that specializes in public companies with a bent for innovation. Because public markets remain dry, ARK is now also looking to invest in private companies as well.

In this discussion with GENs Fay Lin, PhD, and Alex Philippidis, Simon Barnett and Ali Urman explain how ARK Invest came to focus on disruptive public companies, how the firm approaches advancing innovation in its portfolio companies, and their search for startups with promising technologies and enough business expertise to commercialize them. The pair also describes how the new ARK Innovation Center in St. Petersburg, Florida, will allow the firm to accelerate the growth of early-stage companies in the area.

Here is the original post:
The View from ARK Invest: A Discussion with Simon Barnett and Ali Urman - Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News

Press release

Cambridge, MA U.S.A. (September 26, 2022) Allarity Therapeutics, Inc. (Nasdaq: ALLR) (Allarity or the Company), a clinical-stage pharmaceutical company developing novel oncology therapeutics together with drug-specific DRP companion diagnostics for personalized cancer care, today announced the appointment of Jerry McLaughlin as a new member of its Board of Directors, effective October 1, 2022.

Mr. McLaughlin is a highly accomplished biotechnology executive with extensive experience in financing, drug development, licensing, commercialization, and product lifecycle management. Mr. McLaughlin is expected to serve on the compensation, and audit committees as an independent director.

I am delighted that Jerry has chosen to join Allaritys board at this crucial time in our evolution, said Dr. Duncan Moore, Allaritys Chairman of the Board. His operational experience in clinical stage therapeutic development and capital markets acumen will be of great value as we continue to implement the Companys combination therapy-focused strategy.

Mr. McLaughlin said: I firmly believe Allarity Therapeutics is in a unique position to become a leader within the personalized medicine space by developing novel combination oncology therapies together with the Companys unique DRP companion diagnostics. Allaritys recent strategic shift is aligned with the ongoing patient and market realities in oncology, as we continue to see substantially higher patient benefits with combination therapies. I look forward to supporting the CEO, Jim Cullem, and the rest of the Allarity team in unlocking both the clinical and commercial potential of this strategy.

Mr. McLaughlin has three decades of experience in leading operational and executive management roles. He made key contributions to significant life science milestones, including product launches, acquisitions, and financings. He is currently serving as CEO and Board Member of Life Biosciences, LLC, a development-stage biopharmaceutical company advancing therapeutics for patients with neurological and psychiatric diseases. Prior to serving in this role, he was President, CEO, and Member of the Board of Directors at Neos Therapeutics (acquired by Aytu BioScience.) Before joining Neos Therapeutics, he served as President, CEO, and Member of the Board of Directors at AgeneBio, Inc. Earlier in his career, he held corporate leadership roles at NuPathe, Inc., Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc., and Merck & Co., Inc. He received his B.A. from Dickinson College and his MBA from Villanova University in Pennsylvania.

About Allarity Therapeutics

Allarity Therapeutics, Inc. (Nasdaq: ALLR) develops drugs for personalized treatment of cancer guided by its proprietary and highly validated companion diagnostic technology, the DRP platform. The Company has a mature portfolio of three drug candidates: stenoparib, a PARP inhibitor in Phase 2 development for ovarian cancer; dovitinib, a post-Phase 3 pan-tyrosine kinase inhibitor; and the European rights to IXEMPRA (Ixabepilone), a microtubule inhibitor approved in the U.S. and marketed by R-PHARM U.S. for the treatment of second-line metastatic breast cancer, currently in Phase 2 development in Europe for the same indication. Additionally, the Company has rights in two secondary assets: 2X-111, a liposomal formulation of doxorubicin in Phase 2 development for metastatic breast cancer and/or glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), which is the subject of discussions for a restructured out-license to Smerud Medical Research International AS; and LiPlaCis, a liposomal formulation of cisplatin and its accompanying DRP, being developed via a partnership with Chosa ApS, an affiliate of Smerud Medical Research International, for late-stage metastatic breast cancer. The Company is headquartered in the United States and maintains an R&D facility in Hoersholm, Denmark. For more information, please visit the Companys website at http://www.Allarity.com.

About the Drug Response Predictor DRP Companion Diagnostic

Allarity uses its drug-specific DRP to select those patients who, by the genetic signature of their cancer, are found to have a high likelihood of responding to the specific drug. By screening patients before treatment, and only treating those patients with a sufficiently high DRP score, the therapeutic response rate can be significantly increased. The DRP method builds on the comparison of sensitive vs. resistant human cancer cell lines, including transcriptomic information from cell lines combined with clinical tumor biology filters and prior clinical trial outcomes. DRP is based on messenger RNA from patient biopsies. The DRP platform has proven its ability to provide a statistically significant prediction of the clinical outcome from drug treatment in cancer patients in 37 out of 47 clinical studies that were examined (both retrospective and prospective), including ongoing, prospective Phase 2 trials of Stenoparib and IXEMPRA. The DRP platform, which can be used in all cancer types and is patented for more than 70 anti-cancer drugs, has been extensively published in peer reviewed literature.

Follow Allarity on Social Media

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/AllarityTx/ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/allaritytx/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/allaritytx

Forward-Looking Statements

This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements provide Allaritys current expectations or forecasts of future events. The words anticipates, believe, continue, could, estimate, expect, intends, may, might, plan, possible, potential, predicts, project, should, would and similar expressions may identify forward-looking statements, but the absence of these words does not mean that a statement is not forward-looking. These forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements related to clinical and commercial potential due to the Company advancing dovitinib in combination with another therapeutic candidate or other approved drug, any statements related to ongoing clinical trials for stenoparib as a monotherapy or in combination with another therapeutic candidate for the treatment of advanced ovarian cancer, or ongoing clinical trials (in Europe) for IXEMPRA for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer, and statements relating to the effectiveness of the Companys DRP companion diagnostics platform in predicting whether a particular patient is likely to respond to a specific drug. Any forward-looking statements in this press release are based on managements current expectations of future events and are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially and adversely from those set forth in or implied by such forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to,the risk that results of a clinical study do not necessarily predict final results and that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change following more comprehensive reviews of the data, and as more patient data become available, the risk that results of a clinical study are subject to interpretation and additional analyses may be needed and/or may contradict such results, the receipt of regulatory approval for dovitinib or any of our other therapeutic candidates or, if approved, the successful commercialization of such products, the risk of cessation or delay of any of the ongoing or planned clinical trials and/or our development of our product candidates, the risk that the results of previously conducted studies will not be repeated or observed in ongoing or future studies involving our therapeutic candidates, and the risk that the current COVID-19 pandemic will impact the Companys current and future clinical trials and the timing of the Companys preclinical studies and other operations. For a discussion of other risks and uncertainties, and other important factors, any of which could cause our actual results to differ from those contained in the forward-looking statements, see the section entitled Risk Factors in our Form S-1 registration statementon file with theSecurities and Exchange Commission, available at the Securities and Exchange Commissions website atwww.sec.gov, and as well as discussions of potential risks, uncertainties and other important factors in the Companys subsequent filings with theSecurities and Exchange Commission. All information in this press release is as of the date of the release, and the Company undertakes no duty to update this information unless required by law.

###

Company Contact:

Thomas JensenSenior V.P. of Investor Relationsinvestorrelations@allarity.com

Investor Relations:

Chuck PadalaLifeSci Advisors+1(646) 627-8390chuck@lifesciadvisors.comU.S. Media Contact:

Mike Beyer Sam Brown, Inc. +1 (312) 961-2502 mikebeyer@sambrown.com

EU Media Contact:

Thomas PedersenCarrotize PR & Communications +45 6062 9390tsp@carrotize.com

Read the rest here:
Allarity Therapeutics Appoints Seasoned Biotechnology Executive Jerry McLaughlin to Board of Directors - GlobeNewswire

Highlights

Events and Activities

NIBGE Email

Welcome to NIBGE

PAEC has clear mandates on the safe use of modern sciences with an aim to improve the socio economic growth of the country. NIBGE is one of the main biotechnology institutes of the four bioscience centers of PAEC and was formally inaugurated by the President of Pakistan in 1994. It is also an affiliate center of ICGEB. The institute is a focal point of modern biotechnology and provides a technology receiving unit to help the development of country through applications of modern biotechnology and genetic engineering. The research programs at NIBGE are mainly aimed at improving agriculture, health, environment and industry and are supported by national and international financial grants. The institute research facilities include state of the art equipments supported by technical services, IT facility and a National Library for Biological Sciences. The institute now offers several services and marketable products. The educational programs leading to MPhil and PhD degrees have also been incorporated in the institutes mandate for the development of human resources in modern sciences.

Announcement

Featured News

Read the rest here:
Home :: National Institute for Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering

Putnam Investments announced that on Friday, September 30, it will launch two new transparent, actively managed, equity exchange traded funds: the Putnam BDC Income ETF (NYSE Arca: PBDC), concentrating on business development companies (BDCs), and the Putnam BioRevolutionETF(NYSE Arca: SYNB), centered on companies operating at the intersection of technology and biology in the biology revolution.

PBDC will represent the first actively managed BDC ETF in the marketplace, investing in a host of BDC opportunities with an eye toward generating income for investors.

Putnam is excited to bring these two dynamic new strategies to market as we seek to address the long-term investment needs of advisors and their clients, said Robert L. Reynolds, president and CEO of Putnam Investments, in a news release. Our firm is focused on providing unique and differentiated offerings delivered through a variety of vehicles that tap Putnams deep investing expertise and exceptional research capabilities.

PBDC invests in exchange traded BDCs based in the U.S. and registered with the SEC. BDCs generally invest in, lend capital to, or provide services to privately held U.S. companies or thinly traded U.S. public companies. Putnam has managed a similar non-public BDC-focused strategy for nearly five years. The fund is managed by Michael Petro.

SYNB, meanwhile, invests in companies that seek to capitalize on the convergence of technological developments in the life sciences sector, including technology-enabling companies, synthetic biology companies, and companies that operate in industries that are likely to benefit from the biology revolution. The fund is managed by William Rives.

We have identified BDCs and advances in the biology sector as providing distinctive opportunities for investors in rapidly evolving sectors of the economy, added Carlo Forcione, head of product and strategy at Putnam Investments. Our new ETFs represent innovative, early-to-market offerings that will align well with the portfolio construction needs of our clients and the broader marketplace.

The new ETFs will join Putnams existing suite of four active ETFs that the firm launched in May 2021: the Putnam Focused Large Cap Growth ETF (NYSE Arca: PGRO), the Putnam Focused Large Cap Value ETF (NYSE Arca: PVAL), the Putnam Sustainable Future ETF (NYSE Arca: PFUT), and the Putnam Sustainable Leaders ETF (NYSE Arca: PLDR).

For more news, information, and strategy, visitVettaFi.

Read the rest here:
Putnam Launches 2 Active ETFs Targeting BDCs and Biotechnology - ETF Trends

Image Source: FreeImages

The global bio-economy is growing at an incredible pace, with plenty of opportunity for investors. The biotech industry in general, and biotech stocks specifically, provide a lot of potential for long-term returns. Biotechnology is the application of biological principles to create new products and services. It has many applications, from agricultural uses to medical research and drug development. As a result, the biotechnology sector has grown strongly as other industries adopt its technologies and invest in related ventures and partnerships.Investors looking to capitalize on this growth need to understand which companies are leading the way. Fortunately, there are several great biotechnology stocks that can offer excellent returns in the coming years. Here are some of the top opportunities currently available:

Global Blood Therapeutics (GBT) is an emerging biotechnology company focused on creating therapies for rare blood diseases.GBTs lead product, Prophage, is a gene therapy designed to treat patients with beta-thalassemia, a rare inherited blood disorder.drug has been granted Orphan Drug Designation by the FDA and designation as a Breakthrough Therapy from the FDAs Oncology Drug Review Committee.GBT has also partnered with Galapagos NV, one of the top gene-therapy companies in the world. The company has a Phase 3 development program for Prophage, with a goal to complete registration in the next few years. With a potential blockbuster drug on the table, GBT has the potential to grow very quickly.

BridgeBio Pharma (BBIO) is a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company focused on bringing new therapies to patients suffering from rare diseases.BBIO has a robust product pipeline, with several therapies in Phase 1 and 2 clinical trials. The company is also in the pre-clinical development stages of several promising new therapies. BBIOs main product candidates are focused on iron-related disorders, including an iron chelating agent for patients with rare blood diseases.BBIO has partnered with some of the largest companies in the world, including The Medicines Company, Celgene, and Bayer.BBIOs therapies are currently in Phase 2 development and are expected to advance into Phase 3 in the next few years. When these drugs are approved, BBIO will be poised for growth.

SIGA Technologies (SIGA) is a biopharmaceutical company focused on creating vaccines and medicines for infectious diseases.SIGA has a robust product pipeline focused on viral diseases, including respiratory and viral hemorrhagic fever diseases. The company is currently investing in three main products.First is a universal flu vaccine designed to address issues with current flu vaccines. SIGAs universal flu vaccine is administered as a nasal spray, has no adjuvant, and is designed to provide constant immunity to the most common flu strains.Second is an Ebola vaccine designed to treat patients infected with the Ebola virus. The vaccine has been in development since 2003, when the Ebola outbreak in Africa began.Third is a therapeutic vaccine designed to treat dengue fever. The vaccine has completed Phase 1/2 trials and is expected to advance into Phase 3 trials in the next few years.

Ninety (NOVT) is a biotechnology company focused on creating therapies for the eye.NOVT is currently developing a first-in-kind therapy called a corneal scarring therapy that could replace corneal transplants in some patients.The company is expected to advance this product into Phase 3 trials in the next few years. Once the treatment is approved, it could become a huge product for NOVT.While the companys main product remains in development, it is also investing in other eye-related therapies. NOVT has a partnership with Galapagos NV to develop gene therapies for retinal diseases. The company is also developing a novel combination therapy for glaucoma.

Biotechnology is a growing industry that is expected to continue to see strong growth. The sector is also expected to see some strong mergers and acquisitions, providing another avenue for growth.Investors looking for growth in the biotechnology industry can consider investing in any of the top biotechnology stocks above. These companies are all poised for growth over the next several years, and could offer excellent returns for investors.

Image Source: FreeImages

The global economy is growing incredibly, with plenty of opportunities for investors. The biotech industry, in general, and biotech stocks, provide a lot of potential for long-term returns. Biotechnology is the application of biological principles to create new products and services. It has many applications, from agricultural uses to medical research and drug development. As a result, biotechnology has grown strongly as other industries adopt its technologies and invest in related ventures and partnerships. Investors looking to capitalize on this growth need to understand which companies are leading the way. Fortunately, several great biotechnology stocks can offer excellent returns in the coming years. Here are some of the top opportunities currently available:

Global Blood Therapeutics (GBT) is an emerging biotechnology company focused on creating therapies for rare blood diseases.GBTs lead product, Prophage, is a gene therapy designed to treat patients with beta-thalassemia, a rare inherited blood disorder. The drug has been granted Orphan Drug Designation by the FDA and designated as a Breakthrough Therapy by the FDAs Oncology Drug Review Committee.GBT has also partnered with Galapagos NV, one of the top gene-therapy companies in the world. In addition, the company has a Phase 3 development program for Prophage, to complete registration in the next few years. With a potential blockbuster drug on the table, GBT has the potential to grow very quickly.

BridgeBio Pharma (BBIO) is a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company focused on bringing new therapies to patients suffering from rare diseases.BBIO has a robust product pipeline, with several therapies in Phase 1 and 2 clinical trials. The company is also in the pre-clinical development stages of several promising new therapies. BBIOs main product candidates are focused on iron-related disorders, including an iron chelating agent for patients with rare blood diseases.BBIO has partnered with some of the largest companies in the world, including The Medicines Company, Celgene, and Bayer.BBIOs therapies are currently in Phase 2 development and are expected to advance into Phase 3 in the next few years. When these drugs are approved, BBIO will be poised for growth.

SIGA Technologies (SIGA) is a biopharmaceutical company focused on creating vaccines and medicines for infectious diseases.SIGAs robust product pipeline focused on viral diseases, including respiratory and viral hemorrhagic fever. The company is currently investing in three main products:

The vaccine has completed Phase 1/2 trials and is expected to advance into Phase 3 trials in the next few years.

Ninety (NOVT) is a biotechnology company focused on creating therapies for the eye.NOVT is currently developing a first-in-kind therapy called corneal scarring therapy that could replace corneal transplants in some patients. The company is expected to advance this product into Phase 3 trials in the next few years. Once approved, the treatment could become a huge product for NOVT. While the companys main product remains developing, it is also investing in other eye-related therapies. For example, NOVT partnered with Galapagos NV to develop gene therapies for retinal diseases. In addition, the company is also developing a novel combination therapy for glaucoma.

Biotechnology is a growing industry that is expected to continue to see strong growth. The sector is also expected to see strong mergers and acquisitions, providing another avenue for growth. Investors looking for growth in the biotechnology industry can consider investing in any of the top biotechnology stocks above. These companies are poised for growth over the next several years and could offer excellent returns for investors.

View post:
The Best Biotechnology Stocks to Invest in Right Now - Best Stocks

Los Angeles, USA: A recent report published by Verified Market Research, titled [Global Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals Market, History and Forecasts for 2022-2029, data broken down by manufacturers, key regions, types and applications], contains an in-depth analysis of the Global Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals Market. The research report is divided in such a way as to highlight the key areas of the market and give the reader a complete picture. The report examines various aspects of the Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals market, such as its opportunities to explore its driving forces and limitations, market size, market segment analysis, regional prospects, key players and the competitive environment. Market Research Report Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals uses the methodology of primary and secondary research to provide accurate data to its readers. To fully assess the market and key players. Analysts also used SWOT analysis and analysis of Porters five strengths.

In the Global Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals Market, analysts provided historical and forecast data on the market, as well as the expected growth of average annual indicators. This will help the reader to evaluate the market in terms of its growth.

Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals Market is growing at a faster pace with substantial growth rates over the last few years and is estimated that the market will grow significantly in the forecasted period i.e. 2020 to 2027.

Get a Sample Copy (Including FULL TOC, Graphs And Tables) Of This Report @ https://www.verifiedmarketresearch.com/download-sample?rid=19246

Global Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals Market : Drivers and Restraints

In this chapter, the report provides a full explanation of the driving forces of the market. It highlights the main driving forces of the market, which are expected to make a significant contribution to the growth of the market. It covers various industries that are developing in the same field, identifies the main areas of application and determines which of them will play an important role. The report also examines some of the new technologies and developments presented by manufacturers that are expected to become notable engines for the global Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals market.

This chapter also gives the reader important information regarding restrictions that may hinder the growth of the Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals market in the future. This research report discussed factors such as changes in land prices, labor and production costs, environmental issues, new government policies and business standards. In addition, the analysts also gave an idea of the potential opportunities existing in the global market of Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals. It offers a new perspective of turning threats into viable options to give the company a chance to win.

Global Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals Market : Competitive rivalry

The research report includes an analysis of the competitive environment present in the Global Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals Market. It includes an assessment of current and future trends in which players can invest. In addition, it also includes an assessment of the financial prospects of the players and explains the nature of the competition.

Key Players mentioned in the Global Market Research Report Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals Market:

Market segmentation of Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals market:

Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals market is divided by type and application. For the period 2021-2028, cross-segment growth provides accurate calculations and forecasts of sales by Type and Application in terms of volume and value. This analysis can help you grow your business by targeting qualified niche markets.

Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals Market by Product

Fullerenes Liquid Crystals Liposomes Nanoshells Quantum dots Superparamagnetic nanoparticles

Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals Market by Application

Biotechnology Pharmaceutical

Get Exclusive Discount on this Premium Report @ https://www.verifiedmarketresearch.com/ask-for-discount?rid=19246

Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals Market Report Scope

Global Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals Market: Regional segmentation

For further understanding, the research report includes a geographical segmentation of the Global Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals Market. It provides an assessment of the volatility of political scenarios and changes that may be made to regulatory structures. This estimate provides an accurate analysis of the regional growth of the Global Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals Market.

Middle East and Africa (GCC countries and Egypt)North America (USA, Mexico and Canada)South America (Brazil, etc.)Europe (Turkey, Germany, Russia, Great Britain, Italy, France, etc.)Asia-Pacific region (Vietnam, China, Malaysia, Japan, Philippines, Korea, Thailand, India, Indonesia and Australia)

Global Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals Market: Research methodology

The research methodologies used by analysts play a crucial role in how the publication was compiled. Analysts used primary and secondary research methodologies to create a comprehensive analysis. For an accurate and accurate analysis of the Global Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals Market, analysts use ascending and descending approaches.

Table of Contents

Report Overview:It includes major players of the global Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals Market covered in the research study, research scope, and Market segments by type, market segments by application, years considered for the research study, and objectives of the report.

Global Growth Trends:This section focuses on industry trends where market drivers and top market trends are shed light upon. It also provides growth rates of key producers operating in the global Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals Market. Furthermore, it offers production and capacity analysis where marketing pricing trends, capacity, production, and production value of the global Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals Market are discussed.

Market Share by Manufacturers:Here, the report provides details about revenue by manufacturers, production and capacity by manufacturers, price by manufacturers, expansion plans, mergers and acquisitions, and products, market entry dates, distribution, and market areas of key manufacturers.

Market Size by Type:This section concentrates on product type segments where production value market share, price, and production market share by product type are discussed.

Market Size by Application:Besides an overview of the global Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals Market by application, it gives a study on the consumption in the global Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals Market by application.

Production by Region:Here, the production value growth rate, production growth rate, import and export, and key players of each regional market are provided.

Consumption by Region:This section provides information on the consumption in each regional market studied in the report. The consumption is discussed on the basis of country, application, and product type.

Company Profiles:Almost all leading players of the global Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals Market are profiled in this section. The analysts have provided information about their recent developments in the global Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals Market, products, revenue, production, business, and company.

Market Forecast by Production:The production and production value forecasts included in this section are for the global Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals Market as well as for key regional markets.

Market Forecast by Consumption:The consumption and consumption value forecasts included in this section are for the global Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals Market as well as for key regional markets.

Value Chain and Sales Analysis:It deeply analyzes customers, distributors, sales channels, and value chain of the global Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals Market.

To Gain More Insights into the Market Analysis, Browse Summary of the Research Report @https://www.verifiedmarketresearch.com/product/nanoparticles-in-biotechnology-and-pharmaceuticals-market/

Visualize Anesthesia Delivery Systems Market using Verified Market Intelligence:-

Verified Market Intelligence is our BI-enabled platform for narrative storytelling of this market. VMI offers in-depth forecasted trends and accurate Insights on over 20,000+ emerging & niche markets, helping you make critical revenue-impacting decisions for a brilliant future.

VMI provides a holistic overview and global competitive landscape with respect to Region, Country, and Segment, and Key players of your market. Present your Market Report & findings with an inbuilt presentation feature saving over 70% of your time and resources for Investor, Sales & Marketing, R&D, and Product Development pitches. VMI enables data delivery In Excel and Interactive PDF formats with over 15+ Key Market Indicators for your market.

Visualize Anesthesia Delivery Systems Market using VMI @https://www.verifiedmarketresearch.com/vmintelligence/

About us

Verified Market Research is the Globals leading research and consulting firm serving more than 5,000 clients. Verified market research provides advanced analytical research solutions, offering research enriched with information. We offer information about strategic analysis and growth, data needed to achieve business goals, and important revenue decisions.

Our 250 analysts and representatives of small and medium-sized businesses have a high level of knowledge in the field of data collection and management. They use industrial methods to collect and analyze data in more than 15,000 highly efficient niches and markets. Our analysts are trained to combine modern data collection methods, excellent research methodologies, years of collective experience and expertise to conduct informative and accurate research.

We study more than 14 categories of semiconductors and electronics, chemicals, advanced materials, aerospace and defense industries, energy and consumables, healthcare, pharmaceuticals, Automotive and Transportation, Information and Communication Technologies, software and services, information security, mining, minerals and metals, construction, agricultural industry and medical equipment from in more than 100 countries.

Contact us

Dwayne Fernandez

Verified Market ResearchABOUT US: +1 (650)-781-4080United Kingdom: +44 (753)-715-0008APAC: +61 (488)-85-9400Free in the United States.: +1 (800)-782-1768

See the rest here:
Nanoparticles in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals Market Size And Forecast To 2022 |Roche, GE Healthcare, Merck, Novartis, AMAG Pharmaceuticals The...

Disclaimer: You are now leaving PharmiWeb.com website and are going to a website that is not operated by us. We are not responsible for the content or availability of linked sites.

ABOUT THIRD PARTY LINKS ON OUR SITE

PharmiWeb.com offers links to other third party websites that may be of interest to our website visitors. The links provided in our website are provided solely for your convenience and may assist you in locating other useful information on the Internet. When you click on these links you will leave the PharmiWeb.com website and will be redirected to another site. These sites are not under the control of PharmiWeb.com.

PharmiWeb.com is not responsible for the content of linked third party websites. We are not an agent for these third parties nor do we endorse or guarantee their products. We make no representation or warranty regarding the accuracy of the information contained in the linked sites. We suggest that you always verify the information obtained from linked websites before acting upon this information.

Also, please be aware that the security and privacy policies on these sites may be different than PharmiWeb.com policies, so please read third party privacy and security policies closely.

If you have any questions or concerns about the products and services offered on linked third party websites, please contact the third party directly.

More here:
Future Markets Research Releases Commentary on NurExone Biologic Inc, An Emerging Leader in The Exos - PharmiWeb.com

There are many foundations and charities which aim to tackle health conditions through funding medical research to develop better treatment options, improve patient outcomes and quality of life.

People often bequest money in their will to these organisations, donate after a loved one has been struck down by a particular illness or at funerals ask for donations to a an organisation in lieu of traditional flowers.

And while these organisations do great work, what about considering investing directly in medical companies for the greater good? Biotechnology investing is one sector which stands out for not only potential to deliver quality returns but also contribute positively to society.

Australias biotech representative body AusBiotech CEO Lorraine Chiroiu told Stockhead many of us unfortunately have a personal connection to catastrophic disease and, motivated by our experiences, are seeking avenues to put our philanthropic and investment dollars where we can make a meaningful and sustainable difference.

AusBiotech is receiving increasing enquiries from people who want to gift, bequeath or invest in a way that gives the best chance of new medical treatments and cures making their way to people experiencing disease, she said.

For example, we recently received a call from a father whose only son had passed away from cancer. Nobly, he wanted to make a purposeful investment into a company working to provide treatment for the disease that took his son in the hope that other families wouldnt have to go through the same suffering as his family.

Indeed many biotech companies have been founded by grieving family or friends that are passionate about finding a cure for a disease that took their loved one too soon.

Chiroiu said biotechnology companies are the vehicles that move medical research along the translation and commercialisation pathway to patients.

Companies operating in the life science and medtech sectors are in a unique position where business foundations are often influenced by a strong value-driven purpose one that offers positive social impact as the company develops life-saving and life-enhancing technologies.

Focusing clearly on patient impact, social good is codified into biotech companies DNA and are a great avenue for ethical investors to consider diversifying their portfolio.

She said we are living in an age of profound acceleration in medicinal discoveries and healthcare options, as well as a time that the Covid-19 pandemic has brought biotechnology especially in the form of vaccines into sharp focus.

As we emerge from the pandemic, the chronic health challenges and increasing burdens of disease associated with ageing populations around the world has many of us wondering how we can help move medical research from the bench to the bedside the answer is via business, she said

Australias biotech industry is on a strong growth trajectory, through substantially increasing numbers of organisations. Figures released by AusBiotech show the sector has grown 43% since 2019 and 60% since 2017.

Amid a thriving and expanding biotech industry in Australia, feeding the need for commercialisation, clinical development and growth is key and the diversity of investment sources remains a pressing issue, Chiroiu said.

Capital is the lifeblood of these companies and in response to this increasing need, AusBiotech has bolstered its investment program with a goal that Australian and overseas investors increasingly see Australian life sciences research and small-to-medium enterprises as viable and attractive investment options.

Global X head of investment strategy Blair Hannon told Stockhead biotechnology investing is well positioned to tick the boxes of environmental, social and governance (ESG) considerations of both institutional and retail investors.

For environmentally minded investors, the biotech industry has a low carbon footprint as most work is research-driven and not energy-intensive and as such, adding biotech exposure can help lower the average carbon footprint of a portfolio, Hannon said.

The biotech industry is highly regulated as measured by the S&P Biotechnology Select Industry Index and is free of any violators of the UN Global Compact (UNGC), which is a widely-followed benchmark of corporate good behaviour.

Hannon said alongside many other sectors, biotechs are striving towards ESG targets. Whilst a diversified biotech ETF such as its S&P Biotech ETF (ASX:CURE) is not explicitly tracking an ESG framework, Hannon noted many biotech companies within the fund focus on social good as their technology aims to aid people from all walks of life with disease treatments or even eradication.

Prescient Therapeutics (ASX:PTX)CEO and managing director Steven Yatomi-Clarke told Stockhead bringing life-changing therapies to patients is an incredibly challenging undertaking that requires resources and resilience.

PTX is at the forefront of game-changing personalised cancer treatments with a strong pipeline of promising therapies. The company has a growing list of collaborations with leading cancer organisations globally including Peter McCallum Cancer Centre, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Yale, Oxford and UPenn.

Companies brave enough to take on this challenge call on investors to fund the research and development at least, until they become profitable, he said.

But at Prescient, when we accept a dollar from an investor, we are focussed on growing that into more than one dollar.

He said in the last two years, Prescient has spent around $8m of shareholder funds, but through consistent delivery of milestones and progress, the company has translated this $8m into over $100m of shareholder value.

So shareholders have enjoyed a handsome financial return, but additionally, they can be satisfied in knowing that their investment has resulted in incredibly exciting progress to create therapies that we believe are going to change lives.

AusBiotech is aiming to educate potential investors in life sciences companies about the unique ecosystem, through in-person events such as its AusBioInvest 2022 in Perth in October as well as plain English resources including The Guide to Life Sciences Investing,

At Stockhead, we tell it like it is. While Prescient Therapeutics is a Stockhead advertiser, it did not sponsor this article.

Get the latest Stockhead news delivered free to your inbox.

"*" indicates required fields

It's free. Unsubscribe whenever you want.

You might be interested in

Follow this link:
Biotechnology investing for the social good making money and a difference - Stockhead

LOS ANGELES--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Puma Biotechnology, Inc. (NASDAQ: PBYI), a biopharmaceutical company, today announced an agreement with Takeda to license the worldwide research and development and commercial rights to alisertib, a selective, small-molecule, orally administered inhibitor of aurora kinase A. Alisertib is an adenosine triphosphatecompetitive and reversible inhibitor of aurora kinase A and results in disruption of mitosis leading to apoptosis of rapidly proliferating tumor cells that are dependent on aurora kinase A. Alisertib has been tested in clinical trials in patients with metastatic cancers including breast cancer, small cell lung cancer, head and neck cancer, ovarian cancer, peripheral T cell lymphoma and acute myeloid leukemia.

Under the terms of the agreement, Puma will assume sole responsibility for the global development and commercialization of alisertib. Takeda will receive an upfront license fee of $7 million and is eligible to receive potential future milestone payments of up to $287.3 million upon Pumas achievement of certain regulatory and commercial milestones over the course of the agreement, as well as tiered royalty payments for any net sales of alisertib.

Puma initially intends to focus the development of alisertib on the treatment of patients with metastatic estrogen receptor-positive (ER-positive) HER2-negative breast cancer, triple-negative breast cancer and small cell lung cancer. In ER-positive HER2-negative breast cancer, alisertib has previously been tested in a Phase II clinical trial as a single agent (Lancet Oncology 2015), in a Phase II randomized clinical trial as a single agent compared to a combination with fulvestrant (SABCS 2020) and in a Phase II randomized clinical trial in combination with paclitaxel compared to paclitaxel monotherapy (JAMA Network Open 2021). In triple-negative breast cancer, alisertib has previously been tested in a Phase II clinical trial as a single agent (Lancet Oncology 2015) and in a randomized clinical trial in combination with paclitaxel compared to paclitaxel monotherapy (JAMA Network Open 2021). Alisertib has demonstrated meaningful clinical activity in these populations and most notably in ER-positive breast cancer patients who have been previously treated with a CDK4/6 inhibitor (JAMA Network Open 2021). Alisertib has also been previously tested in small cell lung cancer in a Phase II clinical trial as a single agent (Lancet Oncology 2015) and in a Phase II randomized clinical trial in combination with paclitaxel compared to paclitaxel monotherapy (Journal of Thoracic Oncology 2020).

There continues to be a need for new drugs for the treatment of metastatic ER- positive, HER2-negative breast cancer and triple negative breast cancer, said Joyce A. OShaughnessy, M.D., the Celebrating Women Chair in Breast Cancer Research at Baylor University Medical Center, Texas Oncology, and Chair of Breast Cancer Research for the US Oncology Network in Dallas, Texas. The results from the clinical trials of alisertib in these two indications are encouraging and suggest that the drug may be able to provide a clinical benefit to these patient populations, and, due to its novel mechanism, alisertib may be able to provide a benefit in patients who have developed resistance to other treatments modalities, said Dr. OShaughnessy.

Treatment options for patients with small cell lung cancer that has progressed on or after platinum-based chemotherapy are limited, and there is an urgent need for new drugs to treat this patient population, said Taofeek K. Owonikoko, MD, PhD, Chief of the Division of Hematology/Oncology and Associate Director for Translational Research and Co-Leader of the Cancer Therapeutics Program at the UPMC Hillman Cancer Center. The results from the clinical trials of alisertib in small cell lung cancer suggest that the drug may represent a potentially promising treatment option for these patients and more specifically for patients with molecularly defined tumors that are likely to respond to an aurora kinase A inhibitor such as alisertib, said Dr. Owonikoko.

Alan H. Auerbach, Chief Executive Officer, President and Founder of Puma stated, We are pleased to be able to complete this licensing agreement with Takeda for alisertib. To date, alisertib has demonstrated strong evidence of antitumor activity, both as a single agent and in combination with other anticancer drugs, in patients with metastatic ER-positive and triple negative breast cancer, as well as in small cell lung cancer. We look forward to the continued development of alisertib.

Puma will host a conference call today at 2:00 p.m. PDT/5:00 p.m. EDT to discuss the alisertib licensing agreement. The call may be accessed by dialing (877) 709-8150 (domestic) or (201) 689-8354 (international). Please dial in at least 10 minutes in advance and inform the operator that you would like to join the Puma Biotechnology Conference Call. A live webcast of the conference call and presentation slides may be accessed on the Investors section of the Puma Biotechnology website at https://www.pumabiotechnology.com. A replay of the call will be available shortly after completion of the call and will be archived on Pumas website for 90 days.

About Puma Biotechnology

Puma Biotechnology, Inc. is a biopharmaceutical company with a focus on the development and commercialization of innovative products to enhance cancer care. Puma in-licenses the global development and commercialization rights to PB272 (neratinib, oral), PB272 (neratinib, intravenous) and PB357. Neratinib, oral was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 2017 for the extended adjuvant treatment of adult patients with early stage HER2-overexpressed/amplified breast cancer, following adjuvant trastuzumab-based therapy, and is marketed in the United States as NERLYNX (neratinib) tablets. In February 2020, NERLYNX was also approved by the FDA in combination with capecitabine for the treatment of adult patients with advanced or metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer who have received two or more prior anti-HER2-based regimens in the metastatic setting. NERLYNX was granted marketing authorization by the European Commission in 2018 for the extended adjuvant treatment of adult patients with early stage hormone receptor-positive HER2-overexpressed/amplified breast cancer and who are less than one year from completion of prior adjuvant trastuzumab-based therapy. NERLYNX is a registered trademark of Puma Biotechnology, Inc.

Further information about Puma Biotechnology may be found at https://www.pumabiotechnology.com.

Forward-Looking Statements

This press release contains forward-looking statements, including statements regarding the development and commercialization of alisertib. All forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties that could cause Pumas actual results to differ materially from the anticipated results and expectations expressed in these forward-looking statements. These statements are based on current expectations, forecasts and assumptions, and actual outcomes and results could differ materially from these statements due to a number of factors, which include, but are not limited to, the risk factors disclosed in the periodic and current reports filed by Puma with the Securities and Exchange Commission from time to time, including Pumas Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2021 and subsequent reports. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date hereof. Puma assumes no obligation to update these forward-looking statements, except as required by law.

View original post here:
Puma Biotechnology Announces Exclusive License Agreement with Takeda for the Development and Commercialization of Alisertib, an Investigational Aurora...

Proponents of mandatory labeling of foods containing or derived from genetically modified (GM) crops have long claimed that their primary objective is to facilitate informed consumer choice. Based on a review of more than 20 years of evidence in countries or regions where GM labeling has been implemented, that policy has failed. It has resulted in increased food industry costs across the supply chain, higher prices and reduced choice for consumers. In contrast, in places where labeling is voluntary, consumers and taxpayers have had more food choices with lower costs.Labels based on product versus process

In the United States (US) and many other countries, pre-dating the introduction of GM foods in the 1990s, the underlying rationale for mandatory food labeling has been to protect consumers: to help them stay healthy (e.g., by providing nutritional information); to keep them safe and aware of the presence of possible ingredients that might cause harmful reactions; and to help prevent fraud. Consequently, labeling regulations have focused on the final product and its contents, not on how it was produced or processed.

In cases in which the focus was on how the product was produced, process or production-related issues, labels were voluntary in nature. Producers have long labeled a product according to a particular production feature or practice to appeal to a particular segment of consumers that value a specific attribute. For example, labels reflecting religious-based dietary laws, like Kosher or Halal restrictions have been in use for decades.

The organic industry has long relied on this voluntary labeling system, as have proponents of products promoted as, for example, free-range eggs or chickens.

Foods with GM content or origin have been regulated differently, subject to mandatory labeling in many countries based on the premise of protecting consumers because of the contents of the final product.

In the European Union (EU), the current mandatory GM content and origin labeling requirements were introduced more than 20 years ago and specifically focused on foods containing or derived from GM crops. At that time, the rationale given, as the then EU Health and Consumer Protection Commissioner David Byrne stated, so people can make a full and informed choice1.

In contrast, when the US GM crop technology approval system was set up in the late 1980s the relevant regulatory authority, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) concluded that mandatory labeling of GM foods was not necessary because GM foods present no unique or higher risks than foods derived from conventionally bred crops. In other words, the FDAs approach to GM labeling stayed consistent with the long-standing principle that required mandatory labeling of foods only if a warning was necessary to protect consumers; it also embodied the global standard then in place to require mandatory labeling based on the product, rather than the process.

However, in 2016, in response to criticism from groups opposed to crop biotechnology, the US amended its stance, by introducing national, mandatory GM food (referred to as bio-engineered foods) labeling requirements that took effect at the beginning of 2022.

The rationale cited for this recent change of stance according to the US Department of Agriculture, was to increase transparency.and ensure clear information for consumers about the ingredients in their food 2, even though the new requirement undermined both the logic and consistency of long- standing consumer protection focused on a product-based food labeling system.

Not only is mandatory GM food labeling inconsistent with the long-standing consumer protection principles of food labeling, it has failed to meet the stated, primary objective of the legislation in both the EU and the US: to facilitate more informed consumer choice. In addition, there have been negative consequences: higher costs of supply and hence higher prices for consumers than would otherwise have occurred if no labeling requirement existed. These can be attributed to the ways in which the supply chain has responded to the regulatory labeling requirements. The outcomes in both the EU and the US have been similar but arose from two different market perspectives:

Labeling requirements going back more than 20 years were introduced from a baseline in which almost all food products did not contain or were not derived from GM crops. The food industry started from a position of GM avoidance (to avoid even trace amounts of GMOs) in the belief that most European consumers would wish to avoid GM ingredients and GM derived foods altogether.As a result, very few foods with GM content or origin were marketed in the EU. And there was next to no positive labeling for GM content in foods. The result was a sizable jump in costs to accommodate the significant expenses entailed in instituting a GMO avoidance policies and practices such as the inherent higher cost of production of non-GM crops relative to GM crops, re-formulation of products, change of ingredients and segregation of different raw materials through the supply chain 3, 4,5,6 hidden in the higher price of products that used only non-GM ingredients. EU consumers were (and remain) largely unaware that cheaper (and equally safe) alternatives could be made available if the supply chain chose to use them.

It is important to note that consumer research and monitoring of buying behavior on this topic consistently show that the vast majority of consumers have been, and are, largely indifferent to whether the ingredients in the foods they eat, contain or are derived from GMOs7,8. In the UK, where the Food Standards Agency conducted research into consumer attitudes towards a range of food-related issues, concern about GMOs has been consistently low, at 5-7 per cent (unprompted) over the past 10 years7. Therefore, the costs of GM avoidance have been, and today remain imposed, on this, large majority segment of consumers even though, if given the active choice in retail outlets to choose between GMO derived products and those without GMOs, would likely choose the less expensive GMO product.

The original legislative rationale for facilitating consumer choice has never materialized as the favored and executed outcome across the EU food supply chain to the legislation has been to provide only non-GM derived products. The primary beneficiaries of this policy have been the small segment of consumers who actively wish to avoid foods with GMO derived ingredients, companies in in the production base and supply chain of these products, and businesses involved in certification, testing and traceability.

Labeling requirements are much more recent than in the EU. They were proposed in several US states but only passed by voter referendum in Vermont, which briefly had its own mandatory labeling requirement in 2016. This requirement was effectively nullified by a federal labeling law designed to preempt a potential jumble of competing state laws, which could have crippled the food industry supply chain. It was passed in July 2016 (little more than one month after the Vermont law became applicable) and implemented at the beginning of 2022.

The debate over whether to impose mandatory GMO labeling requirements in the US started from a completely different baseline than in the EU. GMO derived food ingredient use has been commonplace in the US since GM crops were first widely grown in the country in the mid-1990s. There was little public concern or even debate. As a result, when faced with mandatory GMO labeling requirements, most companies in the US food product supply chain decided to include no label or in some cases to label engineered products with a positive GMO presence label.

As in the EU, most US consumers have been and remain largely indifferent as to whether the ingredients in the foods they eat contain or are derived from transgenic GMOs or gene edited crops.But the economic consequences of mandatory versus voluntary labeling is huge. The small minority of consumers who wish to avoid GMO ingredients were already being served by the market before legislation was enacted through voluntary labeled products11. To serve these customers, food companies adopted GM ingredient avoidance policies, developed and marketed their products as non-GMO, often embracing the nationwide non-GM (private label) voluntary initiatives.

This voluntary approach made economic sense to products and consumers alike by keeping costs associated with labeling extremely low. I contrast, in cases in which labeling is mandatory, all additional costs with meeting this requirement (e.g., tracking, tracing and changing labels) add to production costs9,10 which in the long run are passed onto consumers in the form of higher prices.

In sum, the minority pro-labeling and anti-GMO segment of consumers in the US did not need any legislation to help them avoid GM derived foods as the market delivered for them. They have evidently been prepared to pay price premiums given the expanding nature of the voluntary non-GM label initiatives. The non-GM food supply chain incurred the higher costs of GM avoidance but passed these onto consumers of these products.

The mandatory labeling rationale of facilitating better consumer choice has not materialized because most companies in the US food supply chain have decided to label most of their products as containing GMOs. In that way, they did not have to pass along to consumers in the form of higher prices the additional costs of complying with the legislation. Again, the majority consumer segment that did not actively seek the new labeling choice/information has largely borne the additional costs although the costs are largely hidden and consumer buying behavior has not altered11. In addition, the taxpayer has incurred a cost associated with compliance monitoring and testing.

The US food market had been adequately delivering consumer choice before the introduction of the federal mandatory labelling legislation via the active marketing of non-GM products to the segment that wants to buy such products.All the legislation has done is impose compliance costs on the rest of the food supply chain, consumers of those products and the taxpayer.

While the EU and US outcomes are broadly the same, the EUs outcome has been more costly because the higher cost GMO (ingredient) avoidance policy has been effectively imposed on all consumers. Also, those who wish to avoid GMO ingredients have obtained a free ride off the larger sector of consumers who would not otherwise actively seek such foods. In the US, the higher costs imposed on the majority of consumers who do not actively seek out non GMO ingredients, relate only to the compliance costs of labeling legislation.

Who are labelings winners and losers? To the majority of consumers, labeling GM ingredients has been a non issue for which many are incurring additional costs. The primary beneficiaries are the minority of consumers who wish to avoid products derived from GM technology as well as businesses in the production and supply chain for non-GM products who benefit from the price premiums and ancillary services like GM trace testing.

In addition, the mandatory labeling requirement for GM-derived products is inconsistent. A consistent labeling system would require reversion to a product, not process-based approach (as was applied by the US FDA until the beginning of this year) or the introduction of a comprehensive mandatory labeling requirement for all products derived from other plant breeding methods such as radiation or chemical-induced mutagenesis, or cytoplasmic male sterility, or embryo rescue that have been widely used for many years to improve crop varieties used in all forms of agriculture (including organic).

On consistency grounds a case could be made to extend compulsory labeling to broader production-related issues like with/without fertilizer, with/without irrigation, with/without fossil-fuels, etc.? The list of differentiated production methods to label on consistency grounds is long.

However, this analysis is not a call to extend mandatory production process-based labeling requirements to other types/features of production method. It is, however, a plea to policymakers to take note of the evidence if they are considering extending mandatory labeling requirements to foods and food ingredients derived from next-generation plant breeding methods including gene editing.

The evidence is clear: compulsory GM product labeling is a case of inconsistent and poor regulation leading to a poor outcome. Voluntary labeling initiatives are better able to deliver more informed consumer choice at a lower net cost to society. Policymakers around the world should not repeat these mistakes when considering the issue of labeling for gene-edited foods.

Graham Brookes is an agricultural economist with PG Economics, UK. He has more than 35 years experience of analyzing the impact of technology use and policy change in agriculture and has authored many papers in peer reviewed journals on the impact of regulation, policy change and GM crop technology. http://www.pgeconomics.co.uk

Link:
Viewpoint: Mandatory labeling of crop biotechnology-derived foods is a failed regulatory policy. Here's why - Genetic Literacy Project

Five world-class teams are set to receive a total of over 19 million from the UK's Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) to support adventurous research aimed at tackling significant fundamental questions in bioscience.

Each of these teams - involving 39 investigators from 16 research organisations - will look to advance the frontiers of bioscience knowledge by exploring bold and exciting questions at the forefront of contemporary bioscience.

By pursuing world-class ideas and multidisciplinary research, these projects will convene the people, places, and transformative technologies necessary to tackle complex biological problems from a multitude of perspectives.

The funding through BBSRCs strategic Longer and Larger (sLoLa) grants programme aims to catalyse ground-breaking collaborations that advance our understanding of fundamental rules of life, with potentially far reaching implications for agriculture, health, biotechnology, and the green economy.

The five projects aim to:

Professor Melanie Welham, Executive Chair of BBSRC, said: Long-term support for discovery science is key to delivering the fundamental breakthroughs that keep the UK at the leading edge of bioscience research.

These five very different projects will each pursue adventurous avenues of investigation at the frontiers of biology by convening the multidisciplinary teams of people, skills and national facilities over the longer timeframes necessary to realise transformational change.

The projects have huge potential to make underpinning discoveries in the life sciences, which could produce future advances to address global challenges from tackling plastic pollution to treating cancer and discoveries with commercialisation potential for biopharma, biotechnology and other industries.

The projects

Specialised ribosomes

Led by Dr Julie Aspden, University of Leeds

Ribosomes are machines within cells that read the instructions from genes and use those instructions to construct proteins. The pivotal role of ribosomes in translating our genetic instructions means that a better understanding of how ribosomes function could be important to understand many diseases, including cancers.

Recently, it has been shown that ribosomes, once considered to be identical and inflexible decoding machines that translate RNA into proteins, can in fact be structurally and functionally specialised.

This specialisation promotes the selective translation of RNAs. In other words, ribosome specialisation can regulate the expression of genes at the level of translation.

However, there are only a handful of examples of ribosome specialisation known to science. This means we lack an in-depth understanding of how widespread this mode of gene regulation is, how it functions mechanistically, and what kind of ribosome code might exist.

Using a synthesis of evolutionary, functional genomic, and biophysical approaches, this project aims to tackle these big questions in four different groups of organisms (fungi, insects, plants and humans).

The team will use machine learning approaches to integrate data generated by a series of cutting-edge technologies in four major eukaryotic models (fungi, insects, plants and humans):

This will allow them to decipher the ribosome code, which has the potential to re-write our understanding of the fundamental principles of translation regulation.

Cracking the ribosome code could provide insight into how translation goes wrong in ribosomopathies and certain cancers. It could also reveal promising new avenues for manipulating the proteome, thus expanding the toolkit for future engineering biology approaches.

This project is a collaboration between eight investigators based at:

Enzymatic photocatalysis

Led by Professor Nigel Scrutton, The University of Manchester

Enzymes are proteins which catalyse biochemical reactions in all living organisms.

Most of the enzymes found in nature are heat-activated. However, there exists a few rare examples of natural light-activated enzymes or photocatalysts which use a photo-sensitive cofactor called flavin.

As their name suggests, heat-activated enzymes require heat to function. They also work with highly specific and often expensive coenzymes and catalyse reaction types limited to those found in the living cell.

In contrast, photocatalysts require light to function and have fewer chemical restraints. This enables photocatalysts to catalyse reactions that are unavailable to heat-activated enzymes, harnessing a process known as photo-biocatalysis.

There is a pressing need to better understand how photo-biocatalysis works. This would not only provide insight into how biology works with light but could also facilitate the exploitation of this process in industrial biocatalysis.

Combining state-of-the-art biophysical, computational and protein engineering methodologies, this project will apply a cyclical design-build-evaluate-learn approach to discovering the generalisable principles of photo-biocatalysis.

The team will use cutting-edge biophysical techniques to study photocatalyst functionality:

This will allow them to simultaneously contribute new fundamental knowledge on the function of existing photo-enzymes whilst illuminating a path towards the engineering of entirely new-to-nature flavin-containing photocatalysts.

In the longer-term, these engineered photocatalysts could be used to synthesise novel products that heat-activated enzymes are unable to synthesise, such as fuels and other high-value chemicals.

This project is a collaboration between six investigators based at:

Multi-layered bacterial genome defences

Led by Professor Edze Westra, University of Exeter

Bacteria are able to protect themselves from infection by viruses and other mobile genetic elements (MGEs) using highly sophisticated genome defence systems.

Aside from protecting bacterial populations against infection, these systems also influence the spread of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) which relies on the transfer of mobile antibiotic resistance genes between bacteria.

In addition to the CRISPR-Cas system, which has already been co-opted by scientists to revolutionise the field of DNA editing, new bacterial defence systems continue to be discovered.

In nature, these systems do not work in isolation. However, very little is known about how they integrate and what the consequences of this integration are on bacteria-MGE interactions.

This project aims to develop a broader understanding of multi-layered bacterial genome defence systems, at scales ranging from molecules to populations.

The team will use bioinformatic, biophysical and molecular biology approaches to understand how the interactions between genome defence systems protect bacteria against infection.

They will then combine experimental evolution and mathematical modelling to determine how multi-layered defence systems shape bacterial genome and MGE evolution.

Knowledge generated through this project has the potential to uncover how combinations of natural genome defence systems could be exploited in the fight against AMR. In addition, these combinations could be further refined in the laboratory to produce a new generation of genome editing tools for a wide range of engineering biology applications.

This project is a collaboration between 12 investigators based at:

Novel plastizymes

Led by Professor Florian Hollfelder, University of Cambridge

The number of new and untested proteins available in metagenomic databases is in the billions and is currently doubling each year.

This represents a treasure trove for the discovery of novel enzymes with exciting properties. However, there is a need for better tools to be able to effectively mine these databases and find enzymes of interest.

One group of enzymes which are drawing attention are plastic-degrading enzymes or plastizymes.

Plastizymes could be used to remove the pollution caused by plastic products. This pollution is a fundamental environmental challenge, an enormous waste of resources, and has the potential to become a major world health issue through the ingestion of micro-plastics.

However, there are currently very few known natural plastizymes and these are relatively inefficient and do not degrade all types of plastic pollutants.

This project aims to address these limitations by employing a combination of computational and protein engineering approaches to discovering new plastizymes and improving their catalytic ability.

The team will employ a number of cutting-edge technologies:

This will allow them to simultaneously derive generic pipelines for the discovery and directed evolution of novel enzymes, whilst exploiting these pipelines to produce improved plastizymes.

Longer-term, these novel plastizymes could contribute towards the UKs net-zero ambition by increasing our capacity to recycle plastic waste.

This project is a collaboration between four investigators based at:

Understanding an ancient universal membrane effector

Led by Professor Gavin Thomas, University of York

Cell membranes are generally impermeable to most chemicals, which enables proteins within the membrane to establish chemical gradients between the inside and the outside of cells.

These gradients are used as the driving forces behind some of lifes most essential chemical reactions, including photosynthesis, respiration, and active transport. Therefore, it is vital that any damage to the membrane is rapidly repaired to ensure the continuation of these crucial processes.

In recent studies, a protein belonging to the IM30 protein family has been shown to repair membrane damage in a number of bacterial pathogens and bacteria used in biotechnology to produce toxin chemicals. Interestingly, IM30 proteins are present in a range of diverse bacteria and even in bacterially-derived chloroplasts, demonstrating their ancientness and suggesting that they provided an ancestral mechanism of membrane repair.

However, while some information is known about their structure and localisation in cells, the mechanisms by which they work are still a mystery.

This project aims to functionally characterise the IM30 system in a number of clinically and industrially-relevant microbes, using bioinformatics, microbial genetics, and advanced biophysical approaches.

The team will optimise new transformative technologies to accurately measure membrane potential in live microbial cells:

These will be used to help determine how IM30 proteins protect against membrane damage in evolutionarily-divergent organisms. This will uncover new fundamental knowledge about an early step in the evolution of robust cellular life.

Mechanistic understanding of this cellular process could also reveal new pathways to target in the fight against anti-microbial resistance (AMR), since some bacteria use IM30 proteins to resist membrane-targeting antibiotics.

This project is a collaboration between nine investigators based at:

About sLoLa funding

Advancing our understanding of the rules of life is a key part of BBSRCs Delivery Plan.

The large-scale support offered through the sLoLa awards scheme enables world-class teams to pursue innovative avenues of multidisciplinary investigation over the longer timeframes necessary to realise transformational change.

By encouraging researchers to pursue bold and creative questions, BBSRC aims to catalyse exciting fundamental bioscience discoveries that may have far reaching implications for agriculture, health, biotechnology, and the green economy.

This is the fourth round of sLoLa funding since the scheme relaunched in 2018 and brings its total investment to 64 million. BBSRC plans to invest up to a further 16 million in a fifth round which is ongoing.

Read more from the original source:
19 million to investigate bold ideas in bioscience research - EurekAlert

--Jodie Morrison appointed as Board Member and Acting CEO--

WALTHAM,Mass., Sept. 20, 2022 /PRNewswire/ --Q32 Bio, a clinical stage biotechnology company developing biologic therapeutics to restore immune homeostasis, today announced the appointment of Jodie Morrison as Board Member and Acting Chief Executive Officer, succeeding Michael Broxson.

"Jodie has a deep background in executive, operational and development leadership, having successfully guided the growth of emerging biopharmaceutical companies across multiple therapeutic areas. As Q32 Bio transitions to later stage clinical trials, we welcome Jodie to the team and look forward to benefitting from her extensive leadership experience as she oversees the Company's progress across our pipeline," said Mark Iwicki, Chairman of the Board of Directors of Q32 Bio. "We also express our appreciation to Mike for his contributions to the Company."

"Q32 Bio is advancing an innovative clinical pipeline and research platform with the potential to transform the treatment options for patients with autoimmune diseases and has made important progress in the past several years," said Ms. Morrison. "I am pleased to lead the Company as it advances its pipeline into the later stages of clinical development, and I look forward to working with our outstanding and dedicated team to bring important new medicines to patients."

During his tenure as CEO, Mr. Broxson helped Q32 Bio progress from an early-stage clinical company to one with a robust pipeline and two rapidly progressing clinical programs. Q32's most advanced program is ADX-914, a fully human anti-IL-7R antibody being developed for the treatment of multiple autoimmune diseases that was recently partnered with Horizon Therapeutics. In addition, the Company is advancing ADX-097, its wholly owned tissue targeted protein therapeutic for the treatment of complement disorders, through a first-in-human, Phase 1 clinical study that is currently ongoing.

Ms. Morrison is a Venture Partner at Atlas Venture and was previously CEO of Cadent Therapeutics until its sale to Novartis in 2020. Previous roles include serving as interim CEO at Keryx Biopharmaceuticals, Inc. (at the time of the merger with Akebia), acting Chief Operating Officer at Syntimmune (acquired by Alexion), and President and CEO of Tokai Pharmaceuticals, where she oversaw the company's successful initial public offering. Prior to being appointed President and Chief Executive Officer at Tokai Pharmaceuticals, Ms. Morrison held other senior positions with the company, including Chief Operating Officer, Head of Clinical Affairs and Program Operations, and Vice President of Clinical Affairs and Program Operations. Prior, Ms. Morrison held roles in clinical operations and medical affairs at Dyax Corporation, Curis, Inc., and Diacrin, Inc. Ms. Morrison received a B.A. in neuroscience from Mount Holyoke College, her clinical research certification from Boston University School of Medicine, and her business training through the Greater Boston Executive Program at the MIT Sloan School of Management. She currently sits as Chair of the Board of Directors for Ribon Therapeutics, Inc., as a member of the Board of Directors at Rectify Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Aileron Therapeutics, Inc.and has been recognized for her leadership skills by the Boston Business Journal's "Power 50" and "Women to Watch" awards, and WEST's "Making a Difference" award.

About Q32 Bio

Q32 Bio is a clinical stage biotechnology company developing biologic therapeutics targeting powerful regulators of the innate and adaptive immune systems to re-balance immunity in severe autoimmune and inflammatory diseases. Q32 Bio's lead programs, focused on the IL-7 / TSLP receptor pathways and complement system, address immune dysregulation to help patients take back control of their lives.

The company's most advanced program, ADX-914, is a fully human anti-IL-7R antibody that re-regulates adaptive immune function and is being developed in collaboration with Horizon Therapeutics for the treatment of autoimmune diseases, including Phase 2 trials in both atopic dermatitis and an undisclosed indication. The IL-7 and TSLP pathways have been genetically and biologically implicated in driving several T cell-mediated pathological processes in numerous autoimmune diseases.

Q32 Bio's lead program for innate immunity, ADX-097, is based on a novel platform enabling tissue-targeted regulation of the complement system without long-term systemic blockade a key differentiator versus current complement therapeutics. Q32 Bio is currently conducting a first-in-human, Phase 1, ascending dose (SAD/MAD) clinical study of ADX-097 for the treatment of complement disorders. For more information, please visitwww.Q32bio.com.

Q32 Bio Contacts:

Investors: Brendan BurnsMedia: Sarah SuttonArgot Partners212.600.1902[emailprotected]

SOURCE Q32 Bio

Continue reading here:
Q32 Bio, a Clinical Stage Biotechnology Company Focused on Therapeutics that Restore Immune Homeostasis, Announces CEO Transition - PR Newswire

Is Rain Oncology Inc (RAIN) Stock at the Top of the Biotechnology Industry?  InvestorsObserver

See the rest here:
Is Rain Oncology Inc (RAIN) Stock at the Top of the Biotechnology Industry? - InvestorsObserver

Is Dyne Therapeutics Inc (DYN) Stock at the Top of the Biotechnology Industry?  InvestorsObserver

Continue reading here:
Is Dyne Therapeutics Inc (DYN) Stock at the Top of the Biotechnology Industry? - InvestorsObserver

Adze Biotechnology Announces Orphan Drug Designation Granted to Adze-1.17-CD40L for the treatment of Malignant  EIN News

Read the original post:
Adze Biotechnology Announces Orphan Drug Designation Granted to Adze-1.17-CD40L for the treatment of Malignant - EIN News

Where Does Ambrx Biopharma Inc - ADR (AMAM) Stock Fall in the Biotechnology Field After It Is Lower By -15.43% This Week?  InvestorsObserver

Read the original here:
Where Does Ambrx Biopharma Inc - ADR (AMAM) Stock Fall in the Biotechnology Field After It Is Lower By -15.43% This Week? - InvestorsObserver

Where Does Novavax Inc (NVAX) Stock Fall in the Biotechnology Field After It Is Up 0.46% This Week?  InvestorsObserver

Continued here:
Where Does Novavax Inc (NVAX) Stock Fall in the Biotechnology Field After It Is Up 0.46% This Week? - InvestorsObserver

DUBLIN--(BUSINESS WIRE)--The "Biotechnology Market Research Report by Technology (Cell-based Assays, Chromatography, and DNA Sequencing), Application, Region (Americas, Asia-Pacific, and Europe, Middle East & Africa) - Global Forecast to 2027 - Cumulative Impact of COVID-19" report has been added to ResearchAndMarkets.com's offering.

The Global Biotechnology Market size was estimated at USD 876.74 billion in 2021, USD 1,023.15 billion in 2022, and is projected to grow at a CAGR 16.87% to reach USD 2,234.84 billion by 2027.

Competitive Strategic Window:

The Competitive Strategic Window analyses the competitive landscape in terms of markets, applications, and geographies to help the vendor define an alignment or fit between their capabilities and opportunities for future growth prospects. It describes the optimal or favorable fit for the vendors to adopt successive merger and acquisition strategies, geography expansion, research & development, and new product introduction strategies to execute further business expansion and growth during a forecast period.

FPNV Positioning Matrix:

The FPNV Positioning Matrix evaluates and categorizes the vendors in the Biotechnology Market based on Business Strategy (Business Growth, Industry Coverage, Financial Viability, and Channel Support) and Product Satisfaction (Value for Money, Ease of Use, Product Features, and Customer Support) that aids businesses in better decision making and understanding the competitive landscape.

Market Share Analysis:

The Market Share Analysis offers the analysis of vendors considering their contribution to the overall market. It provides the idea of its revenue generation into the overall market compared to other vendors in the space. It provides insights into how vendors are performing in terms of revenue generation and customer base compared to others. Knowing market share offers an idea of the size and competitiveness of the vendors for the base year. It reveals the market characteristics in terms of accumulation, fragmentation, dominance, and amalgamation traits.

The report provides insights on the following pointers:

1. Market Penetration: Provides comprehensive information on the market offered by the key players

2. Market Development: Provides in-depth information about lucrative emerging markets and analyze penetration across mature segments of the markets

3. Market Diversification: Provides detailed information about new product launches, untapped geographies, recent developments, and investments

4. Competitive Assessment & Intelligence: Provides an exhaustive assessment of market shares, strategies, products, certification, regulatory approvals, patent landscape, and manufacturing capabilities of the leading players

5. Product Development & Innovation: Provides intelligent insights on future technologies, R&D activities, and breakthrough product developments

The report answers questions such as:

1. What is the market size and forecast of the Global Biotechnology Market?

2. What are the inhibiting factors and impact of COVID-19 shaping the Global Biotechnology Market during the forecast period?

3. Which are the products/segments/applications/areas to invest in over the forecast period in the Global Biotechnology Market?

4. What is the competitive strategic window for opportunities in the Global Biotechnology Market?

5. What are the technology trends and regulatory frameworks in the Global Biotechnology Market?

6. What is the market share of the leading vendors in the Global Biotechnology Market?

7. What modes and strategic moves are considered suitable for entering the Global Biotechnology Market?

Market Dynamics

Drivers

Restraints

Opportunities

Challenges

Companies Mentioned

For more information about this report visit https://www.researchandmarkets.com/r/ijpdlj

See the rest here:
The Worldwide Biotechnology Industry is Expected to Reach $2234 Billion by 2027 - ResearchAndMarkets.com - Business Wire

England is in crisis. They lost a beloved figurehead this month but for decades prior were losing scientific ground. If you look for the home of the modern organic food and anti-vaccine movements, you find their nexus in 1990s England.

The primary royal behind those beliefs is now King Charles III.

In order to manage the $28 billion he inherits (tax-free, paying taxes only applies to peasants in England)(1) he will have to give his $1.5 billion estate to his son, the new Prince of Wales, William (also tax free) but the Prince is not only taking over during a time when Brits are wondering why they still care about a throne that hasnt been relevant in hundreds of years, he is taking over at a time when being anti-science is no longer fashionable for progressive elites.

Though it was recently the darling of the intelligentsia, and Prince Charles longed to belong in that circle, anti-vaccine sentiments have become proletariat since COVID-19. The war on science when it comes to food harms a lot more people worldwide each year than the pandemic did. Hundreds of thousands of kids could stop going blind each year with Golden Rice but elites like King Charles III give money to groups that block its implementation.

Prince William could start to gain back some credibility for the family by jettisoning the organic food fetish of his father. Organic food, like the anti-vaccine movement, is a relic of 1990s England. Dr. Andrew Wakefield set off the modern anti-vaccine craze the same way that English environmental activists set off the Frankenfood one. Now supplements, wellness, and organic are all giant businesses based on exploitation of famous names who wanted to impress their elite friends

The world should have passed the anti-vaccine and anti-food movement by but they persist in large part because of the new British monarch and his quasi-American royalty of American Democrats counterpart, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.(2)

Its easy to embrace science, especially in light of their history making changes when it was needed. They changed their name to Windsor from Saxe-Coburg and Gotha during World War I to help commoners forget the British royal family is German during a time that Germany was shooting at English men in Europe. Given that public relations success, they can certainly change their tune when it comes to science.

Perhaps due to an infusion of new blood outside the shockingly limited pool drawn from during the 19th and 20th centuries, Prince William seems to be a more genetically gifted thinker than his father. He can show it by embracing the modern world, where food and medicine are embraced.(3)

He doesnt actually have to divest from the farm, that is just me getting attention in a title. It is enough if he acknowledges that having peasants toil for his carrots only using specially labeled toxic pesticides is a pastime for the rich, and not a way to feed the world.

(1) The same way California Governor Gavin Newsom doesnt want people who make over $2 million each year to pay higher taxes to subsidize the electric cars the Governor insists Uber drivers need to buy. High taxes are for the middle class and the poor, not the donors he will need in order to fail running for President in 2024.

(2) Nothing looks more hypocritical than people on the left in England and the US suddenly endorsing vaccines when just two years ago they opposed them. It instead reeks of politics, and politics need to be a no-no for the new generation of British royals, lest they be relegated to the name recognition of the Queen of the Netherlands, whoever that is.

(3) and not just engage in publicity stunts about energy costs that are squarely the blame of the government his father now seeks to lead.

Hank Campbell founded Science 2.0 in 2006, and writes for USA Today, Wall Street Journal, CNN, and more. His first book,Science Left Behind,was the #1 bestseller on Amazon for environmental policy books. Follow Hank on Twitter@HankCampbell

A version of this article was originally posted atScience 2.0and is reposted here with permission. Science 2.0 can be found on Twitter@science2_0

Visit link:
Viewpoint: Will King Charles abandon his kooky ideas about agriculture and help accelerate Britain's embrace of sustainable biotechnology tools? -...