Author Interviews, Biomarkers, Heart Disease, JAMA, Personalized Medicine, UCSF / 21.06.2016

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_25308" align="alignleft" width="150"]Peter Ganz, MD Chief, Division of Cardiology Director, Center of Excellence in Vascular Research Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital Maurice Eliaser Distinguished Professor of Medicine University of California, San Francisco Dr. Peter Ganz[/caption] Peter Ganz, MD Chief, Division of Cardiology Director, Center of Excellence in Vascular Research Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital Maurice Eliaser Distinguished Professor of Medicine University of California, San Francisco MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Dr. Ganz:  The research described in the JAMA paper involved measuring 1,130 different proteins in nearly 2000 individuals with apparently stable coronary heart disease, who were followed up to 11 years. Initially, two hundred different proteins were identified whose blood levels could be related to the risk of heart attacks, strokes, heart failure and death, and ultimately a combination of nine proteins was selected for a risk prediction model, based on their combined accuracy and sensitivity. Application of these findings to samples of patients with stable coronary heart disease demonstrated that some of those who were deemed clinically stable instead had a high risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes, while other patients with the same clinical diagnosis had a very low risk. Thus, individuals who all carried the same clinical diagnosis of stable coronary heart disease had a risk of an adverse cardiovascular event that varied by as much as 10-fold, as revealed by analysis of the levels of the nine proteins in their blood. Given such large differences in risk and outcomes, patients could reasonably opt to be treated differently, depending on their level of risk. We hope that in the future, management of patients with stable angina will at least in part rely on risk assessment based on levels of blood proteins.
ASCO, Author Interviews, Biomarkers, Personalized Medicine, UCSD / 07.06.2016

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_24655" align="alignleft" width="200"]Maria Schwaederle PharmD Clinical Research Scientist Center for Personalized Cancer Therapy UCSD Moores Cancer Center La Jolla, CA 92093 Dr. Maria Schwaederle[/caption] Maria Schwaederle PharmD Clinical Research Scientist Center for Personalized Cancer Therapy UCSD Moores Cancer Center La Jolla, CA 92093 MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Dr. Schwaederle: We performed this analysis with experts in the field, including but not limited to Drs Schilsky, Lee, Mendelsohn and Kurzrock, all known for their experience in the area of precision/personalized medicine. Historically, phase I trials (which are often first in human or highly experimental in other ways) were believed to be examining only toxicity. Our meta-analysis of 13,203 patients shows that in the era of precision medicine, this historical belief needs to be discarded. Second, it is the use of precision medicine that makes this belief outdated. Indeed, Phase I trials that utilized a biomarker-driven approach that is the essence of precision medicine had a median response rate of about 31%, which is higher than many FDA approved drugs, and this is in spite of the fact that phase I patients are a highly refractory group having failed multiple lines of conventional therapy. Importantly, however, it was not the use of targeted agents alone that was important. It was the biomarker-based approach where patients are matched to drugs. Without matching, response rates were dismal—about 5%.
AACR, Author Interviews, Biomarkers, Cancer Research, Personalized Medicine, Stanford / 01.05.2016

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Dr. Elodie Sollier Chief Scientific Officer at Vortex Biosciences MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Response: Circulating Tumor Cell (CTC) burden may be a useful biomarker of response to targeted therapy in PDX (Patient Derived Xenograft) mouse models. Vortex Biosciences’ technology has been proven to enrich CTCs from human blood, but use of the technology with mouse blood had not yet been explored. In this poster, human CTCs are isolated with both high efficiency and purity from xenograft model of breast cancer using Vortex’s technology. Circulating Tumor Cell enumeration increased as the tumor burden increased in the mouse demonstrating its utility as a biomarker for drug treatment response.
Author Interviews, Biomarkers, Cleveland Clinic, Genetic Research, Personalized Medicine, Prostate, Prostate Cancer, Urology / 07.03.2016

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_22405" align="alignleft" width="132"]Eric A. Klein, MD Chairman, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute Cleveland Clinic Dr. Eric Klein[/caption] Eric A. Klein, MD Chairman, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute Cleveland Clinic MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Dr. Klein: Prostate cancer is an enigma. While this tumor is the second leading cause of cancer death among American men, most newly diagnosed disease detected by PSA screening is biologically indolent and does not require immediate therapy. Currently, the main clinical challenge in these men is to distinguish between those who can be managed by active surveillance from those who require curative intervention. Current clinical and pathological tools used for risk stratification are limited in accuracy for distinguishing between these scenarios. An abundance of research in the last decade has provided evidence that genomics can offer meaningful and clinically actionable biological information to help inform decision making, and current National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines on prostate cancer endorse the use of commercially available genomic tools for men considering active surveillance.[1] It has been previously shown that the 22-gene genomic classifier, Decipher, accurately predicts the likelihood of metastasis and prostate cancer specific mortality when measured on tissue from radical prostatectomy specimens.[2] In multiple validation studies, it performed with higher accuracy and discrimination compared to clinical risk factors alone. The current study[3] is the first to examine whether the use of Decipher might aid decision making when measured on biopsy tissue at the time of diagnosis. Men with available needle biopsy samples were identified from a study cohort that previously had Decipher performed on their matched radical prostatectomy tissue. In this cohort of mixed low, intermediate and high risk men, Biopsy Decipher predicted the risk of metastasis 10 years post RP with high accuracy, outperforming NCCN clinical risk categorization, biopsy Gleason score and pre-operative PSA. Furthermore, this study showed that Decipher reclassified 46% of patients into lower or higher risk classification compared to NCCN classification alone. The study also showed that Biopsy Decipher can identify men that are at high risk for adverse pathology as defined by the presence of primary Gleason pattern 4 or greater.
AACR, Author Interviews, Melanoma, NYU/NYMC, Personalized Medicine / 25.01.2016

[caption id="attachment_20908" align="alignleft" width="166"]Tomas Kirchhoff, PhD Assistant Professor, Departments of Population Health and Environmental Medicine NYU Langone Medical Center Member, Laura and Isaac Perlmutter Cancer Center NYU Langone Dr. Thomas Kirchhoff[/caption] MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Tomas Kirchhoff, PhD Assistant Professor, Departments of Population Health and Environmental Medicine NYU Langone Medical Center Member, Laura and Isaac Perlmutter Cancer Center NYU Langone  Medical Research: What is the background for this study? Dr. Kirchhoff: Melanoma is the deadliest form of skin cancer, and the cause of approximately 80% of all skin cancer patients annually. One factor that can help reverse this negative trend is efficient prediction of which patients at early melanoma stage will likely progress to more advanced metastatic disease. Current clinical predictors of patient survival, based on tumor characteristics, are important, but are relatively non-specific to inform melanoma prognosis to an individual patient level. It is critical to identify other factors that can serve as more personalized markers of predicting the course of melanoma. Medical Research: What are the main findings? Dr. Kirchhoff: In our study, we found that inherited genetic markers that impact activity of certain immune genes correlate with melanoma survival. More specifically, our findings show that patients with more frequent forms of these genetic markers (genotypes) have, on average, a five-year shorter survival than patients with less common genotypes. We suggest that these genetic markers are independent of the current tumor surrogates and, as such, can serve as novel personalized markers of melanoma prognosis.
Author Interviews, Cancer Research, Genetic Research, Personalized Medicine, UCLA / 24.01.2016

[caption id="attachment_20891" align="alignleft" width="143"]Dr. Chirag Patil, MD American Board Certified Neurosurgeon, Brain & Spine Tumor Program Lead Investigator, Precision Medicine Initiative Against Brain Cancer Program Director, Neurosurgical Residence training program Director, Center for Neurosurgical Outcomes Research – Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California Dr. Chirag Patil[/caption] MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Dr. Chirag Patil, MD American Board Certified Neurosurgeon Brain & Spine Tumor Program Lead Investigator, Precision Medicine Initiative Against Brain Cancer Program Director, Neurosurgical Residence training program Director, Center for Neurosurgical Outcomes Research Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California MedicalResearch.com Editor’s note: Dr. Patil’s research is focused on developing a method of personalized cancer treatment through the harnessing of genome wide mutational analysis of a specific patient’s cancer. MedicalResearch.com: Would you tell us a little about yourself and your research interests? Dr. Patil: I am a Stanford-trained, Board Certified Neurosurgeon and cancer researcher at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles, California. I primarily focus on the care of patients with malignant brain tumors, particularly glioblastomas. I received my undergraduate degree from Cornell, followed by a medical degree from the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), where I was a Regent’s scholar. I completed a residency in neurosurgery and a fellowship in stereotactic radiology at Stanford University. I also have a master’s degree in epidemiology with a focus on clinical trial design and mathematical modeling from Stanford. MedicalResearch.com: Can you tell us about some of your research interests? Dr. Patil: I am keenly interested in and focused on developing precision science-powered novel brain tumor therapies, immuno-therapies, and patient-centered “big data” outcomes research. I lead the recently-funded Cedars-Sinai Precision Medicine Initiative Against Brain Cancer, which utilizes tumor genomics to build a mathematical computer model, i.e., a virtual cancer cell of each patient’s unique tumor. The White House and several other stakeholders have taken keep interest in this research initiative as an example of a leading precision medicine program.
Author Interviews, Cancer Research, Genetic Research, Personalized Medicine, Technology / 06.01.2016

[caption id="attachment_20449" align="alignleft" width="200"]Dr Bissan Al-Lazikani Team leader in computational biology The Institute of Cancer Research London Dr. Bissan Al-Lazikini[/caption] MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Dr Bissan Al-Lazikani Team leader in computational biology The Institute of Cancer Research London Medical Research: What is the background for the canSAR database? What are the main uses for the tool? Dr. Al-Lazikani: Drug discovery is a difficult, time consuming and expensive venture that frequently ends in late stage drug failures - especially in oncology. As with any complex venture, decisions throughout the drug discovery pipeline can be empowered by having access to the right information at the right time. But for drug discovery this means bringing together billions of experimental data from very diverse areas of science spanning genomics, proteomics, chemistry and more. We developed canSAR to help guide our own drug discovery efforts by integrating these huge, diverse data and by analysing the data and deriving hidden links and knowledge from them. This means that we can answer questions in minutes that would have taken weeks using previously available public resources. But, more importantly, canSAR analyses and links these data in a way that allows us  to derive knowledge that was hidden before. For example, one of the main ways canSAR is used is to help select the best druggable targets for drug discovery. Using canSAR we were able to uncover many druggable cancer proteins that were previously overlooked, and we are delighted to see that several of these proteins are now the subjects of drug discovery and development projects both by us and by others. We took the decision to make canSAR publicly and freely available because we believe that cancer drug discovery is a vast challenge that requires openness and data sharing worldwide. It has been embraced by the community is being used by tens of thousands of cancer scientists worldwide, both in academia and industry, to generate hypotheses for experiments and select targets for drug discovery.
Author Interviews, Personalized Medicine, Pharmacology / 16.11.2015

[caption id="attachment_19406" align="alignleft" width="85"]Diane Frenier Esq Reed Smith Corporate Partner Member of Corporate & Securities Group and Life Sciences Health Industry Group Diana Frenier[/caption] MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Diane Frenier Esq Reed Smith Corporate Partner Member of Corporate & Securities Group and Life Sciences Health Industry Group Background: Diane Frenier Esq discusses the M&A boom in the pharmaceutical and retail drug industry including a the "global study of 100 senior executives at life sciences companies by global law firm Reed Smith, in partnership with Mergermarket, reveals that 94% are planning to make an acquisition in the next year”. Medical Research: What are the main drivers behind the pursuit of cross-border life sciences deals? Ms Frenier: I think companies are trying to strengthen their capabilities in areas that are a core focus for them (e.g., in certain therapeutic areas, or for orphan drugs), and that includes adding products in those core focus areas and, in some cases, broadening geographically so they can market products in those core focus areas on a more global basis.  This will allow them to use their resources more efficiently and take advantage of saving from reducing redundancies.
Author Interviews, Cancer Research, Personalized Medicine / 04.11.2015

Timothy Humphrey DPhil. CRUK/MRC Oxford institute for Radiation Oncology University of Oxford, UKMedicalResearch.com Interview with Timothy Humphrey DPhil. CRUK/MRC Oxford institute for Radiation Oncology University of Oxford, UK Medical Research: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Response: Multiple mutations resulting in loss of a particular histone mark (H3K36me3) are frequently found in a number of cancer types. These include mutations resulting in loss of the tumour suppressor SETD2 (which trimethylates H3K36) and over-expression of the oncogene KDM4A (which demethylates H3K36me3), which together are observed in more than 10% of a number of cancer types. Notably, loss of H3K36me3 has been reported in more than 50% of pediatric high-grade gliomas. While loss of this histone mark is associated with poor prognosis, there is no targeted therapy yet. Following observations made in fission yeast, we have found a new way to selectively target H3K36me3-deficient cancers using the WEE1 inhibitor, AZD1775. Surprisingly, treatment of H3K36me3-deficient cancer cells with the WEE1 inhibitor resulted in S-phase arrest. Further analysis revealed ribonucleotide reductase to be the target of this synthetic lethal interaction, thereby leading to dNTP starvation, replication fork collapse and cell death.
Author Interviews, Personalized Medicine, Transplantation, University of Pennsylvania / 05.10.2015

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Brendan J. Keating, DPhil Assistant professor of Transplant Surgery Penn Medicine Medical Research: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Response: Genetic studies in transplantation have been plagued by small samples and very complex phenotypes/outcomes of patients. Transplanted individuals are typically on potent immunosuppression drugs for the rest of their lives, as they have 3.5 million to 10 million variants difference from an unrelated transplanted donor organ. Such populations would certainly benefit from large well-powered genetic studies but only 3 transplant genome-wide genotyping studies comprising a few hundred individuals have been published. The papers outline the resources in hand for the International Genetics & Translational Research in Transplantation Network, comprising 22 studies to date (since the publication it has now expanded to 25 studies and > 32,000 subjects with genome-wide genotyping data). We show significant statistical power in iGeneTRAiN to detect main effect association signals across regions such as the MHC region (which harbors the HLA Class I/II regions which are well established to associate with transplantation outcomes). We also show strong genome-wide power to detect transplant outcomes that span all solid organs including graft survival, acute rejection, new onset of diabetes after transplantation (fast becoming the most common comorbidity post-transplantation), and delayed graft function (to date we have looked at this in kidney transplant patients only). We show that iGeneTRAiN is statistically powered to deliver pioneering insights into the genetic architecture of transplant-related outcomes across a range of different solid-organ transplant studies. The transplant specific GWAS array that we designed (described in depth in the Genome Medicine paper) show that the coverage in key transplant associated regions is much higher than conventional arrays, and we describe the ‘imputation’ pipeline to expand the 780,000 or so variants examined in any given individual to > 15 millions of variants using whole genome sequencing reference datasets.
AACR, Author Interviews, Genetic Research, Melanoma, NYU/NYMC, Personalized Medicine, Wistar / 21.04.2015

Melissa Wilson, MD, PhD Assisstant Professor Perlmutter Cancer Center NYU Langone Medical Center New York, NYMedicalResearch.com Interview with: Melissa Wilson, MD, PhD Assisstant Professor Perlmutter Cancer Center NYU Langone Medical Center New York, NY Medical Research: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Dr. Wilson: Metastatic cutaneous melanoma is an extremely aggressive form of skin cancer.  Traditionally, it has been characterized by clinicopathologic characteristics.  More recently, melanoma tumors have also been stratified by common somatic mutations for which targeted therapies have been developed or are under investigation, including BRAF, NRAS and KIT.  In addition to somatic mutations, aberrant intracellular signaling pathways and cell cycle disruption contribute to melanoma pathogenesis.  Indeed, recent next generation sequencing studies have identified a number of new genes involved in melanomagenesis.  A comprehensive evaluation and understanding of concurrent and mutually exclusive mutations in tumors has been lacking.  Therefore, we developed a comprehensive custom targeted capture of 108 genes previously implicated in melanoma pathogenesis.  We used the targeted panel to perform massively parallel sequencing on 94 well-established human melanoma cell lines, 67 patient-derived xenografts (PDX), and 5 cell lines made from PDX, all untreated. Samples were clustered based on deleterious mutations.  Eighty-three percent of samples had deleterious mutations in the MAPK signaling pathway (including BRAF, RAS) and NF1.  Ten percent of samples had PI3K pathway mutations which were predominantly associated with BRAF mutations.  TP53 was found to be mutated in 24% of the samples and were also associated with mutations in the MAPK pathway.  Mutations in chromatin remodeling genes were mutually exclusive with each other, but were associated with BRAF and NRAS mutations.  Of particular interest, five of the 10 NF1mutated samples harbored likely deleterious mutations in MAP3K5 or MAP3K9, suggesting the potential involvement of JNK signal transduction pathway in a cohort of samples.
Author Interviews, Duke, Personalized Medicine, Technology / 27.03.2015

Ryan Jeffrey Shaw, PhD, MS, RN Assistant Professor School of Nursing Center for Health Informatics Center for Precision Medicine Duke University MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Ryan Jeffrey Shaw, PhD, MS, RN Assistant Professor School of Nursing Center for Health Informatics Center for Precision Medicine Duke University Medical Research: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Dr. Shaw: Primary care delivery revolves around a series of episodes, rather than functioning as a continuum. When patients come to a clinic data on their health is collected as a single data point. This model neglects potentially meaningful data from patients’ daily lives and results in less informed treatment and scheduling of follow-up visits. Lack of meaningful data further blinds clinicians to patients’ health outside of the clinic and can contribute to unnecessary emergency department visits and hospitalizations. Personalized care through mobile health technologies inspires the transition from isolated snapshots based on serial visits to real time and trended data. By using technologies from cell phones to wearable sensors, providers have the ability to monitor patients and families outside of the traditional office visit.
Author Interviews, Genetic Research, Melanoma, Personalized Medicine / 08.03.2015

Pedram Gerami MD Associate Professor of Dermatology and Pathology Northwestern UniversityMedicalResearch.com Interview with: Pedram Gerami MD Associate Professor of Dermatology and Pathology Northwestern University MedicalResearch: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Dr. Gerami: The outcomes for patients with cutaneous melanoma are highly variable and there are limitations to the conventional staging system for melanoma. For example while the status of the sentinel lymph node biopsy is considered the strongest prognosticator, approximately 2/3 of cutaneous melanoma patients that ultimately die from their melanoma will have a negative sentinel lymph node biopsy result. In this study we showed that using a technique known as mRNA expression profiling to determine which genes are highly active and which are not that a molecular prognostic assay with accuracy could be developed. This assay can accurately classify patients based on their gene signature as having a high or low risk for metastasis and death from their melanoma. In an independent validation cohort, patients with a class I or low risk signature had a 5 year disease free survival rate of 97% while those with a class II or high risk signature had a 5 year disease free survival rate of only 31%.
Author Interviews, Breast Cancer, Duke, Genetic Research, JAMA, Personalized Medicine / 05.03.2015

Dr. Michaela A. Dinan Ph.D Department of Medicine Duke UniversityMedicalResearch.com Interview with: Dr. Michaela A. Dinan Ph.D Department of Medicine Duke University Medical Research: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Dr. Dinan: We wanted to examine how  Oncotype DX® Breast Cancer Test (ODX) was being used in real-world practice at the population level. ODX has been examined in clinical trials and limited academic settings but we know that these patients are often younger, have fewer medical comorbidities, and do not necessarily accurately reflect the majority patients with cancer.  In our study, we observed that Oncotype DX® Breast Cancer Test was being used predominately in accordance with guidelines which recommend the test for women with estrogen-receptor positive, disease. We also looked just at women under the age of 70 who met guideline criteria for testing, because this population would include those women who were more likely to be chemotherapy candidates, and we saw a rapid uptake of the test between 2005 and 2009, with use of the test increasing from 8% to 39%.
Genetic Research, MD Anderson, Melanoma, Personalized Medicine / 04.03.2015

Linda Chin, MD Department Chair, Department of Genomic Medicine, Division of Cancer Medicine The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center Houston, TXMedicalResearch.com Interview with: Linda Chin, MD Department Chair, Department of Genomic Medicine, Division of Cancer Medicine The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center Houston, TX Medical Research: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Dr. Chin: BRAF inhibitors have worked very well against melanoma in the clinic, but when the tumors relapse on treatment, it is not always clear what causes it. Without this information, it can be difficult for doctors to identify specific second-line therapies likely to overcome the drug resistance. In this study, we used both mouse and patient melanoma samples to identify patterns of selected protein levels that can categorize modes of drug resistance when other assays such as DNA sequencing are uninformative. We hope that this information can provide missing clues for clinicians.
Author Interviews, Cancer Research, MD Anderson, Nature, Personalized Medicine / 28.02.2015

Dr. Anil Sood MD Professor of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterMedicalResearch.com Interview with: Dr. Anil Sood MD Professor of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center Medical Research: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? MedicalResearch: What is the background for this approach? What are the main findings? Dr. Sood: The background involves several different issues: management approaches have varied quite a bit across the US; definition of “optimal” surgery and rates of complete surgical removal of tumor (R0) have also varied. It is quite apparent that patients who benefit the most from surgery upfront are those who have removal of tumor resection. To address these issues, we have implanted a much more personalized approach whereby patients with suspected advanced ovarian cancer undergo laparoscopic assessment using a validated scoring system (based on the pattern and extent of disease noted during laparoscopic assessment); patients with a score <8 undergo upfront debulking surgery and those with a score ≥8 receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery after 3-4 cycles. To date, this program has been fully implemented as part of the Moonshot Program at M.D. Anderson. This program has already resulted in several benefits – for example, prior to this algorithm being put into place among all patients with suspected advanced ovarian cancer, around 20% would have removal of tumor resection; after the implementation of the algorithm, of those going to upfront debulking surgery (after laparoscopic assessment), almost 85% of times removal of tumor resection can be achieved. Also, this method of treatment is allowing for new and innovative clinical trial designs.
Author Interviews, Biomarkers, Melanoma, NYU/NYMC, Personalized Medicine / 24.02.2015

Iman Osman, MD Professor, Departments of Dermatology, Medicine and Urology Associate Director, NYU Cancer Institute Director, Interdisciplinary Melanoma Program New York University Langone Medical Center New York, NY 10016MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Iman Osman, MD Professor, Departments of Dermatology, Medicine and Urology Associate Director The Laura and Isaac Perlmutter Cancer Center Director, Interdisciplinary Melanoma Program New York University Langone Medical Center New York, NY 10016 MedicalResearch: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Dr. Osman: We were interested in exploring molecules that could be biomarkers or functional regulators of metastasis in melanoma in early-stage tumor lesions on the skin. Though these tumors are treated largely the same (by surgical removal ), patients with these tumors have vastly different outcomes (apparent cure vs. metastatic spread of the disease). The reasons for these disparities are unclear and we have little ability to identify or predict the patients that will be cured and those that won’t. We also don’t have much data to know even if these tumors have differences at the molecular level. Our findings indicate that there are molecular differences in these tumors and that some of these differences contribute to tumor spread. 
Alcohol, Author Interviews, Personalized Medicine / 18.02.2015

Sean M. Murphy, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Health Policy & Administration Washington State University MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Sean M. Murphy, Ph.D. Assistant Professor  Department of Health Policy & Administration Washington State University Medical Research: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Dr. Murphy: Professional healthcare advice regarding excessive alcohol consumption has been shown to reduce demand in a controlled setting. However, success in a clinical trial isn’t always indicative of an intervention’s effectiveness in everyday use. Studies testing the effect of provider advice on alcohol demand in a non-controlled environment are few, and have failed to control for non-moderate drinkers.  Therefore, it is possible that the estimated effect of professional-health advice primarily reflected moderate-drinkers’ responses. The distinction between moderate and non-moderate drinkers is an important one, as society bears a large cost for those who consume above-moderate quantities, while moderate drinkers have been shown to be relatively productive and healthy. Excise taxes may not be efficient given that they impose negative externalities on moderate drinkers, while excessive drinkers have been shown to be relatively unresponsive to price increases. We found that personalized information from a healthcare professional was negatively associated with reported alcohol consumption among both “risky” and “binge" drinkers. Moreover, we found that personalized drinking advice may have an impact on those who are reluctant to state that they were given such advice.
Author Interviews, Genetic Research, Personalized Medicine / 13.02.2015

Prof. Jozef GECZMedicalResearch.com Interview with: Prof. Jozef Gecz NH&MRC Senior Principal Research Fellow Professor of Human Genetics School of Paediatrics and Reproductive Health Faculty of Health Sciences The University of Adelaide at the Women's and Children's Hospital North Adelaide, SA Medical Research: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Prof. Gecz: Cerebral palsy is the most frequent movement disorder of children for many years considered to be due to brain injury. Given that cerebral palsy incidence has not changed dramatically over many years while medical care is constantly improving, we look for other causes and specifically genetic mutation. By investigating 183 children with cerebral palsy and for many also one or both of their parents we find that for at least 14% of these we can find plausible explanation in genetic mutation being involved in the causation of their cerebral palsy. Importantly, we find that 10% of these mutations are de novo, which means that these mutations are not present in the parents (specifically in their blood as that is the tissue source we tested). 4% of mutations were inherited from unaffected mothers to affected sons. Previous estimates suggested 2% genetic contribution to Cerebral palsy. We now know that it is at least 14% and likely more. If you are looking for compensation for this condition, contact an Indiana cerebral palsy lawyer.
Author Interviews, Genetic Research, Leukemia, NEJM, Personalized Medicine / 11.02.2015

David G. Kent, Ph.D From the Cambridge Institute for Medical Research and Wellcome Trust–Medical Research Council Stem Cell Institute University of CambridgeMedicalResearch.com Interview with: David G. Kent, Ph.D From the Cambridge Institute for Medical Research and Wellcome Trust–Medical Research Council Stem Cell Institute University of Cambridge Medical Research: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Dr. Kent: Cancers are the result of the sequential acquisition of errors in the genetic code.  Most studies have focused on the sum of these mutations (e.g., A+B+C = cancer) but no study in patients has asked the question of whether or not the order of genetic mutations impacts the disease (e.g., does A to AB equal B to BA).  We studied patients with chronic blood disorders (known as myeloproliferative neoplasms, or MPNs) that are precursors to cancer to access the earliest stages of tumour development and studied whether or not the order of mutation acquisition impacted disease.  We studied patients with mutations in two genes (JAK2 and TET2) and showed that the order of acquisition of these mutations impacted timing of clinical presentation, disease subtype, frequency of thrombotic events, and differed in their response to targeted therapy in the lab.
Author Interviews, Genetic Research, JAMA, Personalized Medicine / 09.02.2015

Andres Moreno De Luca, MD Investigator and Resident Physician Autism & Developmental Medicine Institute Department of Radiology Geisinger Health System Danville, PA 17822MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Andres Moreno De Luca, MD Investigator and Resident Physician Autism & Developmental Medicine Institute Department of Radiology Geisinger Health System Danville, PA 17822   Medical Research: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Response: The main finding of our study is that family background contributes to the variability in cognitive, behavioral, and motor performance seen in children with 16p11.2 deletions, and perhaps other genetic syndromes, and this may be attributed in part to genetic background effects. In the general population the best predictor of a child’s outcomes in traits such as cognitive ability, height, BMI, etc. is the biparental mean performance in such domains and this is due in part to genetic background. For example, if a child’s parents have IQ scores of 130 and 110, it is expected that the child will have an IQ within 2 standard deviations of 120 (bi-parental mean). However, when studying individuals with genetic conditions, most researchers tend to overlook the influence of familial/genetic background on the affected child’s outcomes and commonly attribute the manifestations (or lack thereof) to the genetic mutation alone. This creates confusion when studying children with neurodevelopmental disorders, such as autism, which show significant clinical variability, as some children with a specific genetic mutation (e.g. deletion 16p11.2) may have intellectual disability without autism, while other children with the same mutation may have autism without intellectual disability. Based on these observations, some researchers have argued that deletion 16p11.2 is incompletely penetrant. However, our study showed that the 16p11.2 deletion has a detrimental effect on cognitive and behavioral performance for all children, but the clinical status (affected vs. unaffected) and ultimate performance level is influenced by the parental performance.