Pump You Up: Epigenetic Editor Drives Muscle Growth in FSHD Patients

A first-in-human clinical trial of an experimental epigenetic therapy has produced an outcome long considered elusive in the progressive genetic muscle degeneration disease facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy (FSHD): measurable gains in lean muscle volume.

Epicrispr Biotechnologies announced updated interim results from its ongoing Phase I/II study of EPI-321, reporting that all three FSHD patients who reached the six-month evaluation point experienced increases in lean muscle mass following a single intravenous (IV) infusion of the therapy. The findings represent what the company says is the first clinical evidence that a treatment may be capable of increasing muscle volume in FSHD, which affects an estimated 870,000 people worldwide and is one of the most common forms of muscular dystrophy. 

Although the study remains in its early stages with only nine total patients across two dosing cohorts, the promising findings were supported by imaging data, functional measurements, and biomarker changes that together suggest the therapy may be altering the biological drivers of the disease.

FSHD lacks disease-modifying treatments to intervene in the characteristic loss of skeletal muscle function, starting in the face, shoulders, and upper arms and spreading throughout the body. “We were pretty blown away,” Epicrispr CEO Amber Salzman told Inside Precision Medicine. “Every single patient gained lean muscle volume. No one has seen that.”

A silencing GEM

FSHD is caused by hypomethylation of the D4Z4 region, which is a polymorphic variable number tandem repeat (VNTR) array made up of 3.3 kilobase units, with each unit encoding the DUX4 gene. This hypomethylation leads to abnormal activation of the DUX4 gene, triggering muscle cell death and tissue degeneration, resulting in progressive muscle weakness, asymmetry, and fat infiltration.

Unlike conventional gene-editing therapies that permanently alter DNA sequences, Epicrispr’s therapy uses their Gene Expression Modulation System (GEMS). Epicrispr’s EPI-321 is an adeno-associated virus (AAV)-delivered epigenetic gene therapy that restores D4Z4 methylation and suppresses DUX4 expression, and preclinical studies show improved muscle function and reduced muscle cell death. “We don’t cut DNA,” Salzman said. “We’re not using Cas9 in the traditional editing sense. We use a dead Cas protein and an epigenetic mechanism to silence the gene.”

According to Epicrispr, preclinical studies demonstrated that the epigenetic modifications persist through many rounds of cell division, suggesting long-term suppression may be possible after a single treatment.

In addition to the therapeutic innovation, Epicrispr has also made headway into the long-standing challenge of identifying reliable molecular biomarkers for FSHD to evaluate activity downstream of DUX4. Traditional muscle biopsies provide information from only a small tissue sample and can be difficult to interpret when substantial fat replacement has already occurred.

Instead, Epicrispr collaborated with researchers at the University of Colorado investigating circulating cell-free DNA signatures associated with DUX4-driven disease activity. The biomarker, known as CBT17, emerged from studies comparing blood samples from approximately 50 healthy individuals and 50 FSHD patients. The biomarker may provide a whole-body readout of disease activity, offering evidence that DUX4 suppression is occurring beyond individual muscles examined through biopsy.

As of the May 12, 2026 data cutoff, EPI-321 has demonstrated a manageable safety profile, with nine patients treated across two dose cohorts. One IV infusion was administered to six patients in the first cohort at a target dose of 2×10¹³ vg/kg and to three patients in the second cohort at a target dose of 4×10¹³ vg/kg.

The company reported a “manageable” safety profile, with no severe dose-limiting toxicities disclosed to date. Salzman was careful not to overstate the findings. “I never want to be hubristic when it comes to AAV,” she said. “You’re giving people a lot of virus.”

She described the treatment experience as somewhat analogous to vaccine-related immune responses, noting that prophylactic immunosuppression is used as part of the protocol. “It’s manageable,” she said. “I’m not going to say it’s favorable. It’s manageable.” No serious grade 3 or grade 4 treatment-related safety concerns have been reported so far.

Baseline levels of CBT17 in treated patients fell substantially after therapy. “When we looked at baseline and three months, our patients’ levels came down so that it was just about in the healthy range,” she said.

Functional measures match MRI

The headline result comes from whole-body MRI analyses conducted six months after treatment. Among the first three evaluable patients, lean muscle volume increased in every individual compared with baseline measurements. On average, patients gained approximately 370 milliliters of lean muscle tissue, equivalent to roughly 0.8 pounds of muscle mass. Individual gains ranged from about 0.5 to 1.3 pounds. For a disease characterized by chronic muscle loss, even stabilizing muscle mass would be considered a meaningful achievement. Actual gains are potentially more significant.

The MRI analyses were performed in collaboration with Springbok Analytics, a company specializing in AI-powered muscle imaging. In addition to being widely used in professional sports to monitor injury recovery and rehabilitation, as well as a growing number of clinical settings, FSHD is one of Springbok’s primary clinical focus areas, along with disorders such as Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease and Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Using a specialized MRI protocol that runs on standard scanners, the company can quantify changes across as many as 140 individual muscles throughout the body, measuring muscle volume, muscle composition, and fat infiltration, producing objective data on muscle health.

According to Salzman, Springbok compared patients’ baseline scans against machine-learning models trained on longitudinal imaging datasets from more than 100 FSHD patients. “They can predict what it’s going to look like in six months—how much muscle patients will lose and where,” she said. “Then we sent them the six-month scans, and every patient gained lean muscle volume.”

The gains were not evenly distributed throughout the body. Patients appeared to benefit most in muscles that still retained substantial healthy tissue before treatment. “If you have too much fat in that muscle, there’s not that much we can do,” Salzman explained. “But if you have some residual muscle, it can not only stop getting worse because we’re cutting off the poison, but you can also regenerate muscle.” 

One participant, a post-menopausal woman, gained approximately 1.3 pounds of lean muscle mass according to the MRI analysis. The increase was particularly notable because age-related muscle loss would normally be expected in that population. Earlier data released by Epicrispr showed favorable trends across several functional and strength assessments at the three-month mark. These measures included tests commonly used in neuromuscular disease studies, such as the Timed Up and Go test, 10-meter walk/run assessments, and quantitative muscle testing.

Because many functional endpoints depend on patient effort, interpreting changes in small open-label studies can be challenging. Investigators and investors alike often question whether participants simply perform better because they know they received treatment. Salzman acknowledged those concerns. “You could say maybe they had a good day, and that’s why the functional measures were better,” she said.

MRI measurements, however, are not subject to effort-dependent variability. “You can’t fake MRI,” she added. Importantly, the regions showing muscle growth on imaging appeared to correspond with areas where patients demonstrated improved performance.

One participant who gained substantial upper-body muscle volume showed corresponding gains on upper-body strength assessments, while lower-body improvements were more limited in areas where muscle loss had already become severe. “The whole story is holding together,” Salzman said. “Their functional measures are getting better; their lean muscle is increasing.”

Taken together, the MRI, biomarker, and functional data provide multiple independent signals supporting biological activity. “You can’t fake blood; you can’t fake MRIs,” Salzman said. “Those are totally supportive.”

Epitome of epigenetic editing?

Beyond FSHD, researchers are closely watching EPI-321 because it represents one of the first clinical tests of an epigenetic CRISPR-based therapeutic strategy. “This is an important milestone not just for FSHD but for epigenetic medicine,” Salzman said. The approach could potentially be adapted to other diseases caused by harmful gene activation or insufficient gene silencing.

Still, significant hurdles remain before EPI-321 can be considered a proven therapy. The current dataset includes only three patients with six months of follow-up. Epicrispr plans to present additional data from six patients at the World Muscle Society Annual Congress in September 2026.

The company expects the initial Phase I/II study to complete enrollment and generate a full readout in mid-2027. Yet, larger studies will be needed to determine whether muscle gains persist, whether they translate into meaningful long-term functional benefits, and whether safety remains acceptable over time.

Regulators will also require evidence linking increases in lean muscle volume to tangible improvements in patient function and quality of life. To that end, Epicrispr is preparing discussions with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration regarding potential future endpoints and whether MRI-based muscle measurements could eventually serve as surrogate markers of clinical benefit.

Whether those early signals hold up in larger populations remains to be seen. But for a disease in which muscle loss has long been viewed as inevitable, the possibility of reversing that trend, even modestly, marks a notable moment for the FSHD field.

The post Pump You Up: Epigenetic Editor Drives Muscle Growth in FSHD Patients appeared first on Inside Precision Medicine.

Opinion: Joseph Fraumeni Jr., pioneering cancer genetics researcher, devoted his life to families like mine

When Joe Fraumeni was a pre-med student in the 1950s, he accompanied a group that visited Massachusetts General Hospital to sit in an amphitheater and watch a patient being cut open for an abdominal operation. As he told me many years later, Joe got so queasy from the sight that he had to walk out and decided not to become a surgeon.

How fortunate we were that he didn’t.

Read the rest…

Affiliate Updates: Summer 2026

An IOCDF Affiliate carries out the mission of the International OCD Foundation through programs at the local community level within the United States. Each Affiliate is an independent 501(c)3 non-profit organization run entirely by dedicated volunteers.

Below will be quarterly updates from our Affiliates, organized by state. Click the (+) to open each menu and read updates and find contact information for clinics near you.

The post Affiliate Updates: Summer 2026 appeared first on International OCD Foundation.

An Evaluation of the Usability and Feasibility of the 50K4Life Mobile App for Delivering Walking Challenges to Public School Administrative Employees: Beta Testing Study

Background: Mobile health apps show promise for delivering physical activity interventions, but uptake remains low due to usability barriers. Beta testing is essential to optimize user experience before full implementation. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the usability, acceptability, and feasibility of the 50K4Life mobile app prototype for delivering a 2-week walking challenge to public school administrative employees. Methods: Following the Integrate, Design, Assess, and Share framework, we conducted a single-group beta test with 12 public school administrative employees in El Paso County, Texas. Participants used the 50K4Life app built on the Pathverse platform for a 2-week walking challenge. Data collection included acceptability surveys, satisfaction questionnaires, app use metrics, and qualitative debriefing sessions. Results: All 12 participants completed the walking challenge. Acceptability was high for app design (n=12, 91.7%), layout (n=9, 75%), and battery impact (n=10, 83.3% reported no issues). However, participants experienced difficulties with navigation (n=7, 58.3%), delays in updating step counts (n=8, 66.7%), and completion of assigned tasks (n=5, 41.7% could not locate all features). App use was high: 100% (n=12) accessed the leaderboard and walking challenge page, and 91.6% (n=11) synced step data and set step goals. Results from participants’ responses in the surveys and feedback from debrief interviews identified needs for improving user engagement features, synchronization, and visual appeal. Conclusions: The application of a participatory approach and Integrate, Design, Assess, and Share framework yielded valuable insights into the acceptability of the 50K4Life app reported by this study cohort and potential for enhanced features in <i>real-world</i> use contexts.

Cancer Immunotherapy Blossoms Are Starting to Bear Fruit

Over the last decade, there has been unprecedented success and progress in immunotherapy for cancer treatment, so says Ira Mellman, PhD, the president of research at the Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy during his opening keynote at the Frontiers in Cancer Immunotherapy Symposium hosted by The New York Academy of Sciences, held on June 23, 2026.

Through his talk, Mellman described the research and clinical seeds that were sown over the last two decades. He showed how these seeds have blossomed, and his expectations for which blossoms will bear fruit, with the right focus and pruning.

Ira Mellman, PhD, the president of research at the Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy during his opening keynote at the Frontiers in Cancer Immunotherapy Symposium hosted by The New York Academy of Sciences, held on June 23, 2026. [C. Singleman]

The last decade of cancer immunotherapy

Before considering therapeutic options, Mellman summarized the biological events required for stimulating an effective immune response in patients. He described the dual stages of T cell activation and T cell exhaustion. Most therapies have relied on interventions that activate T cells, but over time, these T cells become exhausted—they don’t die, but go into senescence.

The next logical step in therapeutic investigation was to explore methods to pull exhausted T cells from senescence back into an active state. While some new therapies are being tested, there is still significant work to be done and there have been many false starts.

Vaccine therapy has emerged to get ahead of the activation-exhaustion problem by developing primed and more efficient T cells.

“The sole purpose of vaccine therapy, as we think of it, is to generate more and better T cells by immunizing against presumptive tumor associated antigens or neo antigens and …having those cells feed into the cycle,” Mellman said. He explained that the idea behind using vaccines is akin to the goal of adaptive therapies, like CAR T, that increase the number of primed and functional T cells, but vaccines do it endogenously.

Broadening his scope further, Mellman spoke about cancers not just in terms of the direct interaction between cancer cells and T cells, but in the broader context of the body. “The tumor microenvironment (TME),” he said, “plays an immense role—both positive and negative—with respect to allowing T cells to do their jobs in the case of anti-tumor immunity.” Consideration of the interactions between cancer and the TME present both opportunities and challenges to developing therapies.

Current progress

“We’ve had unprecedented success both clinically and commercially” within the last 15 years for a variety of cancer therapies that have come from the research stage to FDA approval in a relatively short time. Mellman pointed out that these therapies not only have been created quickly, are effective across a variety of diseases, are well tolerated, and improve survival of patients.

“All of this activity together has really changed the standard of care in a wide variety of cancer types,” he stressed. “That this has happened over a 15-year period is truly extraordinary.”

Why is a renaissance needed?  

With this progress, Mellman returned to his original thesis that the field of cancer immunotherapy is on the precipice of big change.

He asked, “With this success—including clinical and financial—why do we need a renaissance in this area?” He answered his own question stating, that “We are the victims of our own success.”

He described challenges and setbacks stemming from the early progress. He described that identifying new checkpoint targets have not been successful, TIL research is somewhat successful, but outcomes are inconsistent, solid tumors post problems for therapies like CAR T, and cancer vaccines efficacy is unconfirmed except in their use as a post-operative adjuvant.

Reflecting on the history and progress, Mellman presented his four top priorities in progressing cancer immunotherapy over the next ten years. First, focusing on the next generation of cell therapy, especially focusing on treating solid tumors. Second, he suggests moving past CARs to using neoantigen-driven targeting (including vaccines, synthetic neoAg, and TCR platforms). Third, prioritizing in vivo immune engineering to reduce costs and improve accessibility and scalability. Fourth, he stresses the need to focus on a holistic approach to cancer immunology, understanding and optimizing the TME cancer interactions, developing synthetic modulators and utilizing AI models guided by patient insights.

Current steps to the future

Mellman further explained that through his work over the last two decades, he’s learned many lessons. He pointed out that researchers and clinicians need to remember that there are many therapeutic opportunities derived from various approaches; he cautioned against forgetting that mice are not humans and vice versa, pointing out that what may work in one species may not in the other; he encouraged the use of new technologies, including integrating AI into analysis procedures; and finally he suggested that researchers build on clinical research not just laboratory work.

Focusing on his own work, Mellman described how his team integrated these lessons in studying the application of mRNA vaccines. He described a study comparing the outcomes of patients with pancreatic cancer given mRNA vaccines intravenously (IV) or with an intramuscular (IM) dose. They were surprised to find that patients receiving IV delivery responded to the vaccine, but the response was inconsistent at first glance. Through deeper investigation, they determined that non-responsive patients previously had a splenectomy in addition to the removal of their pancreatic tumor. They reasoned that the IV infusion in responsive patients impacted immune cells developing in the spleen. While this study helped explain part of the process, Mellman pointed out that the fundamental mechanisms by which vaccines can be functional as an adjuvant are still unclear and his team is currently working on addressing these questions.

“There is a wealth of new understanding that we can generate if we move to the clinic quickly but do so in a way that really still concentrates on the underlying basic science,” he concluded. He stressed the importance of following approaches with an established proof of concept and suggested that engineering will enable research and scaling up to positively impact many patients.

Tending to the blossoming research and application of cancer therapy will allow for patients to have the opportunity to have better therapies in the future. Though he said this early in his discussion, it seems appropriate to end with Mellman’s assertion that, “This is a remarkable field.”

The post Cancer Immunotherapy Blossoms Are Starting to Bear Fruit appeared first on Inside Precision Medicine.

STAT+: At BIO 2026, industry wrestled with Washington politics, and making AI work better

SAN DIEGO — On the exhibition floor at the annual international BIO conference in San Diego, biotech and startup executives hummed around pavilions representing member countries and states, pausing to watch World Cup games on a giant screen at a South Korean contract drug manufacturer’s booth.

Many attendees were thinking about how to compete off the pitch, too. China’s growing power in the business of developing new drugs became a central matter for much of the convention — as well as how to boost biotech in the U.S.

The road map of hopes and fears for a U.S.-centric biotech industry followed, both onstage and off: getting a better hold on Washington and beating back pricing policies, as well as moving quickly on artificial intelligence as early strategies yield clues about how to use the technology to gain a competitive edge.

Continue to STAT+ to read the full story…

Merck KGaA to Acquire Bio-Techne for $11.3B, Expanding Life Science Tools Presence

Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany, has agreed to acquire Bio-Techne for approximately $11.3 billion, the companies said today, in a deal designed to position the buyer as more of a leader across the life science value chain by expanding its presence in high-growth, next-generation life-sci markets with Bio-Techne’s tools, analytical technologies, and consumables.

The deal would add Bio-Techne’s multiomics offerings, analytical technologies, and integrated workflow solutions to German Merck’s platforms and services in research, bioprocessing and advanced therapeutics, with the aim of creating a combined company capable of helping customers from discovery and translational research through development, testing and commercial manufacturing.

Merck KGaA added that acquiring Bio-Techne would directly deliver on its mid- to long-term strategic agenda, which focuses on adding to its high-growth value drivers, integrated workflows, platformed capabilities—as well as scaling and sourcing innovation through merger-and-acquisition (M&A) deals like the Bio-Techne transaction.

That transaction is the latest in a series of acquisitions for Merck KGaA totaling more than $35 billion, including in the U.S. with acquisitions such as Millipore (for about $7 billion in 2010), as well as Sigma-Aldrich (for $17 billion in a deal announced in 2014 and completed the following year), Versum Materials (for €5.8 billion [about $6.6 billion] in 2019), and last year, SpringWorks Therapeutics (for $3.95 billion).

Merck KGaA said it would also benefit from Bio-Techne’s position as a leading provider of materials, analytics, and process technologies to cell therapy developers. Bio-Techne expects to acquire the ownership in Wilson Wolf it does not own immediately following the end of calendar year 2027 under the terms of a two-part forward contract between the company and Wilson Wolf, a manufacturer of cell culture devices, including the G-Rex product line. Bio-Techne holds 19.9% of Wilson Wolf that it acquired in the fiscal year that ended June 30, 2023.

Merck KGaA employs more than 14,000 people in the U.S. across over 70 company and customer sites.

The $11.3 billion Bio-Techne acquisition is the new third largest biopharma merger-and-acquisition (M&A) deal announced so far this year, behind the €10.7 billion ($12.268 billion) cash buyout offer for Italian-based Recordati being pursued by CVC Capital Partners and Groupe Bruxelles Lambert, which aim to take the company private; and Sun Pharmaceutical Industries’ planned $11.75 billion purchase of Organon, the women’s health drug developer spun out of Merck & Co., in a deal expected to close in early 2027.

The previous third-largest M&A deal this year, now fourth-largest, is the $10.9 billion AbbVie purchase of Apogee Therapeutics, announced on Monday. The fifth largest deal is GlaxoSmithKline (GSK)’s planned $10.6 billion buyout of Nuvalent,  announced June 9 and expected to close in the third quarter.

“Outstanding fit”

“Bio-Techne is an outstanding fit that directly supports our strategic direction focused on delivering cutting-edge products and solutions across the entire industry value chain—from lab customers to those manufacturing in the biotech and pharmaceutical industries,” Kai Beckmann, chairman of the executive board and group CEO of Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany, said in a statement.

“By combining Bio-Techne’s scientific depth, innovation engine and differentiated portfolio with the global scale, manufacturing excellence and customer reach of Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany, we are in a strong position to address some of the most important opportunities in life sciences and support our customers in accelerating the next generation of scientific discovery and therapeutic innovation. This positions us to deliver compelling strategic and financial benefits for shareholders, customers and employees,” Beckmann added.

Those benefits, according to German Merck, include immediate accretion to the company’s earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA) pre margin for both the Group as a while and its Life Science business segment upon closing of the acquisition deal.

The Life Sciences segment finished last year with €8.98 billion ($10.36 billion) in revenue.  Merck KGaA does not break down its businesses further than its three segments, which also include healthcare (drug development, focused on oncology, neurology and immunology, and “global health” treatments such as for malaria) and electronics (high-tech materials).

The deal is expected to close by late 2026 or early 2027, subject to satisfying customary closing conditions that include obtaining regulatory approvals and approval by Bio-Techne shareholders.

Bio-Techne’s board of directors and the corporate bodies overseeing Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany, have already approved the transaction, which will also add to earnings per share (EPS) by year three after closing, German Merck said.

€140M in “synergies”

Merck KGaA said it will carry out cost-cutting “synergies” of approximately €140 million (about $159.3 million) that are expected to be fully realized by the third year after closing.

The planned acquisition will be funded through a combination of existing cash on hand and proceeds from new debt, Merck KGaA said, adding that it will preserve its “strong” investment-grade credit rating.

For Minneapolis-based Bio-Techne, the acquisition is expected to increase its geographic and omnichannel access for its customers through integration of its offerings with those of Merck KGaA through a synergistic platform.

Bio-Techne has more than 3,000 employees, with approximately 2,300 employees based in the U.S. The company operates 34 global locations and 15 manufacturing facilities across the U.S., Canada, the U.K., Switzerland and China, and generated net sales of more than $1.2 billion in the fiscal year that ended June 30, 2025.

A leader in recombinant proteins with a half-century of heritage in next-generation R&D and new modalities, Bio-Techne said it would bring to German Merck a globally recognized portfolio of cytokines, growth factors, antibodies, and immunoassay kits. Bio-Techne is expected to strengthen the analytical and bioprocess solutions of Merck KGaA by adding to its offerings ProteinSimple, a leader in automated protein detection and analysis instruments. Bio-Techne added that its RNAscope and related in situ hybridization technologies would strengthen the capabilities of Merck KGaA, in spatial biology and diagnostics.

“For 50 years, Bio-Techne has enabled scientific breakthroughs across proteomics, spatial biology, and novel therapeutics,” stated Kim Kelderman, president and CEO of Bio-Techne. “This transaction is a testament to the remarkable company our team has built and to the enduring value we create for our customers and stakeholders.”

Muted enthusiasm

Bio-Techne investors appeared to share only muted enthusiasm for the deal, as the company’s shares traded on Nasdaq rose just 19.8% to $70.53 as of 12:48 pm ET, from Wednesday’s close of $58.88 per share. Merck KGaA shares traded on XETRA rose 4.93% to €147.00 ($167.25).

Puneet Souda, senior managing director, life science tools and diagnostics, and a senior research analyst with Leerink Partners, offered a possible explanation in a research note today: “The acquisition appears to be only a 24% premium to yesterday’s close and 26x the Street’s forecast for FY27 [enterprise value]/EBITDA compared to 16x for its LST [life science technologies] peer group.”

“We see the acquisition multiple undervaluing what is a highly accretive asset in our view,” Souda wrote. “Historically, TECH [Bio-Techne’s stock ticker] traded at much higher multiples given their highly accretive consumables profile (80%+ consumables) of consistent 70%+ gross margins and operating margin potential.”

One rival company in particular may benefit from the deal, Souda said: “The announcement is likely to be viewed positive for peer LST companies today, especially RVTY [Revvity] in our view.”

At $73 per share cash, the deal price represents a 36% premium to Bio-Techne’s one-month volume weighted average trading price.

“As part of Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany, we will have greater scale and expanded capabilities to accelerate innovation and deepen our impact. Together, we will empower our customers to tackle the most important challenges in science and healthcare, helping to improve outcomes worldwide,” Kelderman added.

The post Merck KGaA to Acquire Bio-Techne for $11.3B, Expanding Life Science Tools Presence appeared first on GEN – Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology News.

BIO 2026: FDA Leadership Confront Workforce Losses, China Competition in Drug Development

SAN DIEGO The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is in the middle of a cultural and operational shift that goes beyond leadership changes. U.S.–China biotechnology competition is driving discussions around regulatory reform in the U.S. where traditional paradigms are being reviewed and reconsidered, particularly for rare diseases. And patient perspectives need to be a more integral part of the drug development continuum.  

Those were some of the major themes that emerged from a town hall that took place at this year’s Biotechnology Innovation Organization (BIO) meeting in San Diego, which featured members of the current FDA leadership team. 

John Crowley, BIO president and CEO, moderated the discussion with the acting directors of Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) and the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) and the acting chief of staff at the FDA. During the hour-long conversation in a room packed to the hilt with BIO attendees, they spoke about the agency’s current priorities and its plans to increase its headcount, among other initiatives. 

Much of the discussion centered on ongoing plans to stabilize the agency’s workforce following the massive reduction in staffing implemented by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) as well as departures of several leaders in rapid succession. The panelists acknowledged the disruptions to operations, the loss of institutional knowledge, and the past unpredictability at the agency, but did not dwell on it.  

The consensus seems to be that stabilizing the agency’s workforce is an important prerequisite for successfully launching several planned initiatives. In fact, Michael Davis, MD, PhD, acting director of CDER, noted that this has been one of his top priorities. His initial efforts were aimed at “fortifying the center and specifically the workforce” as well as finding ways to retain staff retention and boost recruitment.  

The conversation covered plans to improve overall morale, boost staff numbers, and to refocus on executing the agency’s mission. That includes implementing “some initiatives that were announced” or “have been in discussion for some time” and thinking through what is needed to support those programs, said Lowell Zeta, JD, acting chief of staff at the FDA.  

Karim Mikhail, CBER acting director, stated that in addition to working through existing submissions, his team is also planning for future challenges and ways to address them quickly to avoid backlogs.  

In terms of recruitment, the agency is looking to fill more than 2,200 authorized positions across the agency, Zeta said. About 600 people are currently being onboarded as part of the hiring push “so we feel like we’re making good progress.” CDER’s Davis said he is open to “bringing back good people” who would be interested in returning, as well as recruiting new candidates interested in public health who have the requisite skills.  

The agency is also intentional about its efforts to minimize attrition, including offering opportunities for staff to meet with leadership to discuss challenges and support needs. And those efforts may be working. In CDER, for example, staff attrition has slowed to its historical rate. 

Modernizing clinical development 

 Earlier this week, the FDA announced a slate of early actions aimed at “modernizing” and expediting early and late-stage clinical development. These were unveiled as part of Operation TrailBlazer, a U.S. Department of Health and Human Services initiative. The proposed changes are aimed at streamlining Phase I submission requirements so that drug developers have more clarity about what is necessary at this stage and what can be deferred. The agency is seeking public comments from the scientific community on some of these proposed actions.  

 The panelists positioned the proposed actions as a fundamental shift from the traditional comprehensive review approach to drug development towards a more adaptive design process. “Everybody understands the challenge we have,” Mikhail said. “We have incredible rigor” but “we need to make sure that we’re also as fast as we are rigorous.”   

Importantly, the agency is also seeking to make patient perspectives more central to the drug development process. Asked by Crowley how this will work, Davis shared an anecdote about taking part in a listening session coordinated by the FDA for parents of patients with the rare disorder, Smith-Magenis syndrome. Asking questions like “What is it like to have children with this condition? What effect does that have on the children? What effect does that have on the family dynamic?” makes it “more real when connecting the data to what families and patients are experiencing.”  

China crisis  

Another major theme here and indeed throughout the conference was maintaining U.S. competitiveness and leadership in biotech. The panelists acknowledged China’s current competitive advantage in terms of the development of its biotech infrastructure and the reality of clinical trials moving overseas due to increasing costs and the regulatory burden in the U.S.  

As Crowley put it, “China frankly is eating our lunch” and “we’re forcing so many of our innovators and companies to go to China” for early-stage clinical trials. In this climate, he noted that the FDA has a crucial role to play.  

The FDA has traditionally been viewed as the “guardian of public health, which is an important, primary role,” Crowley said, but “this notion of being a beacon of innovation and U.S. competitiveness tied to our national security is a new and important role.” The panelists also highlighted the growing use of artificial intelligence tools, digital health technologies, and wearable sensors as an important source of innovation within the agency

The FDA has recently signaled a willingness to revisit decisions it made over the past several months if those companies whose applications were rejected choose to resubmit them. “I want to make sure that we’re getting the decisions right in a way they have the confidence of the American public,” Davis said. “I think the public really trusts the FDA to make the right decisions” and “doing this closely with the multidisciplinary expert staff that we have.” 

To be clear, the agency is not going to approve everything, Mikhail said. But it will make sure that patient safety is prioritized, and that a multidisciplinary group of scientific experts at the FDA provide critical input.  

“I think everybody wants what is best for the patients,” he said. So “making sure that safety is paramount” and that “everybody is on the same page with regards to that second chance.”  

The post BIO 2026: FDA Leadership Confront Workforce Losses, China Competition in Drug Development appeared first on GEN – Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology News.

Imaging Technique Scans Entire Donor Livers for Transplant Viability

A new imaging approach to assess donor livers before transplantation could provide a much more comprehensive view of the condition of the whole organ, complementing conventional pathology tests that are typically restricted to localized areas. 

In a study published in Science Translational Medicine, researchers at the University of Oklahoma used polarization-sensitive optical coherence tomography (PS-OCT) to noninvasively measure multiple relevant parameters across the entire surface of donor livers. Using polarized light, this imaging technique was able to detect signs of steatosis, fibrosis, inflammation, and necrosis in donor livers—all of which are critical indicators of transplant viability. 

“PS-OCT offers a noninvasive assessment of liver viability by quantifying hepatic parameters across the entire donor liver, effectively complementing current pathological analysis,” write the authors of the study, led by Qinggong Tang, PhD, associate professor of biomedical engineering at the University of Oklahoma. “These results suggest that PS-OCT provides a robust approach to assessing donor liver viability, which could potentially decrease the discard rate of high-risk livers, thereby expanding the donor pool.”

Liver transplants are limited by a shortage of viable donor livers, which is driven by a high demand for donor livers and high rates of organ discard. In the U.S. alone, there are over 9,000 people on the liver transplant waitlist, which has driven healthcare providers to progressively expand the criteria used to evaluate potential donors. 

Assessing whether a donor liver is viable for transplantation currently relies on biopsies. However, these are invasive procedures that only provide information about the specific location within the liver the sample was taken from. As a result, this approach can sometimes miss critical signs of damage or disease elsewhere in the organ, potentially increasing the risk of transplanting a compromised liver. 

Tang and colleagues first evaluated the performance of PS-OCT imaging in discarded human donor livers, comparing the results to biopsies and functional tests. Using a machine learning algorithm to analyze the imaging data enabled the identification of key signs of injury and disease with 80% accuracy compared to conventional pathology assessments. The team then scanned five viable donor livers slated for transplantation and stratified them into different risk categories, accurately predicting clinical outcomes a week after transplantation. 

While biopsy tests can take several days to give back results, PS-OCT scans can produce a complete picture of the condition of the entire liver within about 15 minutes, offering a fast and noninvasive tool to assess multiple markers of transplant viability. Although the imaging technique is not intended to replace current evaluation methods, it could significantly reduce sampling error and add valuable information when screening potential donors. Ultimately, improving the assessment of donor livers could address the urgent need for increasing transplant numbers while simultaneously improving clinical outcomes for transplant recipients. 

The post Imaging Technique Scans Entire Donor Livers for Transplant Viability appeared first on Inside Precision Medicine.