Human Antibodies Identified That Have Potential To Prevent and Treat Measles Virus

Scientists at La Jolla Institute for Immunology (LJI) say they are the first in the world to characterize human monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) capable of neutralizing measles virus (MeV). The antibodies, derived from the memory B immune cells of an individual who had previously received the MMR vaccine years previously, bind to key hemaggglutinin (H) and fusion (F) surface virus proteins, preventing viral entry into host cells.

The researchers, headed by Erica Ollmann Saphire, PhD, LJI professor, president, and CEO, say the new panel of human antibodies may form the basis for future medical therapies against measles infection. In their newly reported study the team showed that an infusion of the antibodies resulted in 500-fold lower viral load in a rodent model of measles infection.

“These antibodies work as prophylaxis—to protect from initial infection—and they work after viral exposure as a treatment to fight measles infection, said Saphire. “It may be possible to give someone an infusion of these antibodies and deliver the immune response they wish they had.”

In their study (“Human neutralizing antibodies targeting the measles virus hemagglutinin and fusion surface proteins”) reported in Cell Host & Microbe, the team concluded “Characterization of these fully human mAbs provides avenues for prophylactic or therapeutic intervention against re-emerging MeV.”

Measles virus is “… a highly transmissible paramyxovirus, can cause severe complications and death, particularly in infants and young children,” the authors wrote. “A live-attenuated vaccine derived from a genotype A MeV strain provides vaccinees with lifelong immunity and protective antibodies against all 24 MeV genotypes in circulation.”

However, in recent years, decreased vaccination rates have led to deadly measles outbreaks across the U.S. and around the world. This sharp rise in measles cases is especially dangerous for the millions of people who cannot receive a measles vaccine. While the measles vaccine is incredibly safe and effective, it does contain a live, weakened virus. This means that people who have compromised immune systems, such as those who are pregnant or receiving chemotherapy, including children, cannot receive the vaccine. The very young are also at risk. Infants must wait until they are 12 months old to be vaccinated, and most children in the U.S. aren’t fully vaccinated against measles until they are six years of age.

“There are a growing number of people that can’t be vaccinated or haven’t been fully vaccinated,” said Saphire. “The very same people who can’t be vaccinated or can’t be vaccinated yet, are the same people for whom a measles virus infection would be the most severe—or be lethal.”

Until recently, enough people were vaccinated against measles virus that the risk of exposure for this unvaccinated group was very low. Unfortunately, that community protection—herd immunity, is no longer. LJI scientists are on a mission to find treatment options for the most vulnerable.

There are currently no measles-specific therapies to help patients. The new study shows that monoclonal antibody therapies may may be a feasible option. Monoclonal antibody treatments contain many copies of a neutralizing antibody, and are widely used for a variety of infectious diseases. Even infants receive monoclonal antibody therapies each year to prevent respiratory syncytial virus (RSV).

To design a monoclonal antibody treatment for measles, researchers need a clear picture of how human antibodies fight the virus. However, as they noted, “Despite the global presence of MeV and widespread use of the vaccine, few studies have mapped the human antibody response. We do not yet know how human antibodies, from either measles vaccination or natural infection, recognize and protect against the virus.”

Saphire and her colleagues began by harnessing an imaging technique, cryo-electron microscopy (cryo-EM), to capture the first-ever glimpses of how antibodies bind to the measles virus. They started by examining mouse antibodies, and published that work in a recent paper. That initial study showed where measles virus is vulnerable to antibody attack. The mouse antibodies, the researchers showed, latched onto the virus fusion protein, to block viral entry into a cell.

To find out whether human antibodies could do the same thing, the researchers analyzed blood from a clinical research volunteer. “We evaluated 15 MMR-vaccinated donors for their polyclonal MeV responses to identify individuals with vaccine-induced, protective, circulating antibodies,” they explained. The 56-year-old female volunteer they selected had been vaccinated against measles many years before, and already had antibodies ready to fight measles virus. This individual “… demonstrated the highest polyclonal response and the most H- and F-reactive memory B cells.”

From the one blood sample, the LJI scientists isolated antibodies that bind to the measles virus fusion protein, along with other antibodies that bind to the virus hemagglutinin protein. They then captured 3D images of these antibodies bound together with the measles virus. “We found that these antibodies are exceptionally potent,” said study first author, LJI Instructor Dawid Zyla, PhD. “Two orders of magnitude better than comparable molecules reported at conferences.”

Measles virus is a shape-shifting virus. When it meets a human cell, it unfolds to reveal viral machinery that fuses with the host cell membrane. The new study shows that antibodies targeting the fusion protein work by locking the protein in place, leaving the virus unable to shape shift and infect a host cell. The next step was to test these antibodies in a preclinical animal model. Study collaborators at The Ohio State University carried out key experiments in cotton rats. They found that all four lead antibodies reduced viral load when given either before measles exposure or within 24 to 48 hours after measles virus infection. One antibody, designated 3A12, which binds to a site on the F protein, rendered the circulating virus actually undetectable.

While more work needs to be done, the researchers see these antibodies as promising tools in the fight against measles. Their new images of the antibody structures provide the materials needed to make the world’s first before- or after exposure treatment for measles virus. “Now we know what we’re aiming for, and we have the antibodies we need,” said Saphire.

In their paper the authors stated, “The protective mAbs identified here target four distinct, non-competing epitopes, and may be combined as cocktail therapies to enhance treatment potency, maintain durable protection, and reduce the risk of viral escape.… these human mAbs themselves, which recognize conserved sites and inhibit measles by complementary mechanisms, represent a basis to develop a treatment that is urgently needed as measles virus infections surge globally.”

The post Human Antibodies Identified That Have Potential To Prevent and Treat Measles Virus appeared first on GEN – Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology News.

Autism Screening Proposed for Children with Epilepsy

Children with epilepsy are up to 10 times more likely than others to also have autism, according to research that exposes the scale of the association between the two conditions.

The findings, in more than 30,000 children, stress the importance of screening for developmental concerns among those with epilepsy, so support can be delivered as early as possible.

The study, Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology, revealed that girls with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) were more likely than boys to also have epilepsy.

Higher rates of intellectual disability were also seen in children with autism who additionally had epilepsy, and they were also diagnosed with the neurodiversity at an earlier age.

“Our findings emphasize the importance of screening for autism in this population to support earlier diagnosis and timely intervention, both of which are key to improving long-term outcomes,” said senior investigator Elaine Wirrell, MD, from the Mayo Clinic.

ASD and epilepsy are complex disorders of neuronal connectivity that frequently co-occur because of shared molecular and biological mechanisms.

While the increased risk of ASD in children with epilepsy is well documented, there are gaps in knowledge around its incidence and prevalence, and risk factors for their co-occurrence.

To investigate further, Wirrell and team studied the medical records of 30,490 children in Olmsted County, Minnesota, of whom 257 (0.84%) were diagnosed with epilepsy before the age of 19 years.

They found that children with epilepsy were more likely have ASD across all three research and clinical definitions compared with other children, with this likelihood increased between six and 10-fold.

The prevalence was a corresponding 21.4% versus 3.2% using broad research criteria, 14.0% versus 1.6% across stricter research criteria, and 7.9% versus 0.7% for a clinical diagnosis.

Among children with autism, those also with epilepsy were more likely to have a lower IQ on standardized testing than those in whom epilepsy was absent (56.5% versus 15.4%). Specifically, an IQ of less than 70 was observed in 57.4% of children with co-occurring epilepsy and autism compared with only 15.4% autism alone.

Those with autism and epilepsy were also more often female than those with autism alone (38.2% versus 25.8%), and were identified with autism at a younger age, at a mean of seven years and five months versus eight years and eight months).

“These insights underscore the critical need for comprehensive and early screening protocols to better address and manage the intersection of autism and epilepsy, ensuring timely interventions and tailored support for affected individuals,” the researchers concluded.

 

The post Autism Screening Proposed for Children with Epilepsy appeared first on Inside Precision Medicine.

Official leading CDC’s cruise ship program retires

WASHINGTON — The top U.S. official responsible for public health on cruise ships is stepping down, according to an internal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announcement obtained by STAT.

The retirement of Luis Rodríguez, who has been part of the Vessel Sanitation Program since 2010 and served as its chief since 2023, was announced internally at the CDC on Wednesday.

Read the rest…

Next Gen Leadership Awards Presented at the AGBT Agricultural Meeting

Last month, the AGBT Agricultural Meeting was held in Phoenix, Arizona. The conference is focused on agricultural genomics—plant and animal genetics. During the meeting, the recipients of the 2026 Next Gen Leadership Awards were announced.

These awards recognize outstanding early-career scientists and graduate students whose work and potential are shaping the future of agricultural genomics, including advances in plant and animal genomics. Award recipients receive financial support to attend and present their research at the AGBT Agricultural Meeting, with opportunities to engage with leaders in the field and build connections across the genomics community.

“These awardees reflect the strength and diversity of emerging talent in agricultural genomics,” said Sarah Hearne, PhD, chief science and innovation officer at CIMMYT and co-chair of the AGBT Agriculture Scientific Organizing Committee. “AGBT Agriculture plays an important role in bringing these scientists into conversation with leaders across the field, helping accelerate the translation of genomics into practice.”

The awardees represent rising leaders in agricultural genomics, advancing research across genomic variability, genetic analysis, molecular diagnostics, pathogen surveillance, and quantitative trait genomics to improve crop performance, strengthen food safety, and advance sustainable agriculture.

“This award represents a transformative opportunity to grow as a scientist and contribute more effectively to innovation in animal breeding,” said Larissa Bordin Temp, a 2026 Next Gen Leadership Award recipient.

The 2026 AGBT Agricultural Meeting Next Gen Leadership awardees were:

  • Boris ME Alladassi, PhD: postdoctoral research associate at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign
    • Research focus: Connecting the evolutionary and statistical views of epistasis in quantitative trait genomics
  • Mythri Bikkasani: graduate student at Punjab Agricultural University, India
    • Research focus: Connecting the dots: from high-throughput feed phenotyping to genomic dissection of heterosis in maize
  • Larissa Bordin Temp: graduate student at São Paulo State University, Faculty of Agricultural and Veterinary Sciences
    • Research focus: Genomic evaluation of rump fat–adjusted residual feed intake in zebu cattle: implications for selection strategies
  • Lauren Johnson: graduate student at Gluck Equine Research Center, University of Kentucky
    • Research focus: Functional introgression within the horse mhc genes
  • Mehak Kapoor: graduate assistant at Iowa State University
    • Research focus: Cell-type resolved gene expression signatures to identify and predict persistent PRRSV infection
  • Pedro Nuñez Romano, PhD: postdoctoral researcher at Universitat Politècnica de València
    • Research focus: Integrating technology to refine the estimation of social genetic effects in pigs
  • Viona Osei: graduate student at Tuskegee University
    • Research focus: Exploiting genomic variability in Listeria for the development of molecular diagnostic markers
  • Kyungyong Seong, PhD: postdoctoral fellow at the University of California, Davis
    • Research focus: Resurrection of the plant immune receptor Sr50 to overcome pathogen immune evasion
  • Jade van Wijk: graduate student at Earlham Institute
    • Research focus: Using airborne DNA sequencing to monitor sporulation, infection and relative abundance of cereal rust fungi

The post Next Gen Leadership Awards Presented at the AGBT Agricultural Meeting appeared first on GEN – Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology News.

The Download: the tech reshaping IVF and the rise of balcony solar

This is today’s edition of The Download, our weekday newsletter that provides a daily dose of what’s going on in the world of technology.

What’s next for IVF

IVF has brought millions of babies into the world over the last four decades. But the process can still be slow, painful, and expensive—and far from guaranteed to work. Now, a wave of new technologies aims to change that. 

Researchers are using AI to identify promising sperm and embryos, developing robotic systems that could automate parts of the IVF process, and even exploring controversial genetic editing techniques designed to prevent inherited disease.

The technologies could make IVF more effective and accessible. But they’re also raising difficult ethical questions about how far reproductive medicine should go.

Find out what’s next for IVF.

—Jessica Hamzelou

This story is from MIT Technology Review’s What’s Next series, which looks across industries, trends, and technologies to give you a first look at the future. You can read the rest of them here.

The balcony solar boom is coming to the US

Dozens of US states are considering legislation to allow people to install plug-in solar systems, often called balcony solar. These small arrays require little to no setup and could help cut emissions and power bills.

Proponents say the systems could make solar power more accessible, but some experts caution that there are safety concerns. 

Read the full story on balcony solar’s potentially massive impact in the US.

—Casey Crownhart

This article is from The Spark, our weekly climate newsletter. Sign up to receive it in your inbox every Wednesday.

Resistance: 10 Things That Matter in AI Right Now

Resistance against AI’s proliferation is growing. People from all walks of life are speaking out against rising electricity bills from data centers, disappearing jobs, chatbots’ impact on teen mental health, the military’s use of AI, and copyright infringement—among other concerns. 

People want to have a say in how the technology transforms their future. And they’re starting to create small cracks in AI labs’ vision for the future. Find out how.

—Michelle Kim

Resistance is on our list of the 10 Things That Matter in AI Right Now, MIT Technology Review’s guide to what’s really worth your attention in the buzzy world of AI. 

The must-reads

I’ve combed the internet to find you today’s most fun/important/scary/fascinating stories about technology.

1 After years of insults, Anthropic and SpaceX have teamed up
Anthropic will tap SpaceX’s GPUs to meet surging demand. (Axios)
+ While SpaceX gets a marquee customer for its AI ambitions. (Wired $)
+ Anthropic says the deal will double Claude Code’s rate limits. (Ars Technica)
+It’s also exploring building compute capacity in space. (CNBC)
+ Musk previously called Anthropic “evil” and “misanthropic.” (Gizmodo)

2 Ex-OpenAI leaders say Sam Altman sowed “chaos” and distrust
Former CTO Mira Murati said she couldn’t trust his words. (The Verge)
+ He also bypassed OpenAI’s safety board before a model release. (Gizmodo)
+ And pitted leaders against one another. (Forbes)
+ But Elon Musk still tried to recruit Altman to lead a Tesla AI lab. (FT $)
+ Here’s why Musk and Altman are in court. (MIT Technology Review)

3 China’s humanoid robots are fueling its next export boom
Morgan Stanley says Beijing has taken an early lead in the sector. (Bloomberg $)
+ Gig workers are training humanoids at home. (MIT Technology Review)

4 SpaceX’s IPO plans will give Elon Musk “virtually unchecked” authority
And erode typical shareholder protections. (Reuters $)
+ Activists and pension funds are pushing back against the IPO. (Wired $)
+ While SpaceX is shifting focus from Falcon 9 to Starship. (Ars Technica)

5 Google DeepMind will use the MMORPG Eve Online for AI model testing
It’s also bought a stake in the game’s maker. (Ars Technica)
+ DeepMind also recently built a new video-game-playing agent. (MIT Technology Review)

6 The US risks isolating its automakers by banning a Chinese EV standard
It’s prohibiting software that’s dominating global EV markets. (Rest of World)

7 Elon Musk’s proposed Texas chip factory could cost $119 billion
It would manufacture chips for Tesla, SpaceX, and xAI. (CNBC)
+ Future AI chips could be built on glass. (MIT Technology Review)

8 Why the “attention-span crisis” is misunderstood
Technology may be exhausting attention rather than shortening it. (Atlantic $)

9 Scientists are getting closer to explaining what causes lightning
New tools are revealing unexpected physics inside thunderstorms. (Quanta)

10 Kids have found an age verification loophole: fake mustaches
Resourceful children are foiling blocks on adult websites. (TechCrunch)

Quote of the day

“My concern was about Sam saying one thing to one person and completely the opposite to another person.”

—Mira Murati, the former CTO of OpenAI, testifies ‌in court that CEO Sam Altman was deceptive, Reuters reports.

One More Thing

ALAMY


A brief, weird history of brainwashing

During the Cold War, the US prepared for a psychic war with the Soviet Union and China by spending millions of dollars on research into manipulating the human brain. 

The science never exactly panned out, but residual beliefs fostered by this bizarre conflict continue to play a role in ideological and scientific debates to this day. And now, new technologies are altering how we think about mind control. 

This is how the race for mind control changed America forever.

—Annalee Newitz

We can still have nice things

A place for comfort, fun and distraction to brighten up your day. (Got any ideas? Drop me a line.)

+ Listen to the 10 bird songs of spring in this lovely compilation of American species.
+ Good Samaritans saved a 29-foot whale that had wandered too far into a river.
+ Explore the intersection of human emotion and machine learning in this look at AI’s influence on art.
+ Break down the walls between streaming services and manage all your digital music in one place with this app.

A two-decade bibliometric analysis (2004–2024) of parental factors in the context of internet gaming disorder research

ObjectiveThis is the first targeted bibliometric analysis which explores the development of scientific production on the relationship between parenting and Internet Gaming Disorder (IGD) over twenty years, emphasizing the central role of the family context in the etiology and maintenance of IGD.MethodsPapers indexed in Scopus and Web of Science databases from 2004 to December 31, 2024, were analyzed using the PRISMA guidelines, the R package Bibliometrix, and VOSviewer. A comprehensive search strategy was developed using Boolean operators to capture variations of parental and gaming-related terminology. Records were exported in BibTeX format and were merged and cleaned to remove duplicates before the analysis. A descriptive bibliometric analysis, bibliometric mapping, and content analysis were conducted to identify trends and thematic clusters. The analysis included 389 publications.ResultsThe most cited papers confirm the association of low parental warmth, family dysfunction, and comorbid psychiatric symptoms with a higher risk of IGD. Thematic mapping reveals six dominant clusters covering the conceptualization and diagnosis of IGD, parental mediation and virtual environment, psychological vulnerability and mental health, parenting and attachment, parenting styles and self-control, and problematic screen-related behaviors, and a strong concentration of publications in China, Germany, and the USA. The analysis also revealed an increase in publication output after 2013, with a notable acceleration following the inclusion of gaming disorder in the International Classification of Diseases 11th Revision (ICD-11).ConclusionThe bibliometric analysis reveals the rapid growth of research on parenting and IGD, highlighting the multifactorial nature of the disorder where dysfunctional family relationships increase risk, while supportive ones reduce it. Despite progress, longitudinal studies are needed for better understanding of causality and interventions.

The balcony solar boom is coming to the US

Dozens of US states are considering legislation to allow people to install plug-in solar systems, often called balcony solar. These small arrays require little to no setup and could help cut emissions and power bills.

Balcony solar is already popular in Europe, and proponents say that the systems could make solar power more accessible for more people in the US, including renters. As popularity rises, though, some experts caution that there are safety concerns with how balcony solar would work with existing electrical equipment in homes.

Let’s talk about what balcony solar is, why it’s unique, and how new testing requirements could affect our progress toward deploying the technology in the US.

Plug-in solar systems are designed to be simple to install, often requiring no electrician or specialized worker at all. They’re small, and many can be plugged into existing outlets.

People across Germany have installed over a million balcony solar systems. They generally measure up to roughly two square meters or about 20 square feet, and can generate up to 800 watts—enough to power a standard microwave.

Now the plug-in solar wave is coming to the US. Many Americans have already installed DIY balcony solar without the permission of their utilities—it’s something of a regulatory gray area. In late 2025, Utah became the first state to explicitly allow people to install and use balcony solar systems. Over two dozen other states are now considering similar legislation.

Generally, utilities require users to sign an interconnection agreement before they can plug in large arrays of solar panels that generate power for the grid. There can be fees and permits, and it all amounts to an expensive and lengthy process.

Utah’s law ditched the interconnection requirement for panels that have a low power cap and that are certified by a national testing facility. (Legislation under consideration in other states, including New York, includes the same requirements.) The thinking is that since the panels produce very little power, which would be used to meet a home’s own energy demand and probably not get sent back to the grid, the same requirements shouldn’t apply. 

As for that certification piece, in January the national testing and certification lab UL Solutions released UL 3700, a testing protocol to certify balcony solar systems and ensure that they’re safe. 

There are three main safety considerations to address for these plug-in solar systems, says Joseph Bablo, manager of principal engineering, energy, and industrial automation at UL Solutions. First, there’s the possibility of overloading a circuit. Generally, electrical circuits have circuit breakers, which can trip and interrupt current if necessary. But if there’s a solar panel adding extra power to a circuit, a traditional breaker might not be able to respond to overload. Over time, overloaded circuits can damage equipment or even start a fire. 

Second, these small systems are typically installed on the outside of homes, and outdoor power outlets generally have ground fault circuit interruption (GFCI). Basically, if an outlet or its surroundings are wet, it can shut down to prevent electric shock. Many GFCI systems may not work if there’s power going back into an outlet from a solar panel.

Finally, there’s touch safety: If a plug gets disconnected from the wall, the blades of the plug may still have power running through them for a short time. If a panel is getting sunlight, those blades could be energized for longer than is typical.

The new UL Solutions testing framework aims to address these concerns. One of the key recommendations is that plug-in solar panels should use a special outlet that’s designed specifically for them. The safety measures included in that connection, and within a panel, would ensure that the panels are safe.

The need for a special outlet means that currently, people who want to plug in a solar panel array would probably need to have an electrician come and update their wiring in order to comply with the protocol, Bablo says. “I know they want to say ‘No electrician, no permits’—we’re not there.”

Today, anyone can buy products like solar panels and inverters, some of which carry their own component UL certifications, and string them together. (Inverters are covered under UL 1741, for example.)

But the gold standard is to have an entire system that meets the safety requirements, and that means adhering to the new standard, Bablo says. As of early May, there aren’t any plug-in solar systems that have been fully certified by UL Solutions. And Bablo said he couldn’t share information about what, if any, are in the pipeline.  

Even with the new certification requirements, Bablo still thinks plug-in solar still has the potential to help more people access the technology. “There’s a way for it to work, but we want it to work safely,” he says.

This article is from The Spark, MIT Technology Review’s weekly climate newsletter. To receive it in your inbox every Wednesday, sign up here

What’s next for IVF

MIT Technology Review’s What’s Next series looks across industries, trends, and technologies to give you a first look at the future. You can read the rest of them here.

Forty-eight years ago this July, Louise Joy Brown became the world’s first person born with the help of in vitro fertilization. Millions more IVF babies have entered the world since then. And that’s partly thanks to advances in technology that have made IVF safer and more effective.

But it’s still not perfect. The process can be slow, painful, and expensive—and that’s for the lucky people who are able to access it in the first place. And by at least one measure, IVF success rates have been declining in recent years.

Reproduction is complex, and there’s a lot that embryologists and gynecologists still don’t know and can’t control. They don’t know why many healthy-looking embryos don’t “stick” in the uterus, for example. They don’t always have an explanation for why their patients can’t get pregnant. And they can’t always account for vast differences in IVF success rates between individuals and between fertility clinics.

Scientists are working on all those questions and more. They’re wrestling with complex ethical questions about how new genetic tools will be used to analyze or even alter embryos. Meanwhile, technologies designed to standardize treatment, eliminate human error, boost success rates, and make IVF more accessible are already beginning to usher in a new era for assisted reproduction—one aided by AI and robots.

1. Helping embryos stick

Some of those technologies are being developed at the Carlos Simon Foundation in Valencia, Spain. When I visited in March, researchers gave me a tour of the labs and showed me a device that had been used to keep a human uterus alive outside the body for the first time.

While some members of the team dream of building artificial uteruses that might one day be able to carry a fetus to term, they first want to use such devices to learn more about implantation—the moment at which a fertilized egg makes contact with the lining of the uterus, burrows inside, and essentially “hatches,” triggering the start of a pregnancy.

Despite decades of advances in IVF, that process is still poorly understood. Even healthy-looking embryos stick no more than 40% to 60% of the time.

In IVF techniques used today, clinics can create early-stage embryos and wait until the uterus is deemed most receptive, but once they insert the embryo into the uterus, it’s on its own. Xavier Santamaria, senior clinical scientist at the Carlos Simon Foundation, and his colleagues are trialing a different approach. They’ve developed a device that, at the press of a button, injects the embryo into the uterine lining.

Scientists in Valencia showcase Transfer Direct.

JESS HAMZELOU / MITTR

In a demonstration I watched with a prototype, Santamaria picked up his speculum and turned to face the vaginal opening of his “patient,” which in this case was just a model of the real thing—a plastic bottom with labia, a vagina, a uterus, and ovaries, two short stumps representing what would normally be a pair of legs held in stirrups.

He hunched over and peered inside. “Embryo,” he called. His colleague Maria Pardo, an embryologist, passed him a thin needle containing a mouse embryo she had recently collected from a petri dish.

Santamaria’s device allows for the embryo-containing needle to be connected to a delivery tube. This tube also has a camera, a light, and a sensor that lets the doctor know when the needle reaches the uterine lining. Once it has been fed into the uterus, the gynecologist can see the inside of the organ and direct the tube to the lining.

Scientists in Valencia showcase Transfer Direct.

JESS HAMZELOU / MITTR

“When everything is ready, you just press the button,” Santamaria said as he activated it using a foot pedal, allowing the embryo to be injected. “There it goes.”

The team has just started a trial of the device; so far, fewer than 10 women have undergone the procedure, and none of those have become pregnant. But foundation director Carlos Simon is hopeful, noting that the inventors of IVF had to perform over 160 cycles before Louise Brown was born (between 1969 and 1978, that team performed 457 cycles in 250 people, resulting in only two live births). “The trial is ongoing,” he says.

2. Picking the “best” eggs, sperm, and embryos

One long-running challenge of IVF has been selection. Say you manage to collect 10 eggs from one partner and a decent-looking semen sample from the other. How do you choose which cells to use? The same question comes up once the resulting embryos have been cultured in a dish for a few days: Which should you transfer to the uterus?

Traditionally, these judgments have been made by eye. Embryologists literally pick the ones that look the best in terms of their shape or, in the case of sperm, how they move. But scientists have been working on alternatives. And over the last decade or so, many have turned to genetic testing to hint at which embryos have the best chances of creating a healthy baby.

The most commonly used test is called PGT-A, which stands for preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy. Aneuploidy essentially means having an “incorrect” number of chromosomes, and it is thought that embryos with such characteristics are more likely to be lost through miscarriage or potentially develop into babies with genetic conditions.

Once embryologists have created embryos in the lab, they can pinch off a few cells and test them for aneuploidies. The tests are especially beneficial for women over the age of 38, says Alan Penzias, a reproductive endocrinologist at Boston IVF. “You start to see an improvement: more babies and fewer miscarriages,” he says. The tests can shorten the time to pregnancy.

This type of genetic testing is possible thanks to multiple advances in technology—not just in genomics, but also in the ability to keep embryos alive in a dish for five to six days and the technique of freezing embryos while the cells undergo testing and thawing them once the results are in. And it has become hugely popular—some clinics do PGT-A tests on all their embryos.

But PGT-A won’t give you a perfect readout of a future baby’s genetics, says Sonia Gayete-Lafuente, a reproductive endocrinologist at the Center for Human Reproduction in New York City. And some of the abnormalities might be able to self-correct with time. Gayete-Lafuente and her colleagues have transferred some of those “abnormal” embryos into patients’ uteruses and seen them develop into perfectly healthy children, she says.

Other forms of PGT are even more controversial. PGT-P tests are designed to predict an embryo’s chances of developing complex traits that rely on multiple genes, including medical disorders but also physical characteristics like height or cognitive factors like IQ. These tests are new, and they are illegal in some countries, including the UK. But they are gaining ground in the US. Nucleus Genomics—a company that invites customers to “have [their] best baby”—promises to predict traits running the gamut from eye color and intelligence to left-handedness and risk of Alzheimer’s.

When I asked IVF practitioners how they might respond if a patient asked for this service, most dodged the question and told me there’s not enough evidence that any of these tests actually work. They also cautioned that selecting for one trait might inadvertently introduce new risks. None seemed especially keen on the idea of using genetic testing for anything other than preventing serious disease.

3. Speeding things up with AI

Some seemed more excited about the potential for AI. After all, AI tools are generally good at recognizing patterns. Many researchers have attempted to train tools to spot healthy sperm, eggs, and embryos.

And they’ve had some success. A team at Columbia University Medical Center in New York has developed a device that uses AI to examine semen samples from men who have only tiny numbers of healthy sperm. An embryologist might struggle to find a single healthy sperm in such a sample. But the Sperm Tracking and Recovery (STAR) system can analyze over a million microscope images in an hour. It has already been used to create healthy embryos. The team behind the work announced the first pregnancy resulting from the treatment in November last year.

Other teams are using AI tools to advance IVF in more dramatic ways. Around a decade ago, a reproductive endocrinologist named Alejandro Chavez-Badiola began developing an AI tool trained to rank embryos, another to rank eggs, and another to select sperm. He recalls being struck by a realization that these tools were “the brains that have the potential to drive robots in the future,” he says.

4. Using robots to standardize IVF

In the early 2020s, Chavez-Badiola and his colleagues decided to combine technologies and develop an automated system for IVF. In theory, a robotic system loaded up with AI tools could undertake most of the steps required in the IVF process: selecting the eggs and sperm, fertilizing eggs to create embryos, culturing those embryos in a dish, and selecting the “best” one for transfer. Such a system could “do everything in a standard way” without ever getting tired, he says.

Chavez-Badiola, who is now founder and chief medical officer at Conceivable, started building prototypes by motorizing regular IVF equipment and connecting it to computers. He and his colleagues started testing their system with animal cells before eventually moving on to human ones. “We were able to prove that integrating robots to automate different steps in IVF is doable,” he says.

The device is now being used to prepare sperm and eggs and create embryos. At least 19 children have been born following the automated IVF. It is early days, but Chavez-Badiola is hoping that future iterations of the machine could each process thousands of IVF cycles in a year, potentially making the procedure more affordable and accessible.

Many in the field are excited about the potential for automated devices like Conceivable’s. “This is all time saved for the embryologists,” says Laura Rienzi, a clinical embryologist and scientific director of the IVIRMA network of fertility centers in Italy. She also hopes it will help standardize IVF treatments. “Automation [will allow for] every patient to be treated in the same way in every single lab in the world,” she says.

5. Controversial edits are on the table

There’s a catch, however: All these technologies rely on the availability of at least some healthy sperm, eggs, and embryos at the outset. Embryologists and IVF patients have to work with what they’ve got. And sometimes, what they’ve got won’t result in a healthy baby. 

That’s why some scientists are proposing a controversial idea: using gene-editing technologies like CRISPR to tinker with the genome of an IVF embryo before it is implanted. The biophysicist He Jiankui infamously took this approach to create embryos that resulted in the births of three children in the late 2010s. He was widely condemned by the scientific community and ultimately spent three years in a Chinese prison

His former romantic partner Cathy Tie, who now leads startup Origin Genomics, is pursuing the technology as a potential way to prevent serious disease in children. At a recent event held at the Hastings Center for Bioethics, Tie made the case for using embryo editing to prevent diseases like cystic fibrosis, Huntington’s, and sickle-cell.

It won’t be straightforward from a technical, legal, or ethical perspective. Diseases that are known to be caused by single-gene mutations are good first candidates, but as the Center for Human Reproduction’s Gayete-Lafuente points out, most diseases are much more complicated than that. “I wish we could understand the genetic basis of every disease to be able to prevent it,” she says. So far, we can’t. Besides, most diseases can be influenced by our diets, behaviors, and environments as well as our genes.

As things stand, no one knows if editing a human embryo to eliminate the risk of one disease might increase a future child’s risk of some other disorder. And some scientists worry that such edits might be a slippery slope to genetic enhancement or eugenics.

Rienzi hopes that the technology might be developed in a safe way with regulatory oversight, and only for a specific list of diseases. “It has to be within a legal context,” she says. “But to me, it’s a dream.”

In the meantime, the field looks set to keep transforming with the development of new technologies that are already creating healthy babies. Watch this space. 

STAT+: Angelini Pharma buys Catalyst Pharmaceuticals and its rare disease drugs for $4.1B

The Italian company Angelini Pharma said Thursday it would buy the rare-disease focused Catalyst Pharmaceuticals for roughly $4.1 billion in cash. 

The deal values Florida-based Catalyst at $31.50 a share, a 28% premium to the 30-day period before April 22, when it became publicly known that a deal was in the works. 

Buying Catalyst, which sells three approved medicines, will give Angelini a foothold in the U.S. market. It also builds on its work in neurology. 

Continue to STAT+ to read the full story…

Bayer to Acquire Perfuse for up to $2.45B, Seeing Ophthalmology Opportunity

Bayer has agreed to acquire Perfuse Therapeutics for up to $2.45 billion, the companies said, in a deal designed to broaden the buyer’s ophthalmology pipeline with Perfuse’s sole pipeline drug and two clinical phase programs for eye disorders.

Perfuse’s PER-001 is a small molecule endothelin receptor antagonist being developed for the treatment of ophthalmic diseases. Two of PER-001’s four programs are in Phase II development: One designed to treat open-angle glaucoma by improving the visual field for patients, and the other designed to treat diabetic retinopathy (DR) by improving contrast sensitivity and reducing ischemia in patients with the disorder.

Last year, Perfuse announced positive results from two Phase II clinical trials evaluating PER-001.

One was a Phase IIa trial (NCT05822245) assessing PER-001 in glaucoma, which showed that six months after a single intravitreal administration of PER-00, added to existing standard-of-care intraocular pressure (IOP)-reducing therapies, 22.2% of low-dose and 37.5% of high-dose patients experienced ≥7 decibel (dB) improvement in a pre-defined retina region of minimal five test points compared to 0% in control in six months.

The improvement was 8–14x better than the natural history of disease (2.7%) with currently available treatments, Perfuse said at the time.

In the other Phase IIa trial (NCT06003751), which focused on DR, patients showed a mean of +0.9 dB improvement in low luminance contrast sensitivity in the high-dose group and +0.65 dB in the low-dose group across multiple frequencies measured at week 20. In contrast, a mean of -2.1 dB worsening occurred in the control group over the same period.

The low luminance, low contrast visual acuity was better by a mean difference of 5.5 and 5.1 letters from baseline in low- and high-dose groups compared to control measured at week 20, Perfuse said at the time.

PER-001 is also in preclinical development for dry age-related macular degeneration (AMD)/geographic atrophy, as well as for retinal vein occlusion.

“We are excited by the work of the team at Perfuse Therapeutics and encouraged by the potential of PER-001,” Juergen Eckhardt, MD, head of business development and licensing at Bayer Pharmaceuticals, said in a statement. “With this acquisition, we are complementing our expertise in ophthalmology and our pipeline, reinforcing our commitment to developing urgently needed therapies for patients.”

Looking beyond Eylea®

Bayer’s ophthalmology pipeline has long been dominated by the blockbuster drug Eylea® (aflibercept), co-marketed with Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and initially approved in 2011. However, Eylea is close to losing exclusivity for key U.S. patents: According to Regeneron’s Form 10-K annual report for 2024, patents for Eylea expire between 2027 and 2039, starting with four formulation patents expiring on June 14, 2027. Patents for the higher-dose version, Eylea HD®, expire between 2027 and 2032, starting with two formulation patents expiring on June 14, 2027.

Last year, Eylea and Eylea HD saw their sales slip in the mid-teens, generating a total combined $8.04 billion in revenue, consisting of $4.385 billion in U.S. net sales for Regeneron and €3.11 billion in ex-U.S. sales for Bayer (about $3.655 billion today, up from the $3.506 billion reported in January).

During the first quarter of this year, Regeneron reported $941 million in U.S. sales, down 10% from a year ago; Bayer plans to report Q1 sales on May 12.

PER-001 is an intravitreal bio-erodible implant administered into the vitreous cavity of the eye using a single-use, 25-gauge applicator and designed to provide a sustained release of the drug, allowing for a convenient dosing regimen, according to Perfuse and Bayer.

Bayer has agreed to pay $300 million upfront for Perfuse, which is headquartered in San Francisco with R&D facilities in Durham, NC. The remaining up to $2.15 billion in deal value hinges on Bayer achieving development, regulatory, and commercial milestones.

The acquisition deal is subject to approval by Perfuse shareholders and antitrust clearances.

“I’m incredibly proud of what the Perfuse team has accomplished and deeply thankful to all our investors and collaborators,” stated Sevgi Gurkan, MD, Perfuse’s founder and CEO. “Bayer’s vision aligns closely with ours, and they have the scale and global resources to unlock the full potential of PER-001 to change the trajectory of human blindness. We are very excited to see our mission continue with even greater momentum.”

The post Bayer to Acquire Perfuse for up to $2.45B, Seeing Ophthalmology Opportunity appeared first on GEN – Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology News.