Why Glucose Restrictions Are Essential in Treating Cancer – The Epoch Times

The procedure recommended by most doctors might not always be a good option, as it could turn a potentially benign situation into a malignant one.

Thomas Seyfried, Ph.D., professor in the biology department at Boston College, is a leading expert and researcher in the field of cancer metabolism and nutritional ketosis. His book, Cancer as a Metabolic Disease: On the Origin, Management and Prevention of Cancer is a foundational textbook on this topic, and in August 2016, he received the Mercola.com Game Changer Award for his work.

Here, we discuss the mechanisms of cancer and the influence of mitochondrial function, which plays a crucial role in the development and treatment of this disease. Hislandmark cancer theory is available as a free PDF.

Many of his views are now encapsulated in his most paper,1Mitochondrial Substrate-Level Phosphorylation as Energy Source for Glioblastoma: Review and Hypothesis, published online December 27, 2018. Hes also published a number of other papers2,3,4on the metabolic underpinnings of cancer.

The paper is a review and hypothesis paper identifying the missing link in Otto Warburgs central theory,Seyfried explains. [Warburg] defined the origin of cancer very accurately back in the 1920s, 30s, 40s and 50s in his work in Germany. Basically, he argued and provided data showing that all cancer cells, regardless of tissue origin, were fermenters. They fermented lactic acid from glucose as a substrate.

Even in the presence of oxygen, these cells were fermenting. This is clearly a defect in oxidative phosphorylation. The problem is that for decades, people said Warburg was wrong mainly because we see a lot of cancer cells take up oxygen and make adenosine triphosphate (ATP) from within the mitochondria People began to question, If cancer cells have normal respiration, why would they want to use glucose as a fermentable fuel?

The whole concept became distorted The cancer cells simply choose to ferment rather than respire. Now, of course, if you look under the electron microscope at majority of cancers, youll see that the mitochondria are defective in a number of different ways. Their structures are abnormal. The numbers are abnormal. There are many abnormalities of mitochondria seen directly under electron microscopy. Clearly, Warburg was not wrong.

Before we delve into the meat of how cancer actually occurs it would be good to review a diagnostic strategy that nearly all of us are offered when confronted with a cancer diagnosis. It is vital to understand that this may not be your best strategy and that for many it would be wise to avoid the biopsy.

Seyfried warns against doing biopsies, as this procedure may actually cause the cancer to spread. A tumor is basically a group of proliferating cells in a particular part of your body. For purposes of diagnosis, a small biopsy sample will often be taken to ascertain whether the tumor is benign or malignant.

The problem is that when you stab into the cancer microenvironment to remove a part of the tissue, it creates a wound in that microenvironment that in turn elicits the invasion by macrophages and other immune cells.

If you already have an acidic microenvironment, you run the risk of causing a fusion hybridization event in that microenvironment between your macrophages and cancer stem cells (as discussed below). This could turn a potentially benign situation into a malignant one, and if the tumor is malignant, stabbing into it could make a bad situation worse.

The question is, what is the value of doing a biopsy in the first place? We take biopsies of breast tissue to get a genomic readout of the different kinds of mutations that might be in the cells. Now, if cancer is not a genetic disease and the mutations are largely irrelevant, then it makes no sense to do that in the first place. If the tumor is benign, why would you want to stab it? If the tumor is malignant, why would you ever want to stab it?

I came to this view by reading so many articles in the literature based on brain cancer, breast cancer, colon cancer, liver cancer showing how needle biopsies have led to the dissemination of these tumor cells, putting these people at risk for metastatic cancer and death,Seyfried says.

In metabolic therapy you would not touch the tumor; you would not disturb the microenvironment. By leaving it alone, you allow the tumor to shrink and go away.

When you start to look at this as a biological problem, many of the things that we do in cancer make no sense. We have, in brain cancer, people say, You have a very low-grade tumor. Lets go in and get it out. What happens is you go in and get it out, and then the following year it turns into a glioblastoma.

How did that happen? Well, you disturbed the microenvironment. You allowed these cells that are marginally aggressive to become highly aggressive. Then you lead to the demise of the patient,Seyfried says.

That happens significantly because its called secondary glioblastoma arising from therapeutic attempt to manage a low-grade tumor. The same thing can happen with all these different organs. You stab breast tumors, you stab colon tumors, you run the risk of spreading the cells

My argument is the following: If the patient has a lump, whether its in the breast, in the colon, lung or wherever or a lesion of some sort, that should be the cue to do metabolic therapy.

Do metabolic therapy first. In all likelihood, it will shrink down and become less aggressive. Then the option becomes, Should we debulk completely rather than doing some sort of a biopsy? We want to reduce the risk, because if we can catch the whole tumor completely, then we dont run the risk of spreading it

In our procedure, you bring the body back into a very high state of metabolic balance, and then you strategically go and degrade the tumors slowly without harming the rest of the body.

Radiation, chemo and the strategies that were using today dont do this. Theyre based on the gene theory of cancer that genetic mutations are causing the cell cycle to grow out of control. Well, this is not the case. Again, a lot of these toxic procedures need to be rethought, reanalyzed in my mind.

In biology, structure determines function. This is an evolutionarily conserved concept. So, how can mitochondria be structurally abnormal in tissue, yet have normal respiration? As Seyfried notes, this doesnt make sense. Confusion has arisen in part because many study cancer in culture, and make profound statements and comments regarding what happens in culture, Seyfried says.

If you look at cancer cells in culture, many of them do take in oxygen and make ATP, but at the same time, theyre fermenting. This was the conundrum. They called it the Warburg Effect. Theyre fermenting, but many people at the same time thought their respiration was normal.

This was the main problem with Warburgs theory. But Warburg clearly said in his papers [that] its not the fact that they take in oxygen; its how much ATP they can generate from oxidative phosphorylation, which is the normal respiratory capacity of the mitochondria.

As explained by Seyfried, if you measure ATP and look at oxygen consumption in tumor cells, it appears theyre making ATP and taking in oxygen, therefore, their respiration is assumed to be normal. However, when you look at the tissues in cancer patients, the mitochondria are abnormal.

What I and Dr. Christos Chinopoulos from Semmelweis University in Budapest, Hungary, who is the world-leading expert on mitochondrial physiology and biochemistry realized [was] that the mitochondria of tumor cells are actually fermenting amino acids, glutamine in particular. Theyre not respiring. Theyre fermenting an alternative fuel, which is glutamine,Seyfried says.

With this understanding, Warburgs theory can be proven correct cancer arises from damage to the mitochondrias ability to produce energy through respiration in their electron transport chain.

The compensatory fermentation involves not only lactic acid fermentation, but also succinic acid fermentation using glutamine as a fermentable fuel. Its been known for decades that glutamine is a main fuel for many different kinds of cancers, but most people thought it was being respired, not fermented.

Seyfried and Chinopoulos discovery confirms that cancer cells in fact have damaged respiration, and to survive, the cancer cells must use fermentation. The two most available fermentable fuels in the cancer microenvironment are glucose and glutamine. Hence, targeting glucose and glutamine is a crucial component of cancer treatment.

Without glucose and glutamine, the cancer cells will starve, as they cannot use ketones. The simplest approach to cancer then is to bring patients into therapeutic ketosis, and then strategically target the availability of glucose and glutamine.

Basically, what were saying [is] that mitochondrial substrate-level phosphorylation is a non-oxidative metabolism mechanism inside the mitochondria that would generate significant amounts of energy without oxidative phosphorylation,Seyfried says.

According to Seyfried, mitochondrial dysfunction is at the heart of nearly every type of cancer. Unfortunately, few oncologists have this understanding and many still believe cancer is the result of genetic defects. However, nuclear transfer experiments clearly show cancer cannot be a genetic disease.

Theres been no rational scientific argument that I have seen, to discredit the multitude of evidence showing that the [genetic] mutations are not the drivers but the effects [of mitochondrial dysfunction],Seyfried says.

As a matter of fact, theres new information now where people are finding so-called genetic drivers of cancer expressed and present in normal cells, normal skin and also esophagus This is another [issue] how you get these so-called driver mutations in normal tissues. Were also finding some cancers that have no mutations, yet, theyre fermenting and growing out of control.

There are a number of new observations coming out that challenge the concept that cancer is a genetic disease. And once you realize that its not a genetic disease, then you have to seriously question the majority of therapies being used to manage the disease. This [helps] explain [why] we have 1,600 people a day dying from cancer in the United States.

Why do we have such an epidemic of suffering and death when we have been studying this disease for decades? Well, if you look at the massive amounts of scientific papers being written on cancer, youll often find that theyre structured around gene defects.

What Im saying is that if cancer is not a genetic disease and the mutations are downstream epiphenomena, why would the field continue to focus on things that are mostly irrelevant to the nature of the disease? What Im saying is very devastating, because Im telling the majority of the people in the field that theyre basically wasting their time

I think we can drop the death rate of this disease by about 50% in 10 years if cancer is treated as a mitochondrial metabolic disease, targeting fermentable fuels rather than using toxic therapies that are focused on downstream effects.

Radiation is designed to stop DNA replication. DNA replication requires energy. If you pull the plug on their fermentable fuels, theyre not going to be able to replicate anyway All of the things that were doing to treat cancer is basically approaching the disease from a misunderstanding of the biology

We know viruses can cause cancer. We know radiation causes cancer. We know carcinogens cause cancer. We know intermittent hypoxia causes cancer. We know systemic inflammation causes cancer. We know just getting older puts you at risk for more cancer.

We know there are inherited mutations in the genome that can cause cancer. But how are all these things linked through a common pathophysiological mechanism? The common pathophysiological mechanism is damaged through the structure and function of the mitochondria.

Every one of the issues including inherited mutations, damage the respiration of a particular population of cells in a tissue. You look at the breast cancer gene (BRCA 1), for example. People will say, Cancer must be a genetic disease because you inherit a mutation that causes the disease.

You only get the disease if that mutation disrupts the function of the mitochondria. Fifty percent of women who carry the mutation never get cancer or breast cancer because the mutation, for some reason, did not damage the mitochondria in that person.

So, to summarize, the true origin of cancer is damage to the respiratory function of the mitochondria, triggering compensatory fermentation, which is run by oncogenes. Oncogenes play a role by facilitating the entry of glucose and glutamine into the cell to replace oxidative phosphorylation.

Seyfried also has a very different view on the biology of metastasis (the spread of cancer). He explains:

Weve looked at cancer stem cells in a number of our preclinical models These guys grow like crazy in place. The tumor just keeps expanding, but it doesnt spread. It doesnt spread into the bloodstream or metastasize to various organs.

We discovered a very unusual cancer 20 years ago. It took us 10 to 15 years to figure out what it was. You can put a few of these cells anywhere in the mouses body and within three to four weeks, this mouse is full of metastatic cancer. It made the cover of the International Journal of Cancer, when we published this back in 2008, but we had worked on the problem for years.

We couldnt figure out what it was that made these cells so incredibly metastatic. We found out that once we identified the biology of the cell, it turned out [it has] many characteristics in common with the macrophage, which is one of the most powerful immune cells in our body.

We said, Wow. Is this unique only to this kind of cell or do metastatic cancers in humans also express characteristics of macrophages? We looked and we found that almost every major cancer that metastasizes has characteristics of macrophages. Then we said, Well, how could this possibly happen? Is it coming from the macrophage?

A number of scientists have all clearly shown that there is some fusion hybridization character going on. In other words, macrophages, our wound-healing cells, they come into a microenvironment where you might find many proliferating neoplastic stem cells, but they dont have the capacity to metastasize.

Its only when the macrophages fuse with these stem cells that you have a dysregulated energy metabolism coming in this hybrid cell. This hybrid cell now has characteristics of both stem cells and macrophages.

The stem cell is not genetically equipped to enter and exit tissue. The macrophage, as a normal cell of your body, is genetically equipped to enter and exit tissue and live in the bloodstream. Theyre very strongly immunosuppressive. These are all characteristics of metastatic cancer.

According to Seyfried, metastatic cancer cells are essentially a hybrid, a mix of an immune system cell and a dysregulated stem cell, the latter of which could originate from a disorganized epithelial cell or something similar. In short, its a hybrid cell with macrophage characteristics.

Macrophages are essential for wound healing and part of our primary defense system against bacterial infections. They live both in the bloodstream and in tissues, and can go anywhere in the body. When an injury or infection occurs, they immediately move in to protect the tissue.

The metastatic cancer cell has many of those same properties,Seyfried explains,But the energy and the function of the cell is completely dysregulated, so it proliferates like crazy but has the capacity to move and spread through the body, so its a corrupted macrophage. We call it a rogue macrophage.

Like macrophages, metastatic cancer cells can also survive in hypoxic environments, which is why most angiogenic therapies are ineffective against metastatic cancer.

So, what do these metastatic hybrid cells need to survive? Both macrophages and immune cells are major glutamine consumers, and according to Seyfried, you can effectively kill metastatic cells by targeting glutamine.

However, it must be done in such a way so as to not harm the normal macrophages and the normal immune cells. In other words, it must be strategic. For this reason, Seyfried developed a press-pulse therapy for cancer, which allows the patient to maintain normal immune system function, while at the same time targeting the corrupted immune cells the macrophage fusion hybrid metastatic cells as well as inflammation.

The therapies we are using to attempt to kill these [metastatic] cells put us at risk for having the cells survive and kill us. You can control these cells for a short period of time, but they can hunker down and enter into some sort of a slightly dormant state, but they reappear.

People say, Oh, these tumor cells are so nifty and smart they can come back at you. The problem is youve never really challenged them on their very existence, which is they depend on fermentation to survive. If you dont target their fermentation, theyre going to continue to survive and come back at you.

Many of the therapies that we use radiation, chemo and some of these other procedures are not really going after the heart of the problem. That oftentimes puts you at risk for the recurrence of the disease. Your body is already seriously weakened by the toxic treatments. And in the battle, you lose. If you are fortunate enough to survive your body is still beat up.

You have now put your [body] at risk for other kinds of maladies Why are we using such toxic therapies to kill a cell when we know what its weaknesses are? These are the paradigm changes that will have to occur as we move into the new era of managing cancer in a logical way.

To properly address cancer, then, you need to clean up the microenvironment, because the microenvironment will strategically kill cells that are dependent on fermentation while enhancing cells that arent. At the same time, the microenvironment will also reduce inflammation.

You also have to be very careful not to kill your normal and healthy immune cells, because they need glutamine too,Seyfried says. What we find is that when we strategically attack the tumor this way, it turns out that our immune cells are paralyzed.

The cancer cells are killed, but the normal immune cells are paralyzed. Theyre not dying, theyre just not doing their job. What we do is we back off the therapy a little; allow the normal immune cells to regain their biological capacity, pick up dead corpses, heal the microenvironment, and then we go after the cancer cells again.

Its a graded response, knowing the biology of the normal cells and the abnormal biology of the tumor cells. This is a beautiful strategy. Once people know how you can play one group of cells off another, and how you can strategically kill one group of cells without harming the other cells, it really becomes a precision mechanism for eliminating tumor cells without harming the rest of the body.

You dont need to be poisoned and irradiated. You just have to know how to use these procedures to strategically kill the cells. Protecting normal macrophages is part of the strategic process. Killing the corrupted ones is part of the strategic process. Again, you have to put all of these together in a very logical path. Otherwise, youre not going to get the level of success that we should be getting.

This strategy is what Seyfried calls press-pulse treatment, and essentially involves restricting the fermentable fuels glucose and glutamine in a cyclical fashion to avoid causing damage to normal cells and tissues. Glucose is effectively restricted through a ketogenic diet. Restricting glutamine is slightly trickier.

The press-pulse strategy was developed from the concept of press-pulse in the field of the paleobiology. A press was some chronic stress on populations, killing off large numbers, but not everything, because some organisms can adapt to stress. The pulse refers to some catastrophic event.

The simultaneous occurrence of these two unlikely events led to the mass extinction of almost all organisms that existed on the planet. This was a cyclic event over many hundreds of millions of years. The geological records show evidence for this press-pulse extinction phenomenon.

What we simply did was take that concept and say, Lets chronically stress the tumor cells. They need glucose. You can probably kill a significant number of tumor cells by just stressing their glucose. Thats the press. The press is different ways to lower blood sugar. You put that chronic stress on top of the population either by restricted ketogenic diets [or] therapeutic fasting. There are a lot of ways that you can do this.

Also, emotional stress reduction. People are freaked out because they have cancer, therefore their corticoid steroids are elevated, which elevates blood sugar. Using various forms of stress management, moderate exercise all of these will lower blood sugar and contribute to a chronic press and stress on the cancer cells.

However, youre not going to kill all cancer cells if you just take away glucose. Because the other fuel thats keeping the beast alive is the glutamine. We have to pulse, because we cant use a press for glutamine targeting, because then youre going to kill your normal immune cells or impair them, and they are needed for the eventual resolution of the disease.

What were going to do is were going to pulse various drugs. We dont have a diet system that will target glutamine. Glutamine is everywhere. Its the most abundant amino acid in your body But you have to use [the drugs] very strategically; otherwise they can harm our normal immune system and then be counterproductive

I think that once we understand how we can target effectively glutamine without harming our normal immune cells this is the strategy that will make most of these other therapies obsolete Its cost-effective and non-toxic and it will work very well.

But were still at the very beginning of this. We need to continue to develop the doses, timing and scheduling of those drugs that are most effective in targeting glutamine that can be done without harming the rest of the cells in our body.

If you would like to support Dr. Seyfrieds research, please consider making a donation to the Foundation For Metabolic Cancer Therapies. The donation tag is on the top row of the of the foundationsite. This Foundation is dedicated to supporting Dr. Seyfrieds studies using metabolic therapy for cancer management with 100% of the donated funds going directly to research on metabolic therapy for cancer.

Originally published July 31, 2022 on Mercola.com

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times. Epoch Health welcomes professional discussion and friendly debate. To submit an opinion piece, please follow these guidelines and submit through our form here.

Go here to see the original:
Why Glucose Restrictions Are Essential in Treating Cancer - The Epoch Times

Prominent Stanford University scientist and cellular reprogramming innovator will oversee all research for Turn Bio – Yahoo Finance

Vittorio Sebastiano, globally recognized for pioneering science, expands his role at company he co-founded as it moves closer to clinical research

MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif., Aug. 8, 2022 /PRNewswire/ -- Turn Biotechnologies, a cell rejuvenation company developing novel mRNA medicines to cure untreatable, age-related conditions, today announced that co-founder Vittorio Sebastiano, PhD, will become its head of research.

Stanford University Professor Vittorio Sebastiano, PhD, a leader in the emerging field of cellular reprogramming, will oversee research at Turn Biotechnologies, the company he co-founded in 2018.

Sebastiano led development of the unique mRNA-based ERA (Epigenetic Reprogramming of Aging) platform Turn Bio uses to produce tailored protein cocktails to rejuvenate targeted cells. He assumes his role as head of research this month. Sebastiano has served as chairman of Turn Bio's Scientific Advisory Board since he co-founded the company in 2018.

A Stanford School of Medicine faculty member, author of more than 50 scientific articles and frequent speaker at research conferences around the world, Sebastiano is prominent in the emerging field of cellular reprogramming. His Stanford University lab pioneered the development of a new paradigm for treating aging and age-related diseases. He also led the team that first confirmed human cells can be reprogrammed using Turn Bio's ERA platform.

"Vittorio's vision and leadership will propel Turn Bio's innovation and speed our efforts to develop new therapies," said Anja Krammer, the company's CEO. "He keenly understands the potential our science has to redefine the way doctors treat age-related conditions, and shares our commitment to delivering a steady stream of new solutions to the clinic."

Sebastiano, who has conducted research at prominent universities in Europe and the United States, looks forward to bringing his academic research to life by guiding the development of Turn Bio's therapies

"The next months will be incredibly exciting, as we bridge the gap between academic science and the life-changing therapies so desperately needed by millions of people around the world," said Sebastiano. "We have the potential to cure diseases that are currently untreatable, improve the quality of life for millions and truly transform and democratize medical care."

Story continues

Sebastiano received his bachelor's and doctoral degrees from Universit di Pavia in Italy and completed post-doctoral work at the Max Planck Institute for Molecular Biomedicine in Germany and Stanford. Since 2014, he has been an associate professor of OBGyN at Stanford in the Stanford Institute for Stem Cell Biology. He is the Woods Family Scholar in Pediatric Medicine, has served as co-director of the Stanford Stem Cell PhD Program and has received prestigious awards for his pioneering and revolutionizing approach to induce cellular rejuvenation, including the 2017 American Federation for Aging Research (AFAR) Junior Investigator Award and the 2019 Breakthrough in Gerontology Award by AFAR and the Glenn Foundation.

ABOUT TURN BIOTECHNOLOGIES

Turn Bio is a pre-clinical-stage company focused on repairing tissue at the cellular level. The company's proprietary mRNA platform technology, ERA, restores optimal gene expression by combatting the effects of aging in the epigenome. This restores the cells' ability to prevent or treat disease, heal or regenerate tissue and fight incurable chronic diseases.

The company is currently completing pre-clinical research on tailored therapies targeting indications in dermatology and immunology, as well as developing therapies for ophthalmology, osteo-arthritis and the muscular system. For more information, see http://www.turn.bio.

FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:

Jim Martinez, rightstorygroup jim@rightstorygroup.comor (312) 543-9026

SOURCE Turn Biotechnologies

Here is the original post:
Prominent Stanford University scientist and cellular reprogramming innovator will oversee all research for Turn Bio - Yahoo Finance

Beam Therapeutics Announces Pipeline and Business Highlights and Reports Second Quarter 2022 Financial Results – GlobeNewswire

Patient Enrollment into BEACON Phase 1/2 Trial of BEAM-101 On-track for Second Half of 2022

BEAM-201 IND Submitted to FDA; Currently on Clinical Hold

BEAM-102 IND Submission and BEAM-301 IND-enabling Studies On-track for Second Half of 2022

John Lo, Ph.D., Appointed as Chief Commercial Officer

Ended Second Quarter 2022 with $1.2 Billion in Cash, Cash Equivalents and Marketable Securities to Support Advancement of Broad Precision Genetic Medicines Portfolio

CAMBRIDGE, Mass., Aug. 09, 2022 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Beam Therapeutics Inc. (Nasdaq: BEAM), a biotechnology company developing precision genetic medicines through base editing, today provided pipeline and business updates and reported financial results for the second quarter ended June 30, 2022.

2022 is a critical year for Beams transition to becoming a multi-program clinical-stage company, as we prepare for the near-term initiation of patient enrollment in our BEACON Phase 1/2 trial, the first clinical trial evaluating BEAM-101 in patients with sickle cell disease, said John Evans, chief executive officer of Beam. In June, we submitted our IND for BEAM-201 for CD7-positive T-cell malignancies and recently received notification from the FDA of a clinical hold on the IND. We look forward to receiving more detail from the FDA and working with them in an effort to advance BEAM-201 for these difficult-to-treat cancer indications. We are on track to further expand our portfolio with a steady cadence of clinical and preclinical milestones expected in the quarters ahead, including the IND submission for BEAM-102, our second program in sickle cell disease, and the initiation of IND-enabling studies for BEAM-301, our first liver-directed base editing program in glycogen storage disease, both targeted in the second half of this year.

Mr. Evans added, As pioneers and leaders in the field of base editing, weve continued to extend the potential reach of our base editing technology and applications with the development of new base editors, as well as novel base editing-enabled therapeutic strategies, such as our work on non-genotoxic conditioning to improve transplant regimens. Weve also continued to enhance our team, and Im thrilled to welcome John Lo as chief commercial officer. John has a deep science background and an extensive track record in the strategic development and commercialization of novel medicines, including cell therapy products, at leading companies. I cant wait to work with him to advance our portfolio and our vision of providing a new class of precision genetic medicines to patients.

Pipeline Updates & Anticipated Milestones Ex Vivo HSC Programs

Ex Vivo T Cell Programs

In Vivo LNP Liver-targeting Programs

Recent Research Highlights

Business Updates

Second Quarter 2022 Financial Results

About Beam Therapeutics Beam Therapeutics (Nasdaq: BEAM) is a biotechnology company committed to establishing the leading, fully integrated platform for precision genetic medicines. To achieve this vision, Beam has assembled a platform that includes a suite of gene editing and delivery technologies and is in the process of building internal manufacturing capabilities. Beams suite of gene editing technologies is anchored by base editing, a proprietary technology that is designed to enable precise, predictable and efficient single base changes, at targeted genomic sequences, without making double-stranded breaks in the DNA. This has the potential to enable a wide range of potential therapeutic editing strategies that Beam is using to advance a diversified portfolio of base editing programs. Beam is a values-driven organization committed to its people, cutting-edge science, and a vision of providing life-long cures to patients suffering from serious diseases.

Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Investors are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, including, but not limited to, statements related to: our upcoming presentation at the 2022 International HBV Meeting; our plans, and anticipated timing, to nominate additional development candidates, initiate IND-enabling studies, submit IND applications, and initiate clinical trials; our expectation that we are on-track to further expand our portfolio with a steady cadence of clinical and preclinical milestones expected in the quarters ahead; our expectations for transitioning to a multi-program clinical stage company; the potential economic benefits that may be achieved under our amended collaboration agreement with Verve Therapeutics; the therapeutic applications and potential of our technology, including with respect to SCD and our conditioning regimens, T-ALL/T-LL, GSDIa, Alpha-1, HBV, and CAR-T cells; the expected timing of enrolling the first subject in our BEACON Phase 1/2 clinical trial of BEAM-101; the clinical hold on our BEAM-201 IND, including the FDAs communication plans related to, and our plans and expectations for interactions with the FDA and the outcomes in connection therewith; the sufficiency of our capital resources to fund operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements; and our ability to develop life-long, curative, precision genetic medicines for patients through base editing. Each forward-looking statement is subject to important risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied in such statement, including, without limitation, risks and uncertainties related to: our ability to develop, obtain regulatory approval for, and commercialize our product candidates, which may take longer or cost more than planned; our ability to raise additional funding, which may not be available; our ability to obtain, maintain and enforce patent and other intellectual property protection for our product candidates; the potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, including its impact on the global supply chain; the uncertainty that our product candidates, including BEAM-201, will receive regulatory approval necessary to initiate human clinical studies; uncertainty in the FDAs plans to communicate and discuss the clinical hold on the BEAM-201 IND with us and the risk that those discussions may be delayed; the uncertainty in the outcome of our interactions with the FDA regarding the clinical hold on the BEAM-201 IND; that preclinical testing of our product candidates and preliminary or interim data from preclinical studies and clinical trials may not be predictive of the results or success of ongoing or later clinical trials; that enrollment of our clinical trials may take longer than expected; that our product candidates may experience manufacturing or supply interruptions or failures; risks related to competitive products; and the other risks and uncertainties identified under the headings Risk Factors Summary and Risk Factors in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2021, and in any subsequent filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. These forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of this press release. Factors or events that could cause our actual results to differ may emerge from time to time, and it is not possible for us to predict all of them. We undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future developments or otherwise, except as may be required by applicable law.

This press release contains hyperlinks to information that is not deemed to be incorporated by reference in this press release.

Contacts:

Investors: Chelcie Lister THRUST Strategic Communications chelcie@thrustsc.com

Media: Dan Budwick 1AB dan@1abmedia.com

See the rest here:
Beam Therapeutics Announces Pipeline and Business Highlights and Reports Second Quarter 2022 Financial Results - GlobeNewswire

Hisashi Ouchi Suffered an 83-day Death By Radiation Poisoning – HowStuffWorks

On the morning of Sept. 30, 1999, at a nuclear fuel-processing plant in Tokaimura, Japan, 35-year-old Hisashi Ouchi and two other workers were purifying uranium oxide to make fuel rods for a research reactor.

As this account published a few months later in The Washington Post details, Ouchi was standing at a tank, holding a funnel, while a co-worker named Masato Shinohara poured a mixture of intermediate-enriched uranium oxide into it from a bucket.

Suddenly, they were startled by a flash of blue light, the first sign that something terrible was about to happen.

The workers, who had no previous experience in handling uranium with that level of enrichment, inadvertently had put too much of it in the tank, as this 2000 article in Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists details. As a result, they inadvertently triggered what's known in the nuclear industry as a criticality accident a release of radiation from an uncontrolled nuclear chain reaction.

Ouchi, who was closest to the nuclear reaction, received what probably was one of the biggest exposures to radiation in the history of nuclear accidents. He was about to suffer a horrifying fate that would become a cautionary lesson of the perils of the Atomic Age.

"The most obvious lesson is that when you're working with [fissile] materials, criticality limits are there for a reason," explains Edwin Lyman, a physicist and director of nuclear power safety for the Union of Concerned Scientists, and co-author, with his colleague Steven Dolley, of the article in Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.

If safeguards aren't carefully taught and followed, there's potential for "a devastating type of accident," Lyman says.

It wasn't the first time it had happened. A 2000 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission report noted that before Tokaimura, 21 previous criticality accidents had occurred between 1953 and 1997.

The two workers quickly left the room, according to The Post's account. But even so, the damage already had been done. Ouchi, who was closest to the reaction, had received a massive dose of radiation. There have been various estimates of the exact amount, but a 2010 presentation by Masashi Kanamori of the Japan Atomic Energy Agency put the amount at 16 to 25 gray equivalents (GyEq), while Shinohara, who was about 18 inches (46 centimeters) away, received a lesser but still extremely harmful dose of about 6 to 9 GyEq and a third man, who was further away, was exposed to less radiation.

Internet articles frequently describe Ouchi as 'the most radioactive man in history,' or words to that effect, but nuclear expert Lyman stops a bit short of that assessment.

"The estimated doses for Ouchi were among the highest known, though I'm not sure if it's the highest," explains Lyman. "These typically occur in these kinds of criticality accidents."

The radiation dose in a criticality accident can be even worse than in a catastrophic accident at a nuclear power plant, such as the 1986 reactor explosion at Chernobyl in Ukraine, then a part of the Soviet Union, where the radiation was dispersed. (Even so, 28 people eventually died from radiation exposure.)

"These criticality accidents present the potential for delivery of a large amount of radiation in a short period of time, though a burst of neutrons and gamma rays," Lyman says. "That one burst, if you're close enough, you can sustain more than a lethal dose of radiation in seconds. So that's the scary thing about it."

High doses of radiation damage the body, rendering it unable to make new cells, so that the bone marrow, for example, stops making the red blood cells that carry oxygen and the white blood cells that fight infection, according to Lyman. "Your fate is predetermined, even though there will be a delay," he says, "if you have a high enough dose of ionizing radiation that will kill cells, to the extent that your organs will not function."

According to an October 1999 account in medical journal BMJ, the irradiated workers were taken to the National Institute of Radiological Sciences in Chiba, just east of Tokyo. There, it was determined that their lymphatic blood count had dropped to almost zero. Their symptoms included nausea, dehydration and diarrhea. Three days later, they were transferred to University of Tokyo Hospital, where doctors tried various measures in a desperate effort to save their lives.

When Ouchi, a handsome, powerfully built, former high school rugby player who had a wife and young son, arrived at the hospital, he didn't yet look like a victim of intense radiation exposure, according to "A Slow Death: 83 Days of Radiation Sickness," a 2002 book by a team of journalists from Japan's NHK-TV, later translated into English by Maho Harada. His face was slightly red and swollen and his eyes were bloodshot, but he didn't have any blisters or burns, though he complained of pain in his ears and hand. The doctor who examined him even thought that it might be possible to save his life.

But within a day, Ouchi's condition got worse. He began to require oxygen, and his abdomen swelled, according to the book. Things continued downhill after he arrived at the University of Tokyo hospital. Six days after the accident, a specialist who looked at images of the chromosomes in Ouchi's bone marrow cells saw only scattered black dots, indicating that they were broken into pieces. Ouchi's body wouldn't be able to generate new cells. A week after the accident, Ouchi received a peripheral blood stem cell transplant, with his sister volunteering as a donor.

Nevertheless, Ouchi's condition continued to deteriorate, according to the book. He began to complain of thirst, and when medical tape was removed from his chest, his skin started coming off with it. He began developing blisters. Tests showed that the radiation had killed the chromosomes that normally would enable his skin to regenerate, so that his epidermis, the outer layer that protected his body, gradually vanished. The pain became intense. He began experiencing breathing problems as well. Two weeks after the accident, he was no longer able to eat, and had to be fed intravenously. Two months into his ordeal, his heart stopped, though doctors were able to revive him.

On Dec. 21, at 11:21 p.m., Ouchi's body finally gave out. According to Lyman's and Dolley's article, he died of multiple organ failure. Japan's Prime Minister at the time, Keizo Obuchi, issued a statement expressing his condolences to the worker's family and promised to improve nuclear safety measures, according to Japan Times.

Shinohara, Ouchi's co-worker, died in April 2000 of multiple organ failure as well, according to The Guardian.

The Japanese government's investigation concluded that the accident's main causes included inadequate regulatory oversight, lack of an appropriate safety culture, and inadequate worker training and qualification, according to this April 2000 report by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Six officials from the company that operated the plant were charged with professional negligence and violating nuclear safety laws. In 2003, a court gave them suspended prison terms, and the company and at least one of the officials also were assessed fines, according to the Sydney Morning Herald.

Read more:
Hisashi Ouchi Suffered an 83-day Death By Radiation Poisoning - HowStuffWorks

Regen BioPharma Inc (OTCMKTS: RGBP) Breaking Out as Biotech Files Patent on Dendritic Cell Technologies to Augment Efficacy of Survivin mRNA Cancer…

Regen BioPharma Inc (OTCMKTS: RGBP) is making a powerful reversal rocketing back into penny land on Friday up 46% on $1.6 million in dollar volume. RGBP has a massive following of shareholders, many of them international that are jumping on board and accumulating heavily now that RGBP has reversed. Several weeks ago, the Company announced the filing with the United States Patent and Trademark Office of a provisional patent application covering utilization of dendritic cell technologies to augment efficacy of its patented survivin mRNA cancer immunotherapeutic vaccine. RGBP CEO Dr. David Koos stated: We are proud of our collaborators and colleagues who have worked on our first issued survivin patent, which was filed in 2015, before the world realized the potency of modified-mRNA technology that was first successfully commercialized with the COVID-19 vaccines by Moderna and Pfizer. The currently filed application discloses means of significantly increasing efficacy by combining modified-mRNA with unique cellular immunotherapy as well as adjuvant approaches. We chose this strategy to maximally protect our intellectual property around this potentially very valuable mRNA cancer immunotherapy vaccine.

Microcapdaily has been reporting on RGBP since early last year. The last time we covered the Company we stated among other things: RGBP is one of the most followed stocks in small caps with a huge investors base and it has a long history of big moves skyrocketing to 8 cents plus twice over the past 12 months. There are also plenty of buyout rumors on RGBP; notably in the July PR Dr. koos stated: We are proud of our collaborators and colleagues who have worked on our first issued survivin patent, which was filed in 2015, before the world realized the potency of modified-mRNA technology that was first successfully commercialized with the COVID-19 vaccines by Moderna and Pfizer. Rumors are circulating that Dr. Koos has offers for either a B/O or potential joint ventures, licensing, partnerships, or a merger. He wants to get the best offer out there. Regen owns a valuable intellectual property portfolio including 8 issued patents and 13 published patent applications, these patents address enormous billion-dollar markets. RGBP has not seen the kind of volume and interest it showed on Friday in a long time and looks to be preparing to embark on something substantial here.

Regen BioPharma Inc (OTCMKTS: RGBP) is focused on the immunology and immunotherapy space. The Company is focused on rapidly advancing novel technologies through pre-clinical and Phase I/ II clinical trials. Currently, the Company is focused on mRNA and small molecule therapies for treating cancer and autoimmune disorders.

Regen owns a valuable intelectuable property portfolio including 8 issued patents and 13 published patent applications. Zander Therapeutics, Inc. (a company under common control) has been granted an exclusive license to develop and commercialize IP controlled by the Company for non-human veterinary therapeutic use. Regen has granted an exclusive license to Oncology Pharma, Inc. to develop and commercialize Antigen specific mRNA cellular cancer vaccines for the treatment of pancreatic cancer and KCL Therapeutics, Inc. has granted an exclusive license to Oncology Pharma, Inc. to develop and commercialize certain intellectual property for the treatment of colon cancer.

The Company is led by CEO David Koos who has over 30 years of investment banking and venture capital experience. He has a deep knowledge of startup businesses, public markers and SEC reporting companies. Dr. Koos has extensive relationships with large and small financial institutions, hedge funds and entities that Regen BioPharma expects to leverage for company growth. Dr. Koos has a Ph.D. in Sociology and a Doctor of Business Administration with an emphasis in finance. Additionally, he has authored / co-authored numerous peer reviewed journal articles. Dr. Koos worked hard to get the filings up to date and get the Company compliant which has recently been completed with RGBP now pink current

Earlier this year RGBP announced a program to accelerate the clinical development of its NR2F6 therapies. The Company intends to combine modified mRNA technology with Regens existing siRNA (small interfering RNA) intellectual property targeting the NR2F6 nuclear receptor which has been identified as a potentially very important immune cell inhibitor (an immune checkpoint) and cancer stem cell differentiator. mRNA is a single-stranded molecule that carries genetic code from DNA in a cells nucleus to ribosomes (the cells protein-making machinery).

Regen has filed an Investigational New Drug Application (IND#16928) for their drug termed tCellVax with the U.S. FDA. tCellVax is intended to utilize siRNA to silence NR2F6 activity in human immune cells thereby activating these immune cells in such a way that they can attack cancer cells. The Company believes that adding new intellectual property utilizing modified mRNA will profoundly simplify the drug development process and thus speed development. Dyo Biotechnologies has been contracted to assist Regen with the development of the above-mentioned technology.

To Find out the inside Scoop on RGBPSubscribe to Microcapdaily.com Right Now by entering your Email in the box below

$RGBP We're all agree the worst is already behind us The chart is so ready for a blowout run with any major news Until then we'll take a nice n steady organic upwards MrKoos should throw us a prime ribs anydays now??

— CHUONG PHAN (@CHUONGPHAN1974) August 4, 2022

On July 26 RGBP announced the filing with the United States Patent and Trademark Office of a provisional patent application covering utilization of dendritic cell technologies to augment efficacy of its patented survivin mRNA cancer immunotherapeutic vaccine.

In 2021 the Company was granted US patent # 11,090,332 on composition of matter of survivin modified-mRNA useful for teaching the immune system to kill cancer. In the current patent, specific types of dendritic cells, means of generating specialized dendritic cells, and the planned formulation that will enter clinical trials have been granted patent protection.

Immunotherapy of cancer represents a very large market which is currently being led by the class of drugs called checkpoint inhibitors and CAR-T cells. To date there is no mRNA immunotherapy available for treating cancer. This patent application protects the use of our patented survivin mRNA both as a stand-alone vaccine and as an immunotherapy.

RGBP CEO Dr. David Koos stated: We are proud of our collaborators and colleagues who have worked on our first issued survivin patent, which was filed in 2015, before the world realized the potency of modified-mRNA technology that was first successfully commercialized with the COVID-19 vaccines by Moderna and Pfizer. The currently filed application discloses means of significantly increasing efficacy by combining modified-mRNA with unique cellular immunotherapy as well as adjuvant approaches. We chose this strategy to maximally protect our intellectual property around this potentially very valuable mRNA cancer immunotherapy vaccine.

$RGBP has been on fire lately ?

Up 42% on Friday with lots of buys 30 min before closing bell.

Dollar Volume Friday: $1.4 million ?

Keeps moving up further with HEAVY accumulation of shares building since Wednesday 8/3 ?#OTC #OTCMARKETS #OTCUNITED #Pennystocks pic.twitter.com/NNoZ1zo1pS

— Pennies2Riches ? (@GeniusTrader777) August 6, 2022

For more on RGBP Subscribe Right Now!

Currently trading at a $55 million market valuation RGBP has 5,024,517,324 shares outstanding and a debt load that has caused significant dilution in the past. But RGBP is an exciting story developing in small caps, at current levels the selling pressure that decimated the share price from over $0.08 to half a penny is gone and buyers have stepped in and are accumulating heavily at current levels. RGBP is no stranger to big moves and has runner in its blood skyrocketing to $0.0819 not once but twice in the past year alone. Several weeks ago, the Company announced the filing with the United States Patent and Trademark Office of a provisional patent application covering utilization of dendritic cell technologies to augment efficacy of its patented survivin mRNA cancer immunotherapeutic vaccine. RGBP CEO Dr. David Koos stated: We are proud of our collaborators and colleagues who have worked on our first issued survivin patent, which was filed in 2015, before the world realized the potency of modified-mRNA technology that was first successfully commercialized with the COVID-19 vaccines by Moderna and Pfizer. The currently filed application discloses means of significantly increasing efficacy by combining modified-mRNA with unique cellular immunotherapy as well as adjuvant approaches. We chose this strategy to maximally protect our intellectual property around this potentially very valuable mRNA cancer immunotherapy vaccine. Rumors are circulating that Dr. Koos has offers for either a B/O or potential joint ventures, licensing, partnerships, or a merger. He wants to get the best offer out there. Regen owns a valuable intellectual property portfolio including 8 issued patents and 13 published patent applications, these patents address enormous billion-dollar markets. RGBP has not seen the kind of volume and interest it showed on Friday in a long time and looks to be preparing to embark on something substantial here. We will be updating on RGBP when more details emerge so make sure you are subscribed to Microcapdaily so you know whats going on with RGBP.

Disclosure: we hold no position in RGBP either long or short and we have not been compensated for this article

See the original post:
Regen BioPharma Inc (OTCMKTS: RGBP) Breaking Out as Biotech Files Patent on Dendritic Cell Technologies to Augment Efficacy of Survivin mRNA Cancer...