Legalization of abortion produced identity crisis for pro-life Irish Catholics – Crux: Covering all things Catholic

[Editors Note: Jonathon Van Maren is a public speaker, writer, and pro-life activist. His commentary has appeared in National Review, First Things, The American Conservative, the National Post, and elsewhere. Van Maren is the author of The Culture War and Seeing Is Believing: Why Our Culture Must Face the Victims of Abortion as well as the co-author with Blaise Alleyne of A Guide to Discussing Assisted Suicide. He spoke to Charles Camosy about Patriots: The Untold Story of Ireland s Pro-Life Movement.]

Camosy: I must admit, knowing that the final chapter covered the loss of the 8th Amendment protecting equal justice under law for prenatal children under Irish law, a bit of hesitancy to get invested into a story which culminates in that tragic loss. Did you share any of that in making a decision to write this book? And what ultimately drove you to take on this project in the first place?

Van Maren: Interestingly, it was the loss of the 8th Amendment that drove me to research and tell this story. I was in Ireland for a few weeks prior to the 2018 abortion referendum, and the pro-lifers I met there crisscrossing the country, going door-to-door, and putting up with the contempt of the media and the betrayals of so many politicians were simply some of the best people Ive met. And yet, the narrative of what happened started taking shape before the vote: That a movement of progressives and feminists saved Ireland from a handful of misogynist, medieval men and women driven to fanaticism by religion.

(Credit: Courtesy to Crux.)

Like any pro-lifer, Im used to narratives of that sort. But this time, it genuinely upset me. To see so many men and women who fought for decades and saved hundreds of thousands of livesand then left everything on the field to save Irelands constitutional protection for the pre-bornslandered in this way was disgusting. These people fought for the children of others because they cared so deeply. I remember one elderly woman on the Life Canvass, moving slowly from door to door in Dublin. Someone told her that hed be voting for repeal, and the woman said, in a trembling voice: But what about the babies? Thats why so many people took off work, skipped university classes, and poured their own time and money into the pro-life movement.

We in the pro-life movement rarely tell our own stories. As a result, our stories are told by those who slander us, hate us, and at the end of the day, do not understand our motivations. (Recent smear jobs include Norma McCorvey and Phyllis Schlafly.) I thought it would be a crying shame if the beautiful history of the Irish movement ended up being told by a handful of pro-choice journalists and abortion activists.

What lessons can the US, Canadian, and other pro-life movements around the world learn from the glory days of the Irish pro-life movement?

There are many answers to this question. First, the Irish movement was relentless. Keep in mind they were putting activists on the streets every day in a country where abortion was already illegal. They took nothing for granted, and they refused to be reactive. One of the reasons Ireland held on for so much longer than the rest of the West is that they responded to every threat as if it were existential, because it was.

Jonathon Van Maren. (Credit: Courtesy to Crux.)

The Irish movement has also given much to the international pro-life cause. For example, the Dublin Declaration, a document signed by over 1,000 medical professionals affirming that abortion is never necessary to address the health circumstances of the mother, is used by pro-lifers around the world in debate, on campus, and in street outreach. From embryonic stem cell research to difficult health circumstances, the Irish movement was always ready to present a compelling and coherent response to the deceits of the abortion industry, and to take those arguments to the streets and millions of doorsteps. They perfected the fusion of advertising, activism, and the distribution of essential information.

What lessons can such movements learn from the stinging defeat that the loss of the 8th Amendment represents?

To cite just one: That the media, the abortion industry, and the politicians will exploit any crisisand any corpse, to put it crudelyto get abortion on demand. The tragic death of Savita Halappanavar was used as a blood libel against the pro-life movement despite the fact that every inquest and investigation proved that she died of septicemia, and that she did not need an abortion to save her life. That fact was buried. The false narrative that the 8th Amendment killed a womanand would kill morewas relentlessly pounded into the consciousness of Middle Ireland. During the final week leading up to the referendum, abortion activists were simply hanging up photos of her face.

That storythe story of how the 8th was actually lostalso needed to be told.

One often hears folks say that the fall of the 8th can be directly connected to the fall of the Catholic Church more generally in Irish society. Whats your take on this?

It was definitely a significant factor, but can be somewhat overstated. Without Savitas death, it is unlikely that the abortion activists would have been able to achieve repeal of the 8th, at least this time around. That said, the hatred and hostility of many young people towards the Catholic Church is very real and very vitriolic. I examine the impact of secularization and how scandals in the Catholic Church deeply damaged her moral standing in Ireland in the book. For example, many clergy did not speak up during the referendum for fear that their endorsement of the pro-life cause might accomplish the opposite of the intended effect.

As a person with 50 percent Irish heritage myself, I took great pride in being Irish and couldnt wait to go back to visit. Now, however, I must admit feeling ashamed that a people with which I so closely identified could have done something like this. Any advice for folks like me? Do we have any reason for short- or medium-term hope that Ireland can work toward protecting and supporting both prenatal children and their mothers under Irish law?

You are not alone in this. In fact, the loss of the 8th Amendment triggered an identity crisis for many Irish pro-lifers, something I detail in the final chapters. That was a question that came up often: If Ireland is no longer pro-life, what does it mean to be Irish? It was that question that partially inspired the title to the book, Patriots. It has often been a minority fighting for a righteous cause, and the Irish have a tradition of this. For inspiration, the Irish need only to look to her own pastincluding the pro-life heroism I detail in my book.

In terms of what comes next, the Irish are now fighting a battle that resembles the fight in other nations. That said, keep in mind that 33 percent of voters cast their ballots to keep abortion illegal in all circumstances. That is a solid base to work from. I forget precisely where I read this quote, but after one referendum loss in another country, the spokesman for the losing side noted that there had been much support for their position, and that the battle would begin anew immediately. To paraphrase his words: Let us start from 33 percent. I have every confidence in the ingenuity and tenacity of the Irish movement.

Original post:
Legalization of abortion produced identity crisis for pro-life Irish Catholics - Crux: Covering all things Catholic

Stem Cell Therapy Market Regulations and Competitive Landscape Outlook – 3rd Watch News

Stem cells are most vital cells found in both humans and non-human animals. Stem cells are also known as centerpiece of regenerative medicine. Regenerative medicines have capability to grow new cells and replace damaged and dead cells. Stem cell is the precursors of all cells in the human body. It has the ability to replicate itself and repair and replace other damaged tissues in the human body. In addition, stem cell based therapies are used in the treatment of several chronic diseases such as cancer and blood disorders.

The global stem cell therapy market is categorized based on various modes of treatment and by therapeutic applications. The treatment segment is further sub-segmented into autologous stem cell therapy and allogeneic stem cell therapy. The application segment includes metabolic diseases, eye diseases, immune system diseases, musculoskeletal disorders, central nervous system disorders, cardiovascular diseases and wounds and injuries.

Request For Report Sample:http://marketgrowthanalysis.com/reports/sample/217

Stem Cell Therapy Market, By Treatments:

Allogeneic Stem Cell Therapy Autologous Stem Cell Therapy

Stem Cell Therapy Market, By End Users:

Hospitals Ambulatory Surgical Centers

Stem Cell Therapy Market, By Application:

Oncology Central Nervous System Diseases Eye Diseases Musculoskeletal Diseases Wound & Injuries Metabolic Disorders Cardiovascular Disorders Immune System Disorders

Request For COVID-19 Analysis:http://marketgrowthanalysis.com/reports/enquiry/217

Stem Cell Therapy Market, By Geography:

North America Europe Asia Pacific Middle East & Africa Latin America

In terms of geographic, North America dominates the global stem cell therapy market due to increased research activities on stem cells. The U.S. represents the largest market for stem cell therapy followed by Canada in North America. However, Asia is expected to show high growth rates in the next five years in global stem cell therapy market due to increasing population. In addition, increasing government support by providing funds is also supporting in growth of the stem cell therapy market in Asia. China and India are expected to be the fastest growing stem cell therapy markets in Asia.

Key Players in the Stem Cell Therapy Market are:

Chiesi Farmaceutici S.P.A Are: Gamida Cell ReNeuron Group, plc Osiris Therapeutics, Inc. Stem Cells, Inc. Vericel Corporation. Mesoblast, Ltd.

Request For Report TOC:http://marketgrowthanalysis.com/reports/toc/217

See the original post here:
Stem Cell Therapy Market Regulations and Competitive Landscape Outlook - 3rd Watch News

Global Stem Cell Therapy Market (2019-2029) with COVID-19 After Effects Analysis by Emerging Trends, Industry Demand, Growth, Key Players – 3rd Watch…

The new research report titled Stem Cell Therapy Market published by Global Marketers into his huge database. Primary and secondary research methodologies have been used to formulate this report. This Report Provides an in-depth study analyzing the current and future demands of this market also it provides the overview, definition, cost structure, segmentation, recent developments, application,and industry chain analysis, CAGR growth, and Porters Five Forces Analysis, demand. The report has offered an all-inclusive analysis of the global market taking into consideration all the pivotal aspects like growth factors, market developments, future prospects, and trends.

Get/Download Free sample report, @ https://www.globalmarketers.biz/report/life-sciences/2014-2029-report-on-global-stem-cell-therapy-market-by-player,-region,-type,-application-and-sales-channel/152309 #request_sample

Osiris Therapeutics NuVasive Chiesi Pharmaceuticals JCRPharmaceutical Pharmicell Medi-post Anterogen Molmed Takeda (TiGenix)

This Stem Cell Therapy market report will help you determine and analyze your portfolio of key market players with information such as company profile, components and services offered, financial information from the past three years, and key developments it helps you to develop a strategy to gain a competitive edge in the past 4-5 years.

North America (United States, Canada), Asia-Pacific (China, Japan, India, Australia, and South Korea), Latin America (Brazil, Mexico, etc.), The Middle East and Africa (GCC and South Africa), Europe (Germany, Spain, France, UK, Russia, and Italy)

The competitive landscape of the Stem Cell Therapy Market is discussed in the report, including the market share and new orders market share by the company. The report profiles the leading players in the market for providing an in-depth study of this industry as well as provides growth opportunities, future demands of this market. The report also discusses the implemented by the key vendors to maintain their hold on the industry. The business overview and financial overview of each of the key vendors have been analyzed in this research Report.

The research report studies the market in a detailed manner by explaining the key facets of the market that are foreseeable to have a countable stimulus on its developing extrapolations over the forecast period. This report defines the current and present situation as well as the future forecast of this Stem Cell Therapy Market. Also, this report provide all the information on Impact Analysis of COVID-19 on this industry.

Stem Cell Therapy Market By Type:

Autologous Allogeneic

Stem Cell Therapy Market By Application:

Musculoskeletal Disorder Wounds & Injuries Cornea Cardiovascular Diseases Others

Hurry Up!!! Ask For Discount https://www.globalmarketers.biz/discount_inquiry/discount/152309

For more Information or Browse the complete report @ https://www.globalmarketers.biz/report/life-sciences/2014-2029-report-on-global-stem-cell-therapy-market-by-player,-region,-type,-application-and-sales-channel/152309 #table_of_contents

Read this article:
Global Stem Cell Therapy Market (2019-2029) with COVID-19 After Effects Analysis by Emerging Trends, Industry Demand, Growth, Key Players - 3rd Watch...

Farrah Fawcett Glimpse into Life and Final Days of the Beloved ‘Charlie’s Angels’ Star – AmoMama

Farrah Fawcett became an actress known for her beauty andcompassionate nature. As June 25 marked the 11th anniversary of her passing, we looked at memorable moments in her career - from that swimsuit poster to her role in "Charlie's Angels."

At the age of 62, Farrah Fawcett passed away on June 25, 2009, in Santa Monica, California. While her death came on the same day as Michael Jackson's passing, it brought her battle with cancer to a final close.

Her final days, Fawcett spent worried about her family -her son, Redmond, in particular. Fawcett shared Redmond with Ryan O'Neal with whom she had a complicated relationship, and his bumpy road down the wrong path heightened her protective instinct.

Fawcett's close friend Mela Murphy, who stayed by her side at St. John's Health Center until she died, recalled the actress's final moments to PEOPLE and said:

She was saying his name, Redmond.' That was the last thing she said.I told her Id take care of him, that Ill always be there for him."

The actress died a few hours later after what Jaclyn Smith, Fawcett's co-star in "Charlie's Angels," called a "relentless fight" against anal cancer.

Following her first cancer diagnosis in 2006, Fawcett founded The Farrah Fawcett Foundation in aid of HPV-related cancer research after she got declared cancer-free in February 2007.

But the status was short-lived, asa routine check-up three months later revealed a small malignant polyp. Fawcett went to Germany to undergo experimental stem-cell treatment, but sadly it didn't have the results they hoped on.

However, Fawcett remained steadfast in her battle against the disease, one her partner Ryan O'Neal knew about from first-hand experience.

O'Neal and Fawcett initially separated in 1997 after almost two decades together. But when doctors told O'Neal in 2001 that he had leukemia, they reconciled until she died in 2009.

During her acting career, Fawcett earned 10 award wins and 23 nominations, and it includes her role in "Charlie's Angels." Then there is that unforgettablered swimsuit Fawcett posedin during 1976.It sold12 million copies and becamethebest-selling poster of all time.

The poster launched Farrah Fawcett into stardom since she had only done small roles and television commercials up until that point.

Fawcett had even remained under the radar with roles in series such as "I Dream of Jeannie," "The Flying Nun," and a recurring role in "Harry O" when she decided to accept the poster deal.

Continued here:
Farrah Fawcett Glimpse into Life and Final Days of the Beloved 'Charlie's Angels' Star - AmoMama

COVID-19 Outbreak Bestows Lucrative Opportunities to Rheumatoid Arthritis Stem Cell Therapy Market; Demand to Remain High Post Pandemic – Daily…

Analysis of the Global Rheumatoid Arthritis Stem Cell Therapy Market

A recent market research report on the Rheumatoid Arthritis Stem Cell Therapy market published by Fact.MR is an in-depth assessment of the current landscape of the market. Further, the report sheds light on the different segments of the Rheumatoid Arthritis Stem Cell Therapy market and provides a thorough understanding of the growth potential of each market segment over the forecast period (20XX-20XX).

According to the analysts at Fact.MR, the Rheumatoid Arthritis Stem Cell Therapy market is evenly poised to register a CAGR growth of ~XX% during the assessment and surpass a value of ~US$ XX by the end of 2029. The report analyzes the micro and macro-economic factors that are likely to impact the growth of the Rheumatoid Arthritis Stem Cell Therapy market in the upcoming years.

Request Sample Report @ https://www.factmr.co/connectus/sample?flag=S&rep_id=1001

Key Insights Enclosed in the Report

Segmentation of the Rheumatoid Arthritis Stem Cell Therapy Market

The presented report dissects the Rheumatoid Arthritis Stem Cell Therapy market into different segments and ponders over the current and future prospects of each segment. The report depicts the year-on-year growth of each segment and touches upon the different factors that are likely to influence the growth of each market segment.

Competitive landscape

Request Methodology On This Report @ https://www.factmr.co/connectus/sample?flag=RM&rep_id=1001

COVID-19 Analysis

The report encompasses the major developments within the global Rheumatoid Arthritis Stem Cell Therapy market amidst the novel COVID-19 pandemic. The report offers a thorough understanding of the different aspects of the market that are likely to be feel the impact of the pandemic.

Important doubts related to the Rheumatoid Arthritis Stem Cell Therapy market clarified in the report:

Why Choose Fact.MR

Ask analyst about this report at https://www.factmr.co/connectus/sample?flag=AE&rep_id=1001

The rest is here:
COVID-19 Outbreak Bestows Lucrative Opportunities to Rheumatoid Arthritis Stem Cell Therapy Market; Demand to Remain High Post Pandemic - Daily...

A Preview of the 12 Propositions on Californias November Ballot – Times of San Diego

These three measures, all placed on the ballot by the Legislature, had been introduced before protests against racism and police brutality swept the country. But as California lawmakers look for ways to play a role in the national debate about institutional barriers to equity and the meaning of citizenship, many legislators see these as particularly potent causes.

Prop. 16: Ending the ban on affirmative action

Who put it there: The Legislature, via abillby San Diego Democrat Assemblymember Shirley Weber

Type: Constitutional amendment

What it would do: Allow schools and public agencies to take race and other immutable characteristics into account when making admission, hiring or contracting decisions.

In 1996 California voters passedProposition 209, a constitutional amendment banning affirmative action at state institutions. The result was an immediate drop in Black and Latino enrollment at the states elite public universities. Some civil rights organizations have been trying to repeal Prop. 209 ever since.

Each of those attempts has been stymied by a coalition of Republicans, moderate Democrats and some progressive legislators who represent districts with large Asian American voting populations. This year, as in previous years, some of the most vocal and persistent opponents of the effort to reintroduce affirmative action have beenChinese-American political activists. They argue that boosting enrollment of students from underrepresented racial groups would come at the expense of overrepresented Asian American students.

Prop. 17: Restoring the right to vote to people on parole

Who put it there: The Legislature, via abillby Sacramento Democrat Assemblymember Kevin McCarty.

Type: Constitutional amendment

What it would do:Allow Californians who are currently on parole to vote.

In 1974, California voters passed a ballot measure giving people who have committed felonies the right to vote once they complete their sentences and are no longer on parole.

Thanks to that law, there are some 40,000 Californians who are not in prison but unable to legally cast a ballot. But as with any criminal justice debate, this is also one about race. According to anestimate from 2016, two thirds of people on parole in the state are Latino or Black.

Prop. 18: Letting (some) 17 year olds vote (some of the time)

Who put it there: The Legislature, with abillintroduced by San Mateo Democrat Assemblymember Kevin Mullin.

Type: Constitutional amendment

What it would do: Allow 17-year-old U.S. citizens to vote in a primary and special election as long as they will turn 18 by the subsequent general election.

California Democrats have been on a decade-long tear increasing voting access. Same-day voter registration, automatic registration at the DMV and pre-registration of 16- and 17-year-olds are among the recent pro-vote innovations to come out of the Capitol.

Letting people under 18 vote would be yet another extension. Already 23 states let 17- year-olds vote in certain circumstances.

Democratic legislators have tried to do this six times before; this is the first to make the ballot.

This wouldnt be a California election without at least a few wildy contentious ballot measures about housing and property taxes.

Prop. 15: Split roll

Who put it there: Citizens. Campaign largely funded by the California Teachers Association, SEIU California and the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative.

Type: Constitutional amendment

What it would do:Tax some commercial property based on its market value, rather than the price at which it was purchased. This would raise property taxes on many large businesses across the state, increasing funding for schools and local government.

In 1978, California voters passed Proposition 13, placing a cap on property taxes, kicking off a nationwide anti-tax revolt and placing city and county budgets in a generation-spanning straitjacket.

By tying a landlords property tax payments to the original purchase price, Prop. 13 has been thegift that keeps on givingto property owners, particularly those lucky enough to have bought cheap real estate decades ago. Theres been bipartisan reluctance among lawmakers to touch it ever since, lest they incur the wrath of irate homeowners.

This initiative attempts to divide and conquer that political problem by repealing the property tax protections only for commercial landlords with more than $3 million in holdings. If this measure passes, those landowners would have to make tax payments based on the current value of their properties a tax hike for most resulting in anestimated$6.5 to $11.5 billion more for cities, counties and school districts.

Prop. 19: Property tax breaks and closing the Lebowski loophole

Who put it there: The Legislature, via abillby San Mateo Democrat Assemblymember Kevin Mullin, but sponsored by the California Realtors.

Type: Constitutional amendment

What it would do: Allow homeowners who are over 55, disabled or victims of natural disaster to take a portion of their property tax base with them when they sell their home and buy a new one. It would also limit the ability of new homeowners who inherit properties to keep their parents or grandparents low property tax payments. Most of the additional money raised would go into a state fire response fund.

Weve seen this one before half of it, anyway. In 2018, the California Association of Realtors put ameasure on the ballotallowing older or disabled homeowners to keep a portion of their Prop. 13 tax break. The Realtors argued that the current property tax rules disincentivize longtime homeowners from moving, trapping empty-nesters in houses that are too big for them and locking out new families. But because the measure would cost schools, counties and cities, it was opposed by organized labor and local government groups and failed by 20 points.

The Realtors tried again this year, but with an added fiscal sweetener. Under this proposal, anyone who inherits a home from their parents or grandparents would only be allowed to keep the low property taxes if they use the home as their primary residence and only on the first $1 million between the homes original purchase price and its market value. Inspiration for that caveat may have come from theLos Angeles Times, which tracked down a number of California scions, including The Big Lebowski star Jeff Bridges, who are still paying 1970-era property tax levels on their rental properties.

And then there was a last-minute wrinkle. In the final weeks of June, the Realtors sprang a deal: designating that most of the funding generated by the measure would go to fighting wildfires. That won the support of the influential California Professional Firefighters union. It also means the measure will be funding a public need that might be on many voters minds come November.

That bargain was struck after the Realtors had submitted their signatures, so with the help of Assemblyman Mullin, they passed it through the Legislature, pulling their original proposal just before the deadline.

Prop. 21: Rent Control (Again)

Who put it on the ballot: Signatures, collected via an effort mostly funded by the AIDS Healthcare Foundation.

Type: Statute

What it would do: Allow cities to introduce new rent control laws, or expand existing ones.

Despite a 20-percentage point, 56-out-of-58 county defeat in 2018, a statewide rent control measure is back on the ballot.

Polling from that election seasonsuggestedthat California voters generally liked rent control as a concept, but worried about the specifics of the proposal. Accordingly, this new initiative makes a few tweaks.

Under this one, cities would be allowed to apply new rent control ordinances only to homes that are at least 15 years old. And it exempts single-family homes owned by landlords with no more than two properties.

Just like last time, the measure is being pushed by the Los Angeles-based AIDS Healthcare Foundation and its pugnacious presidentMichael Weinstein. State lawmakers by passing a law last year that set a7% ceilingon how much landlords can raise rents each year had hoped to ward off another attempt by Weinstein and company. They had no such luck.

California, the home of three-strikes sentencing, has spent the last decade rethinking its approach to criminal justice. Two measures on the November ballot, channeling the spirit of the 90s, are pushing to reverse that reversal.

Prop. 25: Ditch or keep cash bail

Who put it there: Signatures, via a campaign largely funded by the bail bond industry.

Type: Referendum

What it would do: Ask voters to either approve or strike down a state law that banished money bail from the state criminal justice system.

In 2018, acting on the advice of state Supreme Court Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye, legislators passed a billending cash bail in California. Rather than letting people pay their way out of jail while they await trial, the law gives judges the right to determine whether someone who is arrested should be kept behind bars based on the risk they are deemed to pose to themselves or others.

Moving quickly, the bail bond industry mounted a campaign to put the question on the ballot as a referendum. Voters will vote either Yes to keep the state law and end cash bail for good, making California the first state to do so, or No to keep the bail system.

Prop. 20: Rolling back Brown-era leniency

Who put it there: Signatures, via a campaign largely funded by law enforcement agencies.

Type: Constitutional amendment

What it would do: Allow prosecutors to charge repeat or organized petty theft as a felony, require probation officers to seek tougher penalties for those who violate the term of their parole three times, and exclude those who have been convicted of domestic violence and certain nonviolent crimes from early parole consideration.

Gov. Jerry Brown was famously allergic to talk of his legacy while in office. But if the former governor has one, it might be the effort he spent in his final two terms as governor supporting efforts to reverse the tough on crime policies he helped introduce during his first two terms in the 1970s and 80s.

In 2011, California legislators reduced punishments for parole violators. In 2014, voters passed Proposition 47, recategorizing some non-violent crimes as misdemeanors. In 2016, voters passed Proposition 57, giving inmates convicted of certain non-violent offenses a shot at early release.

This ballot measure would partially undo each of those.

Usually standoffs between employees and their bosses take place behind closed doors. In California, you often find them on the ballot.

Prop. 22: Self-employment for ride-hail and other app-drivers

Who put it there: Signatures, via a campaign mostly funded by Lyft, Uber and Doordash

Type: Statute

What it would do: Turn app-based drivers into independent contractors, exempting companies such as Lyft and Uber from standard wage and hour restrictions. It would also guarantee these drivers an earnings floor, a stipend to purchase health insurance and other minimum benefits.

Unless you happen to be ananti-vaccine protestor, the most controversial law of the 2019 legislative session wasAssembly Bill 5. On its face, the law simply codified a state Supreme Court ruling, making it much harder for companies to treat their workers as independent contractors, rather than full-fledged employees. In practice, it upended the business models of Uber, Lyft, Doordash, Postmates and Instacart, all of which rely on an army of phone-toting gig-workers to provide their various services.

In the months since, all attempts at legislative compromise have fizzled, Californias Attorney General hassued Uber and Lyftfor violating the new law and California regulatorsdeclaredtheir drivers to be employees.

As a last-ditch effort, the various companies implicated have poured $110 million and counting to push a ballot measure that would simply exclude their drivers from the law. And throwing a bone to critics who say their drivers are mistreated, the measure also imposes some worker benefits and protections.

Prop. 23: Regulating dialysis clinics

Who put it there: Signatures, via an effort funded entirely by the Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West

Type: Statute

What it would do: Require dialysis clinics to have at least one physician on site at all times and to report patient infection data to California health officials.

DaVita Kidney Care and Fresenius Medical Care own the majority of the for-profit dialysis clinics in the state. For years, the Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers union has been at war with them.

After unsuccessful efforts to unionize clinic staff, the union sponsored legislation to cap reimbursement rates to clinics and floated an array of possible ballot measures to boost their staff spending and cut their profits. In 2018, the union finally got one on the ballot:Prop 8, which would have set a cap on clinic profit margins.

The measure was soundly defeated, but only after the two companies spent over $111 million, making it the most expensive ballot campaign ever. This one isnt likely to be much cheaper.

Two measures on this years ballot aim to bolster laws and programs already on the books. Both campaigns are led by Bay Area real estate developers with a penchant for ballot box policymaking.

Prop. 24: Stronger consumer privacy laws (again)

Who put it there: Signatures, via a campaign funded entirely by Alastair and Celine Mactaggart.

Type: Statute

What it would do: Strengthen Californias already strongest-in-the-nation consumer privacy law and establish a California Privacy Protection Agency

In 2018, California lawmakers passed theCalifornia Consumer Privacy Act, giving consumers the right to find out what data companies are collecting about them, to opt out of having it collected and to have that data scrubbed. It was and remains the only law like it in the county. It was also acompromise. San Francisco real estate developer Alastair MacTaggart had been pushing for an even stricter ballot measure, but the Legislature stepped in, brokering a deal between MacTaggart and the tech industry.

Now MacTaggart is back. Along with setting up a state agency tasked with enforcing state privacy law, the measure would beef up financial penalties for violators and allow consumers to demand that personal information not be shared at all, rather than simply not sold.

Prop. 14: Borrowing for stem cell research

Who put it there: Signatures via an effort mostly funded by Robert Klein, JDRF International and Open Philanthropy

Type: Bond

What it would do: Borrow $5.5 billion to fund stem cell research

In 2004, voters passed Proposition 71 to create the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine. The institute exists to channel state money toward stem cell research. Prop 71 also let the state borrow $3 billion to do that.

That pot of cash is now almost empty. Robert Klein, a Silicon Valley real estate developer who led the Prop. 71 effort and became the institutes first board chair, is leading the campaign for more.

CalMattersis a nonprofit, nonpartisan media venture explaining California policies and politics.

Originally posted here:
A Preview of the 12 Propositions on Californias November Ballot - Times of San Diego

COVID-19 Impact: Primary Cell Culture Market | Strategic Industry Evolutionary Analysis Focus on Leading Key Players and Revenue Growth Analysis by…

Overview Of Primary Cell Culture Industry 2020-2026:

This has brought along several changes in This report also covers the impact of COVID-19 on the global market.

The Primary Cell Culture Market analysis summary by Reports Insights is a thorough study of the current trends leading to this vertical trend in various regions. Research summarizes important details related to market share, market size, applications, statistics and sales. In addition, this study emphasizes thorough competition analysis on market prospects, especially growth strategies that market experts claim.

Primary Cell Culture Market competition by top manufacturers as follow: , ATCC, Cell Biologics, CellSystems GmbH, Corning, Creative Bioarray, FUJIFILM Irvine Scientific, GE Healthcare, Irvine Scientific, Lonza, MatTek Ltd, Merck, Promocell GmbH, Themo Scientific

Get a Sample PDF copy of the report @ https://reportsinsights.com/sample/9633

The global Primary Cell Culture market has been segmented on the basis of technology, product type, application, distribution channel, end-user, and industry vertical, along with the geography, delivering valuable insights.

The Type Coverage in the Market are: Explant Method Enzymatic Disaggregation Mechanical Separation Other

Market Segment by Applications, covers: Tissue Culture & Tissue Engineering Vaccine Production Gene Therapy and Regenerative Medicine Toxicity Testing and Drug Screening Cancer Research Prenatal Diagnosis Stem Cell Therapy Other

Market segment by Regions/Countries, this report covers North America Europe China Rest of Asia Pacific Central & South America Middle East & Africa

Major factors covered in the report:

To get this report at a profitable rate.: https://reportsinsights.com/discount/9633

The analysis objectives of the report are:

Access full Report Description, TOC, Table of Figure, Chart, [emailprotected] https://reportsinsights.com/industry-forecast/Primary-Cell-Culture-Market-9633

About US:

Reports Insights is the leading research industry that offers contextual and data-centric research services to its customers across the globe. The firm assists its clients to strategize business policies and accomplish sustainable growth in their respective market domain. The industry provides consulting services, syndicated research reports, and customized research reports.

Contact US:

:(US) +1-214-272-0234

:(APAC) +91-7972263819

Email:[emailprotected]

Sales:[emailprotected]

See the original post:
COVID-19 Impact: Primary Cell Culture Market | Strategic Industry Evolutionary Analysis Focus on Leading Key Players and Revenue Growth Analysis by...

A novel system to map protein interactions reveals evolutionarily conserved immune evasion pathways on transmissible cancers – Science Advances

Abstract

Around 40% of humans and Tasmanian devils (Sarcophilus harrisii) develop cancer in their lifetime, compared to less than 10% for most species. In addition, devils are affected by two of the three known transmissible cancers in mammals. Immune checkpoint immunotherapy has transformed human medicine, but a lack of species-specific reagents has limited checkpoint immunology in most species. We developed a cut-and-paste reagent development system and used the fluorescent fusion protein system to show that immune checkpoint interactions are conserved across 160,000,000 years of evolution, CD200 is highly expressed on transmissible tumor cells, and coexpression of CD200R1 can block CD200 surface expression. The systems versatility across species was demonstrated by fusing a fluorescent reporter to a camelid-derived nanobody that binds human programmed death ligand 1. The evolutionarily conserved pathways suggest that naturally occurring cancers in devils and other species can be used to advance our understanding of cancer and immunological tolerance.

Metastatic cancer affects most mammals, but the cancer incidence can vary widely across phylogenetic groups and species (Fig. 1 and table S1) (13). In humans, the lifetime risk of developing cancer is around 40% (4). This figure is in stark contrast to a general cancer incidence of 3% for mammals, 2% for birds, and 2% for reptiles reported by the San Diego Zoo (N = 10,317) (2, 5). A more recent study at the Taipei Zoo reported cancer incidence of 8, 4, and 1% for mammals, birds, and reptiles, respectively (N = 2657) (6). Cancer incidence in domestic animals is generally less than 10% (N = 202,277) (3). However, two studies performed 40 years apart reported that greater than 40% of Tasmanian devils develop spontaneous, often severe neoplasia in their lifetime (5, 7). Devils are also unique because they are affected by two of the three known naturally occurring transmissible cancers in vertebrate species (8, 9). Transmissible cancers are a distinct form of cancer in which the tumor cells function as an infectious pathogen and an allograft. Dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) are the only other vertebrate species affected by a transmissible cancer (10), and interestingly, some breeds of dogs also have high cancer incidence (3, 11).

Metastatic cancer has been reported in nearly all mammalian orders, and MHCs have been the most intensely studied molecules in most orders. In the past decade, studies of immune checkpoint molecules (PD1, PDL1, and CTLA4) have become a primary focus in humans and rodents. However, immune checkpoint studies in other species are limited, particularly at the protein level, because of the lack of species-specific reagents. This creates a vast gap in our understanding of the evolution of the mammalian immune system. The numbers in the columns represent the number studies matching Web of Science search results between 2009 and 2019. See table S1 for search terms.

The devil facial tumor (DFT) disease was first detected in Northwest Tasmania and has been a primary driver of an 80% decline in the wild Tasmanian devil population (8, 12). The clonal DFT (DFT1) cells have been continually transmitted among devils and are estimated to have killed at least 10,000 individuals since at least 1996. In 2014, a second independent transmissible Tasmanian DFT (DFT2) was found in wild devils (9), and 23 cases have been reported to date (13). Genetic mismatches, particularly in the major histocompatibility complex (MHC) genes, should lead to rejection of these transmissible tumors. Consequently, the role of devil MHC has been a focus of numerous studies (Fig. 1 and table S1) to understand the lack of rejection of the transmissible tumors. These studies have revealed that the DFT1 cells down-regulate MHC class I (MHC-I) expression (14), a phenomenon observed in many human cancers. In contrast to DFT1 cells, the DFT2 cells do express MHC-I (15). DFT1 and DFT2 cells have 2884 and 3591 single-nucleotide variants, respectively, that are not present in 46 normal devil genomes (16). The continual transmission of DFT1 and DFT2, despite MHC-I expression by DFT2 cells and genetic mismatches between host and tumor, suggests that additional pathways are likely involved in immune evasion.

Human cancer treatment has been transformed in the past decade by manipulating interactions among immune checkpoint molecules. These have proven broadly effective in part because they function across many different MHC types and tumor mutational patterns. However, these pathways have received little attention in transmissible cancers and other naturally occurring cancers in nonmodel species (Fig. 1 and table S1) (1719). We have previously shown that the inhibitory immune checkpoint molecule programmed death ligand 1 (PDL1) is expressed in the DFT microenvironment and is up-regulated by interferon- (IFN-) in vitro (17). This finding led us to question which other immune checkpoint molecules play a role in immune evasion by the transmissible cancers and the devils high spontaneous cancer incidence. Understanding immune evasion in a natural environment will support DFT vaccine development to help protect this endangered species (20) and has the potential to identify protein interactions that are conserved across divergent species to improve translational success of animal models (19). Unfortunately, a persistent limitation for immunology in nontraditional study species is a lack of species-specific reagents. Wildlife biologists and veterinarians are at the front lines of emerging infectious disease outbreaks, but they often lack species-specific reagents to fulfill the World Health Organizations call for cross-cutting R&D preparedness and perform mechanistic immunological investigations.

To solve the paucity of reagents available for Tasmanian devils and address ongoing limitations for nontraditional study species, we developed a Fluorescent Adaptable Simple Theranostic (FAST) protein system that builds on the diverse uses of fluorescent proteins previously reported (2123). This simple system can be used for rapid development of diagnostic and therapeutic (i.e., theranostic) immunological toolkits for any animal species (Fig. 2). We demonstrate the impact of the FAST system by using it to confirm seven receptor-ligand interactions among 12 checkpoint proteins in devils. We demonstrate the versatility of the system across species by fusing a fluorescent reporter to a well-characterized camelid-derived nanobody that binds human PDL1 (24).

(A) Schematic diagram of FAST protein therapeutic and diagnostic (i.e., theranostic) features. POI, protein of interest. (B) Graphic overview of FAST protein system including key steps: (i) characterize gene of interest (GOI) in silico; (ii) design expression vectors; (iii) digest FAST base vectors and insert alternative genes of interest or colors; (iv) transfect FAST vectors into mammalian cells and monitor using fluorescent microscopy or flow cytometry; (iv) purify the protein using 6xHis tag, visualize fluorescent color to show that protein is in frame and correctly folded. Image of microfuge tubes shows 100 l of mCitrine, mOrange, and mCherry FAST proteins (1 mg/ml) excited with blue light with an amber filter. Full protocols for vector construction and protein testing are available in the Supplementary Materials. (C) Results of flow cytometry binding assay with devil 41BB FAST proteins. The colored lines in the histograms show binding of devil 41BB fused to mTagBFP, mCerulean3, mAzurite, mCitrine, mOrange, mCherry, or mNeptune2 to CHO cells transfected with devil 41BBL, and the black lines show binding to untransfected CHO cells. FSC, forward scatter; SSC, side scatter.

In humans, checkpoint proteins have been targets of immunotherapy in clinical trials, but the functional role and binding patterns of these proteins are unknown for most other species. We have used the FAST system to show that the inhibitory checkpoint protein CD200 is highly expressed on DFT cells, opening the door to single-cell phenotyping of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) in devil blood. Furthermore, we are the first to report that coexpression of CD200R1 can block surface expression of CD200 in any species. Understanding how clonal tumor cells graft onto new hosts, evade immune defenses and metastasize within a host will identify evolutionarily conserved immunological mechanisms to help improve cancer, infectious disease, and transplant outcomes for human and veterinary medicine.

Initially, we developed FAST proteins to determine whether monomeric fluorescent proteins could be fused to devil proteins and secreted from mammalian cells (Fig. 2A and table S2). We used 41BB (TNFRSF9) for proof-of-concept studies by fusing the extracellular domain of devil 41BB checkpoint molecule to monomeric fluorescent proteins (Fig. 2, A and B, and fig. S1). We used wild-type Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cells and CHO cells transfected with 41BBL (TNFSF9) to confirm specificity of the 41BB FAST proteins and demonstrate that the fluorescent proteins [mTag-blue fluorescent protein (BFP), mCerulean3, mAzurite, mCitrine, mOrange, mCherry, and mNeptune2] remained fluorescent when secreted from mammalian cells (Fig. 2C).

We chose mCherry, mCitrine, mOrange, and mBFP for ongoing FAST protein development. Initial batches of FAST proteins were purified using the 6xHis tag and eluted with imidazole. Following purification of FAST protein the color can be immediately observed with blue light and an amber filter unit, allowing confirmation that the fluorescent protein DNA coding sequences were in frame and the proteins were properly folded. After combining, concentrating, and sterile filtering the eluted fractions, 100 l at 1 mg/ml was aliquoted and visualized again using blue light to confirm fluorescent signal (Fig. 2B). A full step-by-step protocol and set of experimental templates for creating and testing FAST proteins for any species are available online in the Supplementary Materials.

We chose candidate immune checkpoint molecules for FAST protein development (Fig. 3A and table S2) based on targets of human clinical trials and then selected devil genes for which a reliable sequence was available either in the published devil genome or transcriptomes (19, 25, 26). We transfected the FAST protein expression vectors (table S3) into CHO cells and tested the supernatant against CHO cell lines expressing full-length receptors. 41BB FAST proteins in supernatant exhibited strong binding to 41BBL cell lines, but the fluorescent signals from most other FAST proteins were too weak to confirm binding to the expected receptors (fig. S2). As FAST proteins do not require secondary reagents, we next incubated target cells with purified FAST proteins and added chloroquine to block the lysosomal protein degradation pathway. This allowed us to take advantage of receptor-mediated endocytosis, which can allow accumulation of captured fluorescent signals inside the target cells (27). This protocol adjustment allowed confirmation that CD47-mCherry, CD200-mBFP, CD200-mOrange, CD200R1-mBFP, and CD200R1-mOrange, and PD1-mCitrine bound to their expected receptors (Fig. 3B). We also demonstrated the flexibility of the FAST proteins by showing that alternative fusion conformations (fig. S1, C and D), such as type II proteins (e.g., mCherry-41BBL) and a devil Fc tag (e.g., CD80-Fc-mCherry) bound to their expected ligands (Fig. 3B). The stability of the fusion proteins was demonstrated using supernatants that were stored at 4C for 2 months before use in a 1-hour live-culture assay with chloroquine (fig. S3).

(A) Diagram of soluble FAST proteins and full-length proteins used for testing of FAST proteins. 41BBL is a type II transmembrane protein; all other proteins are type I. CD80 and CTLA4 soluble FAST proteins included a devil immunoglobulin G (IgG) Fc tag. Arrows indicate interactions confirmed in this study. TNF, tumor necrosis factor. (B) Histograms showing binding of FAST proteins to CHO cells expressing full-length devil proteins. Target CHO cells were cultured with chloroquine to block lysosomal degradation of FAST proteins and maintain fluorescent signal during live-culture binding assays with purified FAST proteins (2 g per well) for 30 min or 18 hours to assess receptor-ligand binding (N = 1 per time point).

To further streamline the reagent development process, we next took advantage of the single-step nature of FAST proteins (i.e., no secondary antibodies or labels needed) in live-cell coculture assays (Fig. 4A). Cell lines secreting 41BB-mCherry, 41BBL-mCherry, or CD80-Fc-mCherry FAST proteins were mixed with cell lines expressing full-length 41BB, 41BBL, or CTLA4-mCitrine and cocultured at a 1:1 ratio overnight with chloroquine. Singlet cells were gated (Fig. 4B) and binding of mCherry FAST proteins to carboxyfluorescein diacetate succinimidyl ester (CFSE) or mCitrine-labeled target cells was analyzed (Fig. 4C). The strongest fluorescent signal from 41BB-mCherry, 41BBL-mCherr, and CD80-Fc-mCherry was detected when cocultured with their predicted receptors, 41BBL, 41BB, and CTLA4, respectively.

(A) Schematic of coculture assays to assess checkpoint molecule interactions (absent, weak, and strong). Cells were mixed and cultured overnight with chloroquine. Protein binding and/or transfer were assessed using flow cytometry. (B) Gating strategy for coculture assays. (C) CHO cells that secrete 41BBL-mCherry, 41BB-mCherry, or CD80-Fc-mCherry were cocultured overnight with target CHO cells that express full-length 41BB, 41BBL, or CTLA4. 41BB and 41BB-L were labeled with CFSE, whereas full-length CTLA4 was directly fused to mCitrine. Cells that secrete mCherry FAST proteins appear in the upper left quadrant. Cells expressing full-length proteins and labeled with CFSE or mCitrine appear in the lower right quadrant. Cells in the upper right quadrant represent binding of mCherry FAST proteins to full-length proteins on carboxyfluorescein diacetate succinimidyl ester (CFSE) or mCitrine-labeled cells. Results shown are representative of n = 3 per treatment. (D) CTLA4-Fc-mCherry FAST protein binding to DFT cells. DFT1 C5065 cells transfected with control vector (black), 41BB (gray), CD80 (red), or CD86 (blue) were stained with CTLA4-Fc-mCherry supernatant with chloroquine. Results are representative of N = 2 replicates per treatment.

The fluorescent binding signal of CD80-Fc-mCherry was lower than expected, so we next reexamined our Fc tag construct. In humans and all other mammals examined to date, the immunoglobulin G (IgG) heavy chain has glycine-lysine (Gly-Lys) residues at the C terminus; the initial devil IgG constant region sequence available to us had an incomplete C terminus, and thus, our initial CD80-Fc-mCherry vector did not have the C-terminal Gly-Lys. We subsequently made a new FAST-Fc construct with CTLA4-Fc-mCherry, which exhibited strong binding to both CD80 and CD86 transfected DFT cells (Fig. 4D).

Analysis of previously published devil and DFT cell transcriptomes suggested that CD200 mRNA is highly expressed in DFT2 cells and peripheral nerves, moderately expressed in DFT1 cells, and lower in other healthy devil tissues (Fig. 5A) (25, 26, 28). As CD200 is an inhibitory molecule expressed on most human neuroendocrine neoplasms (29), and both DFT1 and DFT2 originated from Schwann cells (26, 30), we sought to investigate CD200 expression on DFT cells at the protein level. Staining of wild-type DFT1 and DFT2 cells with CD200R1-mOrange FAST protein showed minimal fluorescent signal (Fig. 5B). However, overexpression of CD200 using a human EF1 promoter yielded a detectable signal with CD200R1-mOrange binding to CD200 on DFT1 cells. A weak signal from CD200-mOrange was detected on DFT1 cells overexpressing CD200R1 (Fig. 5B). To confirm naturally expressed CD200 on DFT cells, we digested CD200 and 41BB FAST proteins using tobacco etch virus (TEV) protease to remove the linker and fluorescent reporter. The digested proteins were then used to immunize mice for polyclonal serum production. We stained target CHO cell lines with preimmune or immune mouse sera collected after three-times immunizations. Only the immune sera showed strong binding to the respective CD200 and 41BB target cell lines (Fig. 5C). After the final immunization (four times), we collected another batch of sera and tested it on DFT1 and DFT2 cells (Fig. 5D). In agreement with the transcriptomic data for DFT cells (25), the polyclonal sera revealed high levels of CD200 on DFT cells, but low levels of 41BB.

(A) GOIs for this study are plotted as a log2-transformed transcripts per million (TPM) heat map with dark blue indicating the most highly expressed genes. Technical replicates (N = 2) from separate flasks were used for the cell lines (C5065, RV) and biological replicates (N = 2) were used for primary tissues, except peripheral nerve (PN) (N = 1). (B) Wild-type DFT1.C5065, DFT2.JV, DFT2.SN, and DFT1.C5065 transfected to overexpress CD200 or CD200R1 were stained with either CD200R1-mOrange or CD200-mOrange FAST protein. Histograms filled with blue or red highlight expected strong binding interactions. The percentage of events that falls within the marker is shown. Results are representative of N = 2 replicates per treatment. (C) Mice were immunized with 41BB or CD200 FAST proteins. Black, preimmune; gray, immune sera from a mouse immunized with 41BB; red, preimmune; blue, immune sera from a mouse immunized with CD200. CHO cells transfected with either full-length 41BB or CD200 were stained with sera and then anti-mouse AF647. Results are representative of N = 2 per treatment. (D) Sera were used to screen two strains each of DFT1 and DFT2 cells for 41BB and CD200 expression. Results are representative of N = 3 per treatment. (E) DFT1 C5065 transfected with either vector control, CD200, or CD200R1 was stained with purified polyclonal anti-CD200 and anti-mouse IgG AF647 (black, no antibodies; red, secondary antibody only; blue, primary and secondary antibody). Results are representative of N = 2 per treatment.

In humans, overexpression of some checkpoint proteins can block surface expression of heterophilic binding partners in cis (e.g., CD80 and PDL1) (31). As a potential route for disrupting the inhibitory effects of CD200 on antitumor immunity, we tested whether overexpression of CD200R1 on DFT cells could reduce CD200 surface expression. We stained a DFT1 strain, C5065, and DFT1 C5065 cells transfected to overexpress CD200 or CD200R1 with polyclonal anti-CD200 sera and secondary anti-mouse IgG Alexa Fluor 647 (AF647). We detected no surface protein expression of CD200 DFT1 cells overexpressing CD200R1 (Fig. 5E).

In addition to high expression of CD200 on neuroendocrine neoplasms (29), CD200 is used as a diagnostic marker for several human blood cancers (32). DFT cells metastasize in the majority of cases (33), and our transcriptome results (Fig. 5A) suggest that CD200 mRNA is more highly expressed in DFT cells than in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) (25, 26). As a result, we tested whether CD200 could be used to identify DFT cells in blood. We stained PBMCs and DFT2 cells separately with polyclonal anti-CD200 sera and anti-mouse AF647 and then analyzed CD200 expression by flow cytometry (fig. S4A). We then mixed the stained PBMCs and DFT2 cells at ratios of 1:10 (fig. S4A) and 1:5 (fig. S4B) and analyzed the mixed populations. PBMCs showed minimal CD200 expression and background staining (fig. S4), whereas CD200 was highly expressed on DFT2 cells. CD200+ DFT2 cells were readily distinguishable from PBMCs.

As our RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) results only included mononuclear cells, we next performed a pilot test to determine whether DFT cells could be spiked into whole devil blood and identified via flow cytometry using CD200 staining. DFT1 and DFT2 cells were labeled with CellTrace violet (CTV), and 10,000 cells were diluted directly into 100 l of whole blood from a healthy devil (N = 1 per treatment; n = 1 devil). The cells were then stained with purified polyclonal anti-CD200 with and without secondary anti-mouse IgG AF647 before red blood cell (RBC) lysis. Initial results showed that DFT2 cells expressed CD200 above the leukocyte background but that DFT1 cells could not be distinguished from leukocytes (fig. S5). To eliminate the secondary antibody step from the whole blood staining protocol, we next labeled the polyclonal anti-CD200 and normal mouse serum (NMS) with a no-wash Zenon mouse IgG AF647 labeling reagent (n = 1 per treatment; n = 2 devils). This system again showed that CD200 expression could be used to identify DFT2 cells in blood (Fig. 6, A to E), suggesting that CD200 is a candidate marker for identification of metastasizing DFT2 cells.

Color dot plots showing DFT cells in green (CFSE), PBMCs in black, DFT Alexa Fluor 647+ (AF647+) cells in red, and PBMC AF647+ in blue. Forward- and side-scatter plot of DFT2.JV cells alone (A) and DFT2.JV cells mixed with PBMCs (B). (C) Color dot plot showing dead cells stained with 4,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI) (right quadrants) and CFSE-labeled DFT cells (upper quadrants). (D) The top row shows unmixed PBMCs. The middle row and bottom row show PBMCs mixed with DFT1.C5065 (middle) and DFT2.JV (bottom) cells. Cell mixtures were either untreated or incubated with Zenon AF647labeled NMS or Zenon AF647labeled -CD200 serum. AF647+ DFT (red) and PBMC (blue) are in the right quadrants. (E) Histogram overlays to highlight AF647+ (right quadrants) from DFT1-PBMC and DFT2-PBMC mixtures. Cells were analyzed on the Beckman Coulter MoFlo Astrios. (F) FAST nanobody proof of concept was accomplished using supernatant from untransfected ExpiCHO cells or ExpiCHO cells secreting human antiPDL1-mCitrine nanobody. Nanobody supernatant was used undiluted or at 1:10 or 1:100 dilutions in media and used to stain CHO cells that express either human PDL1 or human CD80. Results are representative of N = 2 per treatment.

Last, to test whether the FAST system could be applied to other species (e.g., camelid-derived nanobody) and applications (FAST nanobody), we reverse-translated the protein sequence for an anti-human PDL1 nanobody (24) and inserted the codon-optimized DNA sequence into a FAST mCitrine vector. The assembled plasmid was transfected into ExpiCHO cells, and the supernatant was tested for binding to CHO cells stably transfected with either full-length human PDL1 or human CD80; the human proteins were fused to miRFP670 (Addgene no. 79987) in a FAST vector. The nanobody supernatant was used undiluted or at 1:10 or 1:100 dilutions. The nanobody showed strong binding to PDL1-expressing cells, but not CD80-expressing cells (Fig. 6F).

Naturally occurring cancers provide a unique opportunity to study immune evasion and the metastatic process across diverse hosts and environments. The exceptionally high cancer rate in Tasmanian devils coupled with the two transmissible tumors currently circulating in the wild warrants a thorough investigation of the devil immune system. However, taking advantage of these natural disease models has been out of reach for most species because of a lack of reagents. The FAST protein system that we developed here is well suited to discovering additional DFT markers and, more generally, to filling the reagent gap for nontraditional species. For proteins like 41BB that have high affinity for 41BBL, FAST proteins can be used as detection reagents directly from supernatant. For other molecules with lower receptor-ligand affinity, the FAST proteins can be purified, digested with a protease to remove the nontarget proteins, and used for production of higher-affinity binding proteins (e.g., antibodies, aptamers, and nanobodies).

The versatility of the FAST system was demonstrated by fusing a validated human anti-PDL1 nanobody derived from a camel (Camelus bactrianus) heavy-chain variable region to mCitrine. The nanobody-reporter fusion allowed direct testing of the nanobody from supernatant without the need for purification or secondary labeling and provided a 1:1 ratio of nanobody and reporter to allow quantification of target proteins. In addition to fusing nanobodies to fluorescent proteins, fluorescently labeled target proteins could be used with nanobody display libraries to pull down or sort nanobodies that bind the target protein.

The simple cut-and-paste methods for vector assembly lend the FAST protein system to entry-level immunology and molecular biology skill sets. In addition, the ability of FAST proteins to be used in live coculture assays and with elimination of secondary reagents will increase efficiency and reduce experimental error for advanced human and mouse cancer immunology studies. For example, previous high-throughput studies have used a two-step staining process (i.e., recombinant protein and secondary antibody) to screen more than 2000 protein interactions (34); this type of assay can be streamlined using FAST proteins to eliminate the need for secondary antibodies. Fc tags or other homodimerization domains can be incorporated into FAST proteins to increase binding for low-affinity interactions and to assess potential Fc receptormediated functions.

Production of recombinant proteins in cell lines that closely resemble the physiological conditions of the native cell type (i.e., mammalian proteins produced in mammalian cell lines) is more likely to yield correct protein folding, glycosylation, and function than proteins produced using evolutionarily distant cell lines. The fluorescent fusion proteins developed here take advantage of natural receptor expression and cycling processes (e.g., CTLA4 transendocytosis) in eukaryotic target cells; bacterial protein production methods are not amenable to coculture with eukaryotic target cells in immunological assays. Our demonstration of the FAST protein system in CHO cells suggest that this method can be efficiently integrated into existing research and development pipelines for humans and other vertebrate species.

A primary question in transmissible tumor research is why genetically mismatched cells are not rejected by the host. Successful infection of devils with DFT cells relies on the ability of the tumor allograft to evade and manipulate host defenses. The missing-self hypothesis suggests that the lack of constitutive MHC-I expression on DFT1 cells should lead to natural killer (NK) cellmediated killing of the allograft tumor cells. Here, we used the FAST protein system to develop a tool set to address this question and show that DFT1 and DFT2 cells express CD200 at higher levels than most other devil tissues examined to date. CD200 has been shown to directly inhibit NK cells in other species (35), so overexpression of CD200 is a potential mechanism of immune evasion of NK responses by DFT cells.

We hypothesize that CD200 could be particularly important in DFT transmission as the CD200-CD200R pathway is critical to the initial stages of establishing transplant and allograft tolerance in other species (36). In line with this hypothesis, a recent study reported that overexpressing several checkpoint molecules, including CD200, PDL1, and CD47, in mouse embryonic stem cells could be used to generate teratomas that could establish long-term allograft tolerance in fully immunocompetent hosts (37). We have previously reported that PDL1 mRNA and protein are up-regulated on DFT2 cells in response to IFN- (17), and our transcriptome results show that CD47 is expressed at moderate to high levels in DFT cells. Here, we show that overexpression of CD200R1 on DFT1 eliminates binding of our polyclonal anti-CD200 antibodies, suggesting that DFT cells overexpressing CD200R1 could be used to test the role of CD200 in allograft tolerance. Alternatively, genetic ablation of CD200 in DFT cells could be used as a complementary approach to examine the role of immune checkpoint molecules in DFT allograft tolerance. Low MHC-I expression is a primary means of immune evasion by DFT1 cells, and disrupting the CD200-CD200R1 pathway could facilitate improved recognition of DFT1 cells by CD8 T cells by enhancing IFN-mediated MHC-I up-regulation. Recent work in mice has identified immunosuppressive natural regulatory plasma cells that express CD200, LAG3, PDL1, and PDL2; we have previously identified PDL1+ cells with plasma cell morphology near or within the DFT microenvironment (17).

Previous DFT vaccine efforts have used killed DFT cells with adjuvants (38, 39). A similar approach to treat gliomas in dogs reported that tumor lysate with CD200 peptides nearly doubled progression-free survival compared to tumor lysate alone (40). Like devils, several breeds of dog are prone to cancer, and these genetically outbred large animal models provide a fertile ground for testing cancer therapies. The CD200 peptides are reported to provide agonistic function through CD200-like activation receptors (CD200R4) rather than by blocking CD200R1 (40). The functional role of CD200-CD200R pathway in devils remains to be elucidated, but the CD200R1NPLY inhibitory motif and key tyrosine residues are conserved in devil CD200R (19, 41, 42), demonstrating that this motif is conserved over 160 million years of evolutionary history (43). In addition to agonistic peptides, several other options for countering CD200-CD200R immune inhibition are possible. Human chronic lymphocytic leukemia cells often express high levels of CD200, which can be down-regulated in response to imiquimod (44). Likewise, we have previously shown that DFT1 cells down-regulate expression of CD200 mRNA in vitro in response to imiquimod treatment (25). In one of the longest running and most in-depth studies of host-pathogen coevolution, CD200R was shown to be under selection in rabbits in response to a myxoma virus biocontrol agent (45). As DFT1 and DFT2 have been circulating in devils for more than 20 and 5 years, respectively, it will be important to monitor CD200/R expression and the potential evolution of paired activating and inhibitory receptors in these natural disease models.

Immunophenotyping and single-cell RNA-seq of CTCs have a potential to identify key gene expression patterns associated with metastasis and tissue invasion. CD200 is a potential marker for the identification of CTCs from devil blood. As proof of concept, DFT2 cells could be identified in devil blood spiked with DFT2 cells. As CTCs are likely to be rare in the blood of most infected devils, CD200 alone would be insufficient for identifying DFT1 cells. Additional surface DFT markers would be required to purify CTCs for metastases and tissue invasion analyses. The FAST protein system provides a simple procedure to facilitate the production of a panel of DFT markers to help identify key proteins in the metastatic process.

In summary, the simple cut-and-paste production of the vectors and single-step testing pipeline of the FAST system provided multiple benefits. The FAST system allowed us to characterize receptor-ligand interactions and to identify evolutionarily conserved immune evasion pathways in naturally occurring transmissible cancers. Our initial implementation of the system confirmed numerous predicted protein interactions in a marsupial species and documented high expression of the inhibitory molecule CD200 on DFT cells. The high expression of CD200 in devil nervous tissues and neuroendocrine tumors, down-regulation of CD200 in response to imiquimod, and binding of CD200 to CD200R1 are consistent with results from human and mouse studies. Consequently, the CD200/R pathway provides a promising immunotherapy and vaccine target for DFTs (20). Beyond this study, FAST proteins meet the key attributes needed for reagent development, such as being straightforward to make, stable, versatile, renewable, cheap, and amenable to high-throughput testing. The direct fusion of the reporter protein to the protein of interest allows for immediate feedback during transfection, supernatant testing, and protein purification; proteins with frameshifts, introduced stop codons, or folded improperly will not fluoresce and can be discarded after a simple visualization, rather than only after extensive downstream testing. Efficient mapping of immune checkpoint interactions across species can identify evolutionarily conserved immune evasion pathways and appropriate large-animal models with naturally occurring cancer. This knowledge could inform veterinary and human medicine in the fields of immunological tolerance to tissue transplants, infectious disease, and cancer.

The objectives of this study were to fill a major gap in our understanding of the mammalian immune system and to understand how genetically mismatched transmissible tumors evade host immunity. To achieve this goal, we developed a recombinant protein system that directly fuses proteins of interest to a fluorescent reporter protein. The first phase was to determine whether the fluorescent protein remained fluorescent after secretion from mammalian cells and to confirm that proteins bound to their predicted receptors (i.e., ligands). Initial testing was performed in CHO cells and follow-up assays used devil cells. To reduce the risk of false positives in binding assays, we tested each FAST protein against the expected target protein and additional nontarget proteins. To further demonstrate the functionality of this system for antibody development, mice were immunized with either 41BB or CD200 proteins. Pre- and postimmunization polyclonal sera were used to confirm that the proteins used for immunization induced antibodies that specifically bound to surface-expressed recombinant proteins and native proteins on DFT cells. Last, to demonstrate the flexibility of the system, we replicated a known anti-human PDL1 nanobody that we fused to mCitrine. This shows that the FAST system can be used to target human proteins, to produce recombinant proteins derived from other species (e.g., camelid-derived nanobody), and for functions other than receptor-ligand interactions.

Target gene DNA sequences for vector construction were retrieved from Genbank, Ensembl, or de novo transcriptome assemblies (table S2). Target DNA was amplified from a complementary DNA template or existing plasmids using primers and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) conditions shown in tables S2 and S4 using Q5 High-Fidelity 2X Master Mix (New England Biolabs no. M0494L). Primers were ordered with 5 base extensions that overlapped expression vectors on either side of the restriction sites. The amplified products were identified by gel electrophoresis and purified using the NucleoSpin PCR and Gel Clean Up Kit (Macherey-Nagel no. 740609.5). Alternatively, DNA sequences were purchased as double-stranded DNA gBlocks (table S5) (Integrated DNA Technologies) for direct assembly into expression vectors.

All new plasmids were assembled using the NEBuilder kit (New England Biolabs; NEB no. E5520S) following the manufacturers recommendations unless otherwise noted. DNA inserts, digested plasmids, and NEBuilder master mix were incubated for 60 min at 50C and then transformed into DH5 included with the NEBuilder kit. Plasmid digestions were performed following manufacturer recommendations and generally subjected to Antarctic phosphatase (New England Biolabs no. M0289S) treatment to prevent potential reannealing. Sleeping Beauty transposon vectors pSBbi-Hyg (Addgene no. 60524), pSBbi-BH (Addgene no. 60515), pSBtet-Hyg (Addgene no. 60508), and pSBtet-RH (Addgene no. 60500) were gifts to Addgene from E. Kowarz (46). The pCMV(CAT)T7-SB100 containing the cytomegalovirus (CMV) promoter and SB100X transposase was a gift to Addgene from Z. Izsvak (Addgene no. 34879) (47). We first constructed an all-in-one Sleeping Beauty vector by inserting a CMV promoter and SB100X transposase from pCMV(CAT)T7-SB100 (47) into pSBi-BH (46) (tables S3 and S4). This was accomplished by using pAF111-vec.FOR and pAF111.1.REV primers to amplify an overlap region from pSBbi-BH (insert 1) and pAF111-2.FOR and pAF111-2.REV to amplify the CMV-SB100X region from pCMV(CAT)T7-SB100 (insert 2). The purified amplicons were then used for NEBuilder assembly of pAF111. The final all-in-one vectors pAF112 (hygromycin resistance and luciferase) and pAF123 (hygromycin resistance) were assembled from the pAF111 components. pAF112 was assembled by amplifying the Luc2 luciferase gene (insert 1) from pSBtet-Hyg and the P2A-hygromycin resistance gene (insert 2) from pSBbi-BH and inserting into the pAF111 Bsu36 I digest using NEBuilder. pSBbi-Hyg was Bsu36 Idigested to obtain the hygromycin resistance gene, and this fragment was inserted into Bsu36 Idigested pAF111 using T4 ligase cloning to replace the BFP-P2A-hygromycin segment in pAF111.

All full-length gene coding sequences except CTLA4 were cloned into the pAF112 Sfi I digest (table S2). All full-length vectors also contain luciferase with T2A peptide linked to the hygromycin resistance protein; luciferase was included for use in downstream functional testing that was not part of this study. Tasmanian devil CTLA4 was cloned into a NotI-HF and Xma I digest of pAF100 that was used in a different study but is derived from vectors pAF112 and pAF138. In addition, we also used devil PDL1 (CHO.pAF48) and 41BBL (CHO.pAF56) cell lines developed using a vector system described previously (17).

Plasmids containing fluorescent protein coding sequences mCerulean3-N1 (Addgene no. 54730), mAzurite-N1 (Addgene no. 54617), mOrange-N1 (Addgene no. 54499), and mNeptune2-N1 (Addgene no. 54837) were gifts to Addgene from M. Davidson. mTag-BFP was amplified from pSBbi-BH, mCitrine was amplified from pAF71, and mCherry was amplified from pTRE-Dual2 (Clontech no. PT5038-5). pAF137 was constructed by amplifying the devil 41BB extracellular domain with primers pAF137-1.FOR and pAF137-1.REV and amplifying mCherry with pAF137-2a.FOR and pAF137-2.REV (tables S3 and S4). 5 extensions on pAF137-1.FOR and pAF137-2.REV were used to create overlaps for NEBuilder assembly of pAF137 from a pAF123 Sfi Idigested base vector. 3 extensions on pAF137-1.REV and pAF137-2a.FOR were used to create the linker that included an Xma I/Sma I restriction site, TEV cleavage tag, GSAGSAAGSGEF linker peptide, and 6xHis tag between the gene of interest and fluorescent reporter. The GSAGSAAGSGEF was chosen because of the low number of large hydrophobic residues and less repeated nucleic acids than are needed with other flexible linkers such as (GGGS)4. The pAF137 primer extensions also created 5 Not I and 3 Nhe I sites in the FAST vector to facilitate downstream swapping of functional genes and to create a Kozak sequence (GCCGCCACC) upstream of the FAST protein open-reading frame. Following confirmation of correct assembly via DNA sequencing, the FAST 41BB-mCherry (pAF137) was digested and used as the base vector (Fig. 2B and fig. S1, A and B) for development of FAST vectors with alternative fluorescent proteins. This was accomplished by digestion of pAF137 with Sal I and Nhe I and then inserting PCR-amplified coding sequences for other fluorescent proteins using NEBuilder (tables S3 and S4).

Type I FAST (extracellular N terminus and cytoplasmic C terminus) protein vectors were constructed by digestion of 41BB FAST vectors with Not I and either Xma I or Sma I (Fig. 2B and fig. S1, A and B) and then inserting genes of interest (tables S2 to S4). To create an Fc-tagged FAST protein, we fused the extracellular domain of devil CD80 to the Fc region of the devil IgG (fig. S1C). The Fc region was amplified from a devil IgG plasmid provided by L. Corcoran (Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research). All secreted FAST proteins in this study used their native signal peptides, except for 41BBL. 41BBL is a type II transmembrane protein in which the signal peptide directly precedes the cytoplasmic and transmembrane domains of the protein (cytoplasmic N terminus and extracellular C terminus). As type I FAST vectors cannot accommodate this domain architecture, we developed an alternative base vector for type II transmembrane FAST proteins (fig. S1D). To increase the probability of efficient secretion of type II FAST proteins from CHO cells, we used the hamster interleukin-2 (IL-2) signal peptide (accession no. NM_001281629.1) at the N terminus of the protein, followed by a Sal I restriction site, mCherry, an Nhe I restriction site, 6xHis tag, GSAGSAAGSGEF linker, TEV cleavage site, Xma I/Sma I restriction site, the gene of interest, and a Pme I restriction site following the stop codon.

Following transformation of assembled plasmids, colony PCR was performed as an initial test of the candidate plasmids. Single colonies were inoculated directly into a OneTaq Hot Start Quick-Load 2X Master Mix (NEB no. M0488) with primers pSB_EF1a_seq.FOR (atcttggttcattctcaagcctcag) and pSB_bGH_seq.REV (aggcacagtcgaggctgat). PCR was performed with 60C annealing temperature for 25 to 35 cycles. Colonies yielding appropriate band sizes were used to inoculate Luria broth with ampicillin (100 g/ml) for bacterial outgrowth overnight at 37C and 200 rpm. The plasmids were purified using standard plasmid kits and prepared for Sanger sequencing using the BigDye Terminator v3.1 Cycle Sequencing Kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific no. 4337455) with pSB_EF1a_seq.FOR and pSB_bGH_seq.REV primers. The BigDye Terminator was removed using Agencourt CleanSEQ (Beckman Coulter no. A29151) before loading samples to a 3500xL Genetic Analyzer (Applied Biosystems) for sequencing by fluorescence-based capillary electrophoresis.

DFT1 cell line C5065 and DFT2 cell line JV were cultured at 35C with 5% CO2 in cRF10 [10% complete RPMI (Gibco no. 11875-093) with 2 mM l-glutamine, supplemented with 10% heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum, and 1% antibiotic-antimycotic (Thermo Fisher Scientific no. 15240062)]. RPMI without phenol red (Sigma-Aldrich no. R7509) was used to culture FAST protein cell lines when supernatants were collected for downstream flow cytometry assays. Devil peripheral blood cells were cultured in cRF10 at 35C with 5% CO2. CHO cells were cultured at 37C in cRF10 during transfections and drug selection but were otherwise cultured at 35C in cRF5 (5% complete RPMI). For production of purified recombinant proteins, stably transfected CHO cells were cultured in suspension in spinner flasks in chemically defined, serum-free CHO EX-CELL (Sigma-Aldrich no. 14361C) media supplemented with 8 mM l-glutamine, 10 mM Hepes, 50 M 2-ME, 1% (v/v) antibiotic-antimycotic, and 1 mM sodium pyruvate and without hygromycin.

Stable transfections of CHO and DFT cells were accomplished by adding 3 105 cells to each well in six-well plates in cRF10 and allowing the cells to adhere overnight. The next day, 2 g of plasmid DNA was added to 100 l of phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) in microfuge tubes. Polyethylenimine (PEI) (linear, molecular weight, 25,000; Polysciences no. 23966-2) was diluted to 60 g/ml in PBS and incubated for at least 2 min. The PEI solution (100 l) was added to the 100 l of plasmid DNA in each tube to achieve a 3:1 ratio of PEI:DNA. The solution was mixed by gentle pipetting and incubated at room temperature for 15 min. While the solution was incubating, the media on the CHO cells were replaced with fresh cRF10. All 200 l from each DNA:PEI mix was then added dropwise to the CHO cells and gently rocked side to side and front to back to evenly spread the solution throughout the well. The plates were then incubated overnight at 37C with 5% CO2. The next day, the plates were inspected for fluorescence, and then the media were removed and replaced with cRF10 containing hygromycin (1 mg/ml) (Sigma-Aldrich no. H0654). The media were replaced with fresh cRF10 hygromycin (1 mg/ml) every 2 to 3 days for the next 7 days until selection was complete. The cells were then maintained in hygromycin (0.2 mg/ml) in cRF5 at 35C with 5% CO2. Supernatant was collected 2 to 3 weeks after transfection and stored at 4C for 2 months to assess stability of secreted FAST proteins.

Sixteen days after transfection, the first batch of FAST protein cell lines was adapted to a 1:1 mix of cRF5 and chemically defined, serum-free CHO EX-CELL media for 1 to 2 days to facilitate adaptation of the adherent CHO cells to suspension culture in serum-free media. At least 5 107 cells were then transferred to ProCulture spinner flasks (Sigma-Aldrich no. CLS45001L and no. CLS4500250) and stirred at 75 rpm at 35C in 5% CO2 on magnetic stirring platforms (Integra Bioscience no. 183001). Cells were maintained at a density ranging from 5 105 to 2 106 cells/ml for 8 to 14 days. Supernatant was collected every 2 to 3 days, centrifuged at 3200 relative centrifugal force (RCF) for 10 min, stored at 4C, and then purified using the KTA start protein purification system (GE Life Sciences no. 29022094). The supernatant was diluted 1:1 with 20 mM sodium phosphate (pH 7.4) and then purified using HisTrap Excel columns (GE Life Sciences no. 17-3712-05) according to the manufacturers instructions. Samples were passed through the columns using a flow rate of 2 ml/min at 4C; all wash and elution steps were done at 1 ml/min. Elution from HisTrap columns (GE Life Sciences no. 17-3712-05) was accomplished using 0.5 M imidazole and fractionated into 1-ml aliquots using the Frac30 fraction collector (GE Life Sciences no. 29023051). Fluorescence of FAST proteins was checked via brief excitation (Fig. 2) on a blue light transilluminator with an amber filter unit. In the case of mCherry, chromogenic color was visible without excitation. Fractions containing target proteins were combined and diluted to 15 ml with cold PBS, dialyzed (Sigma-Aldrich no. PURX60005) in PBS at 4C, 0.22-m sterile-filtered (Millipore no. SLGV033RS), and concentrated using Amicon Ultra centrifugal filter units (Sigma-Aldrich no. Z706345). The protein concentration was quantified using the 280-nm absorbance on a NanoDrop spectrophotometer. Extinction coefficients using for each protein were calculated using the ProtParam algorithm (48). The proteins were then aliquoted into microfuge tubes and frozen at 80C until further use. The CTLA4-Fc-mCherry protein was designed, assembled, and tested separately from the other FAST proteins and was tested directly in supernatant without purification.

CHO cells expressing full-length proteins were thawed in cRF10 and then maintained in cRF5 with hygromycin (0.2 mg/ml). The adherent CHO cells were washed with PBS and incubated with trypsin for 5 min at 37C to remove cells from the culture flask. Trypsin was diluted five times with cRF5 and centrifuged at 200 RCF for 5 min. Cells were resuspended in cRF5, counted (viability >95% in all cases), and resuspended and aliquoted for assays as described below.

Supernatants (cRF5) were collected from CHO cells expressing devil 41BB extracellular domain fused to either mCherry (pAF137), mCitrine (pAF138), mOrange (pAF164), mBFP (pAF139), mAzurite (pAF160), mCerulean3 (pAF161), or mNeptune2 (pAF163) (tables S2 to S4). The supernatant was spun for 10 min at 3200 RCF to remove cells and cellular debris and then stored at 4C until further use. CHO cells expressing devil 41BBL (CHO.pAF56) and untransfected CHO cells were prepared as described above. Flow cytometry tubes were loaded with 5 104 target CHO cells per well in cRF5, centrifuged 500 RCF for 3 min, and then resuspended in 200 l of supernatant from the 41BB FAST cell lines (N = 1 per treatment). The tubes were then incubated for 15 min at 4C, centrifuged at 500 RCF for 3 min, resuspended in 400 l of cold fluorescence-activated cell sorting (FACS) buffer, and stored on ice until the data were acquired on a Beckman Coulter Astrios flow cytometer (Fig. 2C). All flow cytometry data were analyzed using FCS Express 6 Flow Cytometry Software version 6 (De Novo Software).

U-bottom 96-well plates were loaded with 1 105 target CHO cells per well in cRF5, centrifuged 500 RCF for 3 min, and then resuspended in 175 l of cRF5 supernatant from FAST cell lines collected 11 days after transfection (N = 1 per treatment). The plates were then incubated for 30 min at room temperature, centrifuged at 500 RCF for 3 min, resuspended in 200 l of cold FACS buffer, centrifuged again, and fixed with FACS fix buffer [PBS, 0.02% NaN3, 0.4% formalin, glucose (10 g/liter)]. The cells were transferred to tubes, diluted with FACS buffer, and analyzed on a Beckman Coulter Astrios flow cytometer (fig. S2).

Purified FAST proteins were diluted to 20 g/ml in cRF5, aliquoted into V-bottom 96-well transfer plates, and then stored at 37C until target cells were ready for staining. Target cells were resuspended in cRF5 with 100 M chloroquine, and 100,000 cells per well were aliquoted into U-bottom 96-well plates. One hundred microliters of the diluted FAST proteins (N = 1 per treatment, two time points per treatment) was then transferred from the V-bottom plates into the U-bottom 96-well plates containing target cells. The final volumes and concentrations were 200 l per well in cRF5 with 50 M chloroquine and 2 g per well of FAST proteins. One set of plates was incubated at 37C for 30 min, and another set of plates was incubated at 37C overnight. The cells were then centrifuged 500 RCF for 3 min, the media decanted, and incubated for 5 min with 100 l of trypsin to dislodge adherent cells. The cells were then washed with 200 l of cold FACS buffer, fixed, resuspended in cold FACS buffer, and transferred to tubes for analysis on the Astrios flow cytometer (Fig. 3B).

The protocol for using FAST protein supernatants was the same above as the preceding experiment except for the modifications described here. Supernatants were collected 2 to 3 weeks after transfection, centrifuged at 3200 RCF for 10 min, and stored at 4C for 2 months. Before staining for flow cytometry, the supernatant was 0.22-m filtered. Supernatant was then loaded into V-bottom 96-well plates to facilitate rapid transfer to staining plates and stored at 37C until target cells were ready for staining. Target cells were prepared as described above except for being diluted in cRF5 with 100 M chloroquine. A total of 2 105 cells per well (100 l) were then loaded into U-bottom 96-well plates. One hundred microliters of FAST protein supernatant (N = 1 per treatment) was then transferred from the V-bottom plates to achieve 50 M chloroquine, and the cells were then incubated at 37C for 60 min. The plates were then washed, fixed, and analyzed on the Astrios flow cytometer (fig. S3). A similar procedure was used for staining stably transfected DFT cells with CTLA4-Fc-mCherry, except that the supernatant was used fresh (Fig. 4D).

CHO cells expressing full-length CTLA4 with a C-terminal mCitrine and CHO cells expressing full-length 41BB or 41BBL were labeled with 5 M CFSE; CFSE and mCitrine were analyzed using the same excitation laser (488 nm) and emission filters (513/26 nm). A total of 1 105 FAST proteinsecreting cells were mixed with 1 105 target cells in cRF5 with 50 M chloroquine and incubated overnight at 37C in 96-well U-bottom plates (Fig. 4A). The next day, the cells were rinsed with PBS, trypsinized, washed, fixed, and resuspended in FACS buffer before running flow cytometry. Cells were gated on forward and side scatter (FSC SSC) and for singlets (FSC-H FSC-A) (Fig. 4B). Data shown in Fig. 4C are representative of N = 3 technical replicates per treatment. Data were collected using a Beckman Coulter MoFlo Astrios and analyzed using FCS Express.

RNA-seq data were generated during previous experiments, aligned against the reference Tasmanian devil genome Devil_ref v7.0 (GCA_000189315.1), and summarized into normalized read counts as previously described (25, 26). Transcripts per millionnormalized read counts were calculated in R, and a heat map was produced from log2-converted values using the heatmap.2 function of gplots.

A total of 50,000 DFT cells per well were aliquoted into U-bottom 96-well plates, washed with 150 l of cRF10, and resuspended in 100 l of warm cRF10 containing 100 M chloroquine. Five micrograms of FAST protein per well was then added and mixed by pipetting. The plates were then incubated at 37C for 30 min. The cells were then transferred to microfuge tubes without washing, stored on ice, and analyzed on a Beckman Coulter MoFlo Astrios (N = 2 per treatment).

CD200 and 41BB FAST proteins were digested overnight with TEV protease (Sigma-Aldrich no. T4455) at 4C in PBS. The cleaved linker and 6xHis tag were then removed using a His SpinTrap kit (GE Healthcare no. 28-9321-71). Digested proteins in PBS were diluted 1:1 in Squalvax (OZ Biosciences no. SQ0010) to a final concentration of 0.1 g/l and were mixed using interlocked syringes to form an emulsion. Immunization of BALB/c mice for antibody production was approved by the University of Tasmania Animal Ethics Committee (no. A0014680). Preimmune sera were collected before subcutaneous immunization with at least 50 l of the emulsion. On day 14 after immunization, the mice were boosted using a similar procedure. On day 50, the mice received a booster with proteins in IFAVax (OZ Biosciences no. IFA0050); mice immunized with CD200 again received subcutaneous injections, whereas 41BB mice received subcutaneous and intraperitoneal injections. Preimmune and sera collected after three-times immunizations were then tested by flow cytometry against CHO cells expressing either 41BB or CD200. CHO cells were prepared as described above, and 2 105 cells were incubated with mouse serum diluted 1:200 in PBS for 30 min at 4C. The cells were then washed two times and stained with 50 l of anti-mouse IgG AF647 diluted 1:1000 in FACS buffer. The cells were then washed two times, stained with 4,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI) to identify live cells, and analyzed on a CyAn ADP flow cytometer (Fig. 5C). CD200 and 41BB expression on DFT cells was tested using a procedure similar to the CHO cell staining, except that the sera used were collected after four-times immunizations and was diluted 1:500 and analyzed on the BD FACSCanto II (Fig. 5D).

Approximately, 200 l of NMS or anti-CD200 serum day 157 (after four-times immunizations) was purified using an Ab SpinTrap (GE Healthcare no. 28-4083-47) according to the manufacturers instructions. Serum was diluted 1:1 with 20 mM sodium phosphate and binding buffer (pH 7.0) and eluted with 0.1 M glycine-HCl (pH 2.7), and the pH was neutralized with 0.1 M glycine-HCl (pH 2.7). The eluted antibodies were then concentrated using an Amicon Ultra 0.5 centrifugal unit (Merck no. UFC500308) by centrifuging at 14,000 RCF for 30 min at 4C and then washing the antibodies with 400 l of PBS twice. The protein concentration was then quantified on a NanoDrop spectrophotometer at 280 nm using the extinction coefficients for IgG.

A total of 50,000 DFT cells per well were aliquoted into U-bottom 96-well plates and washed with 200 l of cold FACS buffer. Purified polyclonal anti-CD200 was diluted to 2.5 g/ml in cold FACS buffer, and the cells in appropriate wells were resuspend in 100 l per well (0.25 g per well) diluted antibody; wells that did not receive antibody were resuspended in 100 l of FACS buffer. The cells were incubated on ice for 20 min and then washed with 200 l of FACS buffer. While incubating, anti-mouse IgG AF647 was diluted to 1 g/ml in cold FACS buffer and then used to resuspend cells in the appropriate wells. The plates were incubated on ice for 20 min and then washed with 100 l of cold FACS buffer. The cells were then resuspended in 200 l of FACS fix and incubated on a rocking platform at room temperature for 15 min. The cells were then centrifuged 500 RCF for 3 min at 4C, resuspended in 200 l of FACS buffer, and stored at 4C until they were analyzed on a FACSCanto II (N = 2 per treatment) (Fig. 5E).

Blood collection from Tasmanian devils was approved by the University of Tasmania Animal Ethics Committee (permit no. A0014599) and the Tasmanian Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment. Blood was collected from the jugular vein and stored in EDTA tubes for transport to the laboratory. Blood was processed within 3 hours by diluting 1:1 with serum-free RPMI and then layering onto Histopaque (Sigma-Aldrich no. 10771) before centrifuging at 400 RCF for 30 min. The interface containing the PBMCs was then collected using a transfer pipette, diluted with 50 ml of serum-free RPMI, and centrifuged for 5 min at 500 RCF. Cells were washed with again with cRF10 and then either used fresh or stored at 80C until further use.

Frozen devil PBMC was thawed and cultured in cRF10 at 35C with 5% CO2 for 2 hours; cells were then washed in FACS buffer and counted, and 3 105 PBMCs were used per sample. DFT2.JV cells were removed from culture flasks and counted, and 2 105 cells were used per sample. Samples were incubated with 50 l of normal goat serum (Thermo Fisher Scientific, catalog no. 01-6201) diluted 1:200 in FACS buffer for 15 min at 4C, and 50 l of anti-CD200 serum diluted 1:100 was added (1:200 final) for 30 min at 4C. Cells were then washed two times and stained with 50 l of anti-mouse IgG AF647 diluted to 1 g/ml in FACS buffer for 30 min at 4C. The cells were then washed two times, stained with DAPI (Sigma-Aldrich, catalog no. D9542) to identify live cells, and analyzed on the BD FACSCanto II. PBMC and DFT cells were run separately, and then PBMC and DFT2 were mixed at a ratio of 10:1 by volume for the combined samples (N = 1 per treatment) (fig. S4A). The experiment was repeated (N = 1 per treatment), except that PBMCs and DFT cells were mixed at a 5:1 ratio (fig. S4B).

DFT1.C5065 and DFT2.JV cells were labeled with 5 M CTV and cultured for 3 days at 37C. On the day of the assays, peripheral blood from one devil was collected and stored at ambient temperature for less than 3 hours. One hundred microliters of whole blood was aliquoted into 15-ml tubes and stored at ambient temperature while DFT cells were prepared. The media on CTV-labeled DFT cells were decanted, and the cells were detached from the flask by incubating in 2.5 ml of TrypLE Select for 5 min at 37C. The cells were washed with cRF10, resuspended in cRF10, and counted. DFT cells were then diluted to 1 104 cells/ml in cRF10, and 100 l was aliquoted into appropriate 15-ml tubes containing 100 l of whole blood. One microliter of purified anti-CD200 (0.5 g per tube) was diluted into the appropriate tubes and incubated for 15 min at ambient temperature. Next, anti-mouse IgG AF647 (0.5 g per tube) was added to each tube. Note: 0.5 l (0.5 g) of concentrated secondary antibody was accidentally added directly to the tube for the data shown in the top row, middle column of fig. S5A; for all other tubes, the secondary antibody was diluted 1:20 in PBS and 10 l was added to each tube. The cells were then incubated for 15 min at ambient temperature. The cells were then diluted in 1 ml of ammonium chloride RBC lysis buffer [150 mM NH4Cl, 10 mM KHCO3, and 0.1 mM EDTA disodium (Na2-2H2O)] and mixed immediately gently pipetting five times. The cells were incubated at ambient temperature for 10 min, then diluted with 5 ml of PBS, and centrifuged 500 RCF for 3 min. Some tubes contained residual RBCs, so the pellet was vigorously resuspended in 5 ml of RBC lysis buffer, incubated for 5 min, diluted with 5 ml of cold FACS buffer, and centrifuged 500 RCF for 3 min. The cells were then resuspended in 250 l of FACS buffer and stored on ice until analysis on a Beckman Coulter MoFlo Astrios (N = 1 per treatment). Data were analyzed in FCS Express version 6 (fig. S5).

The experiment above was repeated with the following modifications. DFT cells were labeled with 5 M CFSE and incubated for 2 days at 37C. On the day of the assays, fresh blood was collected from two devils. Purified anti-CD200 and NMS were labeled with Zenon mouse IgG AF647 (Thermo Fisher Scientific no. Z25008) and blocked with the Zenon blocking agent. A total of 1 104 CFSE-labeled DFT cells were diluted directly into 100 l of whole blood in 15-ml tubes, and 12 l (2-l antibody, 5-l labeling agent, and 5-l blocking agent) of Zenon AF647labeled purified NMS or anti-CD200 was added directly to the cells. The cells were incubated for 30 min at ambient temperature. The cells were then gently resuspended in 2.5 ml of RBC lysis buffer and incubated for 10 min at ambient temperature. The cells were diluted with 10 ml of PBS and centrifuged 500 RCF for 3 min. The cells were resuspended in 1.5 ml of RBC lysis buffer and incubated for another 10 min to lyse residual RBCs. The tubes were then resuspended in 9 ml of cRF10 and centrifuged 500 RCF for 3 min. The cells were resuspended in 350 l of cold FACS buffer containing DAPI (200 ng/ml) and stored on ice until analysis on a Beckman Coulter MoFlo Astrios (N = 1 per treatment for n = 2 devils) (Fig. 6, A to D).

The anti-human PD-L1 nanobody (KN035) (24) protein sequence was reverse-translated and as a double-stranded DNA gBlock (Integrated DNA Technologies) (table S5). The sequence was modified to include DNA extension that overlaps FAST vectors. The signal peptide from hamster IL-2 (also in pAF92) was added to the nanobody to increase secretion efficiency in CHO cells. The gBlock was inserted into a NotI-HF and Sma Idigested mCitrine FAST vector with NEB HiFi DNA Assembly Master Mix (NEB no. E2621). Transformation, purification of plasmid DNA, and sequencing were performed as described above.

ExpiCHO cells (Thermo Fisher Scientific no. A29127) for high-yield protein production were maintained at 37C with 8% CO2 with constant shaking at 200 rpm in ExpiCHO Stable Production Medium (SPM) (Thermo Fisher Scientific no. A3711001). ExpiCHO cells were added to a six-well plate at 3 105 cells per well in ExpiCHO SPM and cultured overnight. The next day, 2-g plasmid DNA was added to 100 l of PBS in a microcentrifuge tube. PEI was diluted to 60 g/ml in PBS and incubated at room temperature for 5 min. Diluted plasmid DNA was added to 100 l of PEI solution to achieve a 3:1 PEI:DNA ratio and incubated at room temperature for 15 min. During this time, ExpiCHO cells were transferred to 15-ml centrifuge tubes, washed with PBS at 300g for min, resuspended in 3-ml OptiPRO serum-free media (Thermo Fisher Scientific no. 12309019), and returned to the six-well plate. The PEI:DNA solution was then added directly to cells and incubated overnight. The next day, plates were inspected for fluorescence, and the media were removed and replaced with ExpiCHO SPM supplemented with hygromycin (1 mg/ml). Media were changed every second day until selection was complete. Once selection was complete, the cells were moved to 50-ml TPP TubeSpin bioreactor tubes (Sigma-Aldrich no. Z761028) and maintained at 4 106 to 6 106 cells/ml in ExpiCHO SPM with hygromycin (0.2 mg/ml). Supernatant was collected 2 weeks after transfection and stored at 4C.

CHO cells expressing either human PD-L1 or human CD80 fused to miRFP670 (table S3) were plated at 100,000 cells per well into a U-bottom 96-well plate and centrifuged at 300g for 5 min, and the supernatant was discarded. Two hundredmicroliter supernatant containing secreted PD-L1 nanobody was added to CHO cell lines either neat or diluted in 1:10 and 1:100 in FACS buffer. Cells were incubated at 4C for 30 min before being washed in FACS buffer for analysis on a Beckman Coulter FACSCanto II (Fig. 6F).

N. Howlader, A. M. Noone, M. Krapcho, D. Miller, A. Brest, M. Yu, J. Ruhl, Z. Tatalovich, A. Mariotto, D. R. Lewis, H. S. Feuer, K. A. Cronin, SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 19752016 (National Cancer Institute, 2016).

E. Gasteiger, C. Hoogland, A. Gattiker, S. Duvaud, M. R. Wilkins, R. D. Appel, A. Bairoch, in The Proteomics Protocols Handbook, J. M. Walker, Ed. (Humana Press, ed. 1, 2005), pp. 571607.

View original post here:
A novel system to map protein interactions reveals evolutionarily conserved immune evasion pathways on transmissible cancers - Science Advances

Trending News: Covid-19 Impact On Stem Cell Therapy Market Growth Prospects Analysis And Future Strategic Planning By 2025 | Osiris Therapeutics,…

Stem Cell Therapy Market 2020: LatestAnalysis

Chicago, United States The Stem Cell Therapy market report [5 Years Forecast 2020-2025] focuses on the COVID19 Outbreak Impact analysis of key points influencing the growth of the market. Providing info like market competitive situation, product scope, market overview, opportunities, driving force and market risks. Profile the Top Key Players of Stem Cell Therapy, with sales, revenue and global market share of Stem Cell Therapy are analyzed emphatically by landscape contrast and speak to info. Upstream raw materials and instrumentation and downstream demand analysis is additionally administrated. The Stem Cell Therapy market business development trends and selling channels square measure analyzed. From a global perspective, It also represents overall industry size by analyzing qualitative insights and historical data.

The Global Stem Cell Therapy Market report briefs on the existing competitors and major market trends, covering comprehensive analysis of both growth factors and restrains those can positively or negatively impact the industry outlook during the forecast period. It entails all details about the key factors that are expected to drive the Global Stem Cell Therapy market growth during the forecast time-frame.Market data and analytics showcased in the report are a product of extensive research done on root level and so the resultant information serves as a guideline for new players willing to enter the market. The data comes from several trustworthy sources considering the degree of accuracy and reliability.

>>>>>Get a Sample PDF Copy (including full TOC, Tables, and Figures) of Stem Cell Therapy Market Report @

>>>>>>This Report Covers Leading Companies Associated in Worldwide Stem Cell Therapy Market: : Osiris Therapeutics NuVasive Chiesi Pharmaceuticals JCRPharmaceutical Pharmicell Medi-post Anterogen Molmed Takeda (TiGenix)

Our exploration specialists acutely ascertain the significant aspects of the global Stem Cell Therapy market report. It also provides an in-depth valuation in regards to the future advancements relying on the past data and present circumstance of Stem Cell Therapy market situation. In this Stem Cell Therapy report, we have investigated the principals, players in the market, geological regions, product type, and market end-client applications. The global Stem Cell Therapy report comprises of primary and secondary data which is exemplified in the form of pie outlines, Stem Cell Therapy tables, analytical figures, and reference diagrams. The Stem Cell Therapy report is presented in an efficient way that involves basic dialect, basic Stem Cell Therapy outline, agreements, and certain facts as per solace and comprehension.

Global Stem Cell Therapy Market by Type: Autologous Allogeneic

Global Stem Cell Therapy Market by Application: Musculoskeletal Disorder Wounds & Injuries Cornea Cardiovascular Diseases Others

Market split by Sales Channel, can be divided into: Direct Channel Distribution Channel

Market segment by Region/Country including: North America (United States, Canada and Mexico) Europe (Germany, UK, France, Italy, Russia and Spain etc.) Asia-Pacific (China, Japan, Korea, India, Australia and Southeast Asia etc.) South America Brazil, Argentina, Colombia and Chile etc.) Middle East & Africa (South Africa, Egypt, Nigeria and Saudi Arabia etc.)

If you have any special requirement, please let us know and we can provide you the report as your requirement.

Regions and Countries:U.S, Canada, France, Germany, UK, Italy, Rest of Europe, India, China, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, Australia, Rest of APAC, Brazil, Mexico, Argentina, Rest of LATAM, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, UAE.

The global Stem Cell Therapy market was valued at $XX million in 2019, and MAResearch analysts predict the global market size will reach $XX million by the end of 2029, growing at a CAGR of XX% between 2019 and 2029.

Since the COVID-19 virus outbreak in December 2019, the disease has spread to over 210 countries and territories around the world and 2 international conveyances. The global impacts of COVID-19 are already starting to be felt, and will significantly affect this industry in 2020.

This report analyses the impact of COVID-19 on this industry. COVID-19 can affect the global market in 3 ways: by directly affecting production and demand, by creating supply chain and market disruption, and by its financial impact on enterprises and financial markets.

This report provides detailed historical analysis of global market for Stem Cell Therapy from 2014-2019, and provides extensive market forecasts from 2020-2029 by region/country and subsectors. It covers the sales volume, price, revenue, gross margin, historical growth and future perspectives in the Stem Cell Therapy market.

Leading players of Stem Cell Therapy including: Osiris Therapeutics NuVasive Chiesi Pharmaceuticals JCRPharmaceutical Pharmicell Medi-post Anterogen Molmed Takeda (TiGenix)

Market split by Type, can be divided into: Autologous Allogeneic

Market split by Application, can be divided into: Musculoskeletal Disorder Wounds & Injuries Cornea Cardiovascular Diseases Others

Market split by Sales Channel, can be divided into: Direct Channel Distribution Channel

Market segment by Region/Country including: North America (United States, Canada and Mexico) Europe (Germany, UK, France, Italy, Russia and Spain etc.) Asia-Pacific (China, Japan, Korea, India, Australia and Southeast Asia etc.) South America Brazil, Argentina, Colombia and Chile etc.) Middle East & Africa (South Africa, Egypt, Nigeria and Saudi Arabia etc.)

If you have any special requirement, please let us know and we can provide you the report as your requirement.

Reasons to Purchase this Report:

To understand the impact of end-user applications on the market Analyzing various perspectives of the market To understand the dominating type in the market Countries expected to witness the fastest growth during the forecast period Identify the latest developments, market shares, and strategies employed by the major market players

NOTE: Our team is studying Covid-19 impact analysis on various industry verticals and Country Level impact for a better analysis of markets and industries. The 2020 latest edition of this report is entitled to provide additional commentary on latest scenario, economic slowdown and COVID-19 impact on overall industry. Further it will also provide qualitative information about when industry could come back on track and what possible measures industry players are taking to deal with current situation.

Strategic Points Covered in TOC: Chapter 1:Introduction, market driving force product scope, market risk, market overview, and market opportunities of the global Stem Cell Therapy market.

Chapter 2:Evaluating the leading manufacturers of the global Stem Cell Therapy market which consists of its revenue, sales, and price of the products.

Chapter 3:Displaying the competitive nature among key manufacturers, with market share, revenue, and sales. Chapter 4:Presenting global Stem Cell Therapy market by regions, market share and revenue and sales for the projected period.

Chapters 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9:To evaluate the market by segments, by countries and by manufacturers with revenue share and sales by key countries in these various regions.

Get Full Customize report @ https://www.reporthive.com/request_customization/2359708

Why Go For Report Hive Research?

Report Hive Research delivers strategic market research reports, statistical surveys, industry analysis and forecast data on products and services, markets and companies. Our clientele ranges mix of global business leaders, government organizations, SMEs, individuals and Start-ups, top management consulting firms, universities, etc. Our library of 700,000 + reports targets high growth emerging markets in the USA, Europe Middle East, Africa, Asia Pacific covering industries like IT, Telecom, Semiconductor, Chemical, Healthcare, Pharmaceutical, Energy and Power, Manufacturing, Automotive and Transportation, Food and Beverages, etc. This large collection of insightful reports assists clients to stay ahead of time and competition. We help in business decision-making on aspects such as market entry strategies, market sizing, market share analysis, sales and revenue, technology trends, competitive analysis, product portfolio, and application analysis, etc.

Get in Touch with Us :

Report Hive Research

500, North Michigan Avenue,

Suite 6014,

Chicago, IL 60611,

United States

Website: https://www.reporthive.com Email: [emailprotected] Phone:+1 312-604-7084

More here:
Trending News: Covid-19 Impact On Stem Cell Therapy Market Growth Prospects Analysis And Future Strategic Planning By 2025 | Osiris Therapeutics,...

Trending: Cell Therapy Market Brief Analysis and Application, Growth by 2026 – 3rd Watch News

LOS ANGELES, United States: QY Research has recently published a report, titled Global Cell Therapy Market Professional Survey Report 2020. The research report gives the potential headway openings that prevails in the global market. The report is amalgamated depending on research procured from primary and secondary information. The global Cell Therapy market is relied upon to develop generously and succeed in volume and value during the predicted time period. Moreover, the report gives nitty gritty data on different manufacturers, region, and products which are important to totally understanding the market.

Key Companies/Manufacturers operating in the global Cell Therapy market include: Gilead Sciences Novartis Osiris Vericel Corporation Vcanbio Fujifilm Cellular Dynamics JCR Pharmaceuticals Beike Biotechnology Golden Meditech Guanhao Biotech Segment by Type, , , Stem Cell Non-Stem Cell Segment by Application Hospital Clinic Other By Region North America Europe Japan China Southeast Asia India

Get PDF Sample Copy of the Report to understand the structure of the complete report: (Including Full TOC, List of Tables & Figures, Chart) :

https://www.qyresearch.com/sample-form/form/1916335/global-cell-therapy-market

Segmental Analysis

Both developed and emerging regions are deeply studied by the authors of the report. The regional analysis section of the report offers a comprehensive analysis of the global Cell Therapy market on the basis of region. Each region is exhaustively researched about so that players can use the analysis to tap into unexplored markets and plan powerful strategies to gain a foothold in lucrative markets.

Global Cell Therapy Market Segment By Type:

Stem Cell Non-Stem Cell

Global Cell Therapy Market Segment By Application:

Market Analysis and Insights: Global Cell Therapy Market The global Cell Therapy market was valued at US$ 77485 million in 2019 and it is expected to reach US$ 362235 million by the end of 2026, growing at a CAGR of 27.18% during 2020-2026. Global Cell Therapy Scope and Market Size Cell Therapy market is segmented by players, region (country), by Type, and by Application. Players, stakeholders, and other participants in the global Cell Therapy market will be able to gain the upper hand as they use the report as a powerful resource. The segmental analysis focuses on revenue and forecast by Type and by Application in terms of revenue and forecast for the period 2015-2026. Since the COVID-19 virus outbreak in December 2019, the disease has spread to almost 100 countries around the globe with the World Health Organization declaring it a public health emergency. The global impacts of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are already starting to be felt, and will significantly affect the Cell Therapy market in 2020. The outbreak of COVID-19 has brought effects on many aspects, like flight cancellations; travel bans and quarantines; restaurants closed; all indoor events restricted; over forty countries state of emergency declared; massive slowing of the supply chain; stock market volatility; falling business confidence, growing panic among the population, and uncertainty about future. This report also analyzes the impact of Coronavirus COVID-19 on the Cell Therapy industry. By Company Gilead Sciences Novartis Osiris Vericel Corporation Vcanbio Fujifilm Cellular Dynamics JCR Pharmaceuticals Beike Biotechnology Golden Meditech Guanhao Biotech Segment by Type

Stem Cell Non-Stem Cell Segment by Application Hospital Clinic Other By Region North America Europe Japan China Southeast Asia India

Competitive Landscape

Competitor analysis is one of the best sections of the report that compares the progress of leading players based on crucial parameters, including market share, new developments, global reach, local competition, price, and production. From the nature of competition to future changes in the vendor landscape, the report provides in-depth analysis of the competition in the global Cell Therapy market.

Key companies operating in the global Cell Therapy market include Gilead Sciences Novartis Osiris Vericel Corporation Vcanbio Fujifilm Cellular Dynamics JCR Pharmaceuticals Beike Biotechnology Golden Meditech Guanhao Biotech Segment by Type, , , Stem Cell Non-Stem Cell Segment by Application Hospital Clinic Other By Region North America Europe Japan China Southeast Asia India

Key questions answered in the report:

For Discount, Customization in the Report: https://www.qyresearch.com/customize-request/form/1916335/global-cell-therapy-market

TOC

1 REPORT OVERVIEW1 1.1 Study Scope1 1.2 Key Market Segments1 1.3 Players Covered: Ranking by Cell Therapy Revenue2 1.4 Market Analysis by Type2 1.4.1 Global Cell Therapy Market Size Growth Rate by Type: 2020 VS 20262 1.4.2 Stem Cell4 1.4.3 Non-Stem Cell5 1.5 Market by Application6 1.5.1 Global Cell Therapy Market Share by Application: 2020 VS 20266 1.5.2 Hospital8 1.5.3 Clinic8 1.6 Coronavirus Disease 2019 (Covid-19) Impact Will Have a Severe Impact on Global Growth9 1.6.1 How the Covid-19 is Affecting the Cell Therapy Industry9 1.6.2 Covid-19 Impact: Global GDP Growth, 2019, 2020 and 2021 Projections11 1.6.3 Covid-19 Impact: Commodity Prices Indices20 1.6.4 Covid-19 Impact: Global Major Government Policy25 1.6.5 Proposal for Cell Therapy Players to Combat Covid-19 Impact29 1.7 Study Objectives31 1.8 Years Considered31 2 GLOBAL GROWTH TRENDS32 2.1 Global Cell Therapy Market Perspective (2015-2026)32 2.2 Cell Therapy Growth Trends by Regions33 2.2.1 Cell Therapy Market Size by Regions: 2015 VS 2020 VS 202633 2.2.2 Cell Therapy Historic Market Size by Regions (2015-2020)35 2.2.3 Cell Therapy Forecasted Market Size by Regions (2021-2026)35 2.3 Industry Trends and Growth Strategy37 2.3.1 Market Top Trends37 2.3.2 Market Drivers37 2.3.3 Market Challenges38 2.3.4 Porter Five Forces Analysis39 2.3.5 Advantages of Allogeneic Over Autologous Cell Therapy Products40 3 COMPETITION LANDSCAPE BY KEY PLAYERS42 3.1 Global Top Cell Therapy Players by Market Size42 3.1.1 Global Top Cell Therapy Players by Revenue (2019-2020)42 3.1.2 Global Cell Therapy Revenue Market Share by Players (2019-2020)43 3.1.3 Global Cell Therapy by Company Type (Tier 1, Tier 2 and Tier 3)44 3.2 Global Cell Therapy Market Concentration Ratio44 3.2.1 Global Cell Therapy Market Concentration Ratio (CR5)44 3.2.2 Global Top 5 Companies by Cell Therapy Revenue in 201945 3.3 Cell Therapy Key Players Head office and Area Served45 3.4 Key Players Cell Therapy Product Solution and Service46 3.5 Date of Enter into Cell Therapy Market46 3.6 Mergers & Acquisitions, Expansion Plans47 4 CELL THERAPY BREAKDOWN DATA BY TYPE (2015-2026)51 4.1 Global Cell Therapy Historic Market Size by Type (2015-2020)51 4.2 Global Cell Therapy Forecasted Market Size by Type (2021-2026)52 5 CELL THERAPY BREAKDOWN DATA BY APPLICATION (2015-2026)54 5.1 Global Cell Therapy Historic Market Size by Application (2015-2020)54 5.2 Global Cell Therapy Forecasted Market Size by Application (2021-2026)55 6 NORTH AMERICA57 6.1 North America Cell Therapy Market Size (2015-2026)57 6.2 Cell Therapy Key Players in North America (2019-2020)57 6.3 North America Cell Therapy Market Size by Type (2015-2020)58 6.4 North America Cell Therapy Market Size by Application (2015-2020)59 7 EUROPE60 7.1 Europe Cell Therapy Market Size (2015-2026)60 7.2 Cell Therapy Key Players in Europe (2019-2020)60 7.3 Europe Cell Therapy Market Size by Type (2015-2020)61 7.4 Europe Cell Therapy Market Size by Application (2015-2020)61 8 JAPAN63 8.1 Japan Cell Therapy Market Size (2015-2026)63 8.2 Cell Therapy Key Players in Japan (2019-2020)63 8.3 Japan Cell Therapy Market Size by Type (2015-2020)64 8.4 Japan Cell Therapy Market Size by Application (2015-2020)64 9 CHINA66 9.1 China Cell Therapy Market Size (2015-2026)66 9.2 Cell Therapy Key Players in China (2019-2020)66 9.3 China Cell Therapy Market Size by Type (2015-2020)67 9.4 China Cell Therapy Market Size by Application (2015-2020)67 10 SOUTHEAST ASIA69 10.1 Southeast Asia Cell Therapy Market Size (2015-2026)69 10.2 Cell Therapy Key Players in Southeast Asia (2019-2020)69 10.3 Southeast Asia Cell Therapy Market Size by Type (2015-2020)70 10.4 Southeast Asia Cell Therapy Market Size by Application (2015-2020)70 11 INDIA72 11.1 India Cell Therapy Market Size (2015-2026)72 11.2 Cell Therapy Key Players in India (2019-2020)72 11.3 India Cell Therapy Market Size by Type (2015-2020)73 11.4 India Cell Therapy Market Size by Application (2015-2020)73 12 KEY PLAYERS PROFILES75 12.1 Gilead Sciences75 12.1.1 Gilead Sciences Company Details75 12.1.2 Gilead Sciences Cell Therapy Introduction76 12.1.3 Gilead Sciences Revenue in Cell Therapy Business (2019-2020)76 12.2 Novartis77 12.2.1 Novartis Company Details77 12.2.2 Novartis Cell Therapy Introduction78 12.2.3 Novartis Revenue in Cell Therapy Business (2019-2020)79 12.3 Osiris79 12.3.1 Osiris Company Details79 12.3.2 Osiris Cell Therapy Introduction80 12.3.3 Osiris Revenue in Cell Therapy Business (2019-2020)81 12.4 Vericel Corporation81 12.4.1 Vericel Corporation Company Details81 12.4.2 Vericel Corporation Cell Therapy Introduction82 12.4.3 Vericel Corporation Revenue in Cell Therapy Business (2019-2020)83 12.5 Vcanbio83 12.5.1 Vcanbio Company Details83 12.5.2 Vcanbio Cell Therapy Introduction84 12.5.3 Vcanbio Revenue in Cell Therapy Business (2019-2020)84 12.6 Fujifilm Cellular Dynamics85 12.6.1 Fujifilm Cellular Dynamics Company Details85 12.6.2 Fujifilm Cellular Dynamics Cell Therapy Introduction86 12.6.3 Fujifilm Cellular Dynamics Revenue in Cell Therapy Business (2019-2020)86 12.7 JCR Pharmaceuticals87 12.7.1 JCR Pharmaceuticals Company Details87 12.7.2 JCR Pharmaceuticals Cell Therapy Introduction88 12.7.3 JCR Pharmaceuticals Revenue in Cell Therapy Business (2019-2020)89 12.8 Beike Biotechnology89 12.8.1 Beike Biotechnology Company Details89 12.8.2 Beike Biotechnology Cell Therapy Introduction90 12.8.3 Beike Biotechnology Revenue in Cell Therapy Business (2019-2020)90 12.9 Golden Meditech91 12.9.1 Golden Meditech Company Details91 12.9.2 Golden Meditech Cell Therapy Introduction91 12.9.3 Golden Meditech Revenue in Cell Therapy Business (2019-2020)92 12.10 Guanhao Biotech92 12.10.1 Guanhao Biotech Company Details92 12.10.2 Guanhao Biotech Cell Therapy Introduction93 12.10.3 Guanhao Biotech Revenue in Cell Therapy Business (2019-2020)94 13 ANALYSTS VIEWPOINTS/CONCLUSIONS95 14 APPENDIX96 14.1 Research Methodology96 14.1.1 Methodology/Research Approach96 14.1.2 Data Source99 14.2 Disclaimer102 14.3 Author Details102

About Us:

QYResearch always pursuits high product quality with the belief that quality is the soul of business. Through years of effort and supports from huge number of customer supports, QYResearch consulting group has accumulated creative design methods on many high-quality markets investigation and research team with rich experience. Today, QYResearch has become the brand of quality assurance in consulting industry.

See the rest here:
Trending: Cell Therapy Market Brief Analysis and Application, Growth by 2026 - 3rd Watch News