Search This Blog

Saturday, June 20, 2020

French NASH biotech Inventiva files for a $90 million US IPO

Inventiva, a Phase 2 French biotech developing therapies for NASH and other diseases, filed on Friday with the SEC to raise up to $90 million in an initial public offering.
The company’s pipeline contains lead candidate lanifibranor, an oral small molecule therapy for the treatment of NASH. The company announced positive topline results from its NATIVE Phase 2b trial for lanifibranor, and end of Phase 2b meetings are expected in the 4Q20. Inventiva is currently listed on the Euronext Paris under the symbol “IVA” and last closed at an as-converted $10.83.
The Daix, France-based company was founded in 2011 and booked $11 million in revenue for the 12 months ended March 31, 2020. It plans to list on the Nasdaq under the symbol IVA. Inventiva filed confidentially on April 10, 2020. Jefferies, Stifel, Guggenheim Securities, and H.C. Wainwright are the joint bookrunners on the deal. No pricing terms were disclosed.

Silicosis: Ominous resurgence of an occupational lung condition reported

A new study appearing in the journal CHEST®, published by Elsevier, documents an increased incidence of silicosis, which progressed rapidly to massive pulmonary fibrosis in a significant proportion of patients who had previously worked artificial stone (AS), also called artificial quartz agglomerate or conglomerate, a popular new countertop material, despite cessation of exposure after diagnosis.
AS is composed of finely crushed stone mixed with synthetic resins and has a high silica content. It emits respirable crystalline dust (RCS) while it is being fabricated and in cutting, shaping, and finishing in small industries, which can cause permanent and severe lung damage if it is inhaled.
The study reports on the results of follow-up exams of 106 AS workers in southern Spain who were diagnosed with silicosis or severe pulmonary fibrosis between 2009 and 2018. The investigators first reported the link between their illnesses and AS RCS in a study published in 2014.
“While 6.6 percent of the AS workers were initially diagnosed with massive pulmonary fibrosis, 37.7 percent had more advanced disease at the follow-up exam, even though they had left their jobs and were no longer exposed to the harmful dust. In a quarter of the patients, the rate of decline in lung capacity progressed very rapidly,” explained lead investigator, Antonio León-Jiménez, PhD, Pulmonology, Allergy and Thoracic Surgery Department, Puerta del Mar University Hospital; and Biomedical Research and Innovation Institute of Cádiz (INiBICA), Cádiz, Spain. On a positive note, four years after exposure ended, the annual decrease of lung capacity appeared to slow down.
Silicosis, probably the most ancient occupational disease, has been traditionally related to mining or quarry work. It is caused by inhalation of crystalline silica dust that produces permanent lung scarring (pulmonary fibrosis). Its incidence had decreased in high income countries following the reduction of mining activities and implementation of better protective measures for workers and dust control.
However, over the past decade, the increasing popularity of AS for use in kitchen and bathroom countertops because of its design and attractive colors has supplanted traditional materials like granite and marble. Unfortunately, working with AS has resulted in a resurgence of cases of silicosis identified among fabricators. Despite following protective measures used for handling natural stone, these workers were nonetheless injured by the higher level of crystallized silica contained in AS (93 percent) than in natural stone (five percent-30 percent).
Measures adopted to reduce the concentration of respirable dust, such as the use of water suppression and exhaust ventilation techniques, have been implemented, but harmful levels of RCS are still documented in workplaces, generally in small factories.
The investigators call for more aggressive engineering controls and new treatments to be developed and tested, “Avoiding the continued inhalation of silica is essential but is not enough. The majority of patients are young people and the progression of the disease, in a significant number of them, foreshadows an uncertain future. Our findings emphasize the need to maximize protective measures in active patients and to find new treatments that may delay or curb the progression of the disease,” cautioned Dr. León-Jiménez.
The worldwide demand for engineered quartz countertops continues to soar (estimates project the 2013 levels will triple by 2024). Although the first patients were described ten years ago in Spain and Israel, the number of cases has been increasing throughout the world. In Australia, the situation was considered an occupational epidemic in 2019, and the emergence of new cases in the United States and China warns that it is a global problem that likely has only just begun.
In an accompanying editorial, Robert A. Cohen, MD, and Leonard H.T. Go, MD, both affiliated with the University of Illinois at Chicago School of Public Health, Chicago, IL, USA, add an even stronger cautionary note, “Given the toxicity of this material and the rising human cost of its use, if engineering controls cannot limit worker exposure to hazardous concentrations of RCS, a ban on AS needs to be considered. Colorful countertops are not worth the price paid by these workers.”
make a difference: sponsored opportunity

Story Source:
Materials provided by Elsevier. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

Journal Reference:
  1. Antonio León-Jiménez, Antonio Hidalgo-Molina, Miguel Ángel Conde-Sánchez, Aránzazu Pérez-Alonso, José María Morales-Morales, Eva María García-Gámez, Juan Antonio Córdoba-Doña. Artificial Stone Silicosis. Chest, 2020; DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2020.03.026
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/06/200618073543.htm

Successful Reopening: It’s Not What You Think

With most countries still in lockdown, some have started to reopen, and the world is watching. What does it mean to have a successful reopening, and have we witnessed it? Looking at the resurgence of Covid cases in China and in New Zealand, some may find it hard to label them as a success. However, what happened there is exactly what countries that achieve very low levels of infection can expect of a successful reopening, at least until the virus is eliminated worldwide.
The first step in controlling the virus is to implement strict stay-at-home procedures and to carry out a rigorous contact tracing effort. Tracing the contacts of all those known to be infected with SARS-CoV-2 allows the community to get ahead of the disease by quarantining anyone who might be infected and infectious, preventing them from further transmitting the virus. Massive testing and immediate contact tracing and mandatory isolation for those exposed is crucial for countries to break the chains of transmission.
Wuhan, the city at the epicenter of this pandemic, once had a total of 68,135 confirmed cases. Today, the provincial health commission announced no new confirmed, asymptomatic or suspected Covid-19 across the entire province of Hubei, where Wuhan lies.
The most recent outbreak in China was in  Beijing. No infections were reported in Beijing for almost six weeks. Then on June 10 a man with no history of recent travel visited a doctor with a fever and chills. He tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 and was hospitalized the following day. While in hospital, public health officials discovered that he had visited a meat market on June 3. Within days, the city was under lockdown, a widespread testing initiative was underway, and thousands of contact tracers were trying to chase down potential new infections. Over a million people were tested within a week. More than 180 people as of Friday were found to be virus positive, all asymptomatic.
Thanks to this effort, a new cluster of infections was identified, all with links to the meat market. While it’s unknown how the SARS-CoV-2 virus was first introduced at the market, after a 55-day run in which there was no known local transmission, the sheer volume of people passing through and the less than hygienic conditions may provide some of the explanation for the spread.
It’s possible to argue that this re-emergence of locally transmitted infections demonstrates the failure of Beijing’s reopening. But in a globalized world where people from countries or communities with high rates of infection are still able to travel freely to communities that have their outbreak under control, the possibility of achieving zero new infections while the global infection rates are high is remote.
A similar situation is occurred in New Zealand. After 17 days without any new infections, the country lifted its Covid-19 restrictions, only to be greeted by two new coronavirus cases just over a week later. Those cases came from two women who traveled from the UK to New Zealand, via Australia. Immediately upon detection they were lodged at an isolation hotel in Auckland and then monitored remotely as they traveled by car from Auckland to their home base in Wellington, where they have been in isolation ever since.
As New Zealand’s director general of health said in a news conference, “A new case is something we hoped we wouldn’t get but is also something we have expected and planned for…. That is why we have geared up, and continue to gear up, our contact tracing at a local level and national capacity and capability as well as having our excellent testing capability so we can respond rapidly.”
That is what a successful reopening looks like. It is not measured in the number of days without any new infections, but rather in the way the public health system responds to a spike in new infections. Until every country is rid of the virus, no country will ever be rid of the virus entirely.
We have the measures at hand to ensure a successful reopening – widespread testing, rigorous contact tracing, and mandatory isolation for those who have been exposed to the virus. With that, we can control the current outbreak, bring infections down to manageable levels in every community, and prevent new outbreaks from overwhelming our healthcare system or leading unnecessary death and injury of those infected.

Beware the Progressive-Scientific Alliance

America has reached an epistemological breaking point. For the first two months following the coronavirus outbreak, public-health experts insisted that we “follow the science” and implement their recommendations, even if it meant millions of lost jobs and significant restrictions on constitutionally protected activities, such as church attendance and freedom of assembly. Blue-state governors quickly positioned themselves as executors of this neutral scientific knowledge, condemning anti-lockdown protesters as “anti-scientific;” meantime, social media companies banned anti-lockdown groups and censored content from lockdown skeptics.
But when protests erupted in the U.S. after the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis, many public-health experts reversed course—and subordinated “science” to their activist politics. The same doctors and nurses who once shamed churchgoers released petitions in support of Black Lives Matter and marched with tens of thousands of protesters in the streets. They categorized racism as a public-health threat and rationalized their participation in street demonstrations by deeming Covid-19 transmission the lesser of two evils. In other words, public-health experts rejected science in favor of progressive politics.
Early in the pandemic, University of Washington professor Carl Bergstrom established himself as a coronavirus hawk, defending Britain’s Imperial College model that predicted up to 2.2 million American deaths and arguing that the health-care system would be “overrun.” During the initial lockdowns, Bergstrom warned against “kids hanging out by the lake,” criticized Florida for “leaving beaches open,” and mocked leaders who “want us all back in church on Easter Sunday.”
Bergstrom’s subsequent conversion to “woke science,” however, was swift and absolute. On May 27, before the death of George Floyd dominated the news, the professor insisted he would wear a mask while walking alone in a public park, even if there is “only a 1-in-100,000 chance [to] save a life.” Three days later, after the outbreak of protests in Minneapolis and other cities, he tweeted that he was “heartbroken by the endemic state violence against people of color in America” and was reading Ibram X. Kendi’s book, How to Be an Antiracist. A few days later, Bergstrom conceded that “science is an inherently political activity” and endorsed the protests, making the dubious claim that millions of protesters rallying, chanting, and gathering in close quarters wouldn’t necessarily spread Covid-19—and even if they did, he “wholeheartedly support[ed] the protests nonetheless.”
Here’s the problem: Bergstrom and other public-health experts persuaded Americans that their advice on the pandemic response was driven exclusively by science and underwritten by cold fact. They argued that politics should be subordinated to scientific knowledge—but when the political grounds shifted, they immediately reversed that formulation. Bergson’s case is especially damning. In less than a week, he made the moral leap from recommending behavioral modification for a “1-in-100,000 chance” of death to supporting protests that, according to his colleague Trevor Bedford, could cause up to 4,000 Covid-19 deaths.
Scientists, like everyone else, are entitled to their personal opinions. But the fallout from the lockdowns and protests suggests that progressivism has become the default ideology of the public-health community; science is now a weaponized form of politics. In hindsight, it’s astonishing how quickly Americans ceded political authority to the public-health apparatus. This isn’t only antithetical to self-rule; it also accords constitutional protection to elite causes—and only elite causes. Attending a Black Lives Matter protest is permissible. Attending a church service is not.
Left unchecked, the progressive-scientific alliance will penetrate additional domains of life. Whether it’s “housing is healthcare,” “harm reduction saves lives,” or “antiracism is public health,” slogans abound for subsuming science into politics.
Maligned as it is, politics must reassert itself as the proper arena for making public decisions. As George Gilder wrote in April, at the height of the pandemic: “The American system of government asserts these truths: that the people have an ineradicable right to govern themselves, that politics is how we exercise our free will, and that rather than reflexively deferring to experts, we should defer as much as possible to the principles of freedom and common sense.”
Don’t be fooled by the lab coat. We remain in charge of our destinies.
https://www.city-journal.org/beware-the-progressive-scientific-alliance

The best US IPO of the year

Shares of Royalty Pharma Plc RPRX.O jumped 57.1% in their stock market debut on Tuesday, as the IPO market gathers steam after the coronavirus crisis stalled potential listings.
Royalty Pharma’s shares opened at $44, valuing the company at $26.20 billion.
The company, which buys biopharmaceutical royalties and also helps fund new treatments, sold $2.18 billion in stock after its U.S. initial public offering was priced at the top end of the range, making it the second-largest pharmaceutical listing ever.
Royalty Pharma raised its initial target of selling 70 million shares by about 11% due to strong demand.
A slew of biotech and pharmaceutical companies are filing to go public now, as they are less immune to volatile market swings. The first-day pop highlights that appetite for new stock is undiminished by recent swings in the market.
Biotech shares are also popular among investors as they can be prime targets for takeovers that fetch big premiums.
Earlier this month, shares of Legend Biotech Corp LEGN.O jumped in their market debut after the IPO was priced above the targeted range.
“Royalty Pharma is the other side of the coin in the biotech space which is drawing substantial interest from IPO investors,” said Jeff Zell, senior research analyst at IPO Boutique.
“They have a diversified portfolio of drugs from the most impressive Pharma companies in the world, which generates desired cash-flow.”
Royalty Pharma’s listing eclipses record label Warner Music Group’s WMG.O $1.93-billion IPO earlier this month as the largest U.S. listing so far this year, and is behind only Zoetis Inc ZTS.N as the largest pharma IPO of all time, according to data provider Dealogic.
https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/royalty-pharma-shares-soar-57-in-market-debut-2020-06-16

Coronavirus: scientists uncover why some people lose their sense of smell

From the first reports coming out of Wuhan, Iran and later Italy, we knew that losing your sense of smell (anosmia) was a significant symptom of the disease. Now, after months of reports, both anecdotal and more rigorous clinical findings, we think we have a model for how this virus may cause smell loss.
One of the most common causes of smell loss is a viral infection, such as the common cold, sinus or other upper respiratory tract infections. Those coronaviruses that don’t cause deadly diseases, such as COVID-19, SARS and Mers, are one of the causes of the common cold and have been known to cause loss. In most of these cases, returns when symptoms clear, as smell loss is simply the result of a blocked , which prevents aroma molecules reaching in the nose. In some cases, smell loss can persist for months and years.
For the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), however, the pattern of smell loss is different. Many people with COVID-19 reported a sudden loss of sense of smell and then a sudden and full return to a normal sense of smell in a week or two.
Interestingly, many of these people said their nose was clear, so smell loss cannot be attributed to a blocked nose. For others, smell loss was prolonged and several weeks later they still had no sense of smell. Any theory of anosmia in COVID-19 has to account for both of these patterns.
This sudden return of a normal sense of smell suggests an obstructive smell loss in which the aroma molecules cannot reach the receptors in the nose (the same type of loss one gets with a clothes peg on the nose).
Now that we have CT scans of the noses and sinuses of people with COVID-19 smell loss, we can see that the part of the nose that does the smelling, the olfactory cleft, is blocked with swollen soft tissue and mucus—known as a cleft syndrome. The rest of the nose and sinuses look normal and patients have no problem breathing through their nose.
We know that the way SARS-CoV-2 infects the body is by attaching to ACE2 receptors on the surface of cells that line the upper respiratory tract. A protein called TMPRSS2 then helps the virus invade the cell. Once inside the cell, the virus can replicate, triggering the immune system’s inflammatory response. This is the starting point for the havoc and destruction that this virus causes once in the body.
Initially, we thought that the virus might be infecting and destroying the olfactory neurons. These are the cells that transmit the signal from the aroma molecule in your nose to the area in the brain where these signals get interpreted as “smell”.
However, an international collaboration showed recently that the ACE2 proteins the virus needs to invade the cells were not found on the olfactory neurons. But they were found on cells called “sustentacular cells”, which support the olfactory neurons.
We expect that these support cells are likely to be the ones that are damaged by the virus, and the immune response would cause swelling of the area but leave the olfactory neurons intact. When the has dealt with the , the swelling subsides and the aroma molecules have a clear route to their undamaged receptors and the sense of smell returns to normal.
So why does smell not return in some cases? This is more theoretical but follows from what we know about inflammation in other systems. Inflammation is the body’s response to damage and results in the release of chemicals that destroy the tissues involved.
When this inflammation is severe, other nearby cells start to be damaged or destroyed by this “splash damage”. We believe that accounts for the second stage, where the olfactory neurons are damaged.
Recovery of smell is much slower because the olfactory neurons need time to regenerate from the supply of stem within the lining of the nose. Initial recovery is often associated with distortion of the sense of smell known as parosmia, where things don’t smell like they used to. For many parosmics, for instance, the smell of coffee is often described as burnt, chemical, dirty and reminiscent of sewage.
Physiotherapy for the nose
Olfaction has been called the Cinderella of the senses because of its neglect by scientific research. But it has come to the forefront in this pandemic. The silver lining is that we will learn a lot about how viruses are involved in smell loss from this. But what hope is there for people with a loss of smell now?
The good news is that the olfactory neurons can regenerate. They’re regrowing in almost all of us, all of the time. We can harness that regeneration and guide it with “physiotherapy for the nose”: smell training.
There is solid evidence that many forms of smell loss are helped by this repeated, mindful exposure to a fixed set of odorants every day and no reason to think it won’t work in COVID-19 .
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-06-coronavirus-scientists-uncover-people.html

56% of wild animals in Vietnam’s restaurants ‘have a coronavirus’

A new report has found an alarmingly high rate of coronaviruses in wildlife about to be served at restaurants in Vietnam.
While the country is looking to stop importing imperiled animals to eat, it has yet to do so, and there are still “wildlife restaurants” that have rats, bats, civet cats, snakes, bear, monkeys and pangolins on the menu.
In a study that appears in the pre-print journal bioRxiv, researchers found 56 percent of wild rats were infected with a coronavirus by the time they were ready to be served at restaurants — double from when the animals were first caught.
Coronavirus detection rates in rodent populations sampled in their “natural” habitat were around 0 to 2 percent, jumping to 21 percent by the time they had been caught by traffickers. Due to confinement conditions, by the time the animals hit “wet” markets, they had a 32 percent contamination rate before rising even higher at restaurants, where they are killed and immediately served to diners.
The study was put together by scientists from Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS), the Department of Animal Health of the Viet Nam Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Viet Nam National University of Agriculture, EcoHealth Alliance and One Health Institute of the University of California, Davis
It is thought many coronaviruses incubate in animals before “jumping to humans,” as may have happened with the most recent global pandemic.
The authors of the report blame stress, confinement, shedding and poor nutrition as contributing factors that result in increased coronavirus rates in animals taken from nature to human restaurants.
According to the study, “researchers collected samples at 70 sites in Vietnam, and detected six distinct taxonomic units of known coronaviruses. There is no current evidence to suggest these particular viruses were a human-health threat, but the laboratory techniques used in the study can be utilized to detect emerging or unknown viruses in humans, wildlife and livestock in the future.
Sarah Olson, the associate director of WCS’s Health Program who co-wrote the study, told The Post she was shocked by the results.
“I was expecting maybe 10 percent [of animals found at restaurants to be ill]. But to see over 50 percent is shocking,” Olson said.
“Our study shows how the run-of-the-mill viruses can amplify to a potential spillover into people,” she added. “This issue is more than just wet markets, it’s everything that leads up to them. We need to protect local subsistence hunting but stop the major trade for urban markets. We can decrease the risk of a pandemic on a global scale if we do that.”
Peter Knights, CEO of WildAid, a conservation organization that works to end illegal poaching and consumption of wild animals, agrees. He told The Post in May: “Sixty percent of infectious diseases originate in animals and are transferred to humans … and the risks are increasing with deforestation and climate change. When someone … builds roads into the wild, we come into contact with species we aren’t supposed to. Humans then drive these animals into big cities and sell them at live markets, where the risks increase when you stress these animals or mix these species together.”
Olson also warned: “We are repeating the same mistakes of the past if we don’t take a hard look at human behaviors that breach natural boundaries. [Eating these animals in cities] is not natural. It’s a luxury and not a necessity.”
If this trade isn’t stopped, “worst-case scenario, we would be … on track to see another one of these outbreaks,” she said.
Some scientists believe the COVID-19 pandemic started in a wet market in the Chinese city of Wuhan, possibly jumping from humans via bats or perhaps pangolins, the world’s most-trafficked animal.
“The way these cross-species jump happened is by mixing species that wouldn’t mix in the wild. They transmit diseases in close contact and under stress,” said Knights, who has started a petition calling for the end of wildlife poaching. “The wildlife trade is associated with disease. SARS [allegedly] came from bats via civets cats, HIV was [allegedly] transferred to humans via the bushmeat trade in monkeys and chimpanzees, and now COVID-19 is believed to come from bats, possibly transferred through pangolins.”
And while China and Vietnam have promised to do better, viruses still lurk.
On Thursday it was announced that the trading sections for meat and seafood in Beijing’s wholesale food market were “severely contaminated with the new coronavirus,” according to Reuters.
This comes on the heels of earlier claims by scientists that an apocalyptic bird flu could wipe out half of humanity as environmentalists warned of deadlier pandemics if humans keep destroying the environment.
https://nypost.com/2020/06/20/56-of-wild-animals-in-vietnams-restaurants-have-coronaviruses/