10x Genomics Unveils Atera Spatial Platform at AACR Meeting

The genomics community’s long wait for 10x Genomics’ highly anticipated news is finally over. On Saturday night, at the Hard Rock Café Hotel in San Diego—across the street from the American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) conference—the company hosted the “Impossible” party to announce its new spatial instrument—the Atera.

Serge Saxonov, PhD, CEO of 10x Genomics, walking onto the stage to thunderous applause, noted that there is “a gap between what we need to see and what we have been able to measure.” The Atera, which enables whole-transcriptome spatial biology at scale, “obliterates the typical trade offs” that come with existing spatial tools, he said.

“This is the biggest launch in our history. I am the most excited I’ve ever been about any product, or any product category, across the board,” Saxonov told GEN. “It has been a long time in development, and it is what we have known the world needs for a long time. I think it will fundamentally change how we measure and understand biology, and it really puts research on a new trajectory. It is really exciting to be at a place now where we can deliver it to the world.”

Nuts and bolts

Atera offers more plex, throughput, and sensitivity than 10x Genomics’ Xenium—enabling whole-transcriptome at scale. More specifically, when compared to Xenium, Atera has four times the throughput, six times higher plex capacity for targeted assays, 3.6x higher plex, and 2–3x sensitivity for whole transcriptome assays.

10x Genomics Atera
10x Genomics Atera

The price for Atera is $495,000, and the instrument measures roughly 53” x 36” x 64” or (4.42 ft × 3 ft × 5.33 ft). Orders are currently being taken, and the instrument will be available in the second half of this year.

The instrument can run up to 800 1 cm2 whole transcriptome samples (FFPE and fresh frozen) per year, with flexible run configurations, and a greater than 5 cm² imageable area per slide (for greater than 2,000 mm² total tissue per run when using all four slides.)

There are 18,000-genes on the Atera WTA (whole transcriptome) with stackable customization of 1,000-gene Atera Select panels available now, and optional stacking of up to three 1,000-gene panels coming in the future.

“Spatial genomics with whole-transcriptome profiling capabilities is the ultimate approach to measure single cells in their tissue context,” Holger Heyn, PhD, ICREA professor at the Centro Nacional de Análisis Genómico (CNAG) and member of the Human Cell Atlas, added. “All other lower-plexity approaches have been just a warm-up phase leading to this application.”

Jasmine Plummer, PhD, associate member of the St. Jude Faculty and director of the Center for Spatial OMICs points out that the whole transcriptome, while exciting, can bring a big “sticker shock” for many researchers because it will require a lot more probes in contrast to a sequencing-based platform, where a library accesses all of the genes.

The instrument uses standard glass microscopy slides, which is exciting to Plummer. In the past, she said, slides have posed a challenge when coordinating with other researchers, and using regular slides will be more “pathology friendly.”

An end to tradeoffs? 

Existing spatial technologies, which are still relatively nascent in genomics, have been constrained by tradeoffs between plex, resolution, and throughput. Researchers have had to make choices and prioritize.

“In general, with the landscape as it is today, there is a tradeoff,” Nick Banovich, PhD, VP of scientific development at TGen, and professor of bioinnovation and genome sciences division and director of the Center for Spatial Multi-Omics (COSMO), told GEN. “The closer you walk toward whole transcriptome, the lower the per gene sensitivity.”

“The most exciting thing [about Atara],” he continued, “is that there is still quite good sensitivity with whole transcriptome breadth. That’s the huge advantage of this system; there is no tradeoff anymore.”

However, this launch comes just over three years after Xenium’s launch. Purchasing a new instrument so soon may pose a challenge. Plummer notes: “In this economy, with the uncertainty of scientific funding, it is concerning to ask customers—many of whom just landed a machine—to spend another several hundred thousand dollars.”

Why AACR?

Oncology is one of the most exciting, most promising applications of spatial, especially in the near term, noted Saxonov. This is, in large part, because the work exists across the spectrum—from basic discovery to translation to clinical applications. Spatial is unambiguously important, he asserted.

Unveiling at AACR “just made a lot of sense.”

In addition to the party, the company will host a digital launch event on Tuesday, April 21. Within the AACR program, a presentation from the German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) will include data generated on the platform, highlighting Atera’s ability to uncover cancer biology not accessible with legacy approaches. Researchers distinguished multiple malignant and stem cell states across disease stages, within a single colorectal tumor sample, and mapped how these populations interact with the surrounding immune microenvironment. The data reveal a more complex immune landscape that could inform future therapeutic strategies and drug development. In addition, two posters (#7116, #6216) will include data from Atera.

The future

10x Genomics said that Atera will play a role in advancing large data studies. For example, the company noted that Atera will enable the goal of the Human Cell Atlas (HCA) as it continues its mission to map every cell type in the human body.

“With the Human Cell Atlas entering its next phase of generating spatially resolved atlases, whole-transcriptome approaches will be the workhorse for data generation,” Heyn told GEN.

“I am excited to see the Atara platform being launched now,” he added. “It is very timely as we ramp up production for the Human Cell Atlas 2.0 phase.”

Atera’s future

The company presented a roadmap with future plans at the AACR event, highlighting spatial proteomics, automation, base by base sequencing (a de novo sequencing assay) and software improvements.

Atera, Saxonov told GEN, is a fundamental platform that the company will continue enabling. It lays the groundwork for the next decade of research and work. This point in time, he said, feels similar to the early days of next generation sequencing (NGS). And although the company will continue to develop its other platforms and product lines, Atera has “massive amounts of headroom to keep building on top of it. It is the convergence of all these different technology stacks and different fields onto one.”

“What the platform can do right out of the gate is exciting. And all the things that it can do in the future will be really, really exciting,” he asserted.

The post 10x Genomics Unveils Atera Spatial Platform at AACR Meeting appeared first on GEN – Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology News.

Opinion: The podcast bringing together MAHA and public health for hard conversations

Below is a lightly edited, AI-generated transcript of the “First Opinion Podcast” interview with Brinda Adhikari and Tom W. Johnson, hosts of the podcast “Why Should I Trust You?” Be sure to sign up for the weekly “First Opinion Podcast” on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. Get alerts about each new episode by signing up for the “First Opinion Podcast” newsletter. And don’t forget to sign up for the First Opinion newsletter, delivered every Sunday.

Torie Bosch: In 2025, the well-known emergency physician Craig Spencer found himself in an unexpected place: the Children’s Health Defense Conference in Austin, Texas. There, he chatted with anti-vaccine activists, MAHA supporters, and others with deep distrust of doctors and mainstream medicine. As he wrote in an essay for STAT about the experience, “I didn’t change any minds, nor did my convictions waver. But every conversation was honest and respectful.”

Read the rest…

<![CDATA[Dissect psychodermatology with experts in both fields, from the American Academy of Dermatology 2026.]]>
<![CDATA[Dissect psychodermatology with experts in both fields, from the American Academy of Dermatology 2026.]]>

The case for fixing everything

The handsome new book Maintenance: Of Everything, Part One, by the tech industry legend Stewart Brand, promises to be the first in a series offering “a comprehensive overview of the civilizational importance of maintenance.” One of Brand’s several biographers described him as a mainstay of both counterculture and cyberculture, and with Maintenance, Brand wants us to understand that the upkeep and repair of tools and systems has profound impact on daily life. As he puts it, “Taking responsibility for maintaining something—whether a motorcycle, a monument, or our planet—can be a radical act.”

Radical how? This volume doesn’t say. In an outline for the overall work, Brand says his goal is to “end with the nature of maintainers and the honor owed them.”

The idea that maintainers are owed anything, much less honor, might surprise some readers. Actually, maintenance and repair have been hot topics in academia since the mid-2010s. I played some role in that movement as a cofounder of the Maintainers, a global, interdisciplinary network dedicated to the study of maintenance, repair, care, and all the work that goes into keeping the world going.

Brand is right, too, that maintainers haven’t gotten the laurels they deserve. Over the past few decades, scholars have shown that work from oiling tools to replacing worn parts to updating code bases all tends to be lower in status than “innovation.” Maintenance gets neglected in many organizational and social settings. (Just look at some American infrastructure!) And as the right-to-­repair movement has shown, companies in pursuit of greater profits have frequently locked us out of being able to do repairs or greatly reduced the maintainable life of their products. It’s hard to think of any other reason to put a computer in the door of a refrigerator.

Some of Brand’s earlier work helped inspire those insights. But his new book makes me think he doesn’t see things that way. For Brand, maintenance seems to be a solitary act, profound but more about personal success and fulfillment than tending to a shared world or making it better.


Born in 1938, Brand is 87 years old. A sense hangs over the book—with its battles against corrosion, rust, and decay, with its attempts to keep things going even as they inevitably falter—of someone looking over life and pondering its end. Maintenance: Of Everything connects to every stage of Brand’s life. It’s worth reviewing where it falls in that arc. Brand has always been interested in tools and fixing things, but rarely has he focused on the systems that need the most care. 

More than a half-century ago, Brand was a member of the Merry Pranksters, a countercultural, LSD-centered hippie collective famously led by Ken Kesey, the author of One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest. In 1966, Brand co-produced the Trips Festival, where bands like the Grateful Dead and Big Brother and the Holding Company performed for thousands amid psychedelic light shows.

Brand’s Whole Earth Catalog had a vision that might feel progressive, but its libertarian, rugged-individualist philosophy of remaking civilization alone stood in contrast to more collective social change movements.

In some ways, the Trips Festival set a paradigm for the rest of his life’s work. Brand’s biographers have described him as a network celebrity—someone who got ahead by bringing people together, building coalitions of influential figures who could boost his signal. As Kesey put it in 1980, “Stewart recognizes power. And cleaves to it.” 

Brand applied this network logic to the undertaking he will always be best remembered for: the Whole Earth Catalog. First published in 1968 and aimed at hippies and members of the nascent back-to-the-land movement, the publication had the motto “Access to tools.” Its pages were full of Quonset huts, geodesic domes, solar panels, well pumps, water filters, and other technologies for life off the grid. It was a vision that might feel progressive or left-leaning, but the libertarian, rugged-individualist philosophy of eschewing corrupt systems and remaking civilization alone stood in contrast to the more collective movements pushing for deep social change at the time—like civil rights, feminism, and environmentalism.

That vision also led straight to the empowerment that came with new digital tools, and to Silicon Valley. In 1985, Brand published the Whole Earth Software Catalog, the last of the series, and also cofounded the WELL—the Whole Earth ’Lectronic Link, a pioneering online community famous for, among other things, facilitating the trade of Grateful Dead bootlegs. He also wrote a hagiographic book about the MIT Media Lab, known for its corporate-sponsored research into new communications tech. “The Lab would cure the pathologies of technology not with economics or politics but with technology,” Brand wrote. Again, not collective action, not policymaking: tools. And Brand then cofounded the Global Business Network, a group of pricey consulting futurists that further connected him to MIT, Stanford, and the Valley. Brand had literally helped bring about the modern digital revolution.

His attention then turned toward its upkeep. Brand’s 1994 book, How Buildings Learn: What Happens After They’re Built, argued against high-modernist architectural ideas. Nearly all buildings eventually get remade, he argued, but he especially favored cheap, simple structures that inhabitants could easily retool to suit changing needs. In some ways, Brand was recapitulating the liberated—or libertarian—philosophy of the Whole Earth Catalog: People can remake their world, if they have access to tools. In a chapter titled “The Romance of Maintenance,” he asked readers to see the beauty, value, and occasional pleasures of fixer-uppers of all kinds.

This chapter was a touchstone for many of us in the academic subfield of maintenance studies. Researchers in disciplines like history, sociology, and anthropology, as well as artists and practitioners in fields like libraries, IT, and engineering, all started trying to understand the realities and, yes, romance of maintenance and repair. Brand joined and contributed to Listservs, attended conferences, chatted with intellectual leaders. So it’s a bit uncharitable when he writes that his new book is “the first to look at maintenance in general.” He knows better. The real question, though, is what his work has to teach us that others have not said before. In this first volume, the answer is unclear.


Maintenance: Of Everything, Part One is an odd book. If so much of Brand’s thinking has been about access to tools, he now asks, in a more extended way: How are our tools maintained? But where Brand began his career with a catalogue, in this volume we get … what? A digest? An almanac? An encyclopedia? Its form and riotous variety fit no genre easily. 

The book has two chapters. The first, “The Maintenance Race,” recounts the story of three men who took part in the Golden Globe, a round-the-world race for solo sailors held in 1968. Each of the sailors, Brand explains, had a different philosophy of maintenance. One neglected it and hoped for the best. He died. Another thought of and prepared for everything in advance, and while he didn’t win the race, he completed it and once held the record for the “world’s longest recorded nonstop solo sailing voyage.” The final sailor won and did so through heroic acts of perseverance; his style was “Whatever comes, deal with it,” Brand explains. Structured like a fairy tale and unremittingly romantic, the story—like most of the anecdotes in the book—focuses on the derring-do of vigorous white guys. The strategy is no secret. Brand’s outline explains: “Start with a dramatic contest of maintenance styles under life-critical conditions—a true story told as a fable.” This myth is meant to inspire. 

The second chapter, “Vehicles (and Weapons),” is over 150 pages long. It has five sections, multiple subsections, five subsections designated “digressions,” one called a “subdigression,” two “postscripts,” and several “footnotes” that are not footnotes in a formal sense but, rather, further addenda. At times, it all feels like notes for a future work. Brand makes no apology for the book’s woolliness. “All I can offer here,” he writes, “is to muse across a representative of maintenance domains and see what emerges.” Perhaps the most charitable reading of the potpourri is that it represents the return of a Merry Prankster, offering us a riotous varied light show. It’s a good book to leave on a table and occasionally open to a random page for entertainment. But it often seems as if it does not know what it wants to say or be. 

“Vehicles (and Weapons)” begins by paraphrasing two famous works of maintenance philosophy, Robert M. Pirsig’s Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance and Matthew B. Crawford’s Shop Class as Soulcraft. Maintenance involves both “problem finding” and “problem solving.” While much repair work is marked by anxiety, impatience, and boredom, it also offers positive values and outcomes. “Motorcycle maintainers take heart from what they repair for—the glory of the ride,” Brand writes. 

The beauty and triumph of cheapness is a running theme throughout the work, harking back to How Buildings Learn. Henry Ford’s Model T won out over early electric vehicles and hugely expensive luxury vehicles like Rolls-Royce’s Silver Ghost because it was cheap and easier to maintain. The three most popular cars in human history—the Ford Model T, the Volkswagen Bug, and the Lada “Classic” from Russia—all privileged cheapness, “retained their basic design for decades, and … invited repair by the owner.” Or, to be fair, maybe demanded it? For every hobbyist who delighted in being able to self-reliantly keep a VW running, there must have been thousands who appreciated how cheap it was and hated that it broke a lot. Brand never points to social research, like surveys, that might help us know people’s feelings on such matters.

Other sections recount how Americans created interchangeable parts (enabling not only cheap mass production but also easy maintenance), examine how maintenance works with assault rifles and in war, and track the history of technical manuals from the early modern period to the age of YouTube. These stories are solid, but they’re also well known to students of technology, and nearly all are recycled from the work of others, featuring many large block quotes. The volume breaks little new ground. 

Brand treats maintenance as an unalloyed good. But the field of maintenance studies has moved on, burrowing into the domain’s ironies, complexities, and difficulties. A simple example: In most cases, it is environmentally far better to retire and recycle an internal-combustion vehicle and buy an electric one than to keep the polluting beast going forever. Maintaining a gas-guzzler or a coal-­burning power plant isn’t a radical act but a regressive one. Also, maintenance can become a life-breaking burden on the poor, and it falls inequitably on the shoulders of women and people of color. Keeping existing systems going can be a way of avoiding tough, necessary change—like making technological systems more accessible for people with disabilities. In this volume, Brand is uninterested in such difficult trade-offs. He avoids any question of how politics shapes these issues, or how they shape politics.

This avoidance comes out most clearly in a section of “Vehicles (and Weapons)” that talks about Elon Musk—a character of “unique mastery,” Brand informs us. He tells us that Bill Gates once shorted Tesla’s stock, only to lose $1.5 billion. The lesson is clear: Elon won. 

In what political and social vision is money the best way to keep the score? Brand rightly points out that electric vehicles have fewer moving parts and, in that sense, are more maintainable than internal-combustion vehicles. He celebrates Musk most of all because his products “have all proven to be game changers in part because they combine ingenious design with surprisingly low cost.” Again, it’s Brand’s “cheap, available tools” hypothesis. But there’s a real superficiality and lack of follow-through in thinking here: Teslas remain luxury vehicles whose sales have slumped since federal tax subsidies disappeared. The company has faced several right-to-repair lawsuits; there’s even a law review article on the topic. Musk is in no sense a maintenance hero. Yet Brand writes that with his companies, “Musk may have done more practical world saving than any other business leader of his time.” By the time Brand was writing this book, the controversies surrounding Musk for at least flirting with antisemitism, racism, sexism, authoritarianism, and more were quite clear. About this, the book says not a word.

book cover
Maintenance: Of Everything, Part One
Stewart Brand
STRIPE PRESS, 2026

For sure, Brand needn’t agree with Musk’s critics, but failing to even broach the subject is tone deaf and out of touch. Others have argued that Silicon Valley’s “Move fast and break things” mentality undermines healthy maintenance. Brand doesn’t raise the idea—even to dismiss it. 

It could be that with Maintenance: Of Everything, Part One Brand is just getting going; that in subsequent volumes he’ll have something more coherent to say; that he’ll raise really hard questions and try to answer them. But given his track record, we might reasonably doubt it. Kesey said Brand cleaves to power; he certainly doesn’t question it. 

Lee Vinsel is an associate professor of science, technology, and society at Virginia Tech and host of Peoples & Things, a podcast about human life with technology.

Opinion: Health care is not ready for the new era of AI-enabled cyberattacks

On April 6, cancer patients at Brockton Hospital in Massachusetts showed up for chemotherapy infusions and were told to go home. The hospital’s information systems had been hit by a cyberattack. The ER closed. Ambulances were diverted. Staff switched to paper records. Patients were told to call back later to reschedule their treatment.

This wasn’t the first time that this kind of incident has happened. In May 2024, the Ascension ransomware attack took down systems across 136 hospitals for six weeks. That same year, the Change Healthcare breach compromised the personal health information of 100 million Americans, roughly one in three people in the country, and disrupted billing and authorization systems so severely that physician practices warned they might have to close their doors. After the Change breach, an AHA survey of nearly 1,000 hospitals found that 74% reported direct impact on patient care.

Read the rest…

Trump taps former public health leader Erica Schwartz to run CDC

President Trump nominated Erica Schwartz on Thursday to be director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, tapping a former public health leader for a position that has been filled mostly on a part-time or interim basis during the second Trump administration.

Schwartz was deputy surgeon general during the first Trump administration and spent much of her career in health roles in the U.S. military.

Read the rest…

Brain Circuits Underlying Placebo Pain Relief Identified in Mice

Though the placebo effect is a well documented phenomenon, the neurological mechanisms that underlie the process are still not fully understood. Now scientists from multiple institutions led by a team at the University of California San Diego (UCSD) have pinpointed the brain circuitry in mice that they believe is responsible for placebo pain relief. Details of their findings are published in a new paper in the journal Neuron. In it, they describe brain regions that support placebo effects and highlight sites where endogenous opioid neuropeptides send signals that are important for placebo pain relief. 

The paper is titled “Top-down control of the descending pain modulatory system drives multimodal placebo analgesia.” According to the team, theirs is the first study to establish placebo mechanisms by adapting a protocol used for humans to work in mice. Working alongside labs at the University of Pennsylvania, University of California Irvine, and elsewhere, the UCSD team detected activity in parts of the mouse brain that correspond to those previously implicated in human studies. Furthermore, by precisely mapping neural pathways and brain activity in the mice, the team identified essential roles for neural circuits that link the cortex to the brainstem and spinal cord during placebo pain relief. 

They also found that training mice to exhibit a placebo effect with one type of pain results in relief from several different types of pain including pain from injuries. That is particularly notable because it has “direct implications for how placebo training in humans might be used to produce resilience to future pain that results from injury,” explained Matthew Banghart, PhD, an associate professor in UCSD’s neurobiology department and lead author on the study. The findings also open a door to “expectancy-driven” placebo effects as a substitute for addictive painkillers, he noted, meaning that it might be possible to use placebo conditioning to train patients to build preemptive resilience to pain.

Full details of the findings and methods used are provided in the paper. In it, the teams explain that they used sensor technology and a light-activated drug developed in the Banghart lab to study the role of naturally-occurring opioid peptides in the brain. Specifically, they used the sensors to detect opioid peptide signaling in the ventrolateral periaqueductal gray (vlPAG) region, a known hub for pain signaling, during placebo trials. They then used the light-activated drug called photoactivatable naloxone, or PhNX, to establish that these opioid peptides actually drive pain relief in a manner similar to drugs like morphine. The light allowed the scientists control and timing of the opioid signaling interference. Using PhNX, they confirmed that both morphine-induced pain relief and placebo pain relief use the same opioid signaling pathway in the vlPAG region of the brain. 

Essentially, “we trained a mouse brain to create its own broad-spectrum painkillers on demand, precisely where they are needed to treat pain, without the off-target effects of opioid-based painkillers,” said Janie Chang-Weinberg, a PhD student in the biological sciences graduate program at UCSD and one of the first authors on the study. 

Future studies planned by the team will dig more deeply into how placebo learning unfolds in the brain and evaluate different placebo training strategies in mice with an eye towards developing protocols that readily translate to produce placebo pain resilience in people living with chronic pain.

The post Brain Circuits Underlying Placebo Pain Relief Identified in Mice appeared first on GEN – Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology News.

Proteins.1 Launches to Develop Single Molecule Protein Amplification Tech for Diagnostics

Finnish deep-tech startup, Proteins.1, launched with €4.7 million in pre-seed funding, led by Lifeline Ventures and Cloudberry Ventures, with in-kind support from VTT and Business Finland. Harnessing technology transferred from VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, Proteins.1 is developing a PCR-like enzyme-free, ultra-sensitive amplification platform for the detection of proteins at the single-molecule level. The firm says it aims to transform early disease diagnostics by enabling detection of disease-related molecular warning signals long before there are clinical signs.

While polymerase chain reaction (PCR) technology has transformed modern diagnostics by allowing tiny amounts of DNA to be amplified into detectable signals, no equivalent amplification method has existed for proteins, which often signal the earliest onset of cancer, neurodegeneration, cardiovascular disease, and inflammatory conditions, the company notes. Proteins.1 aims to leverage its technology to establish a new category of ultra-sensitive protein diagnostics, combining high multiplexing, scalable chip-based detection, and significantly lower capital costs compared to existing systems.

The patented, physics-based technology introduces cyclic signal amplification for proteins, potentially enabling up to 1,000 times better sensitivity than current gold-standard platforms, Proteins.1 claims. Unlike conventional immunoassays that rely on enzymatic reactions prone to variability and noise, the Proteins.1 approach is solid-state, enzyme-free, and compatible with semiconductor-based photonic detection.

The platform replaces enzymatic signal amplification with a physics-based magnetic cycling mechanism that repeatedly reads a single captured protein molecule, accumulating signal clarity without increasing background noise. The company says this supports ultra-high sensitivity combined with high multiplexing, potentially enabling the simultaneous measurement of hundreds of biomarkers from a few drops of blood.

“For decades, diagnostics has been limited not by biology, but by what our instruments can detect,” commented Proteins.1 co-founder and CEO Prateek Singh, who is inventor of the core technology. “The body produces early warning signals long before disease becomes visible. Our mission is to make those signals measurable and actionable, years earlier than today.”

Built on research conducted at VTT and further validated through European Union breakthrough innovation funding, the technology has been granted U.S. and Finnish patents, and additional international applications are pending. Initially, the company aims to develop research-use-only applications in oncology, neurology, and immunology, before progressing toward regulated clinical diagnostics. “Early detection dramatically improves survival rates in diseases such as cancer and neurodegenerative disorders,” Singh continued. “If we can detect disease at the molecular stage rather than the symptomatic stage, we entirely change treatment possibilities.”

Proteins.1 plans to expand its engineering and product development team in Finland during 2026–2027, positioning itself as a European hub for next-generation diagnostic technology. “Proteins.1 represents the kind of deep scientific breakthrough that can redefine an entire industry,” said Jyri Engeström at Lifeline Ventures. “The team combines world-class research with proven experience in building and scaling regulated medtech businesses.” Cloudberry Ventures further highlighted the company’s strong alignment with European strengths in photonics, microfabrication, and precision engineering.

Added Rene Kromhof, at Cloudberry VC, “What sets Proteins.1 apart is a fundamentally new sensing approach. Rather than using enzymes that give you one chance to detect a protein, they use light and thin-film transistors to amplify the signal from a single protein until it rises above the noise. That dramatically improves sensitivity, and ultimately, how early disease can be caught.”

CEO Prateek Singh has previously raised venture capital for microfluidics ventures and holds multiple patent families. Co-founder and COO Harri Hallila previously built and exited a regulated medical device company. The broader team includes commercial leadership with experience in leading diagnostics platforms.

The post Proteins.1 Launches to Develop Single Molecule Protein Amplification Tech for Diagnostics appeared first on GEN – Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology News.

Brain Gene Variations Help Explain Neurological and Psychiatric Sex Differences

Thousands of genes are expressed differently in the brains of men and women, researchers have discovered.

The findings could help explain differences in neurodevelopmental, psychiatric, and neurodegenerative disorders between the sexes.

While men are more likely to experience schizophrenia, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, and Parkinson’s disease, women are more prone to mood disorders and Alzheimer’s disease.

The U.S. study, in Science, is the first systemic single-cell survey of sex differences in gene expression across multiple regions of the human brain.

“Together, these findings provide a comprehensive map of molecular sex differences in the human brain and offer initial insight into their underlying mechanisms and potential functional consequences,” Alex DeCasien, PhD, from the National Institute of Mental Health in Bethesda, Maryland, told Inside Precision Medicine.

DeCasien and co-workers conducted a high-resolution analysis of gene expression in tissue samples from the brains of 15 men and 15 women using single-nucleus RNA sequencing.

They then used data from earlier large neuroimaging studies to select six cortical regions to sample, four of which showed sex-related differences in grey matter volume and two in which no such differences were found.

The team found subtle but widespread differences in gene activity between men and women. Biological sex explained very little of the variance in gene expression across the brain, at less than 1%, but differences were widespread—with more than 3000 genes showing different expression according to sex in at least one cortical region.

The greatest sex-related differences in gene expression were on the sex chromosomes. However, most of the genes showing sex-related variations in expression were autosomal—carried on one of the 22 numbered non-sex chromosomes.

The predominant driver for sex-biased expression of genes on these autosomal chromosomes were sex steroid hormones such as estrogen and testosterone.

Surprisingly, more than half the X chromosome genes in women were expressed in both alleles for at least one cell type. This indicated that many had escaped X chromosome inactivation—a female phenomenon in which one of the two X chromosomes is switched off early in development to stop women producing double the number of X-linked gene products to men.

“That finding has implications for understanding sex-biased disease susceptibility because several genes implicated in neurodevelopmental disorders reside on the X chromosome,” commented Jessica Tollkuhn, PhD, from Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, and S Marc Breedlove, from Michigan State University, in an accompanying Perspective article.

They noted that autosomal genes showing sex-biased expression were substantially enriched for extracellular matrix components, hormone signaling pathways, and metabolic processes. “Genes with greater expression in women were enriched for mitochondrial and synaptic functions, whereas male-biased genes were associated with metabolic and structural pathways,” the editorialists added.

“By pinpointing these sexually differentiated processes, the data provide a treasure trove for the discovery of biomarkers of and/or therapeutic targets for differential disease risk in men and women.”

DeCasien and team added: “These findings raise the possibility that sex differences in gene expression modulate the magnitude of genetic effects at risk loci, contributing to differences in disease vulnerability and to reduced portability of polygenic risk prediction across sexes.”

The post Brain Gene Variations Help Explain Neurological and Psychiatric Sex Differences appeared first on Inside Precision Medicine.