Publisher Health

Tumors are made up of many types of cells, both cancerous and benign. The specific complexity of the cells inside brain tumors has been a trademark of the disease, one that makes treatment extremely difficult. While scientists have long known about the variety of cells within a brain tumor, the ways these tumors grow has relied on the understanding that the cells are static, unmoving and relatively fixed.
But researchers at the University of Michigan Department of Neurosurgery and Rogel Cancer Center have discovered that these aggressive tumors contain highly active cells that move throughout tissue in complicated patterns. What’s more, the accumulations of these elongated, spindle-like cells found throughout the tumor, coined ‘oncostreams,’ serve as the basis for cancerous cells’ behavior, determining how tumors grow and invade normal tissue.
Pedro Lowenstein, M.D., Ph.D., Richard C. Schneider Collegiate Professor of Neurosurgery and lead author of this study in Nature Communications, says this organized growth is what makes brain tumors so relentless. “Brain tumors are highly lethal, with less than 5% of patients living beyond five years,” he said. “Unfortunately, reoccurrence is what eventually kills patients. They receive surgery for their initial tumor, but the tumor always comes back within 12 to 18 months,” he said.
Lowenstein and his team, including Maria Castro, Ph.D., also found that overexpression of Collagen 1, a protein produced by tumor cells, is essential to the growth and function of these structures.
“When we eliminated Collagen 1 production from tumor cells, the animal models with brain tumors lived much longer. This step removes oncostreams from tumors and reduces tumor aggressive behavior because the tumors need Collagen 1 to move in the specific way we discovered,” said Lowenstein.
Lowenstein says this structure is likely present in other types of cancer, too. “Once people recognize that there are dynamic areas of the tumor, and that they’re related to tumor growth, eventual invasion and death, people will likely locate oncostreams in other tumor models,” he said.
To detect this previously unknown presence of oncostreams, the team collaborated with Todd Hollon, M.D., assistant professor in the Michigan Medicine Department of Neurological Surgery, and Sebastien Motsch, Ph.D., associate professor of mathematics at Arizona State University, to implement artificial intelligence methods to identify the structures in tissue.
“Essentially, we showed images to a computer and the computer eventually learns to recognize oncostreams,” Lowenstein explained.
Dismantling oncostreams through the removal of Collagen 1 could represent a novel therapeutic target to treat lethal brain tumors. “This research proves the crucial importance of continuing to investigate the complicated extracellular matrix,” notes Andrea Comba, Ph.D., research investigator and first author of the study.
“Based on this discovery, we propose targeting tumor collagen to disrupt oncostreams, and as novel therapy for the treatment of brain glioma,” she said.
Story Source:
Materials provided by Michigan Medicine – University of Michigan. Original written by Anna Megdell. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

Cancer campaigner Dame Deborah James has died at the age of 40, her family has said, describing her as an “inspiration”.Dame Deborah was awarded a damehood by the Queen in recognition of her work, raising awareness of bowel cancer.The former deputy head mistress was diagnosed with the disease in 2016. In 2018 she took part in a podcast, You, Me and the Big C, alongside Lauren Mahon and BBC Radio 5 Live newsreader Rachael Bland. When Bland died later that year, James and Mahon continued the podcast which was praised for its frank discussions about cancer.You can read more about this story here.

Spine-related pain is increasingly common in older adults. While medications play an important role in pain management, their use has limitations in geriatric patients due to reduced liver and kidney function, comorbid medical problems and polypharmacy (the simultaneous use of multiple drugs to treat medical conditions).
Now a new review study has found acetaminophen is safe in older adults, but non-steroidal anti-inflammatories (ibuprofen) may be more effective for spine-related pain. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatories should be used short-term in lower dose courses with gastrointestinal precaution while corticosteroids show the least evidence for treating nonspecific back pain.
Additionally, nerve pain medications (gabapentin and pregabalin) can be used in older persons, with caution to dose and kidney function. Newer antidepressants (duloxetine) more so than older ones (nortriptyline) can help with spine-related pain, with attention to possible sedation and dizziness. Some muscle relaxants (baclofen and tizanidine) can be used in older persons, again accounting for kidney and liver function. Opioids have limited use in common spine-related pain, but can be used with caution in cases that don’t respond to treatment.
“Most older people experience neck or low back pain at some point, bothersome enough to see their doctor. Our findings provide a helpful medication guide for physicians to use for spine pain in an older population that can have a complex medical history,” explained corresponding author Michael D. Perloff, MD, PhD, assistant professor of neurology at Boston University School of Medicine (BUSM) and a neurologist at Boston Medical Center.
The researchers performed a literature review to assess the evidence-basis for medications used for spine-related pain in older adults, with a focus on drug metabolism and adverse drug reactions. They then provided their recommendations based on safe and effective dosing.
Among their findings: Pain medicines gabapentin and pregabalin may cause dizziness or difficulty walking, but may have some benefit for neck and back nerve pain (such as sciatica) in older adults. They should be used in lower doses with smaller dose adjustments. Some muscle relaxants (carisoprodol, chlorzoxazone, cyclobenzaprine, metaxalone, methocarbamol, and orphenadrine) are avoided in older adults due to risk for sedation and falls. Others (tizanidine, baclofen, dantrolene) may be helpful for neck and back pain, with the most evidence for tizanidine and baclofen. These should be used in reduced doses, avoiding tizanidine with liver disease and reducing baclofen dosing with kidney disease. Older antidepressants are typically avoided in older adults due to their side effects, but nortriptyline and desipramine may be better tolerated for neck and back nerve pain at lower doses. Overall, newer antidepressants (namely duloxetine) have a better safety profile and good efficacy for spine-related nerve pain. Tramadol may be tolerated in older adults, but has risk for sedation, upset stomach, and constipation. It may be used in lower doses after alternative medications have failed and works well with co-administered acetaminophen. Opioids are avoided due to their side effects and mortality risk, but low dose opioid therapy may be helpful for severe refractory pain with close monitoring of patients clinically.According to the researchers, complementary medicine, physical therapy, injections and surgery all have a place to help older persons with spine-related pain. “Medications used at the correct dose, for the correct diagnosis, adjusting for preexisting medical problems can result in better use of treatments for spine pain,” added first author Jonathan Fu, a 2022 MD graduate from BUSM.
These findings appear online in the journal Drugs & Aging.
Story Source:
Materials provided by Boston University School of Medicine. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

With the White House under pressure to push back on the Supreme Court ruling on abortion, Xavier Becerra unveiled several steps aimed at protecting access to the procedure.WASHINGTON — President Biden’s health secretary, facing criticism from other Democrats that the administration is not doing enough to counter the Supreme Court’s decision overturning Roe v. Wade, said on Tuesday that there was “no magic bullet” to preserve access to abortion — even as he outlined a series of steps his department will take in an effort to do so.Xavier Becerra, the secretary of health and human services, told reporters that at Mr. Biden’s direction, he had instructed his agency to take a number of actions, including making sure that federal programs cover medication abortion in cases of rape or incest or when the life of the mother is at risk.At a morning news conference, Mr. Becerra said his department would work with the Justice Department to ensure that women have access to abortion pills — two different drugs, taken 24 to 48 hours apart and authorized for the first 10 weeks of pregnancy — in places where state law conflicts with the judgment of the Food and Drug Administration, which has approved the drugs for use and determined that they are safe and effective.It will also require hospital emergency rooms to comply with a federal law mandating that they stabilize patients experiencing a medical emergency — including by performing abortions if necessary. And it will take steps to ensure that patients’ records are private, to keep state or local officials from identifying women who have had abortions.But those steps may not go far enough for progressive Democrats and other advocates for reproductive rights. Some lawmakers, including Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, have pressed the administration to build abortion clinics on federal land and pay for people to travel out of state to seek abortions.From Opinion: The End of Roe v. WadeCommentary by Times Opinion writers and columnists on the Supreme Court’s decision to end ​​the constitutional right to abortion.Michelle Goldberg: “In the aftermath of the anti-abortion movement’s catastrophic victory, it’s worth asking what we can learn from their tactics.”Maureen Dowd: “The court is out of control. We feel powerless to do anything about it. Clarence Thomas, of all people, has helped lead us to where we are.”Peter Coy: “People on the losing end of Supreme Court decisions increasingly feel that justice is not being served. That’s a scary situation for American democracy.”Jamelle Bouie: “The power to check the Supreme Court is there, in the Constitution. The task now is to seize it.”Michele Goodwin, law professor: “The overturning of Roe v. Wade reveals the Supreme Court’s neglectful reading of the amendments that abolished slavery.”Those were not among the measures that Mr. Becerra announced on Tuesday, and he sounded a note of caution about what the administration can and cannot do. There are still complex legal issues to sort out, he said, to ensure the administration does not violate the court’s ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.“It was a long decision and it did upend 50 years of precedent, and so you want to make sure that what you do is within the confines of the law,” Mr. Becerra said. “We’re not interested in going rogue.”Activists unfurled a banner that read “Biden: Protect Abortion” near the White House on Tuesday.Shuran Huang for The New York TimesHe called the court’s decision “despicable,” and at one point said he wanted to offer “my apologies” that the administration could not do more. “There is no magic bullet,” he said, “but if there is something we can do, we will find it and we will do it.”The administration has studied, but remains skeptical about, the idea of hosting abortion clinics on federal enclaves like military bases and national parks — where state prosecutors lack jurisdiction — in states where abortion is now a crime.The problem, according to officials familiar with internal deliberations, is that the federal government could not ensure that doctors who are not federal employees performing official duties — and potentially patients — would not be at risk of prosecution. The White House press secretary, Karine Jean-Pierre, dismissed the idea on Tuesday, telling reporters aboard Air Force One that it could have “dangerous ramifications” for women and doctors.If a Republican were to win the presidency in 2024, his or her Justice Department could charge people with state-law abortion crimes — and the statute of limitations for charging conduct dating back to 2022 will not have run out. States could strip doctors of their medical licenses. And state prosecutors could try to charge people with related conduct that took place outside the enclave — like helping women get there — under a theory of aiding and abetting or conspiracy.Offering financial help to women to cross state lines to get an abortion could also be problematic for the administration, because it might violate the so-called Hyde Amendment, which bars federal funds from being used to pay for abortion except in cases of rape or incest, or where the life of the mother is at risk. Mr. Becerra was asked on Tuesday if the Department of Health and Human Services might provide such financial help.Once officials know “exactly what we believe we are able to do, and have the money to do, we will let you know,” he said. “But until then, what I could simply say to you is: Every option is on the table.”One area where the administration can act is to ensure that women have access to emergency contraception — the so-called morning-after pill, also known as Plan B — and intrauterine devices. Both are common methods of contraception, but abortion opponents regard them as “abortifacients” and have tried in some states to restrict access to them.Some family-planning clinics in states that are banning abortion say their supplies of Plan B are now running short, because women — fearful that the pills will be outlawed — are stocking up. Hailey Kramer, a nurse practitioner at Tri-Rivers Family Planning in Rolla, Mo., said on Monday that the clinic’s supplier was grappling with soaring demand and that the pills had been back-ordered since a draft of the opinion overturning Roe was leaked last month.Mr. Becerra also said he had directed the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to take action against states, including Missouri, that have excluded Planned Parenthood, a major provider of birth control, from Medicaid family planning programs that reimburse for such services.“We will make clear that family planning providers are able to participate in the Medicaid program,” he said.

A single gene that was previously found to be the driving force in a rare syndrome linked to epilepsy, autism and developmental disability has been identified as a linchpin in the formation of healthy neurons.
Duke researchers say the gene, DDX3X, forms a cellular machine called a helicase, whose job it is to split open the hairpins and cul-de-sacs of RNA so that its code can be read by the protein-making machinery of the cell. This gene is carried on the X chromosome, so females have two copies of the gene and males have only one.
“If you remove both copies of the gene in a female mouse, that results in a massive microcephaly where the brains are severely reduced in size,” said Debra Silver, PhD, an associate professor of molecular genetics and microbiology in the Duke School of Medicine who led the research team. “But the removal of a single copy is probably more closely mimicking what’s happening in human patients,” Silver said.
Put another way, the defects caused by faulty DDX3X are dosage-dependent — the syndrome can vary depending on how badly the production of helicases is affected by mutations. The findings appear June 28 in the open access journal eLife.
When DDX3X is altered by a mutation in early development, “you don’t get as many neurons over time because this gene is required for the production of neurons from progenitor cells,” Silver said. “And it is also helping the progenitors to divide properly.”
If it normally takes a nerve precursor cell 15 hours or so to divide, a mutated DDX3X may make that process take even longer, Silver said. “And what that means over time, if these neural precursors are taking too long to divide, is you fall behind, and the brain doesn’t develop properly.”
In a previous study the team published in March 2020, , using genetic samples from 107 developmentally disabled children from around the world, the researchers found that half of the DDX3X mutations disrupted the gene completely, but the other half only made it work more poorly.

Researchers have found that blocking certain acetylcholine receptors in the lateral habenula (LHb), an area of the brain that balances reward and aversion, made it harder to resist seeking cocaine in a rat model of impulsive behavior. These findings identify a new role for these receptors that may represent a future target for the development of treatments for cocaine use disorder. There are currently no approved medications to treat cocaine use disorder.
Published in the Journal of Neuroscience, the study was supported by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), part of the National Institutes of Health. In 2020, over 41,000 people died from drug overdoses involving stimulants, including cocaine and methamphetamine. Developing safe and effective medications that help treat addictions to cocaine and other stimulants is critical to expand the choices offered to people seeking treatment and to help sustain recovery.
“This discovery gives researchers a new, specific target toward solving a problem that has long been elusive — developing treatments for cocaine addiction,” said NIDA Director, Nora Volkow, M.D. “As we have seen with medications to treat opioid use disorder, adding this tool to clinical care could save lives from overdose and drastically improve health and quality of life.”
Addiction science researchers are particularly interested in the LHb as a target for future treatment development because of its position as an interface between brain regions involved with reasoning and other higher order thought processes and those mediating emotion and reward — factors known to be associated with substance use disorders as well as major depressive disorders. For instance, these areas are involved in regulating behaviors like abstaining from a reward when it is determined not to be “beneficial.”
Building on previous work that established the importance of the LHb and acetylcholine receptor signaling in impulsive cocaine-seeking, this study further defines the cellular mechanisms through which LHb neurons regulate this behavior. Researchers used a behavioral paradigm called the Go/NoGo model in rats. In this model, rats were trained to self-administer cocaine, where a lever press led to an injection of the drug. This was followed by specific training in the Go/NoGo task where cocaine was available when the lights were on (Go), but not when the lights were off (NoGo). Animals quickly learned to stop responding when cocaine was not available.
The researchers then chemically manipulated the LHb, to assess the impact on the rats’ ability to withhold their response to cocaine. They found that response inhibition for cocaine was impaired by blocking a specific type of muscarinic acetylcholine receptor, known as M2Rs, with an experimental drug called AFDX-116, and not with a drug called pirenzepine that blocks other muscarinic acetylcholine receptors known as M1Rs. Thus, when M2Rs were blocked in the LHb the rodents were no longer able to stop responding for cocaine even when it was not available (the “NoGo” condition), despite the training. This indicates that increasing LHb M2R function may represent a potential target for treating impulsive drug seeking and substance use disorders.
The researchers also studied the cellular mechanisms by which M2Rs alter LHb neuronal activity by measuring changes in the electrical activity of these neurons in response to acetylcholine-like drugs. Although these drugs reduced both excitatory and inhibitory inputs onto LHb neurons, there was a net increase in inhibition, which may account for acetylcholine’s ability to limit impulsive cocaine seeking.
“The LHb acts like an interface between rational thought in the forebrain and the modulation of neurotransmitters like dopamine and serotonin that originate in the midbrain, which are important in regulating decision processes and emotions,” said Carl Lupica, Ph.D., chief of the Electrophysiology Research Section of the Computational and Systems Neuroscience Branch of NIDA. “While the immediate results of this study are related to cocaine seeking, there are also greater implications for impulsivity as it relates to other drugs as well as to psychiatric conditions like obsessive-compulsive disorder. Our future studies will explore the relationship between LHb activity and impulsive behavior related to other drugs such as cannabis, and opioids such as heroin.”
Although targeting M2Rs is promising, there are challenges because the muscarinic acetylcholine system is involved in everything from regulating heart rate, affecting motion sickness, and controlling vasodilation, for example. These receptors are also located throughout the body, including many other regions of the brain. Further research is needed to develop ways to target the M2Rs in the LHb without causing a cascade of side effects, and as a first step these researchers are now trying to identify where in the brain the acetylcholine released in the LHb originates.
The study was funded by the NIDA Intramural Research Program.

The COVID-19 pandemic and its impacts have taken a disproportionate toll on American mothers who were pregnant or just gave birth. Maternal mortality (i.e., deaths during pregnancy or in the early postpartum period) increased by 18% in 2020, according to data from the National Center for Health Statistics, exceeding the ~16% increase in overall US mortality in 2020. Yet according to a new analysis from the University of Maryland and Boston University, the maternal death rate after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic was even higher, and disproportionately impacted Black and non-white Hispanic mothers.
A research letter published in JAMA Network Open by Marie Thoma in the UMD School of Public Health and Eugene Declercq in the BU School of Public Health compared maternal mortality data from 2018-March 2020, when the pandemic began, to April-December 2020. Overall, they found large increases in maternal death (33%) and late maternal deaths (41%) after March 2020 compared with before the pandemic, and conspicuous increases among Black and Hispanic mothers.
“The increase was really driven by deaths after the start of the pandemic, which are higher than what we see for overall excess mortality in 2020,” said Dr. Thoma, assistant professor of family science in the UMD SPH. The study also showed that existing and new disparities emerged after the pandemic with a 40% jump among already high rates for non-Hispanic Black women and a 74% jump among formerly lower rates in Hispanic women.
Strikingly, said Dr. Declercq, professor of community health sciences at BUSPH, “for the first time in more than a decade, the maternal mortality rate for Hispanic women during the pandemic was higher than that for non-Hispanic white women, a shift that may be related to COVID and deserves greater attention moving forward.”
COVID-19 was listed as a secondary cause of death in 14.9% of maternal deaths in the last nine months of 2020, with it being a contributing factor for 32% of Hispanic, 12.9% of Black and 7% of non-Hispanic white women giving birth.
In their analysis of causes of maternal death, they found the largest increases were due to conditions directly related to COVID-19 (respiratory or viral infection) and conditions made worse by COVID-19 infection, such as diabetes or cardiovascular disease. However, interruptions to the health care system could have led to delayed prenatal care that could have meant that risk factors for pregnancy complications went undetected.
“We need more detailed data on the specific causes of maternal deaths overall and those associated with COVID-19,” Dr. Thoma said. “Potentially we could see improvements in 2021 due to the rollout of vaccines, as well as the extension of postpartum care provided for Medicaid recipients as part of the American Rescue Act of 2021 in some states. We’re going to continue to examine this.”
Story Source:
Materials provided by University of Maryland. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

How can we increase the efficacy of vaccines used to protect against viral respiratory diseases such as influenza and COVID-19? Scientists from Inserm, CNRS and Aix-Marseille Université at the Center of Immunology Marseille-Luminy are opening up new prospects in the field, with the triggering of memory B cells directly in the lungs looking to be a promising avenue. At present, the vaccines are administered intramuscularly and do not trigger the appearance of these cell populations. This research, which enhances fundamental knowledge in the field of immunology, has been published in the journal Immunity.
Memory B cells are immune cells produced primarily in the lymph nodes and spleen following infection. They persist for a long time in these regions and retain the memory of the infectious agent. If the body is confronted with the same agent in the future, these cells are immediately mobilized and rapidly reactivate the immune system for effective protection of the individual.
Following extensive research into these memory B cells, researchers discovered three years ago that they could also be localized in the lungs. The team led by Inserm researcher Mauro Gaya and his colleagues from the Center of Immunology Marseille-Luminy (AMU/CNRS/Inserm) and the Center for Immunophenomics (AMU/CNRS/Inserm) went further in order to describe the nature and functioning of this specific immune cell population.
The aim was to better understand these cells and their involvement in the long-term immune response against respiratory infections. For this, the scientists worked with two mouse models of infection: the influenza and Sars-CoV-2 viruses.
“Bona fide” and “bystanders”
They used fluorescent markers to track the appearance of memory B cells after infection, following which they performed a single-cell transcriptome analysis[1]. “These techniques enabled us to precisely localize these cells in the lungs of our animal models and describe their gene expression profile cell by cell to study their function,” explains Gaya.

In the fight against the Covid-19 pandemic, mRNA-based vaccines have impressively demonstrated their potential. Using this technology, scientists were able to rapidly develop and bring to market vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 that have been extremely effective at protecting millions of people against severe disease progression of COVID-19 or even death.
However, RNA-based medicine can be used to combat more than just viruses. Among others, it can also be considered as a candidate for a new type of antibiotics that can be used to treat bacterial infections in a tailored manner.
Which prerequisites these active agents need to fulfil and how they work in the bacterium — this has been investigated by researchers from the University of Würzburg (JMU). Teams from the Institute of Molecular Infection Biology (IMIB) and the Helmholtz Institute for RNA-based Infection Research (HIRI) were involved. They present the results of their work in the current issue of Nucleic Acids Research.
Traditional antibiotics are increasingly failing
“The number of antibiotic-resistant bacterial strains is growing worldwide; treatments with conventional active agents are failing more and more. We therefore urgently need novel drugs to combat these pathogens in a targeted and effective manner.” This is how Professor Jörg Vogel describes the background of the work that has now been published. Vogel is the Chair of Molecular Infection Biology I at JMU and Director of HIRI as well as the corresponding author of this study.
Programmable mRNA antibiotics could be the solution to this problem. The strategy is simple: “We introduce short chains of bases into bacteria that are designed to exactly match specific genes,” explains Vogel. When these fragments bind to the corresponding mRNA of the gene of interest, they abrogate protein production and, ideally, the bacterium dies as a result.

Although pregnant individuals and newborns may face elevated risks of developing more severe cases of COVID-19 following SARS-CoV-2 infection, data indicate that COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy can help to protect both the mother and child. New research collaboratively led by investigators at Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) and Brigham and Women’s Hospital (BWH) and published in Nature Communications examined how different COVID-19 vaccines and the timing of vaccination during pregnancy impact the extent of this protection.
“Our goal was to compare maternal antibody responses and transplacental transfer of antibody to the neonate with vaccination across all three trimesters of pregnancy, and across different vaccine platforms (Moderna, Pfizer, and Johnson & Johnson). We hope to use this information to better counsel patients wondering about vaccination in the first versus the second or third trimester,” says co-senior author Andrea Edlow, MD, MSc, a maternal-fetal medicine specialist at MGH and an assistant professor of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology at Harvard Medical School.
For the study, Edlow and her colleagues characterized antibody responses after Janssen’s adenovirus-based Ad26.COV2.S, Moderna’s mRNA-based mRNA-1273, and Pfizer-BioNTech’s mRNA-based BNT162b2 vaccines in 158 pregnant individuals. The team also evaluated the transfer of protective SARS-CoV-2 antibodies via the placenta from mother to fetus by analyzing maternal and umbilical cord blood in 175 maternal-neonatal pairs.
The research revealed induction of lower-functioning SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies after Ad26.COV2.S compared with mRNA vaccination, as well as subtle advantages in antibody levels and function with mRNA-1273 versus BN162b2. mRNA vaccine-induced antibodies had higher levels and functions against SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern, such as Alpha, Beta, Delta, and Gamma. Vaccine-induced antibodies also demonstrated neutralizing activity against Omicron. First and third trimester vaccination led to enhanced maternal immune responses relative to second trimester vaccination. The transfer of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies to the fetus through the placenta was most efficient following first and second trimester vaccination.
“These data support the initial vaccine series early in pregnancy if it has not yet been administered, with possible boosting later in pregnancy if eligible, to optimize protective antibody titers for both mother and neonate,” says co-senior author Galit Alter, PhD, a core member at the Ragon Institute of MGH, MIT and Harvard and a professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School.
The investigators stressed the need for more research on this topic. “Additional studies are needed to understand how to optimize maternal and neonatal immunity induced by vaccines in general during pregnancy,” says co-senior author Kathryn J. Gray, MD, PhD, an associate obstetrician at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and an assistant professor of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology at Harvard Medical School.
Other study authors include Caroline G. Atyeo, Lydia L. Shook, Sara Brigida, Rose M. De Guzman, Stepan Demidkin, Cordelia Muir, Babatunde Akinwunmi, Arantxa Medina Baez, Maegan Sheehan, Erin McSweeney, Madeleine Burns,Ruhi Nayak, Maya K. Kumar, Chinmay D. Patel, Allison Fialkowski, Dana Cvrk, Ilona T. Goldfarb, Lael M. Yonker, Alessio Fasano, Alejandro B. Balazs, and Michal A. Elovitz.
This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health, MGH ECOR, Nancy Zimmerman, the Massachusetts Consortium on Pathogen Readiness, the Gates Foundation, and the Musk Foundation.