Science is the practice of figuring out how things work and then using that knowledge to further our understanding or to create tools that can solve problems facing the world. Bioluminescent tools and assays are examples of science doing all these things. Bioluminescence is the light-yielding (luminescence) chemical reaction that is used by many lifeforms. When fireflies flicker in the twilight, they are using bioluminescence to flash on and off. Chemically, bioluminescence happens when an enzyme called luciferase acts on a light-emitting compound, luciferin, in the presence of adenosine triphosphate (ATP), magnesium and oxygen.
For scientists, bioluminescence can serve as a tool to help them understand many cellular functions. Since few animal or plant cells produce their own light, there is little to no background signal (light) to be concerned about. This lack of background means that all light coming from the sample can be measured. In fact, bioluminescence is often a preferred tool for scientists because it does not require an external light source or special filters, which are required for fluorescence-based technologies.
Promega scientists have developed bioluminescent tools and assays to support leading edge scientific research for decades, beginning in 1990 with the Luciferase biosensor technology based on firefly luciferase. Luciferase is a wonderful tool for studying how enzymes work because its output (light) is so easy to measure: samples are placed into a special instrument called a luminometer, and the amount of light being produced (Relative Light Units) is recorded. Bioluminescence technology can be configured to measure a variety of cellular biology, ranging from cell health to enzyme activity down to the specific event of turning a gene on or off. The advent of new techniques for genetic manipulation, along with an enhanced understanding of bioluminescence and the discovery and engineering of better luciferases, enables science to use bioluminescence in even more unique ways.
mRNA vaccines came roaring onto the public stage in 2020. In the United States and Europe, two of the vaccines that are being used against the SARS-CoV-2 virus are mRNA vaccines. The scientific community has been talking about the potential of this technology against infectious diseases as well as cancer for several years, but no one thought that the first mRNA vaccines would make such a huge, and public, debut.
One big benefit of mRNA vaccines is the speed at which they can be developed. mRNA vaccines use messenger RNA particles to teach our cells to make a bit of protein, which then triggers our body’s immune response, and it is relatively easy to synthesize large amounts of mRNA in a laboratory. As promising as this sounds for infectious diseases, the application of mRNA vaccines for oncology might be even more exciting.
The year 2020 was a year filled with things we didn’t do. The global COVID-19 pandemic meant we didn’t gather with family and friends; we didn’t attend concerts or sporting events; we didn’t even go to work or school in the same way. We also didn’t go to the doctor, and as a result, many countries and organizations are reporting that there was an alarming drop in the number of new cancer cases (1–6). Unfortunately, while fewer diagnosis might sound like a good thing, there is no evidence that the actual rate of new cancer occurrence is declining (7).
COVID-19 Restrictions Impact Cancer Screening and Diagnosis
The drop in cancer diagnosis happened after countries began to put into place new restrictions intended to slow the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. These measures often included limiting or pausing many routine screenings and doctor visits, which also limited or paused opportunities to diagnosis cancer. The resulting decline in new cancer diagnosis was dramatic. In the United States, there was a 46.4% decline in the number of newly diagnosed cases of six of the most common cancer types (breast, colorectal, esophageal, gastric, lung and pancreatic) per week between March 1, 2020 and April 18, 2020 (1,2,8).
Viruses are both fascinating and terrifying. Stealthy, insidious and often deadly, they turn our own cells against us. Over the past year, we have all had a firsthand view of what a new and unknown virus can do. The SARS-CoV-2 virus has caused a global pandemic, and left scientists and medical professionals scrambling to unravel its mysteries and find ways to stop it.
COVID-19 is considered a respiratory disease, but we know that the SARS-CoV-2 virus can affect other systems in the body including the vascular and central nervous systems. In fact, some of the most noted symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 infection, headache, and the loss of the sense of taste and smell, are neurological— not respiratory— symptoms.
Three researchers from the University of Wisconsin and the Small Molecule Screening Facility (SMSF) at the University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center (UWCCC) have expanded their collaboration in new directions because of COVID-19. Before the pandemic, Gene Ananiev, PhD, Facility Manager of the SMSF, Tim Bugni, PhD, a Professor in the School of Pharmacy, and David Andes, MD, Professor of Medicine and Medical Microbiology and Immunology and Head of the Division of Infection Disease, worked together on antibiotic compound discovery and development, now they have added Covid-19-related projects to that list.
“It was kind of an interesting aside…” said David Andes “To try to see a need, fill a need.”
The need they saw was for tools that are necessary around any pandemic or infectious disease outbreak: Ways to quickly diagnose and manage those who are infected and ways to study the epidemiology of the disease—the distribution pattern and frequency, causes and risk factors for infection within a population. Specifically, the three were interested in an antibody test that could be used not only to understand the proportion of the population that might have already been infected with SARS-CoV-2, but that also could be used to evaluate the response to different vaccine candidates.
In the Northern hemisphere, the cold and flu season is about to start. Most years that means people schedule flu shots, dust off chicken soup recipes and stock up on tissues. If they start to feel sick, they stay home for a day or two, drink hot tea, eat warm soup and—for the most part— go on with their lives.
This is not, however, most years. This year the world is battling a pandemic virus, SARS-CoV-2. Symptoms of COVID-19, the disease caused by this virus, mirror those of the flu and common cold, and that overlap in symptoms is going to make life more complicated. Most years, a mild cough or minor body aches wouldn’t even warrant a call to the doctor. This year these, and other undiagnosed cold- and flu-like symptoms, won’t be easily ignored. They could mean kids have to stay home from school, and adults have to self-quarantine from work, for up to 2 weeks. In years past people might have been comfortable treating their symptoms at home, this year people will want answers: Is it the flu? Or is it COVID-19?
Lynch Syndrome is the autosomal dominant hereditary predisposition to develop colorectal cancer and certain other cancers. This simple, one sentence definition seems woefully inadequate considering the human toll this condition has inflicted on the families that have it in their genetic pedigree.
They Called it a Curse
To one family, perhaps the family when it comes to this condition, Lynch Syndrome has meant heartache and hope; grief and joy; death and life. Their story is told by Ami McKay in her book Daughter of Family G, and it is at once both a memoir of a Lynch Syndrome previvor (someone with a Lynch Syndrome genomic mutation who has not yet developed cancer) and a poignant and honest account of the family that helped science put name to a curse.
“The doctors called it cancer. I say it’s a curse. I wish I knew what we did to deserve it.”
Anna Haab from Daughter of Family G (1)
The scientific community first met “Family G” as the meticulously created family tree, filled with the stunted branches that mark early deaths by cancer. The pedigree was first published in 1913 in Archives of Internal Medicine (2). In the article, Dr. Alderd Warthin wrote: “A marked susceptibility to carcinoma exists in the case of certain family generations and family groups.” In 1925, an expanded pedigree of circles and squares was published in Dr. Warthin’s follow up study in the Journal of Cancer Research (3). But each circle and square in that pedigree denotes a person. Each line represents their dreams together for the future, and Ms. McKay wants us to know their names: Johannes and Anna, Kathrina, Elmer, Tillie, Sarah Anne (Sally); and—most importantly—Pauline. Because without Pauline there would be no story.
The genetic abnormality called microsatellite instability, or MSI, has been linked to cancer since its discovery in 1993 (1). MSI is the accumulation of insertion or deletion errors at microsatellite repeat sequences in cancer cells and results from a functional deficiency within one or more major DNA mismatch repair proteins (dMMR). This deficiency, and the resulting genetic instability, is closely related to the carcinogenicity of tumors (2).
Historically MSI has been used to screen for Lynch Syndrome, a dominant hereditary cancer propensity. More recently, tumors with deficient MMR function have been identified as being more likely to respond to immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapies (3.). Because MSI can be the first evidence of an MMR deficiency, MSI-High status is predictive of a positive response to immunotherapies such as ICI therapies. (3).
We have all been hearing a lot about RT-PCR, rRT-PCR and RT-qPCR lately, and for good reason. Real-Time Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction (rRT-PCR) is the technique used in by the Center for Disease Control (CDC) to test for COVID-19. Real-time RT-PCR, or quantitative RT-PCR (RT-qPCR)*, is a specialized PCR technique that visualizes amplification of the target sequesnce as it happens (in real time) and allows you to measure the amount of starting target material in your reaction. You can read more about the basics of this technique, and watch a webinar here. For more about RT-PCR for COVID-19 testing, read this blog.
Both qPCR and RT-qPCR are powerful tools for scientist to have at their disposal. These fundamental techniques are used to study biological process in a wide range of areas. Over the decades, Promega has supported researchers with RT-qPCR and qPCR reagents and systems to study everything from from diseases like COVID-19 and cancer to viruses in elephants and the circadian rhythm of krill.
The first time I performed PCR was in 1992. I was finishing my Bachelors in Genetics and had an independent study project in a population genetics laboratory. My task was to try using a new technique, RAPD PCR, to distinguish clonal populations of the sea anemone, Metridium senile. These creatures can reproduce both sexually and asexually, which can make population genetics studies challenging. My professor was looking for a relatively simple method to identify individuals who were genetically identical (i.e., potential clones).
PCR was still in its infancy. No one in my lab had ever tried it before, and the department had one thermal cycler, which was located in a building across the street. We had a paper describing RAPD PCR for population work, so we ordered primers and Taq DNA polymerase and set about grinding up bits of frozen sea anemone to isolate the DNA. [The grinding process had to be done using a mortar and pestle seated in a bath of liquid nitrogen because the tissue had to remain frozen. If it thawed it became a disgusting mass of goo that was useless—but that is a topic for a different blog.] Since I had never done any of the procedures before, my professor and I assembled the first set of reactions together. When we ran our results on a gel, we had all sorts of bands—just what he was hoping to see. Unfortunately, we realized that we had added 10X more Taq DNA polymerase than we should have used. I repeated the amplification with the correct amount of Taq polymerase, and I saw nothing. Continue reading “Optimizing PCR: One Scientist’s Not So Fond Memories”
By clicking “Accept All”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies. However you may visit Cookie Settings to provide a controlled consent.
If you are located in the EEA, the United Kingdom, or Switzerland, you can change your settings at any time by clicking Manage Cookie Consent in the footer of our website.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Advertisement".
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
6 months 2 days
This cookie is set by the provider Media.net. This cookie is used to check the status whether the user has accepted the cookie consent box. It also helps in not showing the cookie consent box upon re-entry to the website.
This cookie is used to store the language preferences of a user to serve up content in that stored language the next time user visit the website.
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
This cookie is associated with Sitecore content and personalization. This cookie is used to identify the repeat visit from a single user. Sitecore will send a persistent session cookie to the web client.
This domain of this cookie is owned by Vimeo. This cookie is used by vimeo to collect tracking information. It sets a unique ID to embed videos to the website.
1 month 18 hours 24 minutes
This cookie is used to calculate unique devices accessing the website.
This cookie is installed by Google Analytics. The cookie is used to calculate visitor, session, campaign data and keep track of site usage for the site's analytics report. The cookies store information anonymously and assign a randomly generated number to identify unique visitors.
This cookie is installed by Google Analytics. The cookie is used to store information of how visitors use a website and helps in creating an analytics report of how the website is doing. The data collected including the number visitors, the source where they have come from, and the pages visted in an anonymous form.
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
1 year 24 days
Used by Google DoubleClick and stores information about how the user uses the website and any other advertisement before visiting the website. This is used to present users with ads that are relevant to them according to the user profile.
This cookie is set by doubleclick.net. The purpose of the cookie is to determine if the user's browser supports cookies.
5 months 27 days
This cookie is set by Youtube. Used to track the information of the embedded YouTube videos on a website.
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
This cookies is set by Youtube and is used to track the views of embedded videos.
This is a pattern type cookie set by Google Analytics, where the pattern element on the name contains the unique identity number of the account or website it relates to. It appears to be a variation of the _gat cookie which is used to limit the amount of data recorded by Google on high traffic volume websites.