London South East | The UK's favourite investor portal.

There they are! Part one of prediction. 7m traded, that could be 3m from Hambro. TR1 next...

12:58...
“Look at that volume today 1850 trades buy lunch over 5m traded. Assume Hambro get rid of 3m that’s 1.7% in round numbers, takes them a tad of 3%. Here’s the prediction lots of delayed sells today posted late. TR1 Thursday Hambro sub 3%...”

Trek

Hi Robbie,

Thanks, for clearing that. He says that...

“It was found that the effect of IFN? on ACE2 expression was greater than that of IFN? or IFN?, so not all interferons are equal in this respect.”

This ties in with the cell paper from SGD...page 15

Our study finds that Type I IFNs, and to a lesser extent Type II IFNs, upregulate ACE2. This is based on several lines of evidence: 1) we identify a human goblet secretory cell subset in upper airway nasal epithelium enriched for ACE2 expression to have the highest IFN?-induced gene signature; 2) we find that IFN?, and to a lesser extent IFN? or IFN?, induced ACE2 expression in a published data set of air-liquid interface cultures derived from human nasal epithelial cells (Giovannini-Chami et al., 2012; Ordovas-Montanes et al., 2018); 3) we extend our search through the Interferome database (Rusinova et al., 2013) and find that, in epithelial barrier tissues, Type I IFNs upregulate ACE2 in multiple studies, especially in primary bronchial cells and keratinocytes (Rusinova et al., 2013); 4) we find two STAT1 binding sites in the promoter of ACE2; 5) in our unpublished atlas of SHIV-infected macaques, known to have elevated levels of chronic IFN signaling, we find ACE2 upregulation in absorptive enterocytes; 6) we directly provide evidence for IFN?, and to some extent IFN?, inducing ACE2 expression in primary human upper airway basal cells; and, 7) influenza infection in humans, a known inducer of the IFN pathway, leads to increased ACE2 expression in goblet secretory cells of the nasal epithelium (Cao et al., 2020).

So imo (only did chemistry, lol) the concerns around ‘excessive’ up regulation of ACE2 providing more ‘targets’ for covid-19 is as well as timing (we covered that one) depends on the IFN type used. Our concerns were that as the paper was only (then) 3 days old the team may have been unaware of the ACE2 response to interferon (the paper did not specify which one). However, we can see from Richard’s email that he is comfortable and indeed aware of the different responses.

Trek

Part1
Regulators at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration on Tuesday authorized the first coronavirus test that lets people collect a sample at home.

The authorization of the diagnostic — developed by testing giant LabCorp — marks the first time the agency has cleared an at-home Covid-19 test and caps weeks of back-and-forth between the agency and startups who sought to develop their own versions of the tests that would allow for at-home sample collection. LabCorp’s test will initially be made available to health care workers and first responders who might have been exposed to the virus. Patients can collect samples at home if the test is recommended by a health care provider after they’ve completed a questionnaire about Covid-19.

“Throughout this pandemic we have been facilitating test development to ensure patients access to accurate diagnostics, which includes supporting the development of reliable and accurate at-home sample collection options,” FDA commissioner Stephen Hahn said in a statement on Tuesday.

“Specifically, for tests that include home sample collection, we worked with LabCorp to ensure the data demonstrated from at-home patient sample collection is as safe and accurate as sample collection at a doctor’s office, hospital or other testing site,” he added.

The FDA had already cleared LabCorp’s test in March under regulations known as an emergency use authorization, geared specifically for situations such as the coronavirus pandemic. On April 5, the company reached out to FDA to ask that it amend that authorization to allow for patients to use it at home. LabCorp’s at-home test uses a specific Q-tip-style cotton nose swab, as opposed to previous, longer swabs that required patients to sample themselves deep in the back of the nose. Experts had previously expressed concerns to STAT about the viability of people testing themselves at home using kits that involve longer swabs, which are uncomfortable when done properly.

The agency’s authorization of the LabCorp test for home sample collection comes after a previous flurry of activity between the agency and companies including Nurx, Carbon Health, and Everlywell, all of which had sought to have their own Covid-19 tests approved for at-home use in March.

Confusion over the FDA’s rapidly shifting guidelines appeared to lead some companies to initially believe their tests were in the clear. On March 21, federal regulators issued stern guidance which clarified that no home tests had yet been approved for use and warned consumers to be wary of “unauthorized fraudulent test kits.” In response to the warning, all three companies stopped selling their kits directly to consumers.

In April, two other companies began selling Covid-19 tests that let people collect saliva samples at home. The two companies — MicroGen DX and Vault Health — told STAT on April 10 that their tests were cleared for patients to collect spit samples at home.

Latest Share Chat

Member Info for TrekMadone

Followers

Following

Posts (Last 30 Days)

Posts (All Time)

Last Post

Member Since

Share Chat Post Distribution (Last 30 Days)

Activity Log (Last 30 Days)