The Systems Biology of COVID-19 and the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The class will build a foundation that includes the emergence of complexity, simple biological subsystems, their reductionist and equivalent toy and organ-chip models, and the measurements required to specify model architecture and parameters. Applications to biology, physiology, medicine, chemical and biological defense, pharmacology, drug discovery, and toxicology. UGrad: PHYS 240 01 and BME 290B; Grad: PHYS 326 and BME 395C.
0. I knew very little about what NIH would be looking for in their BAA.
ReplyDelete1. Surprised that NIH really piggy backed on the DARPA proposal...even citing it. I am also surprised that it took them to 2011 to state, “NIH has identified a critical need for improved model systems.” To me this means the NIH thought the previous models were sufficient had no previous desire to improve models and better science.
2. How do you represent “population diversity” on a chip? Also why is 4 weeks the critical culture time?
3. What are some cell-type specific reporters and biosensors systems linked to the microsystem categories?
4. I am curious as to how many institutions and groups applied for each microsystem. I suspect some microsystems are easier to create and scale to humans easier than others.
Frank "Edad" Block, Jr.
ReplyDeleteSysBio13 Asgn_9C_Class_07_NIH RFP__2013_09_17
0. Knew: DARPA material.
1. Learned: Page 6 work with a consortium. Indemnify the government for patent infringement claims!? NIH Project Scientists.
2. Pressing: What is supposed to be 3D? How is the consortium set up here? Buy insurance for patent infringement claims?
3. Presentation: Who's in the consortium? How is the consortium supposed to work? How, and how well, does the consortium actually work?
4. Thoughts: This appears to be competing with, or at least overlapping with, the DARPA program. Is this an example of "typical government overlap and waste"? Are there valid and important reasons for separate programs?
Frank "Edad" Block, Jr.
ReplyDeleteSysBio13 Asgn_9C_Class_07_NIH RFP__2013_09_17
0. Knew: DARPA material.
1. Learned: Page 6 work with a consortium. Indemnify the government for patent infringement claims!? NIH Project Scientists.
2. Pressing: What is supposed to be 3D? How is the consortium set up here? Buy insurance for patent infringement claims?
3. Presentation: Who's in the consortium? How is the consortium supposed to work? How, and how well, does the consortium actually work?
4. Thoughts: This appears to be competing with, or at least overlapping with, the DARPA program. Is this an example of "typical government overlap and waste"? Are there valid and important reasons for separate programs?
SysBio13 Asgn_9C_Class_07_NIH RFP__2013_09_17
ReplyDelete0. Knew: Familiar with background information from class and benefits of successfully creating OoC's.
1. Learned: NIH view on the OoC and how they connect to the DARPA funding.
2. Questions: How can you test multiple times on one OoC? Will they be "disposable" or can you restore them back to a "healthy" state?
3. Presentation: human stem cells and progenitor cells
4. Thoughts: The development of a database for the microsystem responses to therapies seems like a great idea.
0. Knew: Unaware of NIH’s interest in advancement of OoC’s
ReplyDelete1. Learned: The NIH stressed many times the importance of public outsourcing of the technical gains made by the groups funded through this project, they want en masse growth in this field
2. Pressing: It never occurred to me that a conglomerate of sub-organs could be used to represent the functionality of the whole, it seems to me a very logical solution to constraints imposed by scale reduction, so has anyone tried to tackle OoC’s by using sub-microsystems tethered together in series/where could complications arise from physically separating physiological functions of a single organ?
3. Presentation: Modular biology
4. Thoughts: I hadn’t considered the realpolitiks of government funded research, merit is substantiated by meeting benchmarks
0. knew: Organs on a chip need to be "physiologically accurate, genetically diverse, and pathologically representative."
ReplyDelete1. learned: Skin, musculo-skeletal, and reproductive OoCs need to be made.
2. Question: Can skin be made to grow on top of other organs, like the musculo-skeletal chip? Also, does "amenability to high content screening for repeated dose efficacy testing" simply mean "make it tough enough re-equilibriate after a drug test?"
3. Presentation: physiology 101 will be helpful when its ready. Hopefully it can touch on the 10 organs mentioned.
4. Thoughts: Interesting. Irt helped to put things into perspective and to see what the goal is.
0 Knew: DTRA interest
ReplyDelete1 Learned: NIH is also interested in OoC for drug toxicity testing
2 Pressing: What is meant by "genetically diverse"? (p. 4).
3 Presentation: stem cells versus harvested cells
4 Thoughts: The goals are very high! especially the blood vessel microsystem model... if this were developed it would solve our capillary problem?
0.Knew: Development of OoCs was funded for drug discovery and testing.
ReplyDelete1. Learned: NIH expects all "research resources" to be made available to all "qualified" within the scientific community.
2. Pressing ?: Does NIH expect organs in chips be made available to scientists overseas or does sharing of "research resources" p. 13 come with any restrictions? How will representation of "population diversity" p.4 be achieved on a microchip?
3. Presentation: population diversity
4.Thoughts: Seems less menacing than DTRA.
0. Knew DARPA material, what OoC's can be used for
ReplyDelete1. Learned NIH's interest, essentially the same as DARPA's. What they are specifially looking for from each system.
2. When they say "long culture period" what time frame are they talking about?
3. NIH required microsystems
4. Also when they are talking about having "genetically diverse" microsystems, how do they propose to achieve this?
Blog harvested
ReplyDeleteJPW