Podcasts about genomic

What does it take to build the data systems that sit behind your genetic evaluations?This week on the podcast, Ferg catches up with Dan Garrick from Helical. Dan grew up on a sheep, beef and venison farm in the Manawatu before moving to the US at 13, where he went on to complete a PhD in aerospace engineering at Iowa State University. He's the son of Professor Dorian Garrick, one of New Zealand's most respected animal breeding geneticists, and his grandfather was one of the world's leading experts on sharks, making Dan a third-generation PhD.Dan explains how the same maths used to model fluid dynamics around rockets is used to generate breeding values, and how he ended up joining the family business in 2017 to help roll out some of the first production single step evaluations in the US for American Hereford and IGS. That work quickly revealed a major bottleneck in managing the genomic data flowing in from DNA testing labs. That's where Helical was born.Ferg and Dan talk through how Helical now serves breed societies, genetics companies, universities and labs across beef, dairy, sheep, horses, dogs, aquaculture and forestry. They also look ahead at where things are going. From decision support tools and AI in commercial herds, to the potential for wearable devices like virtual fencing collars to generate entirely new breeding values nobody has thought of yet - both Dan and Ferg agree the future is bright for Agriculture. Head Shepherd is brought to you by neXtgen Agri International Limited. We help livestock farmers get the most out of the genetics they farm with. Get in touch with us if you would like to hear more about how we can help you do what you do best: info@nextgenagri.com.Thanks to our sponsors at MSD Animal Health and Allflex, Heiniger Australia and New Zealand, and ProWay Livestock Equipment. Please consider them when making product choices, as they are instrumental in enabling us to bring you this podcast each week.Check out the MSD range HERECheck out Allflex products HERECheck out Heiniger's product range HERECheck out ProWay's product range HERE

Send us Fan Mail Genomic Data Scientist Career Guide: Salary, Scope & Skills in India and Abroad What if you could use DNA data, Artificial Intelligence, and coding to help predict diseases, improve treatments, and shape the future of medicine?Welcome to another future-ready episode of The Kapeel Gupta Career PodShow, where we decode powerful and emerging careers for students and professionals.In this episode, we explore one of the most exciting interdisciplinary careers of the future — Genomic Data Scientist. This is a career at the intersection of: 

BUFFALO, NY – May 6, 2026 – A new #casereport was #published in Volume 17 of Oncotarget on May 4, 2026, titled “Small bowel GIST harboring concurrent KIT exon 9 duplication and SDHC mutation: A case report.” The study was led by first author Cameron B. Speyer from the UCLA David Geffen School of Medicine, and corresponding author Joseph G. Crompton, who holds appointments at both the UCLA David Geffen School of Medicine and the Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center. In this report, the authors describe a rare and clinically informative case of a small bowel gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) harboring two genetic alterations that are typically considered mutually exclusive. GISTs are most commonly driven by activating mutations in the KIT or PDGFRA genes, which confer sensitivity to targeted therapies such as imatinib. In contrast, tumors associated with succinate dehydrogenase (SDH) deficiency represent a distinct subgroup that is generally resistant to these treatments. The patient, a 68-year-old man, presented with progressive abdominal pain, bloating, and constipation. Imaging studies revealed a large heterogeneous mass in the lower abdomen measuring up to 18 cm. A biopsy confirmed a spindle cell neoplasm consistent with GIST, with immunohistochemical staining positive for CD117 and DOG1. Genomic analysis identified both a KIT exon 9 duplication (A502_Y503) and a germline SDHC mutation (p.R50C)—a highly unusual combination. Despite the presence of the SDHC mutation, which is typically associated with resistance to therapy, the patient demonstrated a strong response to high-dose imatinib. After six months of neoadjuvant treatment, imaging showed a marked reduction in tumor size and metabolic activity, enabling successful surgical resection. “This case suggests that oncogenic KIT signaling may remain the dominant driver of GIST behavior despite the presence of a germline SDHC mutation and highlights the importance of integrated molecular interpretation in GIST management.” Pathologic examination of the resected tumor revealed significant treatment response, including extensive necrosis and reduced tumor viability. Notably, immunohistochemistry demonstrated retained SDHB expression, indicating preserved SDH complex function despite the identified germline mutation. The case highlights an important clinical insight: not all detected genetic alterations contribute equally to tumor behavior. While SDH-deficient GISTs are typically resistant to imatinib, this tumor behaved in a manner consistent with KIT-driven disease, underscoring the importance of interpreting molecular findings within their clinical and pathological context. Overall, this report emphasizes the need for integrated molecular analysis in cancer diagnosis and treatment. As next-generation sequencing becomes more widely used, clinicians may encounter tumors with multiple coexisting mutations. Determining the dominant oncogenic driver is essential for selecting the most effective therapy and improving patient outcomes. DOI - https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.28863 Correspondence to - Joseph G. Crompton - jcrompton@mednet.ucla.edu Abstract video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eB_QG2vBNCE Subscribe for free publication alerts from Oncotarget - https://www.oncotarget.com/subscribe/ Keywords - cancer, GIST, KIT duplication, SDHC mutation, genetic testing, case report To learn more about Oncotarget, please visit https://www.oncotarget.com and connect with us: Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/Oncotarget/ X - https://twitter.com/oncotarget Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/oncotargetjrnl/ YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@OncotargetJournal LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/company/oncotarget Pinterest - https://www.pinterest.com/oncotarget/ Reddit - https://www.reddit.com/user/Oncotarget/ Spotify - https://open.spotify.com/show/0gRwT6BqYWJzxzmjPJwtVh MEDIA@IMPACTJOURNALS.COM

In this episode, we celebrate 10 years of the Participant Panel and explore how genomic research is being guided by patient and participant voices.  Made up of people who have consented for their genome, or the genome of their loved one, to be included in the National Genomics Research Library, the Panel plays a vital role in shaping how research is designed, how data is used, and how genomics is communicated. From influencing policy discussions to to advising the Genomics England board, their work helps ensure lived experience is embedded from the very beginning.  Over the past decade, the Panel has driven meaningful change. From advocating for greater transparency and accessibility, to challenging how the genomics community talks about genetic conditions. But beyond the impact, this episode focuses on the people behind the work: their motivations, experiences, and the realities of representing a wider community.  Our host, Sharon Jones is joined by:  Kirsty Irvine – Chair of the Participant Panel and member of the NHS Genomic Medical Service People and Communities Forum  Lisa Beaton - member of the Participant Panel, panel member for the North East and Yorkshire GMSA and research and development for Harrogate Hospital Foundation Trust  Frances Allan – member of the Participant Panel and member of the following:  CRUK Women+s Cancers PPIE at Cambridge MHRA Yellowcard Biobank Northumberland NHS health forum Ovacome Healthforum IMPRESS cancer diagnostic tool study participant  You can find out more about the Participant Panel in our recent Genomics 101 episode which Lisa featured in, titled ‘What is the Participant Panel?', and you can read about their timeline of achievements over the last 10 years.   “One of the things as participants that we're always really keen to get across, particularly to the scientists, is that behind every piece of data is a face and a name”   You can download the transcript, or read it below. Sharon Jones: This time on Behind the Genes, we'll be celebrating the 10th anniversary of the Participant Panel, and we'll discuss how genomic research is being guided by patient and participant voices. The panel is made up of participants whose data is held in the National Genomic Research Library. They help us to put lived experience at the heart of our work. My name is Sharon Jones, and in this podcast we cover everything from cutting-edge research to real-life stories in genomic healthcare. Joining me this time are Kirsty Irvine, chair of the Participant Panel, and Frances Allan and Lisa Beaton, who are also both members. Collectively, they wear many hats for a range of organisations, which are listed in the episode description. As you'll hear, this one is all about people power. So back in 2016, the Participant Panel was in its infancy, with 12 founding members bringing lived experience of rare conditions. The idea was straightforward but radical: that the people whose genomes were being sequenced should have a real say in how the work was done. Over the decade since, the Panel has shaped some significant changes, from pushing for a service that let participants track their own samples, to publishing a language guide that changed how the genomics community talks about genetic conditions and disability. They've navigated the pandemic, welcomed new members and, in 2025, launched their first formal strategy. This year they mark their 10th anniversary, and today we're hearing from some of the people who've been part of that story. So welcome Kirsty, Frances and Lisa. So what was your reason for joining the Participant Panel? And I will ask Frances that. Frances Allan: Hi Sharon. I joined the Panel back in 2023 following a cancer diagnosis, and as part of that investigation I was fortunate enough to have a whole genome sequence performed. And they also asked would I be interested in taking part in a panel who look after this information, and I ticked the box and then thought no more of it. And then a month or so later I heard from the then Chair, Jillian, um, and had a chat about genomics and joined the Panel, and it was a very good decision that I made. Sharon Jones: Did you have any kind of expectations? What were your early thoughts when you kind of accepted? Frances Allan: Not many thoughts. So I was in the middle of my chemotherapy treatment, but one of the things that really stood out: when I signed the consent form, I said, well, of course I would do that. And the clinician consenting me, said, actually, not everybody does. And I thought, well, why would they not want to do that? So I was really interested in finding out about that. I had no idea how influential the Panel was, and that was great to discover as I became part of it. But seeing the breadth of the research and the knowledge already gained, compared to my rudimentary A-level Biology from many, many years ago, gave me incredible hope, um, and really helped me through a very difficult, difficult time. Sharon Jones: Yeah, that's, that's amazing. It's amazing that you could kind of think in that way whilst you were actually going through the treatment itself. I mean, how did you split yourself in that way? Frances Allan: I think it gave me a sense of, of purpose. So at the time, I'd, I'd stopped working to have my treatment and I was a, a vet previously, so I was used to thinking about medical things and problem solving, and it, it filled a, a void in my life. I had no idea I'd be able to contribute to it. I thought, well, I'd learn something from it. But, you know, the, the Panel is managed very well. Kirsty's a fantastic Chair. Everybody gets an opportunity to speak, and the attendance can be in person. And I've done most of them in person. When I was poorly I attended an online meeting, but even that is managed so well that you get a chance to speak up. If you're not feeling well enough, then you can, you can add it to the chat or email. So it's very, very inclusive and a very supportive environment, as well. Sharon Jones: Yeah, it sounds like a, a very safe space to be in. And Lisa, what was your reason for joining the Participant Panel? Lisa Beaton: I think it was sort of one of those, bit of a light bulb moment for me thinking, yeah, I could do that. I'm not quite sure why I felt I was qualified to do that, but my reasoning is slightly different than Frances. So I joined the 100,000 Genomes Project back in 2015 in respect of one of my children who has an undiagnosed, thought to be neuromuscular, syndrome. Um, so myself, my husband and our daughter recruited for genetic sampling, and over the years I've sort of taken a keen interest in all things genetic and genomic related, followed on kind of various social media platform. And I think if memory serves, I saw an announcement or an advert stating, do you want to be part of the Participant Panel, clicked on the link and thought, this is something that really resonates with me. I've served with different hats on different kind of participant groups and speaking events, and it's something I feel really, it's an overused phrase, but I do feel really passionate and strong about it because, you know, we are the people who are the front and centre of this, because it's our genetic information. So I applied, did a bit of a kind of resume of myself, um, then had huge imposter syndrome and thought, oh, that'll be the last I'll ever hear of that. And uh, actually had a really lovely interview with some of the then, uh, members of the Panel and must have said a few of the right things, 'cause here I am, three years down the line. Sharon Jones: That's amazing. Has it lived up to your expectation? How has it, how has it helped you get through what sounds like a really challenging time? Lisa Beaton: It's, it probably sounds wrong to say I, I didn't really have an expectation, but I joined it really just wanting to kind of know more and see if I could find out more details, more information, kind of more genomic discovery, and hope that I could give something back, if that doesn't sound too cringey. I think one of the things I'm always really keen to say is that you don't need to be a geneticist. You don't need to be a scientist. You don't need to kind of have lots of scientific information. And I will confess that the very first meeting I went to, I did come away thinking, I think I probably only understood about one word in three. But three years down line as I say, I'm still here, and it's been good to challenge myself and to explore kind of things that I don't know information about, but also I found that there are areas that I can definitely bring lived experience to and, and hopefully a voice for people like myself and my family. Sharon Jones: Yeah. That's so important. It sounds like you've become a bit of an expert by, uh, experience there. Has your vocabulary improved in the last three years? Do you know more words now? Lisa Beaton: Yes. Uh, I've, I have to remind myself not to use an acronym. It's one of my pet peeves. You know, when you're, you're in a, a meeting and terminology or, or vernacular, that is not necessarily something that people would use day-to-day, and I think lots of you know, you don't, don't have to be genomics or genetics to, um, using acronyms for things. It's something we all need to remind ourselves that just because you know that expression, somebody else doesn't. So it's really important to kind of keep that at a, a lay explanation so that everybody understands it. Um, I think particularly with quite heavy subject matter such as genomics and genetics, there can be a tendency otherwise for people to feel that it's not for them. And of course it is, because it's about our own personal data. Sharon Jones: Yeah, absolutely. And, um, and coming to you, Kirsty, what were your kind of motivations for, for joining the Participant Panel? Kirsty Irvine: Well, it's been quite a long journey for me to find myself on the Participant Panel, so I and my family, we were all consented into the a 100,000 Genomes Project back in 2015. But from that point, I then spent nearly 10 years chairing committees at NHS Digital and then NHS England, focusing on health data access. And I remember talking about the 100,000 Genomes Project at my interviews for those roles. I then went down a different path. And in those roles I was very much wearing my solicitor's hat. So I was thinking about governance and risk and were we complying with the precise wording of the legislation. And then when the chair role came available, I had a number of people sort of forward it to me saying, I think this would suit you. I think this would suit you. And at that stage, I was aware of the Panel because I'd met the fantastic former chair, Jillian. Um, so I'd seen Jillian at various conferences and meetings and things, so I was well aware of what the Panel did. I was well aware of the Panel's standing. It was probably the only participant panel that I was aware of in my work with NHS Digital, NHS England. And then I realised, you know, I wanted to be closer to the people behind the data and I wanted to do something more active. I wanted to bring a bit more of myself. Because when you're chairing a very formal committee, at NHS England, you, you can't talk about the time that you resuscitated your child at home, you know? And on the Panel, you know, my very first meeting, I, I met someone, someone whose child had, you know, been fed with an NG tube for a number of months. You know, I met someone else who had resuscitated their child, you know, and all of a sudden I could bring more of myself to my colleagues and, and find a real community. So for me, joining the participant panel was a way of shifting the perspective, but to also bring that experience with me because I, the roles at NHS England, you know, from a governance perspective, I couldn't continue chairing those, you know, board subcommittees forever. But I didn't want that knowledge to just sort of disappear. So for me, I'm really delighted that I've, what I hope, what I hope is a good fit. I feel it's a good fit. So that, that's been my journey to the Panel. Sharon Jones: Yeah, that's, that's so interesting. And I guess having that space to kind of be yourself, and having understanding because of your lived experience, brings a lot of value to the role that you're doing now in a way that kind of is different when you're in your previous roles of NHS Digital, because you had to be a bit more, kind of stand back from it and, yeah. That's so interesting. So, what has it been like being part of these groups? You know, the ones that you kind of, you're involved in a lot of things, and we'll list them in the, in the web description. And how has it kind of affected your life, essentially, because it's not the kind of average thing that people are involved in. Frances Allan: So it's been an incredible, I think as Lisa alluded to, incredible learning curve. We've learnt so much. But the team at Genomics England are endlessly patient and very skilful at passing that information on. And we have access to the leading researchers, the clinicians that are involved in genomics. And they're happy to take any question. And the questions, however silly, there's no silly question. They're happy to answer that. And so we learn every time we attend a meeting, we have quarterly meetings and that can be in person or online. Um, but we also have regular lunch-and-learns. So if there's somebody we want to speak to or find more about their specialist area, they'll come and have a, a chat with us. And then we have half of it, them chatting to us and half us, us. Us asking them questions and, and challenging them. Um, so it's very, very informative and then learning from each other. And as Kirsty was saying, you know, this is a, a group of people who've, who've dealt with an awful lot of unique situations and they're happy to, to share that and pass on the information. It's a, it's a great place of learning. Sharon Jones: Lisa, would you agree with that? How it been for you? Lisa Beaton: Yeah, I would definitely echo everything that Frances has actually said there, and I think it's a very humbling experience, as well. Ostensibly, we are a, a collection of individuals who have all been brought together, um, purely because of, uh, our genomic interests. And whether that's for our families, you know, as, as parents, as in my case, or in somebody like Frances' case, who's obviously a participant in her, in her own right. And although there are kind of many differences in our stories, there's also a lot of similarities. But I think what's really interesting, very precious, is that the staff at Genomics England, obviously they range from, you know, there, there's so many different kind of areas from the, the comms, the scientists, etc., but everybody is really interested. They want to know your story, who you are, why you are there. There's a real kind of inclusion focus on that. And one of the things as participants that we're always really keen to get across, particularly to the scientists, is that, you know, behind every piece of data is a face and a name. And I think they really make that felt when they're chatting to us. You know, we go in and, and there, there's people who are there from governance sides for how the data is accessed by other parties. There's people there who are the science technicians, etc. There's people who are dealing with the administrative side of things, but every single person that I've encountered wants to know more about you, what you are there for. And that is, is very, very precious. And as Kirsty also alluded to, a lot of us have been through some really quite traumatic experiences. It, it's not my place to speak of others' journeys, but you know, there, there are, uh, bereaved parents and family members among us. And so we are sharing very precious raw material, emotions, experiences, and that is very powerful, as well. And I, I think the Genomics England staff never forget that. They seem to bear that at the forefront of their, their communications with us, always. Um, and certainly Kirsty and Adam and previous chairs, uh, of the panel, that inclusivity was entirely throughout every dealing we had with them. Sharon Jones: It's very humanising and I think that it's humbling for us who work here that that's always at the forefront of our mind, that this is why we kind of get up and go to work every day, because of that human element. And it's not just a data point. There is a whole family, a story, a history, and that's, that's so important to us in the work that we do. Kirsty, did you want to add your point on this as well? Kirsty Irvine: I've probably got two points I wanted to raise. One was just to draw out what Lisa was saying, is that it can be complex being a Panel member, because the story you're bringing often isn't just your own. In my family, we've got a real, we've got a whole range of genetic differences and conditions that, you know, across the extended family. And so when I speak, I'm often drawing on experiences that aren't solely mine to share, and, you know. So I think that's something that for some on the Panel, we're sort of, we're, we're being quite careful to think about what we're saying, and if we're speaking in the public domain, we might be talking about it in more general terms. So that's, you know, but there's not a single right way, and there's room on the Panel, everyone, for the people who can and, and as Lisa talked about, you know, the, the most acute situation is where someone's bereaved, you know. And it's, so everyone's got different, you know, different experiences. But that, that, again, coming back to the positive side of things, one of the biggest things to me about being on the Panel, what it means to me, is being part of a wider community. I mean, one of the other things that, Sharon, I don't know if I can sort of segue onto this about, you know, the opportunities that have arisen? Sharon Jones: Yeah, absolutely. I'd love to hear more about that. Kirsty Irvine: So one thing that really stands out for me was the opportunity to speak directly with, um, Associate Health Minister Ahmed about, and his policy team. So we went to the department, Adam and I went to the Department of Health, and it was about the use of GP data in consented research cohorts. So getting the GP data into the National Genomic Research Library. So even though there's consent, up until now, that GP data, that tranche of really rich data, hasn't, hasn't gone into the NGRL. So I'll use that abbreviation now that I've used it in full. And so what was really unique for me was that I'd seen it from multiple angles because I'm participant in the 100,000 Genomes Project, so I'm a cohort member. I then worked on the consent review for NHS England. I then sat on a, the consent review assessment committee with, you know, a multiparty group. And then, because I was on the panel, I got to see things full circle. I was then invited to, to go and meet with, um, Minister Ahmed and, and advocate for the use of this GP data. And that really matters because something, you know, there's such important information sitting in that GP data and it wasn't a given, it was not a given that the government was going to the direction that allowed that data to go into the NGRL. And so we were able to talk about how we really wanted that data to be used. And now, going forward, you know, something as simple as BMI or for example, if a, if an individual's coded for a neuro, neurodevelopmental condition like autism, sometimes that data actually only sits in the GP health record. It's in primary care only, so it's not necessarily in the hospital records or other records. And so this is really, really valuable data for, for researchers. And so that was something that was a really special experience, just being able to see that come full circle. And I felt like it's a really tangible example of how the participant voices really helped strengthen that conversation, you know, with the DH policy team, you know, and the government ministers. Sharon Jones: Yeah, I mean that's, that's really powerful and it, it just sort of shows how these opportunities can arise from being involved in a participant panel in a way that you wouldn't have necessarily had that power if you hadn't been involved. And you know, obviously you are wearing lots of different hats in that, in that position, Kirsty. And um, it just sort of shows what can be done when you're, unfortunately, you know, you're in this group for a reason and it's not necessarily the, the most cheeriest reasons, but it, you still leverage that opportunity to create something positive, you know, with it. Frances Allan: So we've given all sorts of opportunities and we seek to get involved with as many things as we can to speak and have our voice heard. Um, and one of the things I did last year was, um, do a short presentation to open a stage at the Genomics England Research Summit, which was quite a challenge for me, but I felt very exhilarated having done it. And then a couple of people came up afterwards and just said, oh, thank you for sharing your story. And a researcher who was slightly older than I, so very experienced, been in his field a long, long time, and he said his clinical years were long behind him, and now he researches within a lab. And actually for someone to say, you know, thank you for, for looking, thank you for finding, had a very profound experience on him. And he knew there was a clinical benefit; his research was very clinically led. But he said he hadn't thought about the recipients of those findings. And I pointed out every time you have that chat with somebody, come to an event like that, have a network, spend a bit longer in the lab, look for something that you might not find, even if it's a negative finding, there will be somebody eventually that benefits from that. And I've been a direct recipient of other people putting forward their whole genome sequence, and then a common change was noted in people with the type of cancer that I have, and that then qualified me for a treatment that otherwise I wouldn't have been eligible for, and I wouldn't have been, I wouldn't have been here now. So it's a very, you know, profound thanks to all the people that are involved from everybody within Genomics England, all the researchers, all the other patients that speak up. We each have a contribution to make. Sharon Jones: Yeah, that's amazing. That must have been quite a poignant experience when you, you met him at the, um, Summit, of just kind of the other side of the, the world that you don't often see. And they obviously don't see our side of the world, and it's kind of interesting to join those dots and kind of come full circle. So moving on. In terms of like, collectively, there's a lot of impact that you have and there's a noticeable shift in organisations where people with lived experience are playing, you know, a much bigger role in decision making. Can you help our listeners understand how people are getting involved in governance and shaping research? Lisa Beaton: From my perspective, it comes back to that word "embedding". I think historically, perhaps there's been an, an almost about-face. Um, it's kind of come at it very backwards, that that embedding has almost happened as an afterthought, which is sort of a bit of a misnomer way of explaining it. When you're talking about embedding, obviously it should be the foundation. Historically, at least both from the parent, parental perspective, I've seen that with clinicians, for example, that historically I've been made perhaps to feel a bit of a thorn in someone's side, that even though we're there for an appointment about our young person, when I'm asking questions that they don't necessarily want to answer, you know, I'm almost the, the add-on rather than the reason that we're there. And I think there has been a paradigm shift in everybody's approach to that. So thinking much more about, you know, the, the what's, the wherefores, the whys. How do we ensure that right from the get go, that patient or participant voice is heard, and it shapes the question. And one of our other Panel members frequently uses the phrase, "nothing about us without us", because that is front and centre of why, you know, genomics exists in the first place, really. Without that data, the conversation ceased to exist. It, it's so vitally important, not just for us as an individual, not just for our family members, but for the greater good, if that doesn't sound too grandiose. Sharon Jones: No, not at all. And, and, and Frances? Frances Allan: I think having raised that value of patient advocacy: what we have to say. So it started off, people felt that they should have some, so they included it, but actually once they started to include it, they thought, this does contribute to our study. And starting at the very beginning of the research project, so what is reasonable to ask participants and patients to do? Is it something that there is benefit from? And trying to see that end goal right at the beginning. And we might help shape a research study that actually goes in a beneficial direction, rather than the researchers starting alone, and then actually getting into the study, and the procedure is, is too painful to endure, there's no clinical benefit, it's not something that can be translated into clinical practice, and it gets abandoned. So start us right at the very beginning, and our perspectives may not be what, what researchers or clinicians think. Uh, with that lived experience, however empathetic you are, the lived experience is a very unique lens and position to look from. Sharon Jones: Yeah, it absolutely is. So, given that you are part of a small group and you know, you're representing a much wider community, essentially, like, what are the considerations that you, you have to bear in mind? Lisa Beaton: I think we can only speak, obviously, to our own individual experience and we are very aware that, you know, diversity, ethnicity, inclusion is something that is a much bigger conversation and certainly something that we want to broaden in, in the panel itself. And I know there's kind of lots of work and thought going into how that can widen those perhaps more diverse communities that historically... It's not that, there's, there's been a terminology that, you know, they're difficult to access, but actually the question is wrong there. The statement is wrong. It's not that they're difficult to access, it's just that we've been asking that incorrectly. And we need to ensure that they are, uh, empowered to bring their stories forward and find ways to push forward for their inclusion. We need to ensure that everybody's voices are heard, otherwise the data set is wrong from the off. So I think that's something that we're all very minded when we speak about, and definitely want to, to diversify the pools of data that come in. That, that has huge resonance for, you know, shaping genomic and genetic policies moving forward, for sure. Sharon Jones: Yeah, definitely. Frances, sort of broadening out that question. Does it feel like a lot of pressure and a lot of responsibility, kind of representing, you know, in this kind of small group where you are almost speaking on behalf of, you know, a lot of people? Frances Allan: I think it mainly feels like a, a privilege, Sharon, to be in that position, to have a say. And back to my, one of my motivators for joining is why would people not choose to do this? And actually understanding why that is. And is it the, you know, the lack of knowledge of genomics? And there is a lot of, of fear about what can be discovered. But understanding the immense benefits from that so people don't miss out on those opportunities. Our genomes contain the, the blueprint to us, but also how we would respond in certain situations, and you want everybody to be using those leverage points. You know, cancer's a really difficult disease to manage, and anything you can do to make it slightly easier, slightly more comfortable, slightly more successful, we want to do that. So every time we speak out and we advocate for the benefits of genomics, we might gain one more person who's going to feel that a successful outcome. Sharon Jones: Yeah, and who knows what, what that can mean for their family and, and sort of further down the line. So have you got any advice for, or encouragement, or any tips for, you know, potential participants who are thinking of getting involved in, in groups? You know, it doesn't necessarily mean the Participant Panel, but just generally, sort of groups related to their conditions or their family's conditions. Frances Allan: Yeah, I think the value of the one's personal experience: don't underestimate that. Everybody has an individual journey and they can comment and reflect on that. And anybody interested in, in joining our panel, you can include in the, the copy or description, ways they're getting in touch with us and speak to us about what that, what that involves. And uh, Lisa said at the, the beginning, you come and it's a huge learning curve, but there are people to support you and guide you through that way. And the learning is, is just fascinating. And there's a position for everybody and everybody's point of view to be heard, and you will be heard. Sharon Jones: Thank you. Lisa? Lisa Beaton: Yeah, I think I might steal a phrase or two actually from some, uh, well-known brands. But, um, one would be "just do it" and the other would be "feel the fear and do it anyway" because, you know, you are amongst friends, first and foremost. We all, we do tailor our experiences, and clearly we self-censor at times because that's necessary to protect the privacy and dignity of not necessarily ourselves, but as we've already alluded to in our chats, but you know, our family members, the wider people that you are aware will be hearing this. And you don't necessarily want certain medical information about your family members out there, because it's not your information to share. But in terms of joining the panel and, you know, having a voice, giving more voices, giving more diverse data, we, we need as many people as possible to come. We need more voices. We need to get our genetic, genomic information out there, uh, in front of the researchers and, and all involved with Genomics England, um, and other patient advocacy groups, as well, because that will only benefit the greater public. Sharon Jones: Thank you. And Kirsty? Kirsty Irvine: I'm just thinking about sort of general tips building on what Lisa and Frances have said. You don't need to be a seasoned public speaker. I think that's something, absolutely not. We've got some fantastic speakers in the group. Um, but then we've got people in the group who've got, who have got different skills, so don't think that you need to be ready to give a TED Talk at the first meeting, be that the Participant Panel or whatever group you might be motivated to join. We, we just need good listeners. I've chaired meetings in the past where people, uh, wanted to contribute via the chat function, and that worked absolutely fine. They would put their incredibly insightful, erudite comments in the chat, and then I would relay them to the group, and that was how we got that person's input, because we realised that they weren't necessarily going to speak up in the forum. So whatever your communication style, we can accommodate it at the Participant Panel and we would be delighted to hear from you. Sharon Jones: That's great. Thank you. Um, final question. So what do you hope the next 10 years of participant involvement will look like? Kirsty Irvine: I think if I could use a little catchphrase, which I'm sure is not mine, but I would like to see us fully integrated as partners, not participants. I'll put that out there. I mean, Sharon, I wonder if I could sort of also open things up to how are things going to look in another 10 years, because there's been some statistics that have really struck me, uh, at presentations that, that we've heard. One of them being that in the next, you know, within 10 years, around about half the data in the National Genomics Research Library will be from, I don't know if this is the best name for it, the general population. So that's people who aren't necessarily seeking an answer, or have a diagnosis or a condition. These are people who have donated their genomic data through being part of, you know, research projects. And, as a panel, so Genomics England's evolving and the panel will be evolving. And in 10 years time, the panel will need to be, I believe, true to the original route. So, 100,000 Genomes Project. Uh, the people who've had their whole genome sequencing through cancer diagnoses. You know, there's a significant COVID cohort, but also people of the gen, general population. So how do we advocate for and look after everyone in that broad group of people. So I think that, that's both a challenge, that's a challenge for us, but it's also really exciting to think how we can meet that challenge. Sharon Jones: Yeah, definitely one, definitely an opportunity and a challenge, and one that will take a lot of thinking in the next few years. Frances? Frances Allan: Yeah, thanks Sharon. I think looking forward to that, that 10-year period is how genomics just becomes a normal part of everybody's healthcare, so we all fully understand the benefits of it. People are willing to participate in it and then using lots of different types of data to go into the National Genomics Research Library. So at the moment, it's mainly genomics material, but there's been a lot of work done with the cancer cohort, putting in diagnostic images, pathology slides, other clinical data, written notes, and this can then be accessed under the strict criteria of the access review committee. It can be accessed by clinicians, researchers across the world. And we want our research library to be the premium source of that information and to have collaboration with researchers, clinicians, participants, worldwide, to speed up the generation of that information and those positive outcomes. It's a, a very, very rich data source now, and it'll only get bigger as we include people from the general population. Sharon Jones: That'd be amazing and have some quite incredible global, um, outcomes. Lisa? Lisa Beaton: I just had a little image actually pop into my head that I, I almost look at it a little bit like we're doing one of those, I think they might be called an "impossipuzzle" where actually we don't have the picture on the box, but we have lots and lots of little pieces that are all going in together and they're making up a really creative, wonderful, fantastic, woven story, a tapestry as you were, of different information that's coming through. And how incredible, you know what, what a wonderful legacy we're building, you know, and this amazing picture that's going to evolve and change and develop over the years to come. Sharon Jones: That's a wonderful note to end on, so we're going to wrap it up there. Thank you for listening. A special thanks to our guests, Kirsty, Frances, and Lisa, for joining me today as we discussed how lived experience can shape health research. If you'd like to hear more like this, please subscribe to the Behind the Genes on your favourite podcast app. And if you want to know more about the Participant Panel, you can head to the Genomics England website and listen to our 10-minute explainer podcast, Genomics 101. Behind the Genes is produced by Deanna Barac, Florence Cornish, Sophie McLachlan and Dave Howard at Bespoken Media.

Learn how AI and whole genome sequencing are transforming rare disease diagnostics, reducing the diagnostic odyssey for families and enabling faster, more accurate clinical decision-making. This episode was recorded live at Becker's 16th Annual Meeting on April 15, 2026.It features insights from Dr. Shannon Haymond, Chief of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine at Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago and Vice Chair for Pediatric Pathology at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine and Dr. Calum Yacoubian, Director for Health Data Enablement, Applied AI Science, IQVIA. This episode is sponsored by IQVIA.

How do public health officials detect emerging viruses before they spread widely across the U.S.? Heather Reese, Genomic Epidemiology and Preparedness Team Lead at CDC tells us about the Traveler-Based Genomic Surveillance (TGS) program: a cutting-edge effort that turns international travel into an early warning system for public health threats.  By combining voluntary nasal swabs from incoming travelers with wastewater sampling from aircraft, the program monitors for pathogens like COVID-19, flu, and RSV. These data help identify new variants and emerging strains, often before they begin circulating domestically, giving public health leaders critical time to prepare and respond.Driving Impact with Flexible FundingHow Public Health Can Support Modern Administrative Readiness in a Dynamic World | ASTHO

Send us Fan MailIn this episode of The Oncology Journal Club, the team weigh promising trial signals against the level of evidence needed to change clinical practice. From perioperative cholangiocarcinoma to molecular matching and chrono-oncology, the focus stays on a key question: what meaningfully improves outcomes for patients?What's covered NeoGOLP trial in high-risk resectable iCCA: improved event-free survival; overall survival still immature  MoST programme: molecular matching and survival associations when therapies align with biomarkers  Genomic therapy matching in clinical decision-making  Chrono-oncology: does treatment timing influence outcomes?  CHOPIN phase II uveal melanoma trial: combination therapy signals and feasibility  ASCO living guideline updates across lung, gastro-oesophageal and thyroid cancers The Oncology Journal Club Podcast hosted by Professor Craig Underhill, Dr Kate Clarke and Professor Chris Jackson, and proudly produced by The Oncology NetworkVisit oncologynetwork.com.au for Show Notes, to send us Voice Notes and more information. 

Genomics of the Golden Horde Science Sessions are brief conversations with cutting-edge researchers, National Academy members, and policymakers as they discuss topics relevant to today's scientific community. Learn the behind-the-scenes story of work published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), plus a broad range of scientific news about discoveries that affect the world around us. In this episode, Ayken Askapuli explains genomic insights into the ancestors and descendants of the Golden Horde. In this episode, we cover: •[00:00] Introduction. •[00:56] Population geneticist Ayken Askapuli introduces the Golden Horde. •[02:01] He describes the individuals in the mausoleums whose DNA the team sampled.  •[04:11] Askapuli explains findings about the modern populations the Golden Horde individuals were related to. •[05:08] He then explains findings about the Y chromosome characteristics of the Golden Horde individuals. •[06:14] Askapuli talks about what the results say about the ancestry of the Golden Horde. •[06:48] He describes how the results aid understanding of population genetics in central Eurasia. •[08:10] He lists the caveats and limitations of the study. •[09:53] Conclusion. About Our Guest: Ayken Askapuli PhD candidate University of Wisconsin-Madison View related content here: https://www.pnas.org/doi/abs/10.1073/pnas.2531003123 Follow us on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts for more captivating discussions on scientific breakthroughs! Visit Science Sessions on PNAS.org: https://www.pnas.org/about/science-sessions-podcast  Follow PNAS: Twitter/X Facebook LinkedIn YouTube Sign up for the PNAS Highlights newsletter

In this episode of AskDifferent, bioinformatician and Einstein Foundation Early Career Awardee Maximilian Sprang takes us into the hidden world of errors in genomic data. Why do sequencing studies sometimes produce impressive-looking results that later fail to replicate? What happens when tiny technical glitches masquerade as biological discoveries - and what does that mean for patients and precision medicine? Sprang explains how his team detects and even deliberately introduces errors to understand them better, improve software tools, and make genomic research more reliable without throwing "messy" data away.___#AskDifferent, the Einstein Foundation's podcast serieshttps://www.einsteinfoundation.de/en/

Matters Microbial #127: Even Your Navel Has Them — An Archaea‑Whisperer Explores April 7, 2026 Today Dr. Nahui Medina-Chavez, postdoctoral scholar in the Travisano laboratory at the University of Minnesota, joins the Quality Quorum to discuss her interest in the ubiquitous archaea, and her own research studying experimental evolution in extreme halophiles. Host: Mark O. Martin Guest: Nahui Medina-Chavez Subscribe: Apple Podcasts, Spotify Become a patron of Matters Microbial! Links for this episode Here is an article on R2A, which is used to cultivate water associated microbes. A solid and clear article describing the "great uncultivated majority."  An article describing the discovery of the archaea. An engaging video summary of the archaea. A recent article suggesting that archaea are the root and originator of eukaryotes like ourselves! An interesting video about the lokiarcheota, which contain the genetic echoes of eukaryotic life. An article about the extremely halophilic archaea. Do extreme halophiles live within salt crystals? The beautiful pink pigment, bacteriorhodopsin, associated with these archaea (despite the "bacterio" portion of the name). The LTEE experiment, describing how researchers can study evolution in the laboratory. Genomic islands in microbiology. The "Archaeal Power Hour" website. A fine video presentation by Dr. Medina-Chavez on archaea. A fine article by Dr. Medina-Chavez and her postdoctoral advisor Dr. Michael Travisano on archaeal communities. Dr. Medina-Chavez's Research Gate website. Intro music is by Reber Clark Send your questions and comments to mattersmicrobial@gmail.com

This episode was originally released on November 5, 2024Dr. Hannah Belcher was already studying autism she found out she herself was Autistic. Getting her diagnosis felt like everything suddenly clicked… but why did it take so long to get answers?In this episode, Hannah shares her journey and talks about how many Autistic people, especially women, learn to mask their true selves to fit in– causing them to slip through the diagnostic cracks. Then, we invite Dr. John Constantino to break down the genetic underpinnings of Autism Spectrum Disoder and related conditions like ADHD—and how science is shaking up the genomic picture of what we thought we knew about this male-female bias.From outdated theories to “refrigerator mothers,” join hosts Dr. Kaylee Byers and Dr. Rackeb Tesfaye as they comb through the tangled web of sex bias and ask whether our current methods of studying neurodiversity is actually addressing the questions the people with ASD want answered?A Note on Language:When talking about Autism - semantics matter. So, it's important to recognize the nuances of language. Many people in the Autism community prefer identity-first language, such as "Autistic person," as it centers Autism as a core part of their identity. Others, however, may prefer person-first language, like "person with Autism," which places the individual before the condition. We've used both forms of language in this episode, and we encourage respecting individual preferences by asking what each person is most comfortable with. For more on this, check out resources like the National Institutes of Health's guide on writing respectfully about identity and the Autistic Self Advocacy Network's explanation of identity-first language.Additionally, when we refer to ‘Autism risk' in the context of academic research, it typically means an increased genetic likelihood of receiving an Autism diagnosis. However, we recognize that "risk" can imply a negative connotation (which we do not support.) Instead, we aim to discuss Autism in ways that honour the neurodiversity of all individuals.Lastly, regarding sex differences in Autism diagnoses, in this episode, we're talking specifically about sex assigned at birth. Although we mention gender, we want to be clear that we aren't exploring how Autism diagnoses may vary by gender identity—that area remains understudied! So, our conversation is focused on differences between males and females, and we look forward to seeing more research on the richly complex interactions between gender identitiy and neurodiversity in the future.Highlights:(6:32) Growing up undiagnosed(18:52) The genetic underpinnings of Autism and related neurodiverse conditions(22:20) Debunking the “female protective effect”(26:37) A biased assessmentResources:1. ‘Taking off the Mask: A Practical Guide for Managing Autistic Camouflaging and Mental Health‘ - Dr. Hannah Belcher2. Inherited Risk for Autism Through Maternal and Paternal Lineage - National Institute of Health3. 'Decade of data dents idea of a ‘female protective effect'- The Transmitter4. How ADHD Gender Bias is Slowly, Steadily Harming Females - ADDitude Mag5. Refrigerator Mothers - A Discredited Cause Of Autism- Autism Help6. Study challenges idea that autism is caused by an overly masculine brain- Science.org7. Autism Spectrum Conditions In Women: Diagnosis, Mental Health, And The Role Of Camouflaging- Research Gate

Azim Surani, Director of Research at the Gurdon Institute and Professor Emeritus at University of Cambridge, received the Kyoto Prize in Basic Sciences, specifically in the field of Life Sciences and Medicine, for his work in demonstrating how male and female mammalian genomes receive distinct imprints during germ cell development. Genomic imprinting introduced a novel concept to Mendelian genetics and is a now fundamental principle in the life sciences. Surani's research has contributed to developmental biology and epigenetics, along with a wide range of life science fields including physiology, regenerative medicine, reproductive medicine, and plant science. Series: "Kyoto Prize Symposium" [Science] [Show ID: 41117]

Azim Surani, Director of Research at the Gurdon Institute and Professor Emeritus at University of Cambridge, received the Kyoto Prize in Basic Sciences, specifically in the field of Life Sciences and Medicine, for his work in demonstrating how male and female mammalian genomes receive distinct imprints during germ cell development. Genomic imprinting introduced a novel concept to Mendelian genetics and is a now fundamental principle in the life sciences. Surani's research has contributed to developmental biology and epigenetics, along with a wide range of life science fields including physiology, regenerative medicine, reproductive medicine, and plant science. Series: "Kyoto Prize Symposium" [Science] [Show ID: 41117]

Azim Surani, Director of Research at the Gurdon Institute and Professor Emeritus at University of Cambridge, received the Kyoto Prize in Basic Sciences, specifically in the field of Life Sciences and Medicine, for his work in demonstrating how male and female mammalian genomes receive distinct imprints during germ cell development. Genomic imprinting introduced a novel concept to Mendelian genetics and is a now fundamental principle in the life sciences. Surani's research has contributed to developmental biology and epigenetics, along with a wide range of life science fields including physiology, regenerative medicine, reproductive medicine, and plant science. Series: "Kyoto Prize Symposium" [Science] [Show ID: 41117]

Azim Surani, Director of Research at the Gurdon Institute and Professor Emeritus at University of Cambridge, received the Kyoto Prize in Basic Sciences, specifically in the field of Life Sciences and Medicine, for his work in demonstrating how male and female mammalian genomes receive distinct imprints during germ cell development. Genomic imprinting introduced a novel concept to Mendelian genetics and is a now fundamental principle in the life sciences. Surani's research has contributed to developmental biology and epigenetics, along with a wide range of life science fields including physiology, regenerative medicine, reproductive medicine, and plant science. Series: "Kyoto Prize Symposium" [Science] [Show ID: 41117]

Azim Surani, Director of Research at the Gurdon Institute and Professor Emeritus at University of Cambridge, received the Kyoto Prize in Basic Sciences, specifically in the field of Life Sciences and Medicine, for his work in demonstrating how male and female mammalian genomes receive distinct imprints during germ cell development. Genomic imprinting introduced a novel concept to Mendelian genetics and is a now fundamental principle in the life sciences. Surani's research has contributed to developmental biology and epigenetics, along with a wide range of life science fields including physiology, regenerative medicine, reproductive medicine, and plant science. Series: "Kyoto Prize Symposium" [Science] [Show ID: 41117]

What if we could detect 400 rare diseases in your newborn before any symptom appears?The technology exists but the US is moving fast, China is scaling rapidly, and Europe is choosing caution. Behind the science lies a global power struggle and the rules are still being written.Welcome to Pharma Minds, Mini-Series “Who controls innovation?". In this mini-series, we explore one question in two parts: who controls innovation and who actually makes it happen.Genomic medicine is no longer a promise. It is becoming our reality.But as the science advances, a global race is emerging : the United States is moving fast, China is scaling rapidly, and Europe is advancing more cautiously.In this episode, we go inside the PERIGENOMED project with Prof. Laurence Olivier-Faivre, clinical geneticist and Head of Department at Dijon University Hospital (France), one of France's most ambitious national initiatives aiming to integrate whole-genome sequencing into newborn screening.The ultimate goal? To act before symptoms appear.By detecting over 400 rare diseases in the first days of life, we can treat conditions that are treatable before irreversible damage occurs. But behind this medical breakthrough lies a complex web of ethical dilemmas, organizational challenges, and cultural differences.In this episode, we cover:◾️ The Reality of Execution : how newborn genomic screening actually works and its direct medical impact.◾️ The Ethical Minefield : managing genetic data, incidental findings, and the critical issue of family consent.◾️ The Healthcare Revolution : the massive operational shift required for hospitals and maternity wards.◾️ The Global Race : the cultural and strategic differences in genomic medicine between France, the US, the UK, and China.◾️ The Future : what lifelong genetic prevention will look like in the years to come. Three approaches. Three speeds. Who will ultimately define the rules of preventive genomic medicine?What do you think Europe should prioritize in genomic medicine: speed, ethics, or competitiveness?Let us know in the comments.

2. Flores discusses the Clovis culture'srapid expansion and its role in the American extinction of large mammals. While climate played a part, overhunting and genomic isolationlikely triggered these disappearances. (2)1908

In this episode, our previous guest Dr. Daphne Martschenko returns with her co-author Dr. Sam Trejo to discuss their new book What We Inherit: How New Technologies and Old Myths Are Shaping Our Genomic Future.Dr. Martschenko is an Assistant Professor at the Stanford Center for Biomedical Ethics, where she studies how to promote ethical and socially responsible conduct in human genetics and engages the public around controversial science. Dr. Trejo is an Assistant Professor of Sociology at Princeton University whose work examines how social and biological factors jointly influence human development, with a focus on educational and health inequality.Their collaboration began in graduate school, where they approached genomic research from different intellectual traditions. Dr. Trejo, trained at Stanford, became involved with researchers studying polygenic scores, which are genetic indices linked to social and behavioral outcomes. A controversial talk and an unfortunate reply‑all email situation sparked debate about whether this work risked echoing eugenic ideas. His advisor encouraged him to connect with Dr. Martschenko.Dr. Martschenko, who earned her PhD at Cambridge, was studying how genomic scientists understood their motivations, responsibilities, and the risks of their work. More skeptical of the field's claims and concerned about premature industry applications, she, like Dr. Trejo, was frustrated by polarized academic debates in which opposing sides rarely engaged productively. Their shared desire for more constructive dialogue shaped their collaboration and ultimately their book. In this work, they discovered more common ground than expected. Although disagreements remained, that didn't hinder their ability to think together about regulatory frameworks that should be in place.They highlight two myths that distort public understanding of genomics: • The Destiny Myth—the belief that genes unilaterally determine life outcomes, historically used to justify harms such as involuntary sterilization. • The Race Myth—the false idea that humanity is divided into discrete biological races whose genetic differences explain behavioral or social outcomes, a misconception that has fueled discriminatory policies and continues to underlie white supremacist ideologies.Their work aims to help the public interpret genomic data and understand both its promise and limits. They note that polygenic scores remain a “black box”: even when predictive in certain contexts, their biological pathways are unclear and may operate differently across environments. Their remaining differences center on how scientific advances might counter—or inadvertently reinforce—social harms, and where scientific effort should be focused to meaningfully reduce health disparities.Find their book here: https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691237756/what-we-inherit?srsltid=AfmBOoppBsKJ5iKykfO2MzqGseQw_3EF028_8tMTrAB9G0trgMdqIUSeOther joint publications: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35047864/https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37695009/https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34493865/

With the increasing incidence of colorectal cancer in those less than 50 years of age, one must wonder how many patients present with a Stage IV diagnosis. Take a deep dive with us discussing the management of metastatic colorectal cancer by joining our team and guests, Drs. Cathy Eng, Michael D'Angelica, and Nina Sanford.Hosts: - Dr. Janet Alvarez - General Surgery Resident at New York Medical College/Metropolitan Hospital Center- Dr. Wini Zambare – General Surgery Resident at Weill Cornell Medical Center/New York Presbyterian- Dr. Philip Bauer, Assistant Professor of Surgery, Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital-  Dr. J. Joshua Smith MD, PhD, Chair, Department of Colon and Rectal Surgery at MD Anderson Cancer Center Guest Speakers:- Dr. Michael D'Angelica MD, FACS – Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Enid A. Haupt Chair in Surgery, Vice Chair, Education- Dr. Cathy Eng MD, FACP - Division of Hematology and Oncology, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, David H. Johnson Endowed Chair in Surgical and Medical Oncology, Professor of Medicine, Hematology and Oncology, VICC Associate Director for Strategic Relations and Research Partnerships, Executive Director, Young Adult Cancers Program - Dr. Nina Sanford, MD – Radiation Oncology, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Chief of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology Service, Associate Professor Learning Objectives:1.     Review the epidemiology, prognosis, and common metastatic patterns of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).2.     Discuss the role of systemic chemotherapy and targeted therapies in the first- and subsequent-line treatment of mCRC, including the impact of molecular biomarkers such as MSI/MMR, RAS, BRAF, and HER2.3.     Evaluate the indications and timing of surgical and locoregional therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer, particularly in patients with liver-limited or oligometastatic disease.4.     Describe the multidisciplinary management of mCRC, including the roles of radiation therapy, systemic therapy sequencing, and palliative interventions to optimize outcomes and quality of life.References:Singh, M., Morris, V. K., Bandey, I. N., Hong, D. S. & Kopetz, S. Advancements in combining targeted therapy and immunotherapy for colorectal cancer. Trends Cancer 10, 598–609 (2024). PubMed Link: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38821852/Napolitano, S. et al. BRAFV600E mutant metastatic colorectal cancer: Current advances in personalized treatment and future perspectives. Cancer Treat. Rev. 134, (2025). PubMed Link: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40009904/Ciardiello, F. et al. Clinical management of metastatic colorectal cancer in the era of precision medicine. CA. Cancer J. Clin. 72, 372–401 (2022). PubMed Link: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35472088/Kim, S. Y. & Kim, T. W. Current challenges in the implementation of precision oncology for the management of metastatic colorectal cancer. ESMO Open 5, e000634 (2020). PubMed Link: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32188714/Biller, L. H. & Schrag, D. Diagnosis and Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Review. JAMA 325, 669–685 (2021). PubMed Link: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33591350/Smith, J. J. et al. Genomic stratification beyond Ras/B-Raf in colorectal liver metastasis patients treated with hepatic arterial infusion. Cancer Med. 8, 6538–6548 (2019). PubMed Link: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31503397/Saadat, L. V. et al. Hepatic Artery Infusion Chemotherapy Compared to Transarterial Radioembolization For Unresectable Colorectal Liver Metastases. Ann. Surg. 10.1097/SLA.0000000000006851 doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000006851. PubMed Link: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=10.1097/SLA.0000000000006851 (Linked via DOI search as the direct PMID is still indexing)Xiao, A. & Fakih, M. KRAS G12C Inhibitors in the Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer. Clin. Colorectal Cancer 23, 199–206 (2024). PubMed Link: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38825433/André, T. et al. Pembrolizumab in Microsatellite-Instability–High Advanced Colorectal Cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 383, 2207–2218 (2020). PubMed Link: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33264544/Morris, V. K. et al. Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: ASCO Guideline. J. Clin. Oncol. 41, 678–700 (2023). PubMed Link: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36252154/Xu, Z. et al. Treatments for Stage IV Colon Cancer and Overall Survival. J. Surg. Res. 242, 47–54 (2019). PubMed Link: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31071604/Smith, J. J. & D'Angelica, M. I. Surgical Management of Hepatic Metastases of Colorectal Cancer. Hematol. Oncol. Clin. North Am. 29, 61–84 (2015). PubMed Link: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25475573/Strickler, J. H. et al. Tucatinib plus trastuzumab for chemotherapy-refractory, HER2-positive, RAS wild-type unresectable or metastatic colorectal cancer (MOUNTAINEER): a multicentre, open-label, phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol. 24, 496–508 (2023). PubMed Link: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37142372/Kruijssen, D. E. W. van der et al. Upfront resection versus no resection of the primary tumor in patients with synchronous metastatic colorectal cancer: the randomized phase III CAIRO4 study conducted by the Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group and the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group. Ann. Oncol. 35, 769–779 (2024). PubMed Link: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38852675/Hitchcock, K. E., Romesser, P. B. & Miller, E. D. Local Therapies in Advanced Colorectal Cancer. Hematol. Oncol. Clin. North Am. 36, 553–567 (2022). PubMed Link: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35562258/Hitchcock, K. E. et al. Alliance for clinical trials in Oncology (Alliance) trial A022101/NRG-GI009: a pragmatic randomized phase III trial evaluating total ablative therapy for patients with limited metastatic colorectal cancer: evaluating radiation, ablation, and surgery (ERASur). BMC Cancer 24, 201 (2024). PubMed Link: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38350888/Adam, R. et al. Liver transplantation plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in patients with permanently unresectable colorectal liver metastases (TransMet): results from a multicentre, open-label, prospective, randomised controlled trial. The Lancet 404, 1107–1118 (2024). PubMed Link: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39306468/Elez, E. et al. Encorafenib, Cetuximab, and mFOLFOX6 in BRAF-Mutated Colorectal Cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 392, 2425–2437 (2025). PubMed Link: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40444708/***Fellowship Application Link: https://forms.gle/QSUrR2GWHDZ1MmWC6Please visit https://behindtheknife.org to access other high-yield surgical education podcasts, videos and more.  If you liked this episode, check out our recent episodes here: https://behindtheknife.org/listenBehind the Knife Premium:General Surgery Oral Board Review Course: https://behindtheknife.org/premium/general-surgery-oral-board-reviewTrauma Surgery Video Atlas: https://behindtheknife.org/premium/trauma-surgery-video-atlasDominate Surgery: A High-Yield Guide to Your Surgery Clerkship: https://behindtheknife.org/premium/dominate-surgery-a-high-yield-guide-to-your-surgery-clerkshipDominate Surgery for APPs: A High-Yield Guide to Your Surgery Rotation: https://behindtheknife.org/premium/dominate-surgery-for-apps-a-high-yield-guide-to-your-surgery-rotationVascular Surgery Oral Board Review Course: https://behindtheknife.org/premium/vascular-surgery-oral-board-audio-reviewColorectal Surgery Oral Board Review Course: https://behindtheknife.org/premium/colorectal-surgery-oral-board-audio-reviewSurgical Oncology Oral Board Review Course: https://behindtheknife.org/premium/surgical-oncology-oral-board-audio-reviewCardiothoracic Oral Board Review Course: https://behindtheknife.org/premium/cardiothoracic-surgery-oral-board-audio-reviewDownload our App:Apple App Store: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/behind-the-knife/id1672420049Android/Google Play: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.btk.app&hl=en_US

In this explainer episode, we've asked Georgia Chan, Senior Data Wrangler at Genomics England, to explain what de-identified data is. You can also find a series of short videos explaining some of the common terms you might encounter about genomics on our YouTube channel. If you've got any questions, or have any other topics you'd like us to explain, let us know on podcast@genomicsengland.co.uk. You can download the transcript or read it below. Florence: What do we mean by de-identified data?   My name is Florence Cornish, and today I'm here with Georgia Chan. Georgia is Senior Data Wrangler here at Genomics England, which just means that she cleans up and adds structure to complicated data so that it becomes usable, and she is going to be telling us much more about the topic of de-identified data.  Georgia, I think it would be a good place to start by talking about the National Genomic Research Library, which is the library that we at Genomics England store data in. So maybe you could explain more about that and what kind of data is in there.   Georgia: Sure. Thanks Florence. So, we have genomic data.  Genomic data is information that comes from a person's DNA. It helps us understand how the body works and why disease happens. This can include whole genome sequencing data, variants found in genes, small differences that make each of us unique, and information about how genes function or how they differ between people.  Genomic data does not include a person's name or who they are. It's biological information, not identity, and it's used to understand health and disease. It's really important to note that by nature, it's nature, genomic information is incredibly rich. We all have millions of common genetic variants, but your whole genome is unique to you. So although genomic data alone can't directly identify you, it still counts as personal data under data protection.   We also have clinical data. Clinical data provides real world context for the genomic data. It shows what's happening in someone's health. This can include diagnosis of a disease or a symptom, treatments that have been received, health outcomes over time, such as remission or progression, and this clinical data that help researchers see how genetic differences relate to symptoms, treatment response, and long-term outcomes.   So, we have both of these kinds of data. Genomic data on its own can be hard to interpret, and clinical data on its own only tells part of the story. Together, they allow researchers to better understand how diseases develop, helps them discover new or more targeted treatments, and it helps them improve diagnosis, care, and outcomes.  And this is why both types of this data are used together in the National Genomic Research Library.   Florence: And so, both of these data types, both clinical and genomic, we say that they are de-identified. But what exactly does that mean?   Georgia: Yes, good question. De-identified data means that information which directly identifies a person has been changed or removed from a health record before researchers can access it.  And in practice, it means that researchers cannot see who the person is. The data cannot be used to contact individuals, and a person's identity is protected by design, which means that necessary safeguards are embedded into every stage of a service or process. So, researchers work with the data, but not with people's identities.  Florence: Could you tell me a little bit more about why it's so important to de-identify data in this way?   Georgia: Sure. De-identification creates a safe middle ground. It means that data can be used to improve healthcare whilst people's privacy and trust is respected. So, without de-identification, every new research question would require individual contact and large-scale, long-term research would be extremely difficult.  With de-identification, we reduce the risk of someone being identified. We prevent inappropriate use of data, and we ensure that data is used only for approved research.   And it's important to note also that it sits alongside a list of other safeguards, so that helps ensure data is used responsibly, such as secure Research Environment, strict access control, independent ethical and governance approvals. And all of those safeguards are provided in Genomics England's Research Environment.   Florence: I think a common question that people might have, or a question that I definitely had when I first heard the term, is how de-identified data is different from anonymous data.   Georgia: Yes, it is a good question. So, anonymised data cannot be linked back to an individual and is no longer considered personal data, whereas de-identified anonymised data, it has identified as hidden from researchers, but it can still be relinked by a trusted authorised organisation if needed.   So, in healthcare research, de-identification is often preferred because it allows long-term follow up. It also allows updates as new health information becomes available, and also allows corrections or withdrawals when they occur and when they're appropriate.  Florence: So say a researcher did find something in the data that they might want to feedback, how can we re-identify that participant? What does that process look like?   Georgia: Researchers cannot re-identify participants themselves. At Genomics England, if researchers do make a new discovery that could help an individual, for example, a possible diagnosis for a rare condition, we have an in-house clinical team who can link back to that individual's details and work with their NHS clinicians to establish if this new insight can be fed back.  So if something clinically important is discovered, research is reported through a formal governance process, and then a trusted authorized team, not the researchers who re-identify the participant, and this ensures that researchers never know who the participant is and individuals remain protected.  Whilst important findings can still benefit patients, and this would only happen when it's ethically approved and clinically appropriate.   Florence: Great. Well, I think we'll finish there. Thank you so much, Georgia, for taking the time to talk us through the meaning of de-identified data and why it is so important to protect participants.  Georgia: Thank you, Flo. And let's remember that de-identified data isn't about hiding information. It's about using it responsibly.   Florence: Absolutely. If you want to hear more explainer episodes like this, you can find them on our website at www.genomicsengland.co.uk or wherever you get your podcasts. Thank you for listening. 

Amy LeBlanc, DVM, a board-certified veterinary oncologist, Senior Scientist, and the Director of the intramural NCI's Comparative Oncology Program, will review canine osteosarcoma and the clinical, biologic, and molecular features that make it a relevant animal-patient model for humans. She will share new data from the NCI's Comparative Oncology Program regarding MYC, and its value as a predictive biomarker for the disease in canine patients.Dr. Amy LeBlanc is a board-certified veterinary oncologist, Senior Scientist, and the Director of the intramural NCI's Comparative Oncology Program. In this position, she conducts preclinical mouse and translational pet dog studies that are designed to inform the drug and imaging agent development path for human cancer patients, specifically those with osteosarcoma. She directly oversees the NCI Comparative Oncology Trials Consortium (COTC), which provides the infrastructure necessary to connect participating veterinary academic institutions with stakeholders in drug development to execute fit-for-purpose comparative clinical trials in novel therapeutics and imaging agents. Her program provides support to several extramural NCI-funded initiatives, including the Integrated Canine Data Commons and Cancer Moonshot-funded canine immunotherapeutic clinical trials conducted under the PRECINCT network.

Are aliens real? Are they here?Did they create us? What is the evidence that the answer to all three is YES? How do we even process this information if it's true?These are just some of the questions I asked Bruce Fenton in our extraordinary two-hour conversation recorded a few minutes ago.This one lingers. Hope you enjoy it! What's your first reaction—mind blown, skeptical, or already rethinking everything?

Join us in this episode as we explore the transformative role of technology, especially AI, in aging well. Our guest, Jon Warner, a seasoned expert in healthcare and innovation for older adults, shares his journey, latest trends, and a hopeful vision for the future of personalized, preventative care that empowers individuals to thrive at any age.About JonJon Warner is an aging expert and sought-after advisor for digital health, health, healthcare and wellness organizations. Five-time company CEO, Jon is a widely respected entrepreneur having founded and led 3 startups (with 2 successful exits).His career started in the corporate world with Air Products and Chemicals, working in the US and across Europe before joining Exxon-Mobil. Following his 15 years in the corporate world, Warner founded and grew The Worldwide Centerfor Organizational Development, a management consulting business with global clients including Ford Motor Company, L'Oreal, British Airways, HSBC, Microsoft, Glaxo, Foster Wheeler, Toyota, Johnson and Johnson, Coca-Cola, PWC, The UK NHS, Roche and MasterCard.Key TakeawaysIn the past two decades, macro demographic changes have led to increased innovation and more focus on aging populations.Aging is plastic, not predetermined: Aging is a flexible process, influenced by lifestyle and epigenetic factors.Innovation in AI allows us to customize solutions and tailor them in ways that will help us to thrive and to prevail for longer in better health. AI is capable of pulling together data and creating new threads of insights.AI brings the opportunity to case-assess more richly and not only understand the care that's being rendered, but in what context the person lives. Using AI in affordable housing allows analysis of social determinants of health data—answering questions like: Does beingsocial and having a wide friend set prevent heart disease and dementiaAI needs contextual thinking provided by humans The risk of AI is misinformation from scaping the internet, which is not always reliable. We need “guidelines and guide rails.” To reduce risk, be specific with prompts and rely on credible reports and studies.Precision medicine eliminates a one-size-fits-all approach. Genomic data and social determinant data allows us to render solutions that are individualized in ways we couldn't imagine a decade ago.

Genetic resilience and the dynamics of inbreeding and diversity in dairy breeding. Dr. Maltecca (6:43)The main issues in managing genetic diversity in dairy cattle include inbreeding depression and continuing selection without exhausting the available variability in the population. These are difficult to investigate in a breeding population, as there is not a model algorithm where there is the luxury of designing an experiment. Dairy cattle closely resemble one another, so it is difficult to distinguish between the effect of selection from the effect of drift and the effect of deleterious mutation accumulation in the population. Researchers find proxies to estimate inbreeding and inbreeding depression because we don't have good estimates of dominance effects.Identifying genetic diversity within indigenous and highly commercialized breeds for improved performance and future preservation. Dr. Huson (12:24)Dr. Huson covered four steps of thinking about genetic diversity in cattle: characterization of the genetic diversity, biological understanding of why we should preserve diversity, utilizing our understanding of diversity in breeding programs, and preserving and reassessing diversity over time. Harnessing indigenous African breeds for sustainable dairy production: Opportunities for crossbreeding to accelerate genetic improvement. Dr. Mapholi (16:52)Dr. Mapholi emphasized the importance of tick and disease resistance for the sustainability of the African dairy industry. The indigenous African breeds had been overlooked due to small frame size and the perception they were not suitable for commercial farming, but they have excellent tick and disease resistance. Exotic breeds from the US and Europe struggled with the harsh environment. Crossbreeding indigenous and exotic breeds is allowing for simultaneous improvement in milk production and disease resistance. Genomics is particularly helpful to identify the best candidate breeds for crossing.Genomic- versus pedigree-based inbreeding: 2 sides of the same coin. Dr. Macciotta (24:19)It was thought that genomic selection would help in slowing the increase of inbreeding because we were looking at the DNA of the animal, not their pedigree. However, the traditional top animals were the population from which genomic selection began, and genomic selection shortens generation interval, so inbreeding continues to increase at a faster rate. Genomics offer new tools for investigating inbreeding, but there are 10-15 options to calculate inbreeding, all of which could provide a different answer. With pedigree selection, there is only one measurement of inbreeding. We are still investigating the best method for calculating inbreeding using genomic tools.Managing genetic diversity: Strategies for sustainable livestock improvement. Dr. Baes (27:53)Genomic selection has increased the speed at which animals become more related. There are negative implications of inbreeding, but today, the genetic and economic gains achieved through the current intense directional selection still far outweigh the inbreeding issues. No one knows where the edge of the cliff is, however. Dr. Baes envisions an international system one day where academia, AI companies, and producers all work together to understand and manage genetic diversity in livestock.The panelists discuss key takeaways they got from the other speakers' presentations and give perspectives on the topic of genetic diversity for their particular country and field of study. (34:58)Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (46:10)Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we'll mail you a shirt.

Genomic epidemiology is reshaping how we detect, investigate, and control infectious disease outbreaks—but what does that actually look like from the bench to public health? In this episode of Let's Talk Micro, Luis is joined by genomic epidemiologist Krisandra Allen for a practical, case-based conversation on how pathogen sequencing data is generated, analyzed, and paired with epidemiologic information to answer questions traditional methods can't. They discuss foodborne and hepatitis A outbreaks, geographically dispersed clusters, and how sequencing is being integrated into routine public health workflows, while highlighting the essential role of clinical microbiology labs in specimen submission and data quality. A timely episode for microbiologists, public health professionals, and trainees curious about how their lab work feeds into real-world surveillance and outbreak response.   Stay connected with Let's Talk Micro: Website: letstalkmicro.com Questions or feedback? Email me at letstalkmicro@outlook.com Interested in being a guest on Let's Talk Micro? Fill out the form here: https://forms.gle/V2fT3asjfyusmqyi8   Support the podcast: Venmo Buy me a Ko-fi  

Guest: Dan Flores. Flores details the Clovis culture's rapid expansion and efficient hunting, arguing human predation and genomic meltdown drove the "American extinction" of large mammals like mammoths.1908

Intelligence Notes:LAWSUIT: Genomic Warfare Confirmed-Monsanto Technology in your COVID SHOTS 2026- New World Order.Pharmaceutical Warfare: Bayer, ModeRNA, Pfizer et al.To support the [Show] and its [Research] with Donations, please send all funds and gifts to :$aigner2019 (cashapp) or https://www.paypal.me/Aigner2019 or Zelle (1-617-821-3168). Shalom Aleikhem!

In this episode of our special series on corn production on The Crop Science Podcast Show, Dr. James Schnable from the University of Nebraska–Lincoln breaks down how genetics, genomics, and machine learning are reshaping modern hybrid development. He explains how breeders use genomic prediction and high-throughput phenotyping to tackle climate variability, stress tolerance, and yield stability. Listen now on all major platforms!"Hybrid breeding and statistical analysis really are what moved hybrid cornfields in the US from around 26 to 30 bushels an acre to now north of 200."Meet the guest: Dr. James Schnable is the Nebraska Corn Presidential Chair at the University of Nebraska–Lincoln, where he leads research integrating quantitative genetics, genomics, and machine learning to improve crops like corn and sorghum. His work focuses on advanced phenotyping, climate resilience, and genetic discovery to support breeders and the crop industry.Liked this one? Don't stop now — Here's what we think you'll love!What you will learn:(00:00) Highlight(01:06) Introduction(04:19) Breeding changes(08:33) Climate-ready hybrids(11:02) Key trait priorities(14:55) Genomic prediction(18:50) Gene editing limits(23:17) Final three questionsThe Crop Science Podcast Show is trusted and supported by innovative companies like:- KWS

In this JCO Precision Oncology Article Insights episode, host Dr. Harold Nathan Tan summarizes "Palbociclib in Patients With Head and Neck Cancer and Other Tumors With CDKN2A Alterations: Results From the Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry Study" by Worden et al.  TRANSCRIPT Harold Nathan Tan: Welcome to JCO Precision Oncology Article Insights, where we explore research that is reshaping our understanding of cancer therapeutics. I'm your host, Harold Nathan Tan, and today's episode centers on the TAPUR study, an analysis that confronts a long-standing assumption in molecular oncology: namely, whether CDKN2A alterations create a therapeutic vulnerability that can be exploited by CDK4/6 inhibition with palbociclib. CDKN2A is one of the most frequently altered tumor suppressors across solid tumors. Its importance lies in its production of two proteins, p16 and p14, which serve as guardians of cell cycle progression. p16 directly inhibits CDK4 and CDK6, preventing phosphorylation of the RB protein and therefore blocking entry into S phase, whereas p14 stabilizes p53 by counteracting MDM2, enabling cells to pause or die in response to oncogenic stress. When CDKN2A is lost or mutated, these dual checkpoints collapse. CDK4/6 activity becomes unchecked, RB remains phosphorylated and inactive, and p53-mediated surveillance is blunted from a mechanistic standpoint. This creates a possible dependency on CDK4/6 signaling that could, in principle, be therapeutically reversed by palbociclib. The TAPUR study is a prospective phase 2 basket study designed to evaluate whether FDA-approved targeted agents can meaningfully benefit patients with advanced treatment-refractory cancers harboring specific genomic alterations. In this analysis, patients were eligible for palbociclib if their tumors carried CDKN2A loss or mutation and retained RB activity. Two cohorts were examined: one consisting of head and neck cancers, and another composed of a broad spectrum of tumor types that collectively shared the CDK2 alteration. The results from the head and neck cancer cohort are particularly intriguing. Among the 28 available patients, the study observed a disease control rate of 40%, surpassing the predefined threshold for a positive signal. Although the objective response rate was low at only 4% with one partial response, the durability of disease stabilization was clinically meaningful. However, the most important insight comes from examining which head and neck tumors benefited. The strongest and most durable disease control occurred in non-squamous malignancies, particularly salivary gland tumors such as adenocarcinoma, adenoid cystic carcinoma, and poorly differentiated parotid tumors, as well as in esthesioneuroblastoma. In contrast, classic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma rarely demonstrated sustained benefit. When progression-free survival was analyzed, non-squamous tumors achieved a median PFS of approximately 20 weeks compared to just eight weeks in squamous tumors. This divergence reflects deep biological differences. Many non-squamous head and neck cancers preserve an intact RB axis and rely on CDK4/6-driven cell cycle control as a core proliferative mechanism. By contrast, squamous tumors tend to accumulate a dense array of co-alterations that weaken or circumvent CDK4/6 dependency. Many squamous tumors also harbor disruptive TP53 mutations, removing essential checkpoint control and allowing the cell to bypass the growth-arresting effects of palbociclib. In other words, even though CDKN2A loss is present, CDK4/6 is no longer the dominant node controlling proliferation in these cancers, and the tumor simply finds other ways to drive cell cycle entry. One of the most thought-provoking findings from the TAPUR study involves esthesioneuroblastoma. Three patients with this rare tumor achieved durable disease control despite the lack of standardized systemic treatment options for this malignancy. Genomic analyses have shown that while esthesioneuroblastoma often carries TP53 or IDH2 mutations, a meaningful subset exhibits alterations in CDKN2A or related cell cycle regulators. The consistency of this disease stabilization observed in TAPUR may reflect a lineage-specific reliance on CDK4/6 signaling, opening the door for future exploration of CDK4/6 inhibitors in this orphan disease. In the histology-pooled cohort, which included 40 available patients across 18 tumor types, palbociclib did not achieve the disease control threshold required to declare activity, with only a disease control rate of 13% and an ORR of 5%. While a few isolated responses occurred, for instance in thymic carcinoma and B-cell lymphoma, the overall disease control rate was 13%, which failed to rise above what might be expected from the natural history of advanced refractory cancers. This outcome reinforces the principle that CDKN2A loss is not a universal predictor of CDK4/6 dependency. Many of the tumors represented in this cohort, such as pancreatic cancer, melanoma, and gastrointestinal malignancies, are well known to evolve multiple compensatory mechanisms that circumvent CDK4/6 as a critical proliferative node. The safety profile of palbociclib was consistent with its known hematologic toxicities. High rates of neutropenia, leukopenia, and thrombocytopenia were observed, along with one treatment-related death due to respiratory failure. In a setting where activity is limited to specific subgroups, these toxicities underscore the importance of careful patient selection and raise the bar for demonstrating clinically meaningful benefit, particularly in heavily pretreated populations. So what do these findings tell us about the broader landscape of precision oncology? First, they remind us that a mutation's functional role is dependent on the cellular and lineage context in which it occurs. CDKN2A loss may accelerate proliferation in many tumors, but the mechanism of that acceleration varies widely, and the degree to which a tumor relies on CDK4/6 signaling is anything but uniform. Second, the findings suggest that palbociclib monotherapy may hold meaningful and durable benefit in the subset of non-squamous head and neck cancers, particularly salivary gland malignancies and esthesioneuroblastoma. Third and perhaps most importantly, the results reinforce a growing consensus that the future of CDK4/6 inhibition in solid tumors lies not in monotherapy, but in rational combination strategies. CDK4/6 inhibitors have been shown to synergize with EGFR inhibitors, PIK3CA, and mTOR inhibitors, MEK inhibition, and even immune checkpoint blockade. These combinations aim to dismantle the compensatory pathways that allow tumors to escape CDK4/6 blockade and may unlock therapeutic potential in tumors that show limited sensitivity to monotherapy. Ultimately, the TAPUR findings challenge the notion that CDKN2A is a straightforward predictive biomarker. Instead, the study reveals CDKN2A as a biomarker whose meaning is modulated by tumor lineage, co-mutation status, and the broader regulatory circuit governing proliferation. Precision oncology must therefore move beyond single-gene interpretation towards integrated frameworks that situate genomic alterations within their biologic ecosystems. In some head and neck cancer subtypes, particularly non-squamous malignancies, that ecosystem appears amenable to CDK4/6 inhibition, and that insight, not the simplistic gene-to-drug match, represents the true value of the TAPUR analysis. Thank you for joining me for this episode of JCO Precision Oncology Article Insights. I'm Harold Nathan Tan, and I look forward to exploring more research that continues to refine how we understand and strategically exploit the vulnerabilities of cancer. The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience, and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinions of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement.      

In this special end-of-year episode of Behind the Genes, host Sharon Jones is joined by Dr Rich Scott, Chief Executive Officer of Genomics England, to reflect on the past year at Genomics England, and to look ahead to what the future holds.  Together, they revisit standout conversations from across the year, exploring how genomics is increasingly embedded in national health strategy, from the NHS 10-Year Health Plan to the government's ambitions for the UK life sciences sector. Rich reflects on the real-world impact of research, including thousands of diagnoses returned to the NHS, progress in cancer and rare condition research, and the growing momentum of the Generation Study, which is exploring whether whole genome sequencing could be offered routinely at birth.  This episode offers a thoughtful reflection on how partnership, innovation, and public trust are shaping the future of genomic healthcare in the UK and why the years ahead promise to be even more exciting.  Below are the links to the podcasts mentioned in this episode, in order of appearance:  How are families and hospitals bringing the Generation Study to life? How can cross-sector collaborations drive responsible use of AI for genomic innovation? How can we enable ethical and inclusive research to thrive? How can parental insights transform care for rare genetic conditions? How can we unlock the potential of large-scale health datasets? Can patient collaboration shape the future of therapies for rare conditions? https://www.genomicsengland.co.uk/podcasts/what-can-we-learn-from-the-generation-study “There is this view set out there where as many as half of all health interactions by 2035 could be informed by genomics or other similar advanced analytics, and we think that is a really ambitious challenge, but also a really exciting one.”  You can download the transcript, or read it below. Sharon: Hello, and welcome to Behind the Genes.   Rich: This is about improving health outcomes, but it's also part of a broader benefit to the country because the UK is recognised already as a great place from a genomics perspective. We think playing our role in that won't just bring the health benefits, it also will secure the country's position as the best place in the world to discover, prove, and where proven roll out benefit from genomic innovations and we think it's so exciting to be part of that team effort.  Sharon: I'm Sharon Jones, and today I'll be joined by Rich Scott, Chief Executive Officer at Genomics England for this end of year special. We'll be reflecting on some of the conversations from this year's episodes, and Rich will be sharing his insights and thoughts for the year ahead. If you enjoyed this episode, we'd love your support, so please subscribe, rate, and share on your favourite podcast app. So, let's get started.  Thanks for joining me today, Rich. How are you?  Rich: Great, it's really good to be here.   Sharon: It's been a really exciting year for Genomics England. Can you tell us a bit about what's going on?  Rich: Yeah, it's been a really busy year, and we'll dive into a few bits of the components we've been working on really hard. One really big theme for us is it's been really fantastic to see genomics at the heart of the government's thinking. As we'll hear later, genomics is at the centre of the new NHS 10-year health plan, and the government's life sciences sector plan is really ambitious in terms of thinking about how genomics could play a role in routine everyday support of healthcare for many people across the population in the future and it shows a real continued commitment to support the building of the right infrastructure, generating the right evidence to inform that, and to do that in dialogue with the public and patients, and it's great to see us as a key part of that.  It's also been a really great year as we've been getting on with the various programmes that we've got, so our continued support of the NHS and our work with researchers accessing the National Genomic Research Library. It's so wonderful to see the continued stream of diagnoses and actionable findings going back to the NHS. It's been a really exciting year in terms of research, publications. In cancer, some really exciting publications on, for example, breast cancer and clinical trials. Really good partnership work with some industry partners, really supporting their work. For me, one of the figures we are always really pleased to see go up with time is the number of diagnoses that we can return thanks to research that's ongoing in the research library, so now we've just passed 5,000 diagnostic discoveries having gone back to the NHS, it really helps explain for me how working both with clinical care and with research and linking them really comes to life and why it's so vital.   And then, with our programmes, it's been great to see the Generation Study making good progress. So, working with people across the country, more than 25,000 families now recruited to the study, and we're beginning to hear about their experiences, including some of the families who've received findings from the programme. It's really nice to see and hear from Freddie's family, who talked to the press a bit about the finding that they received. Freddie was at increased risk of a rare eye cancer, and really pleasingly, it was possible to detect that early through the screening that was put in place. Again, it really brings to life why we're doing this, to make a difference and improve health outcomes.  Sharon: That's an incredible 12 months. Diving into that Generation Study piece and for listeners who don't know what that is, it's a research study in partnership with the NHS that aims to sequence the genomes of 100,000 newborn babies. On an episode from earlier in the year, we had mum, Rachel Peck, join the conversation, whose baby Amber is enrolled on a study. Let's year from Rachel now.  Rachel: From the parents' point of view, I guess that's the hardest thing to consent for in terms of you having to make a decision on behalf of your unborn child. But I think why we thought that was worthwhile was that could potentially benefit Amber personally herself or if not, there's the potential it could benefit other children.  Sharon: Consent has been such a big area of focus for us, Rich, and Rachel touches on that complexity, you know, making a decision on behalf of her unborn child. Can you talk a bit about our approach to consent in the Generation Study and what's evolving in that model?  Rich: Yeah. It's been for the whole study, really, starting out asking a really big question here, what we're aiming to do is generate evidence on whether and if so, how whole genome sequencing should be offered routinely at birth, and that's responding to a really ill need that we know that each year thousands of babies are born in the UK with treatable rare conditions. We will also need to see if whole genome sequencing can make a difference for those families, but we realise to do that, as with all screening, that involves testing more people than are going to benefit from it directly themselves. So, you have to approach it really sensitively. There's lots of complicated questions, lots of nuance in the study overall. One of them is thinking really carefully about that consent process so that families can understand the choices, they can understand the benefits and risks. This is still a research study. We're looking to understand whether we should offer this routinely. It's not part of routine care at this point. The evidence will help decision-makers, policymakers in the future decide that.  At the beginning of the programme, we spent a lot of time talking to families, talking to health professionals who understand the sorts of decisions that people are making at that time of life, but also are experts in helping think about how you balance that communication. That involved, as I say, a lot of conversations. We learnt a lot, lots of it practical stuff, about the stage of pregnancy that people are at when we first talk to them about the study, so that people aren't hurried and make this decision. What we've learnt in the study, right from the outset, is talking to people from midway through the pregnancy so that they really have time to engage in it and think about their choice. So, it's an important part of getting the study design right so that we run the study right. It's also a really crucial element of the evidence that will generate from the study so that we can understand if this is something that's adopted, how should we communicate about it to families. What would they want to know? What's the right level of information and how do we make that accessible in a way that is meaningful to people from different backgrounds, with different levels of interest, different accessibility in terms of digital and reading and so on. There's a lot that we've learnt along the way and there's a lot that we're still learning. And as I say, important things that we'll present as evidence later on.  Sharon: Thank you. It's fascinating there are so many moving parts and a lot to consider when you're building the design of a programme like this or study like this.  Earlier in the year you had a great conversation with Karim Beguir about the developments of AI in genomics. Let's revisit that moment.  Karim: We live in an extraordinary time. I want to emphasise the potential of scientific discovery in the next two or three years. AI is going to move, let's say, digital style technologies like coding and math towards more like science and biology. In particular, genomics is going to be a fascinating area in terms of potential.  Sharon: So, Karim talks about AI moving from maths and coding into biology. Why is genomics such a natural area for AI?  Rich: It's really fascinating. I think it links a lot to how we think about genomics and how you get the most value in terms of health benefit and sort of the progress that we can see could come through genomics more generally. So, your genome, which is your DNA code, written in 3 billion little letters across each one of us, one copied from mum, one copied from dad, even just our genomic code of one person is a large amount of data. That is just part of the story because we're not just interested in DNA for DNA's sake, this is about thinking about health and how we can improve health outcomes. So, it's also thinking about the other sorts of information that needs to link to genomic data to make a difference. Whether that's just to provide routine healthcare with today's knowledge, or whether it's about continuing to learn and discover.  As I mentioned at the beginning, I think a really important part of this whole picture is we've learnt a lot in the last 20/30/40 plus years about genomics. It's incredible how much progress has been made, and we're really just scratching the surface. Take rare disease and the progress that's been made there, it's wonderful how many more families we're able to help today. We know that many thousands of families we still can't find a diagnosis for when we know that there is one there for many of them. That theme of ongoing learning is at the centre of all of our work, and that will continue as we look about broader uses of genomics in other settings beyond rare conditions and cancer. It's also that ongoing learning, but also the amount of, at the moment, manual steps that are required in some of the processes that we need to, for example, find a diagnosis for someone or to make sure the tools that we use are the most up to date, the most up to date with the medical literature, for example. AI is a tool that we're, as the whole of the society, we're beginning to see how it can play a role. We see it as important today for some of the just really practical things. I mentioned it, staying up to date with the medical literature, making sure that we and our systems are aware of all of the knowledge that's coming in from around the world. It's got real potential there.  I think the biggest bottom line here is that it's got the potential to be a really important tool in terms of our ongoing learning and improvement. I'm a doctor by background, the human intelligence alone is fantastic, it's moved us a long way, but we know it also has tremendous blind spots. AI has the potential to complement us there. I guess another thing to really call out here, AI isn't a panacea, it's not suddenly going to answer all of the questions. And, just like human intelligence, it will have its own biases, have its own strong points, and less strong points.  One of the things we're really committed to is working with people like Karim, and many others, to understand where AI could make a difference, to test it, to generate evidence on how well it works and an understanding in all sorts of ways about how that might play out. And, make sure that as AI becomes a tool, that we in genomics, but also in other areas, we understand its strong points and where we need to be more careful and cautious with it. That's a really important part of what we're going to be doing in the coming years here, is making sure that we can maximise the impact of it, but also be confident, so that we can explain to people whose data we might use it on how we're doing it and what it's bringing.  Sharon: Thanks Rich. It's definitely a fast-moving conversation of which we really want to be part of. One of the things that's come up again and again this year is participation and co-production. Let's hear quote that really captures that.  Bobbie: In an earlier conversation with Paul, which you might find surprising that it's stuck with me so much, he used the word ‘extractive'. He said that he'd been involved in research before and looking back on it, he had felt at times it could be a little bit extractive. You come in, you ask questions, you take the data away and analyse it, and it might only be by chance that the participants ever know what became of things next. One of the real principles of this project was always going to be co-production and true collaboration with our participants.  Sharon: That was Professor Bobbie Farsides talking about moving away from extractive research towards true co-production. How are we making that shift in practice here at Genomics England?  Rich: It's a great question. It's one of the areas where I think we've learnt most as an organisation over the years about how really engaging from the beginning with potential participants in programmes, participants who join our programmes, people who are involved in delivering our programmes and healthcare is so important at the beginning. I mentioned earlier the work to think about the consent process for the Generation Study, and that's one of the areas where I think from our first programme, 100,000 Genomes Project, we learnt a lot about how to do that well, some of the pitfalls, some of the bits that are most challenging. And really, right from the start of our programmes, making sure that people who will potentially benefit from the programmes, potentially join them, can be part of that engagement process, and really part of the design and the shaping of the research questions, the parameters around research, but also the materials and how people will engage with them. And that's one of the key capabilities we have internally as an organisation, so we work with partners externally, but also it's a really key part of the team that we have at Genomics England.  Sharon: So, whilst Bobbie talked about moving away from research that can feel one-sided and towards true collaboration, in another episode, Lindsay, a parent of a child with a rare condition, reflected on what that change really means for families and how it's empowering to see their voices and experiences shaping future treatments.  Lindsay: Historically, there's been a significant absence of a patient voice in rare disease research and development. And knowing that that's changing, I think that's really empowering for families. To know that professionals and industry are actually listening to our stories and our needs and really trying to understand, that offers much greater impact on the care and treatments of patients in the future.  Sharon: So, what role do you see participants as partners in shaping the next phase of Genomics England's work?  Rich: So, as you probably detected from my last answer, we see it as absolutely vital. One of the really exciting things here at Genomics England, we've had a participant panel from very early in our life as an organisation. That's one really important route to us at the heart of our organisation, part of our governance, making sure that participants representing all sorts of parts of our programme, but rare conditions being a really large focus for us. And I think, what's so striking as someone with a medical and a research background can see how I think historically medics and researchers have sometimes not known, sort of maybe been a bit scared about knowing how to involve participants from the outset. Often, because they're worried that they might ask the wrong questions in the wrong way, they just don't have the tools.   One of the things I often say now to people we work with is one of the most empowering and positive experiences we have at Genomics England is the power of our participants helping to, right from the beginning, shape what the questions are that we should be asking. Realise some of the challenges that you can't possibly, if you're not in their shoes, understand are the most important to really shape how we prioritise our work internally, the problems that we need to solve first, how we think about some of the practical impacts on people's lives that, again, without hearing from their voice you just wouldn't know. And again, to help our researchers, people accessing data in the National Genomic Research Library, helping them make sure that they involve participants in their work and the confidence and tools to do that.  Sharon: That's great, thank you. Another big theme this year has been collaboration across the NHS, academia, and industry. Dr Raghib Ali puts this really well.  Raghib: There are areas where academia and the NHS are very strong, and there are areas where industry is very strong, and why working together, as we saw, you know, very good examples during the pandemic with the vaccine and diagnostic tests, etc., a collaboration between the NHS, academia, and industry leads to much more rapid and wider benefits for our patients and, hopefully, in the future for the population as a whole in terms of early detection and prevention of disease.  Sharon: So, how does collaboration fit into the 10-year health plan and what's next for 2026 in that space, Rich?  Rich: I think one of the most enjoyable parts of my role at Genomics England and our role as an organisation is the fact that we see ourselves very much as part of a, sort of team across the UK and in fact internationally in terms of delivering on the potential we see for genomics. So, we have a vision as an organisation, which has been the same the last 5 or so years, which is a world where everyone can benefit from genomic healthcare. In fact, that vision is now shared by the NHS from a genomics perspective, and really demonstrably, the 2 parts of the system absolutely pointing in the same direction. And when we've been thinking, looking forward with that 10-year lens on it, what we always like to do, and I think it's a real privilege to be able to do, because we're here in the UK, because we have a National Health Service, because there's been that long-term commitment from government on genomics and really taking a long-term investment view there, and because of so many other parts of the ecosystem, other experts who access data in the National Genomic Research Library, research organisations like Our Future Health, UK Biobank, all teaming together, and the expertise that's there in genomics more broadly. So we've, if you like, worked back from what the UK could do as whole, and in the 10-year health plan, as I said earlier, genomics is at the heart of that.  There's a double helix on the front cover and, in fact, on the watermark on almost every page. And, there's this view set out there where as many as half of all health interactions by 2035 could be informed by genomics or other similar advanced analytics. And we think that that's a really ambitious challenge. We see a really important role for us, as Genomics England, in contributing to that, but it's very much a team effort. Our role is around where we have the biggest capabilities, so around building and running digital infrastructure at a national scale for healthcare delivery and for research, to building evidence to inform future policies, so running programmes like the Generation Study to inform future policy. And really, as part of that, that evidence piece, being driven by engagement, ethics, and work on equity, to really make sure that evidence that future policy can be built on is informed by a fully rounded view. We think if we do that right that we could as a country with others, the NHS, research organisations, many others could live up to that ambition that's set out there in the 10-year plan.   And the 10-year plan is really clear, and government is really clear that this is about improving health outcomes. But it's also part of a broader benefit to the country because the UK is recognised already as a great place from a genomics perspective. We think playing our role in that won't just bring the health benefits, it also will secure the country's position as the best place in the world to discover, prove and where proven role out benefit from genomic innovations. And we think it's so exciting to be part of that team effort.  Sharon: So, Genomics England's refreshed mission and direction of travel is really setting out how we move from research to routine care, and how we embed genomics across the health system. Carlo Rinaldi captured the idea perfectly, imagining a future where diagnosis and hope arrive hand in hand.  Carlo: My dream is that in five to ten years' time an individual with a rare disease is identified in the clinic, perhaps even before symptoms have manifested. At that exact time the day of the diagnosis becomes also a day of hope, in a way, where immediately the researcher, the genetic labs, flags that specific variant, that specific mutation. We know exactly which is the best genetic therapy to go after.   Sharon: And Rich, what are your thoughts on that?  Rich: I think Carlo captures it really well. And for us, I think a really big theme is for that potential for genomics to make a difference, a continued and in fact increased difference for people with rare conditions and cancer, areas where it's already making a difference, but also with the potential to make a much broader impact for people across the population. The real theme is embedding genomics into routine care, making it something that you don't need to know that you're seeing an expert in genomics to benefit from it, really make sure that those benefits can be felt as just part of routine care. It's not something separate where we recognise that the best healthcare is healthcare that's supported by all sorts of inputs, with genomics being a key part of that, and that we can continue to learn as we do that. So that with people's consent, with their understanding of how their data is being used, we know that if we don't have the best answer for them today, we give the best answer we can today, and we can continue to learn, and they can benefit from that in the future.   I'm a rare disease doctor by background, and one of the really most enjoyable parts of my job is seeing that come to practice. In the last year or so I've had a number of families where I've been seeing the family for years, and a researcher accessing data in the National Genomic Research library has found an answer that we've not been able to find for maybe their child's whole life, and then finally we're able to feed it back. Seeing that come to life is just so wonderful, and I think gives us a bit of a blueprint for how things could work more generally.  Sharon: That's great. I mean, what a feeling for those families who do get those answers. As we look ahead to 2026 and beyond, the conversation is starting to include prevention, using genomics not just to diagnose conditions but to predict and treat and even prevent them. Alice Tuff-Lacey summarised this nicely in an episode about Generation Study.  Alice: This is quite an exciting shift in how we use whole genome sequencing, because what we're talking about is using it in a much more preventative way. Traditionally where we've been using it is diagnostically where we know someone's sick and they've got symptoms of rare condition, and we're looking to see what they might have. What we're actually talking about is screening babies from birth using their genome to see if they're at risk of a particular condition. And what this means is this raises quite a lot of complex ethical, operational, and scientific and clinical questions.  Sharon: Rich, when you think about 2026, what's your biggest hope for where we'll be this time next year?  Rich: I think it's a really exciting time. As you can tell from how we've been speaking, I'm really excited about the direction of travel and how over the next 5 and 10 years we can really make a transformational shift because of how well placed we are in the UK from a genomics perspective. Where we are with today's knowledge, where we could be because of the continued government and NHS commitment to genomics being at the heart of this, if we build the right infrastructure, if we generate the right evidence to inform what's adopted, I think we're in a really exciting place.  From a 2026 perspective, I think what we're really committed to is continuing to do the work, the day-by-day-by-day work that is to build that incrementally. So, a really big focus for us is continuing to support the NHS and making sure researchers can access data, so that flow of answers for families can continue and grow, accelerate, to continue delivering the Generation Study because it's a really important part of that wider jigsaw to generate the evidence that can inform future policy on whether this is something that's adopted and offered routinely to every child when they're born.  I think a really important time now that the government's provided the opportunity for us as a team, as a UK genomics and life sciences ecosystem, is to really put in place some of the next steps, the building blocks that can take us towards that 10-year vision. So for us also, a really important part of the year is beginning the design process for an adult population genomics programme, where we're looking at what evidence it's important that we can provide that's complementary to different work around by others in the ecosystem that needs to be there if we're going to think about that potential broader use of genomics.  Sharon: That's great. It sounds like another exciting year ahead. So, we're going to wrap up there. Thank you to Rich Scott for sharing your reflections on the key milestones this year, and for your thoughts on the year ahead. Thanks, Rich.  Rich: Thanks very much for having me.  Sharon: If you enjoyed today's episode, we'd love your support, so please subscribe, share, and rate us on wherever you listen to your podcasts. I've been your host, Sharon Jones. This podcast was produced by Deanna Barac and edited by Bill Griffin at Ventoux Digital. Thank you for listening. 

Maximizing your healthspan requires understanding your specific genetic blueprint to see how your body processes fats, carbs, and antioxidants. Standard medical school training provides only a fraction of the education needed to understand nutrition and prevention. I sat down with Dr. Jeff Graham to uncover why common health "hacks" like Vitamin E or intermittent fasting might be backfiring based on your DNA. We explore the transition from high-intensity athletics to longevity-focused movement, and how advanced testing identifies disease risks years before they appear on a standard lab report.Jeff breaks down the impact of the APOE and MTHFR genes on brain health, the surprising anti-inflammatory benefits of sardines, and why muscle mass is your greatest currency as you age. We also discuss the future of AI in diagnostics, the truth about CrossFit injuries, and why contrast therapy is a non-negotiable for cellular resilience."If you're investing in anything with your time or your money that isn't asking you to do something hard most days, then you need to run away." - Dr. Jeff GrahamSupport the show and get 50% off MCT oil with free shipping—just leave us a review on iTunes and let us know!https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/live-beyond-the-norms/id1714886566 About Jeff Graham:Dr. Jeff Graham is a performance and longevity expert combining clinical expertise with precision genomic medicine. He holds a medical degree from the University of Arkansas, completed his residency in North Carolina, and graduated cum laude from a sports medicine fellowship with board certification in lifestyle medicine. As Chief Medical Officer at Wild Health, Jeff focuses on leveraging advanced testing and data-driven insights to maximize health spans for clients ranging from senior executives to competitive CrossFit athletes.Connect with Jeff Graham:- Website: https://wildhealth.com - Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/wildhealthmd/ - LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/precisionmdjeff/ Connect with Chris Burres:- Website: https://www.myvitalc.com/ - Website: http://www.livebeyondthenorms.com/ - Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/chrisburres/ - TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@myvitalc - LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/chrisburres/ DisclaimerThe content shared in this podcast is intended for educational and informational purposes only. It does not constitute medical advice of any kind, nor does it include any specific claims or guarantees. The views expressed are based on personal experiences, research, and individual perspectives, and are meant to inspire and inform listeners on topics related to wellness, lifestyle, and personal development.We strongly encourage all listeners to consult with a qualified professional or licensed expert before making any decisions related to health, finances, or other sensitive areas of life. Thank you for tuning in—and for taking proactive steps toward a more informed, intentional life.

Weeds remained an evolving challenge for Wisconsin farmers. Jill Welke gets a recap from UW-Extension Weed Specialist, Dr. Rodrigo Werle. Werle's making his rounds statewide sharing what they learned this growing season. He says there were some breakthroughs this year that proved to be challenging. Those breakthroughs were weeds overcoming existing chemistry to keep growing. Werle says he's got a long list of projects to try and get grower answers for 2026. Above average temperatures will make a white Christmas unlikely in many areas of Wisconsin. Stu Muck explains what's acting as the catalyst for this late December warm-up. Time for another Mid-West Farm Report Ride-A-Long. An opportunity to accept invitations to find out about the latest technology and innovations Wisconsin farmers are evaluating and using. Today we travel to Malta, IL and the site of the Syngenta Seeds Research and Development Innovation Center. Pam Jahnke finds out about the length of time required to develop products like the new Durastak corn rootworm tool. Drew Showalter, Head, Corn Portfolio Strategy, tells Pam about the evolution of the product and why it's a game-changer for Wisconsin farmers. Paid for by Syngenta. On Friday Wisconsin animal health officials announced the genomic sequencing information gathered from the H5N1 positive herd in Dodge County. Pam Jahnke reports that the genotype was found to be D1.1, a spillover from wildlife into dairy cattle. This is new and no connected to previous detections that trace their strain to an outbreak in the Texas Panhandle. Wisconsin's seen no new dairy detections and continues to rigorously monitor dairies through the National Milk Testing Strategy. A new bipartisan bill introduced on Friday could provide hope for wedding barn operators in 2026. The bill LRB-2567 would roll back 2023 Act 73 that restricts venues to six alcohol-consuming events annually. Jean Bahn, operator of Farmview Event Center in rural Green Lake County says potential clients do not like having their event restricted. She says she's lost business because people want to be able to feature alcohol as a guests option. Bahn had previously filed suit against the state claiming Act 73 was unconstitutional and designed to put her out of business. When a court ruling went against her motion last month, this new bipartisan bill became a last ray of hope for retaining business in 2026.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

"Within-family genomic selection in strawberry: optimization of marker density, trial design, and training set composition" with Dr. Joshua Sleper If plant breeding were a poker game, you'd have to play a lot of hands to beat the house. Quantitative genetics hopes to give players an advantage by recognizing patterns that can point to future success. In strawberry, a genetically complex and labor-intensive plant, this is particularly important. This episode, Joshua join me to discuss his work using quantitative genetics to help give strawberry breeders a hand. Tune in to learn: ·        How some plants have "sticky cards" in their genetics ·        What challenges strawberry breeders face ·        How many clones are really enough ·        What lies on the horizon for strawberry breeding If you would like more information about this topic, this episode's paper is available here: https://doi.org/10.1002/tpg2.20550 This paper is always freely available. Contact us at podcast@sciencesocieties.org or on Twitter @FieldLabEarth if you have comments, questions, or suggestions for show topics, and if you want more content like this don't forget to subscribe. If you'd like to see old episodes or sign up for our newsletter, you can do so here: https://fieldlabearth.libsyn.com/. If you would like to reach out to Joshua, you can find him here: j.sleper@ufl.edu Resources CEU Quiz: https://web.sciencesocieties.org/Learning-Center/Courses/Course-Detail?productid=%7b9908BAD4-89DB-F011-8544-000D3A3685DF%7d  Transcripts: Coming soon Rex Bernardo's Essentials of Plant Breeding: https://www.abebooks.com/9780972072427/Essentials-Plant-Breeding-Rex-Bernardo-097207242X/plp   A Quarter Century of Genomewide Prediction - Dr. Rex Bernardo: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K45M4N9mJBM&t=8s Field, Lab, Earth is Copyrighted by the American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America.

Can genomic classifiers close the gap between what we see and what a tumor will do? In this episode of BackTable Urology, Dr. Carissa Chu (UCSF) joins Dr. Ruchika Talwar (Vanderbilt) to explore how genomic classifiers are reshaping the way clinicians diagnose and manage bladder cancer. --- This podcast is supported by: VeracyteVeracyte.com/decipher-bladder --- SYNPOSIS They discuss the limitations of traditional staging systems and how molecular subtyping is providing deeper insight into tumor biology, treatment response, and prognosis. Dr. Chu highlights where these classifiers can be integrated into real-world clinical decision-making today, where the evidence is still emerging, and which ongoing trials may define the next era of precision medicine in urologic oncology. --- TIMESTAMPS 0:00 - Introduction3:01 - Overview of Genomic Classifiers9:34 - Risk Stratification15:22 - Current Evidence for Genomic Classifiers22:07 - Clinical Implications of Biomarkers27:23 - Ordering Genomic Classifiers33:46 - Future Directions37:57 - Final Takeaways --- RESOURCES Alignment of molecular subtypes across multiple bladder cancer subtyping classifiershttps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38480079/ GUSTO Trialhttps://fundingawards.nihr.ac.uk/award/NIHR128103

Cancer treatment is moving toward a more precision-based approach, where therapies are guided not just by the tumor's location but also by its genetic features. Mutations in cancer cells can point to specific drugs that may be more effective for certain patients. However, detecting these mutations often requires broad and detailed analysis. This is where comprehensive genomic profiling becomes especially important. One of the main challenges in cancer care is that many existing genetic tools focus on only a limited number of mutations. As a result, some treatment opportunities may be missed. Certain mutations are also difficult to detect because they occur at low levels or exist in complex forms, such as gene fusions. Without advanced screening methods, these changes may go unnoticed. To address these challenges, researchers from Exact Sciences Corporation conducted a large-scale study using a broad genomic screening approach. The findings were recently published in the journal Oncotarget. Full blog - https://www.oncotarget.org/2025/12/15/comprehensive-genomic-profiling-in-cancer-insights-from-over-10000-tumors/ Paper DOI - https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.28757 Correspondence to - Jean-Paul De La O - jdelao@exactsciences.com Abstract video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awiRhDfiMTE Sign up for free Altmetric alerts about this article - https://oncotarget.altmetric.com/details/email_updates?id=10.18632%2Foncotarget.28757 Subscribe for free publication alerts from Oncotarget - https://www.oncotarget.com/subscribe/ Keywords - cancer, solid tumors, comprehensive genomic profiling, matched therapy, gene fusions, limit of detection To learn more about Oncotarget, please visit https://www.oncotarget.com and connect with us: Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/Oncotarget/ X - https://twitter.com/oncotarget Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/oncotargetjrnl/ YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@OncotargetJournal LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/company/oncotarget Pinterest - https://www.pinterest.com/oncotarget/ Reddit - https://www.reddit.com/user/Oncotarget/ Spotify - https://open.spotify.com/show/0gRwT6BqYWJzxzmjPJwtVh MEDIA@IMPACTJOURNALS.COM

Send us a textDr. Pankaj Agrawal, Division Chief of Neonatology at University of Miami, discusses rapid genomic advances—from six-month diagnostic timelines in 2000 to same-day sequencing today. While current practice targets phenotype-based testing for unexplained conditions or dysmorphic features, Agrawal advocates moving toward universal NICU sequencing to identify previously unrecognized conditions. Key barriers include administrative buy-in, cost concerns, consent processes, and result disclosure challenges. Even negative results provide value—offering families reassurance and contributing to research databases. With only 5,000 of 20,000 genes linked to human disease, ongoing gene discovery work continues. Agrawal emphasizes the NICU as ideal for genomic implementation given high genetic disease prevalence and intervention opportunities. Support the showAs always, feel free to send us questions, comments, or suggestions to our email: nicupodcast@gmail.com. You can also contact the show through Instagram or Twitter, @nicupodcast. Or contact Ben and Daphna directly via their Twitter profiles: @drnicu and @doctordaphnamd. The papers discussed in today's episode are listed and timestamped on the webpage linked below. Enjoy!

Watch every episode ad-free & uncensored on Patreon: https://patreon.com/dannyjones Dr. Melissa Ilardo, Ph.D is a professor of evolutionary genomics and biomedical informatics at the University of Utah. Her research explores human evolution and adaptation in populations that have previously been overlooked or excluded from biological research. Her recent work looks into a population who engages in the practice of breath-hold diving & is evolving on a unique breakaway trajectory from the rest of homo sapiens on earth. SPONSORS https://hellofresh.com/danny10fm - Get 10 Free Meals + a Free breakfast for Life! https://cell.ver.so/danny - Use code DANNY to save 15% on your first order. https://butcherbox.com/danny - Get free steak in every box for a year PLUS $20 off your first box. https://whiterabbitenergy.com/?ref=DJP - Use code DJP for 20% off EPISODE LINKS https://medicine.utah.edu/faculty/melissa-ilardo https://www.superhumanlab.org https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/19/science/bajau-evolution-ocean-diving.html https://www.instagram.com/superhumanscilab https://linkedin.com/in/melissa-ilardo FOLLOW DANNY JONES https://www.instagram.com/dannyjones https://twitter.com/jonesdanny OUTLINE 00:00 - Genomic evolution of Baju people (sea nomads) 15:00 - How long Baju can hold their breath for 21:19 - All-female Korean free divers (Haenyeo) 32:17 - Lost species of humans 42:44 - Humans won't survive the next 100,000 years 47:50 - Mother of humanity: The real "Eve" 59:48 - Humans are attracted to mates by pheromones 01:06:30 - Why assisted reproductive technology might be harmful to evolution 01:14:57 - Effects of the global population mixing & mating together 01:21:37 - Risks of CRISPR gene editing 01:30:37 - Lifespan & the grandmother hypothesis 01:37:18 - Evolution of un-contacted indigenous tribes 01:40:50 - What future humans will look like 01:49:08 - Intelligence is not genetic Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Today's guest is Dr. Mark Kiel, Chief Science Officer and Founder at Genomenon. Genomenon is a genomics intelligence company that unlocks real-world evidence from biomedical literature to help pharmaceutical and clinical diagnostics companies inform precision medicine, accelerate patient diagnosis, and guide trial design and label expansion. Mark joins Emerj Editorial Director Matthew DeMello to explore how AI can streamline the extraction, organization, and interpretation of genomic and clinical data, enabling faster, more accurate decision-making in pharmaceutical R&D. He also shares practical approaches to integrating AI with human curation, improving workflow efficiency, and scaling insights for rare disease diagnosis, trial design, and drug development strategy. This episode is sponsored by Genomenon. Learn how brands work with Emerj and other Emerj Media options at emerj.com/ad1. Want to share your AI adoption story with executive peers? Click emerj.com/expert2 for more information and to be a potential future guest on the 'AI in Business' podcast!

In this crossover episode with the Functional Breeding Podcast Sarah and friend of the pod Dr Hekman discuss a recent paper revealing some interesting differences between the brains of herding dogs and “normal” dogs, particularly Sarah's beloved border collies. The paper is "Genomic evidence for behavioral adaptation of herding dogs." and you can find it here: https://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/sciadv.adp4591 Sign up for courses and join the membership here: sarahstremming.com Join us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/cogdogradio Music by AlexGrohl from Pixabay

This episode, I am being interviewed by Sarah Stremming about a recent scientific article about the genetics of behavior in herding breeds and specifically in border collies. I talk about the study's methods and what it all means, and Sarah grounds it in her deep practical experience with herding dogs. Sarah has been on the podcast so many times that she hardly needs an introduction but for new listeners, she is an internationally known dog behavior consultant and speaker. You can learn more about her at sarahstremming.com and I encourage you to check out her podcast, cog dog radio, where this episode is being jointly released. On a personal note I want to let you all know that while I haven't been releasing episodes, this podcast has been very much on my mind. I continue to suffer from chronic fatigue which makes this kind of effort really difficult for me - after recording this episode I was unable to work for the rest of the day. I'm improving but it's very slow going. I am deeply grateful to those on Patreon who continue to support the podcast during this hiatus - that support goes straight to the Functional Dog Collaborative and is much needed and appreciated.  Jeong, Hankyeol, Elaine A. Ostrander, and Jaemin Kim. "Genomic evidence for behavioral adaptation of herding dogs." Science Advances 11.18 (2025): eadp4591. https://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/sciadv.adp4591  

Ancestral Native American Dispersal and Admixture 3. Meltzer describes the dispersal of the first peoples into the Americas, explaining that ancestral Native Americans likely arrived first and made it south of the ice sheets, splitting into Northern and Southern groups with the Southern group dispersing rapidly toward Tierra del Fuego. This rapid dispersal into completely unknown, people-free land suggests dogs—whose genomic history matches human travel—were likely part of their cultural repertoire for defense and hunting. Genomic data reveals that ancient groups later became isolated, developing distinctive genetic markers before experiencing later admixture as mobility increased, and critically shows no ancestral relationship between these first Americans and European, Ainu, or Polynesian populations.

In this episode of The Dairy Podcast Show, Dr. Michael Overton from Zoetis and Meagan Young from VAS bring a new perspective on cow replacement strategies. They discuss the economics of replacement timing, the impact of salvage value, and how keeping cows too long can reduce herd productivity. Learn how data-driven decisions impact profitability and sustainability on dairy operations. Listen now on all major platforms!"Keeping cows longer than necessary often hides economic losses through reduced milk production." - Dr. Michael OvertonMeet the guests: Dr. Michael Overton, Global Dairy Platform Lead at Zoetis, combines veterinary practice, academia, and industry expertise to advance data analytics and economic modeling in dairies. Meagan Young, Voice of Customer Program Manager at VAS, connects producer insights with software solutions like DairyComp to improve herd decision-making. Liked this one? Don't stop now — Here's what we think you'll love!What you'll learn:(00:00) Highlight(01:19) Introduction(07:34) Herd replacements(08:24) Beef crossbreeding impact(10:19) Economics of heifers(12:28) Herd management choices(24:04) Genomic testing role(26:00) Final three questionsThe Dairy Podcast Show is trusted and supported by innovative companies like:VAS* Evonik* Afimilk* Adisseo* Priority IAC- SmaXtec- Natural Biologics- dsm-firmenich- ICC- Berg + Schmidt- AHV- Protekta

Get started with 1 month free of Superhuman today, using my link: https://try.sprh.mn/briankeating Today's guest made bacteria immune to every virus that exists. This breakthrough could revolutionize medicine by creating virus proof cell therapies and potentially extending this protection to human cells. Also demonstrating that we can fundamentally rewrite the language of life itself, something that was previously thought impossible. George Church is a Harvard Medical School genetics professor and pioneer of synthetic biology. He's an entrepreneur who's found in multiple biotech companies and is known for pushing the boundaries between science fiction and reality. His team just did something that sounds like pure science fiction. They made living cells completely immune to every virus on Earth. That resistant immune, every single virus that tries to infect your cells just fails. The viruses can't evolve around it. Here's the wild part. They didn't add anything new. They just removed a few letter from the genetic alphabet. But George isn't stopping there. He wants to do this to human cells. He's talking about engineering astronauts for Mars missions, bringing back wooly mammoths, and maybe even, just maybe, making humans virus proof to the implications are staggering. The ethics are murky. And the timeline. Well, if church's track record tells us anything is happening far faster than we think. KEY TAKEAWAYS 00:00:00 – Church's team made cells virus-proof, a major medical breakthrough 00:02:34 – Radiation resistance may come from DNA repair linked to desiccation 00:04:43 – A few genes can boost bacteria's radiation resistance 00:07:16 – Panspermia is unlikely due to harsh space conditions 00:10:50 – Space travel may need biological, not just physical, changes 00:14:19 – Regenesis explores synthetic biology's potential 00:18:19 – Height involves many genes, but single ones can have big effects 00:20:57 – Once sci-fi, genome sequencing and pig organs are now real 00:23:20 – Church and Venter are more collaborators than rivals 00:27:17 – Rewriting genes can create virus-proof organisms 00:35:36 – DNA can store data, but reading/writing is slow 00:41:06 – Gattaca and Jurassic Park portray genetics well with small flaws 00:44:03 – Gene therapies can be affordable for all 00:46:44 – Stem cells can create any body cell for therapy 00:49:15 – “Mirror humans” are possible but avoided ethically 00:53:59 – Genomic privacy isn't an issue since we shed DNA constantly 00:56:09 – Gene editing helps endangered species adapt, not revive extinct ones 01:00:30 – Virus-proof humans are possible, but tough to deliver to all cells 01:02:59 – Gene therapies could reverse aging at the cellular level 01:04:18 – Church avoids saying “impossible,” but admits to timeline optimism - Get My NEW Book: Focus Like a Nobel Prize Winner: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0FN8DH6SX?ref_=pe_93986420_775043100 Please join my mailing list here

In this episode of The HemOnc Pulse, host Melissa speaks with Omar Nadeem, MD, Senior Physician at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Assistant Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School, about emerging genomic insights in smoldering multiple myeloma. The discussion focuses on recent research showing how molecular profiling can improve understanding of disease progression and refine risk stratification beyond traditional clinical models. Dr. Nadeem highlights how genomic data may help distinguish patients with smoldering myeloma who are at higher risk of progression from those likely to remain stable, offering the potential to guide more personalized treatment decisions. The conversation also explores the evolving landscape of precursor plasma cell disorders and the role of immunotherapy, including CAR T-cell therapy, in clinical management.      

Part 2 of this installment of Unearthed! features animals, swords, art, shoes, shipwrecks, and the miscellany category of potpourri. Research: Abrams, G., Auguste, P., Pirson, S. et al. Earliest evidence of Neanderthal multifunctional bone tool production from cave lion (Panthera spelaea) remains. Sci Rep 15, 24010 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-08588-w Addley, Esther. “English warship sunk in 1703 storm gives up its secrets three centuries on.” The Guardian. 7/31/2025. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2025/jul/31/british-warship-hms-northumberland-1703-storm-archaeology Alberge, Dalya. “New research may rewrite origins of the Book of Kells, says academic.” The Guardian. 9/26/2025. https://www.theguardian.com/books/2025/sep/26/new-research-may-rewrite-origins-of-the-book-of-kells-says-academic Alex, Bridget et al. “Regional disparities in US media coverage of archaeology research.” Science Advances. Vol. 11, No. 27. July 2025. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adt5435 American Historical Association. “Historians Defend the Smithsonian.” Updated 8/15/2015. https://www.historians.org/news/historians-defend-the-smithsonian/#statement Anderson, Sonja. “Underwater Archaeologists Capture Photos of Japanese Warship That Hasn’t Been Seen Since It Sank During World War II.” Smithsonian. 7/23/2025. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/underwater-archaeologists-capture-photos-of-japanese-warship-that-hasnt-been-seen-since-it-sank-during-world-war-ii-180987026/ “Ancient DNA provides a new means to explore ancient diets.” Via PhysOrg. 7/1/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-06-ancient-dna-explore-diets.html Archaeology Magazine. “Roman Workshop Specialized in Manufacturing Nails.” 9/11/2025. https://archaeology.org/news/2025/09/11/roman-workshop-specialized-in-manufacturing-nails-for-army-boots/ Arnold, Paul. “DNA analysis reveals insights into Ötzi the Iceman's mountain neighbors.” Phys.org. 7/22/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-07-dna-analysis-reveals-insights-tzi.html Arnold, Paul. “Prehistoric 'Swiss army knife' made from cave lion bone discovered in Neanderthal cave.” Phys.org. 7/9/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-07-prehistoric-swiss-army-knife-cave.html Associated Press. “Divers recover artifacts from the Titanic’s sister ship Britannic for the first time.” 9/16/2025. https://apnews.com/article/britannic-titanic-shipwreck-recovery-9a525f9831bc0d67c1c9604cc7155765 Breen, Kerry. “Woman's remains exhumed in Oregon's oldest unidentified person case.” CBS News. 9/24/2025. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/oak-grove-jane-doe-remains-exhumed-oregon-unidentified-person-homicide/ Croze, M., Paladin, A., Zingale, S. et al. Genomic diversity and structure of prehistoric alpine individuals from the Tyrolean Iceman’s territory. Nat Commun 16, 6431 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-61601-8 Davis, Nicola. “Even Neanderthals had distinct preferences when it came to making dinner, study suggests.” The Guardian. 7/17/2025. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2025/jul/17/even-neanderthals-had-distinct-preferences-when-it-came-to-making-dinner-study-suggests Durham University. “Bronze and Iron Age cultures in the Middle East were committed to wine production.” EurekAlert. 9/17/2025. https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1098278 “Archaeologists discover four at-risk shipwrecks on colonial waterfront at Brunswick Town/Fort Anderson State Historic Site.” 8/4/2025. https://news.ecu.edu/2025/08/04/archaeologists-discover-four-at-risk-shipwrecks-on-colonial-waterfront-at-brunswick-town-fort-anderson-state-historic-site/ Fratsyvir, Anna. “Polish president-elect urges Ukraine to allow full exhumations of Volyn massacre victims, despite resumed work.” 7/12/2025. https://kyivindependent.com/polands-president-elect-urges-zelensky-to-allow-full-exhumations-in-volyn-as-work-already-resumes/ Fry, Devin and Jordan Gartner. “Coroner’s office identifies man 55 years later after exhuming his body from cemetery.” 7/19/2025. https://www.kltv.com/2025/07/19/coroners-office-identifies-man-55-years-later-after-exhuming-his-body-cemetery/ Guagnin, Maria et al. “12,000-year-old rock art marked ancient water sources in Arabia's desert.” Phys.org. 10/1/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-10-year-art-ancient-sources-arabia.html History Blog. “Medieval leather goods found in Oslo.” 7/15/2025. https://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/73641 Jana Matuszak, Jana. “Of Captive Storm Gods and Cunning Foxes: New Insights into Early Sumerian Mythology, with an Editoin of Ni 12501.” Iraq. Vol. 86. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/iraq/article/of-captive-storm-gods-and-cunning-foxes-new-insights-into-early-sumerian-mythology-with-an-edition-of-ni-12501/391CFC6A9361C23A0E7AF159F565A911 Kuta, Sarah. “Cut Marks on Animal Bones Suggest Neanderthal Groups Had Their Own Unique Culinary Traditions.” Smithsonian. 7/17/2025. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/cut-marks-on-animal-bones-suggest-neanderthal-groups-had-their-own-unique-culinary-traditions-180987002/ Kuta, Sarah. “Seventy Years Later, They Finally Know What It Is.” Smithsonian. 8/1/2025. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/scientists-found-sticky-goo-inside-a-2500-year-old-jar-70-years-later-they-finally-know-what-it-is-180987088/ Kuta, Sarah. “Underwater Archaeologists Were Looking for a Lost Shipwreck in Wisconsin. They Stumbled Upon a Different Vessel Instead.” Smithsonian. 7/16/2025. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/underwater-archaeologists-were-looking-for-a-lost-shipwreck-in-wisconsin-they-stumbled-upon-a-different-vessel-instead-180986990/ Linköping University. “Ancient crop discovered in the Canary Islands thanks to archaeological DNA.” Phys.org. https://phys.org/news/2025-09-ancient-crop-canary-islands-archaeological.html Lucchesi, Madison. “More layoffs at GBH as ‘Defunded’ sign goes viral.” Boston.com. 7/24/2025. https://www.boston.com/news/media/2025/07/24/gbh-layoffs-defunded-sign/ Luscombe, Richard. “‘It’s incredibly exciting’: ancient canoe unearthed after Hurricane Ian stormed through Florida.” The Guardian. 9/28/2025. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/28/florida-ancient-canoes Margalida, Antoni et al. “The Bearded Vulture as an accumulator of historical remains: Insights for future ecological and biocultural studies.” Ecology. Volume 106, Issue 9. 9/11/2025. https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ecy.70191 Metcalfe, Tom. “300-year-old pirate-plundered shipwreck that once held 'eyewatering treasure' discovered off Madagascar.” Live Science. 7/3/2025. https://www.livescience.com/archaeology/300-year-old-pirate-plundered-shipwreck-that-once-held-eyewatering-treasure-discovered-off-madagascar Mondal, Sanjukta. “Ancient Romans likely used extinct sea creature fossils as amulets.” Phys.org. 7/28/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-07-ancient-romans-extinct-sea-creature.html Morris, Steven. “Iron age settlement found in Gloucestershire after detectorist unearths Roman swords.” The Guardian. 7/4/2025. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2025/jul/04/roman-swords-gloucestershire-villa-iron-age-settlement-discovery Mullett, Russell et al. “Precious finger traces from First Nations ancestors revealed in a glittering mountain cave in Australia.” Phys.org. 7/28/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-07-precious-finger-nations-ancestors-revealed.html Ocean Exploration Trust. “Expedition reveals 13 shipwrecks from WWII battles off Guadalcanal.” Phys.org. 8/4/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-08-reveals-shipwrecks-wwii-guadalcanal.html Oster, Sandee. “Study translates fragmentary ancient Sumerian myth around 4,400 years old.” Phys.org. 7/22/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-07-fragmentary-ancient-sumerian-myth-years.html Paul, Andrew. “130-year-old butter bacteria discovered in Danish basement.” Popular Science. 9/15/2025. https://www.popsci.com/science/old-butter-basement-discovery/ Penn, Tim. “Big Roman shoes discovered near Hadrian's Wall—but they don't necessarily mean big Roman feet.” Phys.org. 7/20/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-07-big-roman-hadrian-wall-dont.html#google_vignette Pogrebin, Robin and Graham Bowley. “Smithsonian Responds to Trump’s Demand for a Review of Its Exhibits.” New York Times. 9/3/2025. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/03/arts/design/smithsonian-bunch-trump.html Preston, Elizabeth. “Scientists found a 650-year-old shoe in a vulture nest. That’s just the start of it.’ National Geographic. 10/1/2025. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/article/vulture-nest-was-hiding-a-650-year-old-shoe Reilly, Adam. “GBH lays off 13 staff at American Experience, pauses production of new documentaries.” GBH. 7/22/2025. https://www.wgbh.org/news/local/2025-07-22/gbh-lays-off-13-staff-at-american-experience-pauses-production-of-new-documentaries Richmond, Todd. “Searchers discover ‘ghost ship’ that sank in Lake Michigan almost 140 years ago.” Associated Press. 9/15/2025. https://apnews.com/article/lake-michigan-schooner-shipwreck-door-county-ccff930d8cd87f3597483938f8fb4fd6 Savat, Sarah. “Discovery expands understanding of Neolithic agricultural practices, diets in East Asia.” EurekAlert. 9/24/2025. https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1099662 Seb Falk, James Wade, The Lost Song of Wade: Peterhouse 255 Revisited, The Review of English Studies, Volume 76, Issue 326, October 2025, Pages 339–365, https://doi.org/10.1093/res/hgaf038 Smith, Kiona N. “Oldest wooden tools in East Asia may have come from any of three species.” Ars Technica. 7/7/2025. https://arstechnica.com/science/2025/07/did-denisovans-or-homo-erectus-make-the-oldest-wooden-tools-in-east-asia/ The Catholic Herald. “Plans in train to exhume holy remains of martyr St Thomas More.” 7/14/2025. https://thecatholicherald.com/article/plans-in-train-to-exhume-holy-remains-of-martyr-st-thomas-more The History Blog. “1600-year-old iron scale, weights found in Turkey.” 7/10/2025. https://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/73597 The History Blog. “2,500-year-old honey identified in ancient offering.” 7/31/2025. https://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/73776 The History Blog. “Kushan vessel inscribed with woman’s name found in Tajikistan.” 7/8/2025. https://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/73582 The History Blog. “Medieval sword fished out of Vistula in Warsaw.” 7/7/2025. https://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/73574 The History Blog. “Unique 3D mural 3,000-4,000 years old found in Peru.” 7/30/2025. https://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/73769 The White House. “Letter to the Smithsonian: Internal Review of Smithsonian Exhibitions and Materials.” 8/12/2025. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/2025/08/letter-to-the-smithsonian-internal-review-of-smithsonian-exhibitions-and-materials/ Thorsberg, Christian. “A Tiny Typo May Explain a Centuries-Old Mystery About Chaucer’s ‘Canterbury Tales’ and ‘Troilus and Criseyde’.” Smithsonian. 7/16/2025. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/a-tiny-typo-may-explain-a-centuries-old-mystery-about-chaucers-canterbury-tales-and-troilus-and-criseyde-180986991/ University of Cambridge. “Scholars just solved a 130-year literary mystery—and it all hinged on one word.” 7/16/2025. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2025/07/250716000855.htm Vindolanda Trust. “Magna Shoes.” 7/2/2025. https://www.vindolanda.com/news/magna-shoes Whiddington, Richard. “$2 Thrift Store Plate Turns Out to Be Rare Chinese Porcelain Worth Thousands.” Artnet. 8/21/2025. https://news.artnet.com/market/chinese-porcelain-uk-thrift-store-auction-2680013 Whiddington, Richard. “Famed Antikythera Shipwreck Yields More Astonishing Discoveries.” Artnet News. 7/16/2025. https://news.artnet.com/art-world/antikythera-shipwreck-more-discoveries-2668217 Whiddington, Richard. “Scholars Crack 130-Year-Old Mystery Behind a Lost Medieval Epic.” 7/17/2025. https://news.artnet.com/art-world/song-of-wade-mystery-chaucer-2668558 Whiddington, Richard. “Sunken Clues Reveal Identity of Mysterious Scottish Shipwreck.” Artnet. 7/25/2025. https://news.artnet.com/art-world/scotland-shipwreck-sanday-2671342 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Part one of this quarter's installment of Unearthed! features things related to books and letters, and edibles and potables, and as we usually do, we are starting this installment of Unearthed with updates. Research: Abrams, G., Auguste, P., Pirson, S. et al. Earliest evidence of Neanderthal multifunctional bone tool production from cave lion (Panthera spelaea) remains. Sci Rep 15, 24010 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-08588-w Addley, Esther. “English warship sunk in 1703 storm gives up its secrets three centuries on.” The Guardian. 7/31/2025. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2025/jul/31/british-warship-hms-northumberland-1703-storm-archaeology Alberge, Dalya. “New research may rewrite origins of the Book of Kells, says academic.” The Guardian. 9/26/2025. https://www.theguardian.com/books/2025/sep/26/new-research-may-rewrite-origins-of-the-book-of-kells-says-academic Alex, Bridget et al. “Regional disparities in US media coverage of archaeology research.” Science Advances. Vol. 11, No. 27. July 2025. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adt5435 American Historical Association. “Historians Defend the Smithsonian.” Updated 8/15/2015. https://www.historians.org/news/historians-defend-the-smithsonian/#statement Anderson, Sonja. “Underwater Archaeologists Capture Photos of Japanese Warship That Hasn’t Been Seen Since It Sank During World War II.” Smithsonian. 7/23/2025. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/underwater-archaeologists-capture-photos-of-japanese-warship-that-hasnt-been-seen-since-it-sank-during-world-war-ii-180987026/ “Ancient DNA provides a new means to explore ancient diets.” Via PhysOrg. 7/1/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-06-ancient-dna-explore-diets.html Archaeology Magazine. “Roman Workshop Specialized in Manufacturing Nails.” 9/11/2025. https://archaeology.org/news/2025/09/11/roman-workshop-specialized-in-manufacturing-nails-for-army-boots/ Arnold, Paul. “DNA analysis reveals insights into Ötzi the Iceman's mountain neighbors.” Phys.org. 7/22/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-07-dna-analysis-reveals-insights-tzi.html Arnold, Paul. “Prehistoric 'Swiss army knife' made from cave lion bone discovered in Neanderthal cave.” Phys.org. 7/9/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-07-prehistoric-swiss-army-knife-cave.html Associated Press. “Divers recover artifacts from the Titanic’s sister ship Britannic for the first time.” 9/16/2025. https://apnews.com/article/britannic-titanic-shipwreck-recovery-9a525f9831bc0d67c1c9604cc7155765 Breen, Kerry. “Woman's remains exhumed in Oregon's oldest unidentified person case.” CBS News. 9/24/2025. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/oak-grove-jane-doe-remains-exhumed-oregon-unidentified-person-homicide/ Croze, M., Paladin, A., Zingale, S. et al. Genomic diversity and structure of prehistoric alpine individuals from the Tyrolean Iceman’s territory. Nat Commun 16, 6431 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-61601-8 Davis, Nicola. “Even Neanderthals had distinct preferences when it came to making dinner, study suggests.” The Guardian. 7/17/2025. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2025/jul/17/even-neanderthals-had-distinct-preferences-when-it-came-to-making-dinner-study-suggests Durham University. “Bronze and Iron Age cultures in the Middle East were committed to wine production.” EurekAlert. 9/17/2025. https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1098278 “Archaeologists discover four at-risk shipwrecks on colonial waterfront at Brunswick Town/Fort Anderson State Historic Site.” 8/4/2025. https://news.ecu.edu/2025/08/04/archaeologists-discover-four-at-risk-shipwrecks-on-colonial-waterfront-at-brunswick-town-fort-anderson-state-historic-site/ Fratsyvir, Anna. “Polish president-elect urges Ukraine to allow full exhumations of Volyn massacre victims, despite resumed work.” 7/12/2025. https://kyivindependent.com/polands-president-elect-urges-zelensky-to-allow-full-exhumations-in-volyn-as-work-already-resumes/ Fry, Devin and Jordan Gartner. “Coroner’s office identifies man 55 years later after exhuming his body from cemetery.” 7/19/2025. https://www.kltv.com/2025/07/19/coroners-office-identifies-man-55-years-later-after-exhuming-his-body-cemetery/ Guagnin, Maria et al. “12,000-year-old rock art marked ancient water sources in Arabia's desert.” Phys.org. 10/1/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-10-year-art-ancient-sources-arabia.html History Blog. “Medieval leather goods found in Oslo.” 7/15/2025. https://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/73641 Jana Matuszak, Jana. “Of Captive Storm Gods and Cunning Foxes: New Insights into Early Sumerian Mythology, with an Editoin of Ni 12501.” Iraq. Vol. 86. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/iraq/article/of-captive-storm-gods-and-cunning-foxes-new-insights-into-early-sumerian-mythology-with-an-edition-of-ni-12501/391CFC6A9361C23A0E7AF159F565A911 Kuta, Sarah. “Cut Marks on Animal Bones Suggest Neanderthal Groups Had Their Own Unique Culinary Traditions.” Smithsonian. 7/17/2025. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/cut-marks-on-animal-bones-suggest-neanderthal-groups-had-their-own-unique-culinary-traditions-180987002/ Kuta, Sarah. “Seventy Years Later, They Finally Know What It Is.” Smithsonian. 8/1/2025. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/scientists-found-sticky-goo-inside-a-2500-year-old-jar-70-years-later-they-finally-know-what-it-is-180987088/ Kuta, Sarah. “Underwater Archaeologists Were Looking for a Lost Shipwreck in Wisconsin. They Stumbled Upon a Different Vessel Instead.” Smithsonian. 7/16/2025. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/underwater-archaeologists-were-looking-for-a-lost-shipwreck-in-wisconsin-they-stumbled-upon-a-different-vessel-instead-180986990/ Linköping University. “Ancient crop discovered in the Canary Islands thanks to archaeological DNA.” Phys.org. https://phys.org/news/2025-09-ancient-crop-canary-islands-archaeological.html Lucchesi, Madison. “More layoffs at GBH as ‘Defunded’ sign goes viral.” Boston.com. 7/24/2025. https://www.boston.com/news/media/2025/07/24/gbh-layoffs-defunded-sign/ Luscombe, Richard. “‘It’s incredibly exciting’: ancient canoe unearthed after Hurricane Ian stormed through Florida.” The Guardian. 9/28/2025. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/28/florida-ancient-canoes Margalida, Antoni et al. “The Bearded Vulture as an accumulator of historical remains: Insights for future ecological and biocultural studies.” Ecology. Volume 106, Issue 9. 9/11/2025. https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ecy.70191 Metcalfe, Tom. “300-year-old pirate-plundered shipwreck that once held 'eyewatering treasure' discovered off Madagascar.” Live Science. 7/3/2025. https://www.livescience.com/archaeology/300-year-old-pirate-plundered-shipwreck-that-once-held-eyewatering-treasure-discovered-off-madagascar Mondal, Sanjukta. “Ancient Romans likely used extinct sea creature fossils as amulets.” Phys.org. 7/28/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-07-ancient-romans-extinct-sea-creature.html Morris, Steven. “Iron age settlement found in Gloucestershire after detectorist unearths Roman swords.” The Guardian. 7/4/2025. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2025/jul/04/roman-swords-gloucestershire-villa-iron-age-settlement-discovery Mullett, Russell et al. “Precious finger traces from First Nations ancestors revealed in a glittering mountain cave in Australia.” Phys.org. 7/28/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-07-precious-finger-nations-ancestors-revealed.html Ocean Exploration Trust. “Expedition reveals 13 shipwrecks from WWII battles off Guadalcanal.” Phys.org. 8/4/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-08-reveals-shipwrecks-wwii-guadalcanal.html Oster, Sandee. “Study translates fragmentary ancient Sumerian myth around 4,400 years old.” Phys.org. 7/22/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-07-fragmentary-ancient-sumerian-myth-years.html Paul, Andrew. “130-year-old butter bacteria discovered in Danish basement.” Popular Science. 9/15/2025. https://www.popsci.com/science/old-butter-basement-discovery/ Penn, Tim. “Big Roman shoes discovered near Hadrian's Wall—but they don't necessarily mean big Roman feet.” Phys.org. 7/20/2025. https://phys.org/news/2025-07-big-roman-hadrian-wall-dont.html#google_vignette Pogrebin, Robin and Graham Bowley. “Smithsonian Responds to Trump’s Demand for a Review of Its Exhibits.” New York Times. 9/3/2025. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/03/arts/design/smithsonian-bunch-trump.html Preston, Elizabeth. “Scientists found a 650-year-old shoe in a vulture nest. That’s just the start of it.’ National Geographic. 10/1/2025. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/article/vulture-nest-was-hiding-a-650-year-old-shoe Reilly, Adam. “GBH lays off 13 staff at American Experience, pauses production of new documentaries.” GBH. 7/22/2025. https://www.wgbh.org/news/local/2025-07-22/gbh-lays-off-13-staff-at-american-experience-pauses-production-of-new-documentaries Richmond, Todd. “Searchers discover ‘ghost ship’ that sank in Lake Michigan almost 140 years ago.” Associated Press. 9/15/2025. https://apnews.com/article/lake-michigan-schooner-shipwreck-door-county-ccff930d8cd87f3597483938f8fb4fd6 Savat, Sarah. “Discovery expands understanding of Neolithic agricultural practices, diets in East Asia.” EurekAlert. 9/24/2025. https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1099662 Seb Falk, James Wade, The Lost Song of Wade: Peterhouse 255 Revisited, The Review of English Studies, Volume 76, Issue 326, October 2025, Pages 339–365, https://doi.org/10.1093/res/hgaf038 Smith, Kiona N. “Oldest wooden tools in East Asia may have come from any of three species.” Ars Technica. 7/7/2025. https://arstechnica.com/science/2025/07/did-denisovans-or-homo-erectus-make-the-oldest-wooden-tools-in-east-asia/ The Catholic Herald. “Plans in train to exhume holy remains of martyr St Thomas More.” 7/14/2025. https://thecatholicherald.com/article/plans-in-train-to-exhume-holy-remains-of-martyr-st-thomas-more The History Blog. “1600-year-old iron scale, weights found in Turkey.” 7/10/2025. https://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/73597 The History Blog. “2,500-year-old honey identified in ancient offering.” 7/31/2025. https://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/73776 The History Blog. “Kushan vessel inscribed with woman’s name found in Tajikistan.” 7/8/2025. https://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/73582 The History Blog. “Medieval sword fished out of Vistula in Warsaw.” 7/7/2025. https://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/73574 The History Blog. “Unique 3D mural 3,000-4,000 years old found in Peru.” 7/30/2025. https://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/73769 The White House. “Letter to the Smithsonian: Internal Review of Smithsonian Exhibitions and Materials.” 8/12/2025. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/2025/08/letter-to-the-smithsonian-internal-review-of-smithsonian-exhibitions-and-materials/ Thorsberg, Christian. “A Tiny Typo May Explain a Centuries-Old Mystery About Chaucer’s ‘Canterbury Tales’ and ‘Troilus and Criseyde’.” Smithsonian. 7/16/2025. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/a-tiny-typo-may-explain-a-centuries-old-mystery-about-chaucers-canterbury-tales-and-troilus-and-criseyde-180986991/ University of Cambridge. “Scholars just solved a 130-year literary mystery—and it all hinged on one word.” 7/16/2025. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2025/07/250716000855.htm Vindolanda Trust. “Magna Shoes.” 7/2/2025. https://www.vindolanda.com/news/magna-shoes Whiddington, Richard. “$2 Thrift Store Plate Turns Out to Be Rare Chinese Porcelain Worth Thousands.” Artnet. 8/21/2025. https://news.artnet.com/market/chinese-porcelain-uk-thrift-store-auction-2680013 Whiddington, Richard. “Famed Antikythera Shipwreck Yields More Astonishing Discoveries.” Artnet News. 7/16/2025. https://news.artnet.com/art-world/antikythera-shipwreck-more-discoveries-2668217 Whiddington, Richard. “Scholars Crack 130-Year-Old Mystery Behind a Lost Medieval Epic.” 7/17/2025. https://news.artnet.com/art-world/song-of-wade-mystery-chaucer-2668558 Whiddington, Richard. “Sunken Clues Reveal Identity of Mysterious Scottish Shipwreck.” Artnet. 7/25/2025. https://news.artnet.com/art-world/scotland-shipwreck-sanday-2671342 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

As it was in the Garden of Eden, where the serpent changed the biological makeup of God's creation, so it goes again with the Fallen Ones using mad science to create an abomination on Earth. Genomic technologies are driving a vast expansion in digitalized data, from gene sequences and entire genomes that link genes to specific functions and other types of metadata for humans, other animals, plants, and microbes. A prime example includes the development of customized bioweapons. America's adversaries can direct biological attacks, specifically at US livestock and crops, to create a food security crisis. Another way is for the harvesting and pirating of DNA for racial targeting. Humanity is at a crossroads. It has to avoid both biotechnological calamity and the reign of the Antichrist. Listen to Ground Zero with Clyde Lewis M-F from 7-10 pm, pacific time on groundzeroplus.com. Call in to the LIVE show at 503-225-0860. #groundzeroplus #clydelewis #genome #DNA #biological

Robert walks Langston Kerman through the story of Dr. George Church, a very real scientist who co founded the company making bullshit claims of "de extincting" dire wolves. (2 Part Series) Sources: George Church, Colossal W*nker – For Better Science Can Gene Therapy Slow Ageing in Dogs? - Gowing Life Never-ageing Anti-aging to cure COVID-19 – For Better Science The original sins of Leonard Guarente – For Better Science Jeffrey Epstein Hoped to Seed Human Race With His DNA - The New York Times Biologist George Church apologizes for contacts with Jeffreyticl Epstein Genetics Company Wants To Bring Iconic Tasmanian Tiger Back From Extinction - Newsweek Gene editing company hopes to bring dodo ‘back to life’ | Extinct wildlife | The Guardian Jeffrey Epstein-Funded Geneticist Is Building a Dating App That Only a Eugenicist Could Love George Church Explains How DNA Will Be Construction Material of the Future - DER SPIEGEL Geneticist George Church gets funding for lab-grown woolly mammoths Wooly Mammoth De-extinction Scientist Reveals Plan To Create 'Arctic Elephant' - Newsweek Bringing back dinosaurs or making new ones? – DW – 06/10/2015 ‘If you’re not failing, you’re probably not trying as hard as you could be’ — Harvard Gazette CRISPR gene editing on human embryos may be dangerous Here are some actual facts about George Church’s DNA dating company | MIT Technology Review Scientist on the Loose: George Church Strays Into Eugenics—Again | Center for Genetics and Society So...What do we think of Colossal Biosciences? : r/pleistocene The "de-extinction" of the woolly mammoth, a "Colossal" hoax? - Genomic chronicles | Medicine/Science Hiltzik: New frontiers in pseudoscientific baloney - Los Angeles Times Colossal Liar Wolves – For Better Science Meet The Disruptors: How Ben Lamm & Hypergiant Are Shaking Up the Space and AI Industries | by Jason Hartman | Authority Magazine | Medium Millionaire Ben Lamm Warns Against Entrepreneurship - Great Entrepreneurs The Serial Entrepreneur Turned Billionaire: Ben Lamm’s Tech and Science Revolution | Where Business News Meets Thought Leadership How 39-year-old Ben Lamm has started five companies Meet Ben Lamm: The World's First De-extinction Billionaire - Forbes India Oral history interview with George M. Church - Science History Institute Digital Collections Dr. George Church, Founding Father of Genomics | News | W.I. The Church Of George Church The World Has a Data Storage Problem. Is DNA the Answer? - proto.life DNA: The Future of Data Storage?. DNA, with its amazing storage… | by Nithil Krishnaraj | TechTalkers | Medium See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.