First Alzheimer's blood test available in US in June
The first blood test to help diagnose Alzheimer's disease will be available from late June in the US. PHOTO: ISTOCKPHOTO
WASHINGTON – The first blood test to help diagnose Alzheimer's disease will be available from late June in the US following regulatory clearance for its use last week, according to the Japanese company behind the innovation.
The test will initially be available at about 50 American research institutes and hospitals that specialise in Alzheimer's disease, Mr Goki Ishikawa, head of Fujirebio Holdings Inc., a unit of Japan's H.U. Group Holdings Inc., said in an interview on May 20. It's partnering with bigger rivals like Beckman Coulter Inc. to help develop and manufacture their products, he said.
The Food and Drug Administration cleared the blood test to help diagnose Alzheimer's disease last week, potentially making it easier to find and treat patients with the memory-robbing disease that affects nearly seven million Americans.
The test was cleared for use in people at least 55 years old and who exhibit signs of the disease. It is designed to detect amyloid, a protein that can build up in the brain and is a hallmark of Alzheimer's, the most common form of dementia in the elderly.
The process, which takes roughly 30 minutes from drawing the blood to diagnosis, will be available to patients at a fraction of the cost of a PET scan. The method is viewed as a critical step in making new types of Alzheimer's treatments widely accessible.
Until now, patients typically have to get a specialised PET scan to detect amyloid in their brains or undergo cerebrospinal fluid tests, both of which are more expensive and invasive. The lack of quick and easy tests has until now slowed the rollout of new Alzheimer's drugs like Eisai Co. and Biogen Inc.'s Leqembi and Eli Lilly & Co.'s Kisunla.
The company plans to file data to seek approvals in Japan as early as August and Europe within this year, Mr Ishikawa said. In China, Fujirebio's undisclosed partner will probably submit data to regulators next year, he added. In India, it partners with Agappe Diagnostics Ltd.
'We have a presence in Japan but that's not necessarily the case in markets overseas,' said Mr Ishikawa. 'We can't get the market shares by ourselves, but if we supply the raw materials to partners, we can benefit through them.' BLOOMBERG
Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Straits Times
5 hours ago
- Straits Times
Kennedy's ouster of US vaccine advisers puts pharma ties under scrutiny
FILE PHOTO: U.S. Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. testifies before a Senate Health, Education, Labor & Pensions Committee hearing on the Department of Health and Human Services budget, on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., U.S., May 14, 2025. REUTERS/Leah Millis/File Photo U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s surprise ouster of a national vaccine advisory board, claiming it was "plagued with persistent conflicts of interest," puts new scrutiny on the group that recommends which shots should be administered to the American public. Kennedy said most vaccine experts on the 17-member Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) have received "substantial funding" from drugmakers. He did not provide examples of conflicts of interest for any individual adviser or say how that may have influenced specific recommendations. Committee members say their work with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention follows rigorous vetting of their financial ties. They must abstain from votes on any vaccine for which they have a conflict, as well as any rival to that vaccine or any product from the same manufacturer, according to CDC rules. The agency's website lists one of the departing panel members as recusing herself over such conflicts. "To determine that the whole (advisory board), all 17 members, have conflicts of interest, that has not been shown by the evidence," fired board member Dr. Oliver Brooks told Reuters. "However, the decisions that have been made (by Kennedy) undermine confidence in the process and in vaccines." Six of the vaccine advisers fired by Kennedy received a total of $80 or less from drugmakers from 2017 to 2023, according to a Reuters review of the Open Payments federal database of industry payments to healthcare providers. Seven other panel members received between $4,000 and $55,000 from drugmakers for consulting, speaking fees, travel or meals over the period 2017 to 2023. Two of those experts had also worked with other scientists in industry-funded research projects worth several millions of dollars. Brooks, retired chief medical officer at Watts Healthcare in Los Angeles and former president of the National Medical Association, received nearly $44,000 in general payments from Sanofi, according to the government records. Most of the payments occurred in 2017 and 2018, with nothing after 2020. Brooks became a vaccine adviser in 2021, and did not disclose any conflicts that would preclude him from voting. He said the panel's sole aim is "to prevent vaccine-preventable illness." Sanofi declined to comment. At least three vaccine advisers were not health professionals tracked by mandatory Open Payments reporting. KENNEDY'S CONFLICT Kennedy, who has spent years sowing doubts about vaccine safety and efficacy contrary to scientific evidence, faced questions from Congress about his own potential conflicts of interest during a confirmation hearing. Kennedy said he would divest his financial interest in litigation against Merck over its Gardasil vaccine, which prevents cancers caused by the human papillomavirus, to his non-dependent, adult son. In posts on X this week, Kennedy said he would share "examples of the historical corruption at ACIP" and announced eight new panel members. Four of them had received nominal reimbursement for meals, according to Open Payments, while the remainder recorded no payments or weren't covered by the database. A 2009 federal inspector general's report criticized the CDC for lax enforcement of disclosures among its advisory panels. New research shared with Reuters suggests conflicts have since declined among vaccine board members. "People are more aware of these issues on advisory committees, so they're facing greater scrutiny there," said Dr. Genevieve Kanter, an associate professor of public policy at the University of Southern California who has studied conflicts among government health advisers. Kanter's analysis of vaccine panel disclosures found that, on average, 43% of panel members facing decisions on specific vaccines declared conflicts in 2000 compared to 5%, on average, at meetings over the last 10 years. Kanter said it will also be important to understand how the vaccine advisers assembled by Kennedy are vetted for conflicts. They are due to meet at the end of June. "We don't want to replace one conflict with another set of conflicts," she said. "If someone has a financial interest in treatments that are believed to be alternatives to vaccines for certain conditions, we want to know that." DISCLOSURE RULES ACIP members are required to divest all stock in vaccine makers and stop any active consulting work for those companies before joining the panel. They can't accept travel or food from vaccine companies or collect product royalties. Similar restrictions apply to family members. Committee members can keep working on vaccine clinical trials funded by industry and those research grants can help cover their salaries. They are required to file annual disclosures and recuse themselves from votes when specific conflicts arise. "ACIP members ... are carefully screened for major conflicts of interest and selected through a lengthy process," said the California Department of Public Health, whose immunization chief, Dr. Robert Schechter, was fired from the panel by Kennedy. One of the fired panel members, Dr. Bonnie Maldonado, is a pediatric infectious diseases specialist at Stanford University who has led vaccine studies worldwide. She participated in research that received $4.65 million in funding from Pfizer, most of it spanning 2021 to 2023. The studies involved vaccines for COVID-19, RSV and other diseases. Maldonado also received general payments from drugmakers, including $26,465 from Pfizer and nearly $7,000 from Merck. Maldonado abstained from a vote on COVID vaccine recommendations in June 2024, declaring a conflict of interest. In October, she did participate in a COVID-related vote. Maldonado didn't respond to a request for comment. Noel Brewer, a professor of public health at the University of North Carolina, is not a clinician and therefore not included in Open Payments. In a 2017 research paper, he disclosed receiving research grants from Merck, Pfizer and GSK and serving on a paid advisory board for Merck. The disclosures did not give details on the payment amounts. Spokespeople for the three vaccine makers were not immediately available for comment. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Business Times
19 hours ago
- Business Times
Harvard crackdown: Can Singapore become its own intellectual leader?
THE US has long been a global science leader, with this best exemplified by its scientists creating a Covid-19 vaccine – amid a pandemic no less – within a year. Given that vaccine developments typically take a decade or more, this is nothing short of a feat, and something that has been decades in the making – a result of generous state funding for research and an openness to talent, among other factors. This is why US President Donald Trump's crusade against Harvard University and other top American institutions should give us pause, even if the fate of Ivy League colleges an ocean away may not seem, at first, to have major repercussions for Singapore. Alongside the on-and-off-again tariffs, immigration crackdown and slashing of government budgets, some observers may regard Trump's first 140 days as part of a natural ebb and flow in American politics. After all, the country has seen its fair share of upheavals in the last 249 years, having survived a civil war in the mid-19th century and, over 100 years later, lived through a particularly turbulent 1968 punctuated by two assassinations, heightened social unrest over the Vietnam War and issues related to values and race. Yet, even Americans appear spooked themselves. Experts and ordinary people, regardless of political leanings, are voicing concern that American democracy is being eroded and possibly sliding into autocracy, multiple surveys have shown. In particular, the administration's clampdown on its universities could have far-reaching consequences. America's embrace of diversity had long been part of its DNA, a trait that has drawn the world's brightest minds who, in turn, have kept its universities at the forefront of research and innovation that have resulted in life-saving drugs and key inventions. Some of these foreign talents remain in the country in pursuit of the American dream; others, equipped with new knowledge and skills, return home for the betterment of their motherland. Singapore too, has benefited from the return of US-trained scholars who have gone on to helm senior positions in government and the private sector. BT in your inbox Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox. Sign Up Sign Up But all that is now in peril under the Trump administration, which has threatened to cut funding and foreign student quotas – actions that portend a brain drain and a possible curtailment of its research capabilities. The question is how long this crusade would last, and whether the damage wrought would be permanent. Meanwhile, foreign students and postgraduates have been targets of an immigration crackdown. Some have had their visas revoked, and others fear they would not be able to re-enter if they leave. Prospective students are naturally reconsidering their choice, given the uncertainty and apparent lack of transparency. Even researchers are hesitating to visit; a French scientist was denied entry in March because he had criticised the administration in a text message. In 2022 and 2023, Singapore sent about a quarter of its Public Service Commission scholarship recipients to the US, and many more students went at their own expense. But the latest developments raise the question whether the city-state should reconsider its reliance on the US for intellectual leadership. The imbroglio should also prompt Singapore to look afield at Europe and China, which are now seizing the opportunity to woo students and researchers seeking alternatives. A small but growing number of Singapore students have headed for European and Chinese universities over the years. And not least, Singapore might also take a leaf out of their playbook and do the same, since having a strong talent mix is what would augment its universities' standing. Rather than looking mainly to the West for intellectual leadership, Singapore has now an opportunity to build up its own for the region.
Straits Times
2 days ago
- Straits Times
US NIH director hopes administration will settle with universities over suspended grants
U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) Director Jay Bhattacharya testifies before a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing on U.S. President Donald Trump's budget request for the NIH, on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., U.S., June 10, 2025. REUTERS/Kent Nishimura WASHINGTON - National Institutes of Health Director Jay Bhattacharya told a U.S. Senate panel on Tuesday he was hopeful that President Donald Trump's administration would reach a settlement with universities that have had research grants suspended. "I'm very hopeful that a resolution being made with the universities where those decisions have been made, where those grants have been paused," Bhattacharya said while appearing at a hearing of the Senate Appropriation Committee's Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies on the NIH's 2026 budget request. Dozens of scientists, researchers and other employees at the NIH issued a rare public rebuke on Monday ahead of the hearing, criticizing the Trump administration for major spending cuts that "harm the health of Americans and people across the globe," politicize research and "waste public resources." The NIH has terminated 2,100 research grants totaling about $9.5 billion and an additional $2.6 billion in contracts since Trump took office Jan. 20, they said in the letter. The contracts often support research, from covering equipment to nursing staff working on clinical trials. The White House wants to reduce U.S. health spending by more than a quarter next year, with the NIH facing the brunt with a cut of $18 billion, or 40%, from this year's budget, leaving it with $27 billion. The Trump administration wants to cut funding altogether for four of the agency's 27 institutes and centers while consolidating others into five new ones. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
