Explore the vast range of titles available.

Biomarkers in Medicine is a comprehensive guide to understanding the current and future status of biomarkers. The book features 27 chapters focusing on disease biomarkers for diseases such as cancer, neurodegenerative diseases, cardiac diseases, metabolic conditions and much more. This book supplies readers with the unique insight of experts in multiple specialties in medicine and life sciences who have extensive experience in diagnostics and clinical laboratories. The book includes case studies and practical examples from different classes of biomarkers on different platforms, including new data for biomarkers in different therapeutic indications. In addition to presenting biomarker information, each chapter covers the relevant pathology and also emphasizes on preclinical and clinical manifestation of the disease process. Clinicians managing patients or clinical trials, clinical researchers, clinical laboratories, diagnostic companies, regulatory agencies, medical school graduate students, academic students, and the general public involved in healthcare delivery will all benefit from information presented in this book.

This book examines the life-science experiments that give rise to the dual-use dilemma. It therefore addresses a topic of tremendous contemporary importance. This is the first book-length treatment of the subject by professional ethicists.

The idea that noncrop habitat enhances pest control and represents a win–win opportunity to conserve biodiversity and bolster yields has emerged as an agroecological paradigm. However, while noncrop habitat in landscapes surrounding farms sometimes benefits pest predators, natural enemy responses remain heterogeneous across studies and effects on pests are inconclusive. The observed heterogeneity in species responses to noncrop habitat may be biological in origin or could result from variation in how habitat and biocontrol are measured. Here, we use a pest-control database encompassing 132 studies and 6,759 sites worldwide to model natural enemy and pest abundances, predation rates, and crop damage as a function of landscape composition. Our results showed that although landscape composition explained significant variation within studies, pest and enemy abundances, predation rates, crop damage, and yields each exhibited different responses across studies, sometimes increasing and sometimes decreasing in landscapes with more noncrop habitat but overall showing no consistent trend. Thus, models that used landscape-composition variables to predict pest-control dynamics demonstrated little potential to explain variation across studies, though prediction did improve when comparing studies with similar crop and landscape features. Overall, our work shows that surrounding noncrop habitat does not consistently improve pest management, meaning habitat conservation may bolster production in some systems and depress yields in others. Future efforts to develop tools that inform farmers when habitat conservation truly represents a win–win would benefit from increased understanding of how landscape effects are modulated by local farm management and the biology of pests and their enemies.

Conservation genetics focuses on understanding the role and requirement of genetic variation for population persistence. However, considerable debate now surrounds the role of genetic factors (as opposed to non-genetic factors such as habitat destruction, etc.) in population extinction, and a synthesis is now timely. Can extinction be explained by habitat destruction alone or is lack of genetic variation a part of the explanation? The book reviews the arguments for a role of genetics in the present biodiversity crisis. It describes the methods used to study genetic variation in endangered species and examines the influence of genetic variation in the extinction of species. To date, conservation genetics has predominantly utilized neutral genetic markers, e.g., microsatellites. However, with the recent advances in molecular genetics and genomics it will soon be possible to study ‘direct gene action’, following the fate of genetic variation at the level of DNA, through expression, to proteins in order to determine how such phenotypes fare in populations of free living organisms. This book explores these exciting avenues of future research potential, integrating ecological quantitative genetics with the new genome science. It is now more important than ever that we ask relevant questions about the evolutionary fate of endangered populations throughout the globe and incorporate our knowledge of evolutionary processes and the distribution of genetic diversity into effective conservation planning and action.

This volume explores the complexity, diversity and interwoven nature of taxonomic pursuits within the context of explorations of humans and related species. It also pays tribute to Professor Colin Groves, whose work has had an enormous impact on this field. Recent research into that somewhat unique species we call humankind, through the theoretical and conceptual approaches afforded by the discipline of biological anthropology, is showcased. The focus is on the evolution of the human species, the behaviour of primates and other species, and how humans affect the distribution and abundance of other species through anthropogenic impact. Weaving together these three key themes, through the considerable influence of Colin Groves, provides glimpses of how changes in taxonomic theory and methodology, including our fluctuating understanding of speciation, have recrafted the way in which we view animal behaviour, human evolution and conservation studies.

[ Barriers to Bioweapons ] is a must-read for nonproliferation experts and should be a standard text for understanding biological weapons development for some time to come. ―David W. Kearn, Perspectives on Politics In both the popular imagination and among lawmakers and national security experts, there exists the belief that with sufficient motivation and material resources, states or terrorist groups can produce bioweapons easily, cheaply, and successfully. In Barriers to Bioweapons , Sonia Ben Ouagrham-Gormley challenges this perception by showing that bioweapons development is a difficult, protracted, and expensive endeavor, rarely achieving the expected results whatever the magnitude of investment. Her findings are based on extensive interviews she conducted with former U.S. and Soviet-era bioweapons scientists and on careful analysis of archival data and other historical documents related to various state and terrorist bioweapons programs. Bioweapons development relies on living organisms that are sensitive to their environment and handling conditions, and therefore behave unpredictably. These features place a greater premium on specialized knowledge. Ben Ouagrham-Gormley posits that lack of access to such intellectual capital constitutes the greatest barrier to the making of bioweapons. She integrates theories drawn from economics, the sociology of science, organization, and management with her empirical research. The resulting theoretical framework rests on the idea that the pace and success of a bioweapons development program can be measured by its ability to ensure the creation and transfer of scientific and technical knowledge. The specific organizational, managerial, social, political, and economic conditions necessary for success are difficult to achieve, particularly in covert programs where the need to prevent detection imposes managerial and organizational conditions that conflict with knowledge production. In both the popular imagination and among lawmakers and national security experts, there exists the belief that with sufficient motivation and material resources, states or terrorist groups can produce bioweapons easily, cheaply, and successfully. In Barriers to Bioweapons , Sonia Ben Ouagrham-Gormley challenges this perception by showing that bioweapons development is a difficult, protracted, and expensive endeavor, rarely achieving the expected results whatever the magnitude of investment. Her findings are based on extensive interviews she conducted with former U.S. and Soviet-era bioweapons scientists and on careful analysis of archival data and other historical documents related to various state and terrorist bioweapons programs.Bioweapons development relies on living organisms that are sensitive to their environment and handling conditions, and therefore behave unpredictably. These features place a greater premium on specialized knowledge. Ben Ouagrham-Gormley posits that lack of access to such intellectual capital constitutes the greatest barrier to the making of bioweapons. She integrates theories drawn from economics, the sociology of science, organization, and management with her empirical research. The resulting theoretical framework rests on the idea that the pace and success of a bioweapons development program can be measured by its ability to ensure the creation and transfer of scientific and technical knowledge. The specific organizational, managerial, social, political, and economic conditions necessary for success are difficult to achieve, particularly in covert programs where the need to prevent detection imposes managerial and organizational conditions that conflict with knowledge production.

Many cancer patients are diagnosed at a stage in which the cancer is too far advanced to be cured, and most cancer treatments are effective in only a minority of patients undergoing therapy. Thus, there is tremendous opportunity to improve the outcome for people with cancer by enhancing detection and treatment approaches. Biomarkers will be instrumental in making that transition. Advances in biotechnology and genomics have given scientists new hope that biomarkers can be used to improve cancer screening and detection, to improve the drug development process, and to enhance the effectiveness and safety of cancer care by allowing physicians to tailor treatment for individual patients-an approach known as personalized medicine. However, progress overall has been slow, despite considerable effort and investment, and there are still many challenges and obstacles to overcome before this paradigm shift in oncology can become a reality.

The Department of Homeland Security's (DHS's) BioWatch program aims to provide an early indication of an aerosolized biological weapon attack. The first generation of BioWatch air samplers were deployed in 2003. The current version of this technology, referred to as Generation 2 (Gen-2), uses daily manual collection and testing of air filters from each monitor, a process that can take 12 to 36 hours to detect the presence of biological pathogens. Until April 2014, DHS pursued a next-generation autonomous detection technology that aimed to shorten the time from sample collection to detection to less than 6 hours, reduce the cost of analysis, and increase the number of detectable biological pathogens. Because of concerns about the cost and effectiveness of the proposed Generation 3 system (Gen-3), DHS cancelled its acquisition plans for the next-generation surveillance system. In response to the cancellation announcement, Congress asked the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to conduct a review of the program and the proposed system enhancements that would have been incorporated in BioWatch Gen-3. However, Mike Walter, BioWatch Program manager, Office of Health Affairs, DHS, said that DHS did not agree with all of GAO's characterizations of the BioWatch program efforts described in this review. In response to this, DHS requested that the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine conduct a workshop to further explore the findings of the 2015 GAO report and discuss the impact these findings may have with regard to the future development of the technical capabilities of the BioWatch program. Workshop participants also discussed existing and possible collaborations between BioWatch, public health laboratories, and other stakeholders that could contribute to the enhancement of biosurveillance capabilities at the federal, state, and local levels. This publication summarizes the presentations and discussions from the workshop.

A peanut-derived protein product, AR101, used in an oral desensitization protocol in children and adolescents with severe peanut allergy increased the amount of oral peanut protein tolerated in approximately two thirds of participants who received AR101, as compared with 1 of 25 controls.

The term “biobanking” is often misapplied to any collection of human biological materials (biospecimens) regardless of requirements related to ethical and legal issues or the standardization of different processes involved in tissue collection. A proper definition of biobanks is large collections of biospecimens linked to relevant personal and health information (health records, family history, lifestyle, genetic information) that are held predominantly for use in health and medical research. In addition, the International Organization for Standardization, in illustrating the requirements for biobanking (ISO 20387:2018), stresses the concept of biobanks being legal entities driving the process of acquisition and storage together with some or all of the activities related to collection, preparation, preservation, testing, analysing and distributing defined biological material as well as related information and data. In this review article, we aim to discuss the basic principles of biobanking, spanning from definitions to classification systems, standardization processes and documents, sustainability and ethical and legal requirements. We also deal with emerging specimens that are currently being generated and shaping the so-called next-generation biobanking, and we provide pragmatic examples of cancer-associated biobanking by discussing the process behind the construction of a biobank and the infrastructures supporting the implementation of biobanking in scientific research.