scholarly journals Hot to touch: the story of the 2021 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (10) ◽  
Author(s):  
Darren W. Logan
Keyword(s):  
Translational Research ◽  
Nobel Prize ◽  
Basic Science ◽  
Body Position ◽  
Animal Health ◽  
Sensory Modality ◽  
Nobel Committee ◽  
Physical Forces ◽  
Piezo Channels ◽  
Mild Temperature

ABSTRACT The 2021 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine was awarded to Ardem Patapoutian and David Julius for their research on receptor channels responsible for the perception of touch and temperature. Somatosensation, an overarching sense that enables us to safely interface with the physical forces around and within us, is the fourth sensory modality to be recognized by the Nobel Committee. The story of the discovery of TRP and PIEZO channels, and subsequent investigations into their myriad roles in the perception of noxious and mild temperature, touch, pain, pressure and body position, is an archetype for how translational research into human and animal health is built on a foundation of excellence in basic science.

Law in Disorder

2021 ◽  
pp. 125-145
Author(s):  
Andrew Zangwill
Keyword(s):  
Solid State ◽  
Nobel Prize ◽  
Crucial Role ◽  
State Theory ◽  
Scaling Theory ◽  
Nobel Committee ◽  
Solid State Theory ◽  
Van Vleck ◽  
Electrostatic Mechanism ◽  
Visitor Program

A formal request by the theorists produces a stand-alone Solid-State Theory Group at Bell Labs. A summer visitor program leads several visiting theorists to conclude that localization occurred in Feher’s samples due to an electrostatic mechanism suggested by Nevill Mott. Anderson develops a theory for localization where the disorder in the positions of the dopants plays a crucial role. Mott champions Anderson’s theory and the Nobel Committee cites it when Anderson wins a share of the 1977 Nobel Prize with Mott and John Van Vleck. David Thouless re-ignites Anderson’s interest in localization and he leads the Gang of Four to develop a novel scaling theory of localization.

scholarly journals The Future of Restorative Neurosciences in Stroke: Driving the Translational Research Pipeline From Basic Science to Rehabilitation of People After Stroke

2008 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 97-107 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Binith Cheeran ◽  
Leonardo Cohen ◽  
Bruce Dobkin ◽  
Gary Ford ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Translational Research ◽  
Basic Science ◽  
Clinical Importance ◽  
Small Scale ◽  
Front Line ◽  
Pressure Groups ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Public Sector Research

Background. Major advances during the past 50 years highlight the immense potential for restoration of function after neural injury, even in the damaged adult human brain. Yet, the translation of these advances into clinically useful treatments is painstakingly slow. Objective. Here, we consider why the traditional model of a “translational research pipeline” that transforms basic science into novel clinical practice has failed to improve rehabilitation practice for people after stroke. Results. We find that (1) most treatments trialed in vitro and in animal models have not yet resulted in obviously useful functional gains in patients; (2) most clinical trials of restorative treatments after stroke have been limited to small-scale studies; (3) patient recruitment for larger clinical trials is difficult; (4) the determinants of patient outcomes and what patients want remain complex and ill-defined, so that basic scientists have no clear view of the clinical importance of the problems that they are addressing; (5) research in academic neuroscience centers is poorly integrated with practice in front-line hospitals and the community, where the majority of patients are treated; and (6) partnership with both industry stakeholders and patient pressure groups is poorly developed, at least in the United Kingdom where research in the translational restorative neurosciences in stroke depends on public sector research funds and private charities. Conclusions. We argue that interaction between patients, front-line clinicians, and clinical and basic scientists is essential so that they can explore their different priorities, skills, and concerns. These interactions can be facilitated by funding research consortia that include basic and clinical scientists, clinicians and patient/carer representatives with funds targeted at those impairments that are major determinants of patient and carer outcomes. Consortia would be instrumental in developing a lexicon of common methods, standardized outcome measures, data sharing and long-term goals. Interactions of this sort would create a research-friendly, rather than only target-led, culture in front-line stroke rehabilitation services.

Basic Principles of Translational Research

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Boris Rubinsky
Keyword(s):  
Translational Research ◽  
Basic Concept ◽  
Basic Science ◽  
Clinical Medicine ◽  
Irreversible Electroporation ◽  
The Public ◽  
Food Engineering ◽  
New Science ◽  
Fda Approval ◽  
Health Laws

Translational research turns fundamental new science and innovations into a product that has value to the public. The process is difficult because it combines a variety of diverse disciplines and skills from basic science, clinical medicine, engineering, business, public health, laws and regulations. These areas are so wide apart that it is very difficult to combine. The author has engaged in translational research since the early 1980’s and will describe the processes, pitfalls and rewards through typical examples from his projects that include: development of imaging monitored cryosurgery from concept to treatment of hundreds of thousands of patients, transgenes in food engineering from basic science to a twenty year wait for FDA approval, microelectroporation from basic concept to incorporation of the technology by numerous companies and non-thermal irreversible electroporation from basic concept to current clinical use in over 50 hospitals and over thousand treated patients.

scholarly journals A team-based translational journal club: Understanding the translational research highway

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (6) ◽  
pp. 291-294
Author(s):  
Carol Feghali-Bostwick ◽  
Jillian Harvey ◽  
Carissa Hasseler ◽  
Diana Lee-Chavarria ◽  
Perry Halushka
Keyword(s):  
Translational Research ◽  
Basic Science ◽  
Journal Club ◽  
Dissemination And Implementation ◽  
Translational Science ◽  
Innovative Methods ◽  
Pivotal Study ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Science Paper ◽  
Training Grant

AbstractThe mission of the National Center for Advancing Translational Science (NCATS) is to catalyze the generation of innovative methods and technologies that will enhance the development, testing, and implementation of diagnostics and therapeutics across a wide range of human diseases and conditions.1 NCATS funded a predoctoral TL1 training grant at our institution. We developed a novel team-based Translational Journal Club utilizing three-member teams to find a basic science paper and two clinical study papers that covered a single therapeutic, either a pivotal study or a dissemination and implementation study; one member of the team presented a paper on the above topics in successive weeks. In addition, the trainees attended lectures on: how to design a pivotal clinical trial, dissemination and implementation, and drug development from a basic science discovery through its approval. From these presentations, the trainees appreciated the T0 to T3/4 continuum and its challenges. They also attended sessions on how to present scientific concepts, making them better communicators. The trainees found the Translational Journal club to be very rewarding, illuminating, and providing a much better understanding of the translational research processes required to develop new therapies.

EDITORIAL BOARD TRIBUTE TO THE NOBELS

2004 ◽  
Vol 8 (5) ◽  
pp. 555-557
Keyword(s):  
Faculty Member ◽  
Nobel Prize ◽  
Graduate School ◽  
Junior Faculty ◽  
Advisory Board ◽  
Junior Faculty Member ◽  
Nobel Committee ◽  
Macroeconomic Dynamics ◽  
Formative Years

The Editor, Advisory Board, and Associate Editors of Macroeconomic Dynamics extend their heartiest congratulations to Finn Kydland and Ed Prescott as the co-recipients of the 2004 Nobel Prize in Economics.Finn has served on the MD advisory board since the journal's founding, and his advice during the journal's formative years has helped make MD the success it is today.Much of the work which the Nobel Committee cited as the basis for awarding the prize to Finn and Ed was done while Ed was a junior faculty member at the Graduate School of Industrial Administration (now the Tepper School of Business) at Carnegie Mellon University, and while Finn was earning his doctorate at GSIA. As a result, the Board thought it would be appropriate to include a brief explication of the significance of Finn and Ed's work written by one of Finn's current Ph.D. students at Carnegie Mellon, Espen Henriksen. Espen is currently working to complete his thesis under Finn's supervision.

No Silver Medal for Nobel Prize Contenders

2016 ◽  
Vol 125 (1) ◽  
pp. 34-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nils Hansson ◽  
Heiner Fangerau ◽  
Annette Tuffs ◽  
Igor J. Polianski
Keyword(s):  
20Th Century ◽  
Nobel Prize ◽  
Medical Literature ◽  
Early 20Th Century ◽  
Nobel Committee ◽  
History Of ◽  
Silver Medal ◽  
New Perspective ◽  
First Time ◽  
Carl Koller

Abstract Taking the examples of the pioneers Carl Ludwig Schleich, Carl Koller, and Heinrich Braun, this article provides a first exploratory account of the history of anesthesiology and the Nobel Prize for physiology or medicine. Besides the files collected at the Nobel Archive in Sweden, which are presented here for the first time, this article is based on medical literature of the early 20th century. Using Nobel Prize nominations and Nobel committee reports as points of departure, the authors discuss why no anesthesia pioneer has received this coveted trophy. These documents offer a new perspective to explore and to better understand aspects of the history of anesthesiology in the first half of the 20th century.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document