Blog

  • Brain cells beat AI in learning speed and efficiency

    Brain cells beat AI in learning speed and efficiency

    Researchers have demonstrated that brain cells learn faster and carry out complex networking more effectively than machine learning by comparing how both a Synthetic Biological Intelligence (SBI) system known as ‘DishBrain’ and state-of-the-art RL (reinforcement learning) algorithms react to certain stimuli.

    The study, ‘Dynamic Network Plasticity and Sample Efficiency in Biological Neural Cultures: A Comparative Study with Deep Reinforcement Learning’, is the first known of its kind.

    The research was led by Cortical Labs, the Melbourne-based startup which created the world’s first commercial biological computer, the CL1. The CL1, through which the research was conducted, fuses lab-cultivated neurons from human stem cells with hard silicon to create a more advanced and sustainable form of AI, known as “Synthetic Biological Intelligence” (SBI). 

    The research investigated the complex network dynamics of in vitro neural systems using DishBrain, which integrates live neural cultures with high-density multi-electrode arrays in real-time, closed-loop game environments. By embedding spiking activity into lower-dimensional spaces, the study distinguished between ‘Rest’ and ‘Gameplay’ conditions, revealing underlying patterns crucial for real-time monitoring and manipulation. 

    The analysis highlights dynamic changes in connectivity during Gameplay, underscoring the highly sample-efficient plasticity of these networks in response to stimuli. To explore whether this was meaningful in a broader context, researchers compared the learning efficiency of these biological systems with state-of-the-art deep RL algorithms such as DQN, A2C, and PPO in a Pong simulation. 

    In doing so, the researchers were able to introduce a meaningful comparison between biological neural systems and deep RL, concluding that when samples are limited to a real-world time course, even these very simple biological cultures outperformed deep RL algorithms across various game performance characteristics, implying a higher sample efficiency.

    The research was led by Cortical Labs, in conjunction with the Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health, Monash University, Clayton, Australia; IITB-Monash Research Academy, Mumbai, India; and the Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, University College London, United Kingdom.

    Brett Kagan, Chief Scientific Officer at Cortical Labs, commented: “While substantial advances have been made across the field of AI in recent years, we believe actual intelligence isn’t artificial. We believe actual intelligence is biological. In this research, we set out to investigate whether elementary biological learning systems achieve performance levels that can compete with state-of-the-art deep RL algorithms. The results so far have been very encouraging. Understanding how neural activity is linked to information processing, intelligence and eventually behaviour is a core goal of neuroscience research – this paper is an important and exciting step in that journey. 

    “This breakthrough was a critical proofpoint that led to the eventual creation of the CL1, the world’s first biological computer, to access these properties. However, this is the beginning of the journey, not the end. Through further research into Bioengineered Intelligence (BI) we believe we can unlock capabilities that far surpass anything demonstrated to date.”

    Based on the original breakthrough, and the launch of the CL1, Cortical Labs has launched a second paper – ‘Two Roads Diverged: Pathways Towards Harnessing Intelligence in Neural Cell Cultures’ – proposing a novel approach to generating intelligent devices called Bioengineered Intelligence (BI). 

    Interest in using in vitro neural cell cultures embodied within structured information landscapes has rapidly grown. Whether for biomedical, basic science or information processing and intelligence applications, these systems hold significant potential. Currently, coordinated efforts have established the field of Organoid Intelligence (OI) as one pathway. 

    However, specifically engineering neural circuits could be leveraged to give rise to another pathway, which the paper proposes to be Bioengineered Intelligence (BI). The research paper examines the opportunities and prevailing challenges of OI and BI, proposing a framework for conceptualising these different approaches using in vitro neural cell cultures for information processing and intelligence. 

    In doing so, BI is formalised as a distinct innovative pathway that can progress in parallel with OI. Ultimately, it is proposed that while significant steps forward could be achieved with either pathway, the juxtaposition of results from each method will maximise progress in the most exciting, yet ethically sustainable, direction. 

    “Our goal was to go beyond anecdotal demonstrations of biological learning and provide rigorous, quantitative evidence that living neural networks exhibit rapid and adaptive reorganization in response to stimuli-capabilities that remain out of reach for even the most advanced deep reinforcement learning systems,” added Cortical Labs’ Forough Habibollahi. “While artificial agents often require millions of training steps to show improvement, these neural cultures adapt much faster, reorganizing their activity in response to feedback. By analyzing how their electrical signals evolved over time, we found clear patterns of learning and dynamic connectivity changes that mirror key principles of real brain function, demonstrating the potential of biological systems as fast, efficient learners.”

    Cortical Labs’ Moein Khajehnejad added: “By converting high-dimensional spiking activity into interpretable, low-dimensional representations, we were able to uncover the internal plasticity and network reconfiguration patterns that accompany learning in biological neural cultures. These were not just statistical differences; they were real, functional reorganizations that paralleled improvements in task performance over time.

    “What makes this study truly groundbreaking is that it’s the first to establish a head-to-head benchmark between synthetic biological systems and deep RL under equivalent sampling constraints. When opportunities to learn are limited, a condition closer to how animals and humans actually learn, these biological systems not only adapt faster but do so more efficiently and robustly. That’s an exciting and humbling result for the fields of AI and neuroscience alike.”

    Support for Cortical Labs:

    “This study strengthens the case for Bioengineered Intelligence as a powerful, adaptive substrate for computation. Bioengineered Intelligence could reshape how we think about machines – and minds. This work hints at living systems that can outlearn machines.” – Adeel Razi, Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health, School of Psychological Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.

    Professor Mirella Dottori, Head of Stem Cell and Neural Modelling Lab, School of Medical, Indigenous and Health Sciences, University of Wollongong, added: “Cortical Labs’ research studies are paving the way forward in an emerging, and exciting new frontier for neuroscience, whereby in vitro neural models are being developed and used to tackle some of the most complex aspects of brain function – learning and memory – both major constituents of intelligence. The CL1 technology sets up a much-needed platform for neuroscience research in understanding brain function; however, the innovation is that it can provide a measure of ‘intelligence’ whereby neuronal functionality is determined in an interactive, dynamic approach. This is a significant step for the field. Of further significance, this technology can be applied in the longer term to study how neuronal networks and function differ in neurocognitive diseases and disorders.”

    Hideaki Yamamoto, Associate Professor at the Research Institute of Electrical Communication, Tohoku University, commented: “These synthetic biological systems will certainly provide a new approach to understanding the physical substrate of brain computation. Furthermore, they may open a new class of computing, especially in tasks that the brain excels at. The CL1 will be a strong platform for putting this vision into action. When I first met the team three years ago, they had just started discussing the idea of building their own MEA system. That they have developed the CL1 and brought it to commercialization in such a short time is deeply impressive.”

    Source:

    Journal references:

    Continue Reading

  • Wildfire near Spanish capital under control as one person dies – Reuters

    1. Wildfire near Spanish capital under control as one person dies  Reuters
    2. Flames near Madrid as wildfires burn across Spain and Portugal  BBC
    3. Thousands evacuated in Spain as deadly heatwave fans Mediterranean wildfires  The Guardian
    4. Spain on fire: 22 Great Fires registered this summer alone with a devastating August so far  Gamereactor UK
    5. Spanish PM warns of ‘complicated’ night amid 15 wildfires  breakingthenews.net

    Continue Reading

  • Why Some Physicians Still Lead With Lifestyle-First Obesity Care Despite the GLP-1 Revolution

    Why Some Physicians Still Lead With Lifestyle-First Obesity Care Despite the GLP-1 Revolution

    The rapid adoption of GLP-1 receptor agonists has fundamentally altered obesity management, with these medications now prescribed to millions of patients seeking significant weight loss. Yet a substantial number of physicians continue to prioritize lifestyle interventions as their primary approach, even as professional guidelines increasingly emphasize pharmacologic options and patients arrive with specific medication requests.

    What drives this clinical philosophy in an era where injectable medications promise double-digit weight loss? The answer lies not in resistance to innovation but in a nuanced understanding of what produces lasting results in real-world practice.

    Guidelines Support Combination Therapy, Not Medication Replacement

    Current medical guidance reflects the growing evidence base for antiobesity medications while maintaining emphasis on behavioral foundations. As noted in the National Institutes of Health’s Endotext chapter on obesity pharmacotherapy, current guidelines recommend that individuals who have attempted lifestyle improvements and continue to have a BMI of ≥ 30 or ≥ 27 with an obesity-related comorbidity may be eligible for weight-loss medication treatment.

    The guidance emphasizes that antiobesity medications “are indicated in combination with lifestyle modification for the management of overweight and obesity,” similar to approaches used for other chronic diseases.

    These guidelines represent a significant evolution from previous recommendations that positioned medications as last-resort options. However, they consistently emphasize pharmacotherapy as an adjunct to, rather than a replacement for, structured behavioral interventions. This distinction proves crucial for physicians who maintain lifestyle-first approaches. They’re not ignoring current guidance but interpreting it through the lens of clinical experience and patient outcomes.

    Real-World Data Reinforces Lifestyle Foundations

    Real-world outcomes highlight the limitations of medication without sustained adherence. This may help explain why some clinicians continue to lead with lifestyle interventions.

    A Cleveland Clinic study of 7881 patients with obesity published in the journal Obesity revealed significant gaps between clinical trial efficacy and everyday practice outcomes. More than 50% of patients discontinued GLP-1 medications within 1 year — 20% within 3 months and 32% between 3 and 12 months. Additionally, more than 80% remained on subtherapeutic maintenance dosages.

    The weight-loss results varied dramatically based on adherence and dosing. Patients who discontinued early achieved only 3.6% weight loss, while those who discontinued late lost 6.8%. Patients who continued treatment lost 11.9% on average, but those who both continued treatment and achieved high maintenance dosing lost 13.7% with semaglutide and 18.0% with tirzepatide — results approaching clinical trial outcomes.

    Dexter Shurney, MD, MPH, MBA, chief medical officer at ModifyHealth, sees these data as validation of his approach: “The majority of common chronic conditions — hypertension, [congestive heart failure] CHF, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, depression, and obesity — are fundamentally lifestyle issues. Therefore, a lifestyle-first approach to care makes perfect sense because it addresses root cause.”

    Clinical Philosophy Rooted in Sustainability

    For physicians committed to lifestyle-first care, the approach stems from observed patient outcomes rather than theoretical preferences. Kenji Kaye, MD, a board-certified internist and concierge physician with South Denver Concierge in Denver, explains: “Without foundational lifestyle changes, medications and surgery are destined to fail. We have seen many patients not lose weight or even gain weight despite max dosages of these pharmaceuticals.”

    Dexter Shurney, MD, MPH, MBA

    This perspective is informed by understanding obesity as a multifactorial condition requiring comprehensive intervention. As Kaye notes: “Lifestyle habits, genetics, hormonal state, activity level, and other comorbid conditions all contribute to obesity. I like to focus on addressing the variables that will have the biggest impact while evaluating for underlying contributing medical conditions.”

    The sustainability argument extends beyond weight loss to broader health outcomes. Shurney emphasizes the systemic benefits of lifestyle interventions: “Lifestyle medicine has a much broader clinical application than a single medication or surgical intervention, which are typically designed to treat one condition at a time and come with multiple side effects. Lifestyle interventions work well to effectively avoid the polypharmacy issues that many patients often face.”

    He cites dramatic results achievable with intensive lifestyle programs: “When starting a patient on a rigorous lifestyle medicine program for type 2 diabetes, it is often necessary to reduce their insulin dose by half within days to avoid hypoglycemia. I have routinely seen average drops in cholesterol of 20%-50% within 7-8 weeks.”

    Strategic Medication Use Within Lifestyle Framework

    Even among physicians who lead with lifestyle-based care, some incorporate GLP-1 receptor agonists as part of a broader treatment plan that includes behavior change. Elizabeth Slauter, MD, a board-certified family medicine and obesity medicine physician who practices at a direct primary care clinic in Boerne, Texas, explains her approach: “Studies consistently show that the best outcomes with obesity medications occur when they are combined with lifestyle changes. So, it makes sense to start with lifestyle interventions as a foundational approach.”

    The decision to add medications often hinges on practical considerations. Cost remains a significant barrier, with many patients unable to afford long-term treatment. Slauter frequently encounters this challenge: “Many people cannot afford the cost of medications, especially long term — and research shows that these medications are often needed long-term to maintain results,” she said.

    photo of Kenji Kaye
    Kenji Kaye, MD

    Insurance coverage inconsistencies and prior authorization requirements create additional barriers. The Cleveland Clinic study identified cost and insurance coverage as primary reasons for treatment discontinuation, alongside side effects and medication shortages.

    For these physicians, medications serve as tools within a comprehensive framework rather than standalone solutions. Kaye describes his typical process: “My usual practice is to discuss these medications as an option but only after a careful review of their food choices, activity level, health history, and current medications.”

    Navigating Patient Expectations and Media Influence

    The widespread media coverage of GLP-1 receptor agonists has created new clinical challenges. Patients increasingly present with specific medication requests, often based on social media testimonials or celebrity endorsements rather than clinical assessments.

    Kaye addresses this directly: “Medications like GLP-1s are mentioned almost everywhere including the media, pharmaceutical ads, and celebrity gossip. When a patient presents asking for a prescription, it is a perfect opportunity to really delve into the details of what these medications can offer and also the risks involved.”

    Setting realistic expectations becomes crucial, Slauter said. “One issue I run into frequently is that patients expect to be on weight-loss medication for a short term, and this is not always reasonable,” she said. This expectation management is particularly important given the Cleveland Clinic data showing that discontinuation leads to reduced effectiveness.

    The educational approach allows physicians to address misconceptions while maintaining therapeutic relationships, Kaye said. “Most of the time patients welcome an open discourse about options and strategies to achieve their goals,” he said.

    Systemic Pressures and Professional Conviction

    Healthcare systems increasingly favor interventions that produce rapid, measurable outcomes, creating pressure to prescribe medications over time-intensive lifestyle counseling. Reimbursement structures often inadequately compensate for the extended counseling sessions required for effective lifestyle interventions.

    photo of Elizabeth Slauter
    Elizabeth Slauter, MD

    Shurney identifies this as a fundamental barrier: “The lack of reimbursement parity for lifestyle interventions is a disincentive to practice this way,” he said. “It’s much easier to prescribe a medication and receive the ‘quality prize’ for checking the drug adherence box than to prescribe lifestyle and not receive a similar financial reward.”

    Some physicians have modified their practice models to maintain their clinical philosophy. “I joined a direct primary care specifically to have the time to counsel my patients on this,” Slauter said. “A traditional insurance-based practice did not offer the time needed for this.”

    Long-Term Perspective Drives Clinical Decisions

    What ultimately sustains these physicians’ commitment to lifestyle-first care is their long-term perspective on patient outcomes, Kaye said. “After seeing many patients start down the pathway of pharmaceuticals and ultimately not reaching their goals reaffirmed my commitment to a more holistic approach,” he said. “In my experience, without a strong foundation of lifestyle changes, the long-term success rate is low even with antiobesity medications.”

    This perspective is reinforced by concerns about healthcare sustainability. Shurney warns: “What we risk are ever-higher healthcare costs, since these medications are very expensive and need to be taken for years, if not forever, to sustain the weight loss. Additionally, we still do not know the long-term effects of these medications.”

    Continue Reading

  • Tech Mahindra and Coresight Research Release Report Highlighting Key Global Trends for Building the “Store of the Future”

    Tech Mahindra and Coresight Research Release Report Highlighting Key Global Trends for Building the “Store of the Future”

    Pune, August 12th 2025 – Tech Mahindra (NSE: TECHM), a leading global provider of
    technology consulting and digital solutions to enterprises across industries, in collaboration
    with Coresight Research, a leading research and advisory firm specializing in retail and
    technology, unveiled a global survey report titled “Store of the Future: Unlocking
    Performance Through Innovation.”     The report provides timely, data-backed insights into
    how retailers are modernizing their in-store operations by focusing on unifying the shopper
    journey, enhancing the shopper experience, optimizing labor productivity, and maximizing
    store sales – the four pillars of building the “Store of the Future.”

    The report defines the store of the future as a technology-enabled, data-integrated retail
    environment designed to elevate customer journey while driving back-end efficiency. Based
    on a survey of 360 retail decision-makers across North America and Europe, the findings
    highlight how leading retailers are turning to technology to solve core operational challenges,
    from ineffective store management to inventory inaccuracies – with 92% actively investing in
    tools to enhance in-store operations.


    Sampath Saagi, Head of Diverse Industry Verticals Group (DIG), Americas, Tech
    Mahindra,

    said,
    “The “Store of the Future” is more than just a connected space, it’s a
    dynamic, data-driven environment where seamless customer experiences meet operational
    efficiency. This report envisions equipping retailers with actionable insights and a practical

    roadmap to navigate their transformation journey – helping them identify where to invest,
    improve store performance, and deliver greater value to customers. Through our
    collaboration with Coresight Research, we aim to empower the industry with data-led
    strategies for building smarter, future-ready stores.”


    Key findings highlight an industry in transition:

    • 92% of retailers are actively investing in technologies to boost in-store operations.

    • 84% of respondents acknowledge persistent operational inefficiencies that affect
      margins and revenue.

    • Enhancing shopper experience emerged as the top priority for 40% of retailers
      building future-ready stores.

    • 57% are investing in advanced data analytics, making it the most widely adopted
      technology, while automated inventory tracking is seen as the most critical need.

    • Retailers anticipate that technology will drive benefits, including improved product
      availability, greater automation, and real-time data insights.

    • Automated inventory tracking is viewed as the most critical capability for future store
      operations.

    • The top three benefits of technology adoption are greater product availability,
      increased automation, and access to real-time data.

    The report outlines that despite widespread optimism towards technologies, challenges
    remain, such as high implementation costs and data security concerns, that continue to slow
    adoption, underscoring the need for a phased, strategic approach to digital transformation.

    Deborah Weinswig, CEO and Founder of Coresight Research, said,

    “Building the “Store
    of the Future” goes beyond deploying isolated technologies; it requires a clear understanding
    of core operational challenges and a cohesive blueprint to solve them. Success hinges on
    aligning investments with both near-term performance goals and long-term scalability to
    create a true competitive edge.”

    The report provides global retailers a roadmap for building scalable, secure, and future-
    ready retail environments – “Store of the Future.”

    For more information about Tech Mahindra’s retail solutions, click here

    About Tech Mahindra

    Coresight Research is a research and advisory firm specializing in retail and technology.
    Established in 2018 by leading global retail analyst Deborah Weinswig, the firm is
    headquartered in New York, with offices in London, Lagos, Hong Kong, Shanghai and
    Mangalore (India). The firm provides data-driven analysis and strategic advisory to clients
    including retailers, brands, real estate owners, enterprise technology companies,
    accelerators and more. For more information, please visit https://coresight.com/

    About Tech Mahindra

    Tech Mahindra (NSE: TECHM) offers technology consulting and digital solutions to global enterprises across industries, enabling transformative scale at unparalleled speed. With Cisco Confidential 150,000+ professionals across 90+ countries helping 1100+ clients, Tech Mahindra provides a
    full spectrum of services including consulting, information technology, enterprise applications,
    business process services, engineering services, network services, customer experience &
    design, AI & analytics, and cloud & infrastructure services. It is the first Indian company in the
    world to have been awarded the Sustainable Markets Initiative’s Terra Carta Seal, which
    recognizes global companies that are actively leading the charge to create a climate and nature-
    positive future. Tech Mahindra is part of the Mahindra Group, founded in 1945, one of the
    largest and most admired multinational federation of companies. For more information on how TechM can partner with you to meet your Scale at Speed™ imperatives, please visit https://www.techmahindra.com

    For more information on Tech Mahindra, please contact:

    [email protected]

    Abhilasha Gupta, Global Head – Corporate Communications & Public Affairs, Tech
    Mahindra

    Email: [email protected] ; [email protected]

    Continue Reading

  • Alectinib Efficacy Post-Brigatinib Against Advanced ALK+ Non-Small Cel

    Alectinib Efficacy Post-Brigatinib Against Advanced ALK+ Non-Small Cel

    Renaud Descourt,1 Florian Guisier,2 Maurice Pérol,3 Jacques Cadranel,4 Helene Doubre,5 Michael Duruisseaux,6– 8 Stéphane Culine,9 Bertrand Mennecier,10 Olivier Bylicki,11 Christos Chouaid,12 Laurent Greillier13

    1Hopital La Cavale Blanche, CHU Brest, Brest, France; 2CHU Rouen, Rouen, France; 3CLCC Léon-Bérard, Lyon, France; 4Hôpital Tenon, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France; 5Hôpital Foch, Suresnes, France; 6Department of Respiratory Medicine and Early Phase (EPSILYON), Louis Pradel Hospital, Hospices Civils de Lyon Cancer Institute, Lyon, France; 7Oncopharmacology Laboratory, Cancer Research Centre of Lyon, UMR INSERM 1052 CNRS 5286, Lyon, France; 8Claude Bernard University Lyon 1, University of Lyon, Lyon, France; 9Hôpital Saint-Louis, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France; 10CHU Nancy, Nancy, France; 11HIA Sainte-Anne, Toulon, France; 12CHI Créteil, Créteil, France; 13Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Marseille, Hôpital Nord, Aix–Marseille Université, Marseille, France

    Correspondence: Renaud Descourt, Oncology department, Cavale Blanche Hospital, Brest University Hospital, Boulevard Tanguy-Prigent, Brest, 29200, France, Email [email protected]

    Background: Brigatinib and alectinib are next-generation anaplastic lymphoma kinase inhibitors (ALKis) showing efficacy against naïve and post-crizotinib-treated advanced ALK+ non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs). Real-world data on alectinib efficacy after brigatinib failure are lacking.
    Methods: Alectinib efficacy was retrospectively assessed in patients previously treated with brigatinib during an early-access program (EAP) from 1 August 2016 to 21 January 2019. The primary endpoint was alectinib median progression-free survival (mPFS) according to local investigators.
    Results: Among the 183 patients included in the brigatinib EAP, 92 (50.3%) received ≥ 1 agent(s) post-brigatinib; 30 (16.4%) received alectinib, 19 (10.4%) immediately post-brigatinib; 11 (6%) after ≥ 1 other treatment line(s). With median follow-up at 25.5 (95% CI: 10.6– 30.5) months, mPFS on brigatinib for the study population (n = 30) was 13.6 (95% CI: 6.3– 17.7) months. For patients given alectinib immediately post-brigatinib, mPFS and median overall survival (mOS) were 4.8 (95% CI: 2.0– 12.5) and 27 (95% CI: 12.5–not reached (NR)) months, respectively. In this subgroup, brigatinib was discontinued for toxicity or progression for 5/19 (26%) or 14/19 (74%) patients, with mPFS lasting 12.5 (95% CI: 3.3– 17.9 and 3.4 (95% CI: 0.9– 9.2) months, respectively. For patients receiving ≥ 1 agent(s) between brigatinib and alectinib, with median follow-up at 13.3 (95% CI: 2.3– 31.5) months, mPFS and mOS were 5.0 (95% CI: 0.5– 18.8) and 19 (95% CI: 2.3–NR) months, respectively.
    Conclusion: According to the results of this retrospective real-world study, alectinib post-brigatinib showed limited overall activity but remains an option for patients with advanced ALK+ NSCLCs, especially when brigatinib was discontinued because of toxicity.

    Introduction

    Brigatinib and alectinib are second-generation anaplastic lymphoma kinase inhibitors (ALKis) and both are used as first-line standard-of-care for advanced ALK-rearranged (ALK+) non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) based on the results of two randomized Phase 3 trials.1 The ALTA-1L trial compared brigatinib vs crizotinib as first-line therapy for ALK+ NSCLC; brigatinib significantly prolonged median progression-free survival (mPFS), the primary endpoint, from 11.1 to 24 months, according to the Blinded Independent Review Committee (BIRC) (HR: 0.48 [95% CI: 0.35–0.66]; p < 0.0001), with respective 3- and 4-year mPFS rates of 43% and 36%.2 The ALEX trial that compared alectinib vs crizotinib as first-line therapy for ALK+ NSCLC, also found mPFS to be significantly prolonged with alectinib (25 vs 11.1 months according to BIRC; HR: 0.50 [95% CI: 0.36–0.70]; p < 0.0001), with respective 3- and 4-year mPFS rates of 46.4% and 43.7%.3

    In the management of ALK-rearranged NSCLC, several studies, especially in real-world conditions, have demonstrated the positive prognostic impact of the therapeutic sequence.4,5 With this in mind, we have already made a focus on post-brigatinib lorlatinib efficacy in the real-world BrigALK2 study.6 Another interesting sequence is post-brigatinib alectinib efficacy for which data are scarce.

    BrigALK2 is a French, multicenter, retrospective, real-world study that evaluated brigatinib efficacy prescribed in an early-access program (EAP) in France, from 1 August 2016 to 21 January 2019. It enrolled 183 patients with pre-treated advanced ALK+ NSCLCs. For those heavily treated patients (median of two ALKis before brigatinib), mPFS and median overall survival (mOS) from brigatinib initiation were, respectively, 7.4 and 20.3 months.6

    The aim of this ancillary analysis was to assess alectinib efficacy when administered after brigatinib to patients with advanced ALK+ NSCLCs in a real-world setting.

    Patients and Methods

    Study Design and Patients

    As previously described, patients included in the BrigALK2 trial had advanced, ALK-rearranged NSCLC pre-treated with at least one ALKi, and had received brigatinib as part of its early access in France between August 1, 2016, and January 21, 2019. This analysis focused on alectinib efficacy post-brigatinib failure (toxicity or progressive disease). Patients were identified and included by each local investigator in participating centers. Alectinib could have been prescribed immediately post-brigatinib or after at least one other line of therapy.

    Data Collection

    Patient information, retrospectively collected from medical records and entered into a case-report form, included demographics and NSCLC characteristics, numbers and localizations of metastatic sites, numbers of previous treatments, reason for brigatinib discontinuation (progression or toxicity), therapeutic sequences, if any, between brigatinib and alectinib, and treatments after alectinib. All identified eligible patients were enrolled, without selection, in each participating center.

    Endpoints

    The primary endpoint was mPFS on alectinib, according to local investigators, defined as the time between alectinib onset and progression or death. Secondary endpoints were median duration of treatment (mDOT), mOS from alectinib onset, disease-control rate (DCR) and objective response rate (ORR). Each endpoint was evaluated according to therapeutic sequence, either alectinib initiation immediately post-brigatinib (brigatinib-alectinib) or after at least one intermediate line (chemotherapy or ALKi; brigatinib-X-alectinib).

    Statistical Analyses

    Patient characteristics were compared with a chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test for discrete variables. The Kaplan–Meier method was used to estimate PFS, DOT and OS for the entire population, subgroups defined by their therapeutic sequences and reason for brigatinib discontinuation. The Log rank test compared survival according to treatment sequence. Responses to treatment were assessed by local investigators applying RECIST 1.1 criteria. Statistical analyses were computed with SAS v9.4 software (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA).

    The study was conducted in accordance with French laws and regulations in force (law 78–17 of 6 January 1978 modified by laws 94–548 of 1 July 1994, 2002–303 of 4 March 2002, 2004–801 of 6 August 2004). The GFPC has committed to the French National Commission for Data Protection and Liberties (CNIL) to respect MR-004 reference methodology.

    Results

    During the brigatinib EAP, 183 patients managed in 66 centers were enrolled. At data cut-off date (7 July 2022), 92 (50.3%) patients had received at least one agent(s) post-brigatinib (ALKi or chemotherapy); 30 (16.4%) who received alectinib post-brigatinib—regardless of treatment line—constituted the study population (Figure 1). Median age was 53 years, and all NSCLCs had adenocarcinoma histology. Patients were heavily pre-treated with a median of four therapeutic lines before alectinib, receiving a median of three ALKis (Table 1). Under brigatinib, mPFS and mDOT were 13.6 (95% CI: 6,3–17,7) and 10.9 (95% CI: 6,2–20,2) months, respectively. Brigatinib was discontinued because of progression for 22 (73.3%) patients and toxicity for 8 (26.7%). Under brigatinib, the main progression site was the brain (71%), including 20% of patients with carcinomatous meningitis as progression.

    Table 1 Patients Characteristics

    Figure 1 Flowchart.

    Figure 2 Median overall survival curve for patients treated with the brigatinib-alectinib sequence (n=19).

    Figure 3 Median overall survival curve for patients treated with the brigatinib-X-alectinib sequence (n=11).

    Among the 30 patients, 19 (63%) received alectinib immediately post-brigatinib and 11 (37%) after at least one other chemotherapy or ALKi line (Figure 1).

    After median follow-up of 25.5 (95% CI: 10.6–30.5) months, brigatinib-alectinib–sequence patients’ mPFS and mOS were 4.8 (95% CI: 2.0–12.5) and 27.0 (95% CI: 12.5–not reached (NR)) months, respectively (Figure 2); alectinib ORR was 26.3% (5/19) with no complete responses, DCR was 63% and mDOT, 7.1 (95% CI: 2.1–18.2) months. For patients who discontinued brigatinib because of treatment-related adverse event(s)/toxicity, mPFS and mDOT lasted 12.5 (95% CI: 3.3–17.9) and 18.2 (95% CI: 3.4–21.6) months, respectively, vs 3.4 (95% CI: 0.9–9.2) and 5.7 (95% CI: 0.9–10.6) months for those who stopped brigatinib because of progression (Table 2).

    Table 2 Alectinib Efficacy Post-Brigatinib Failure According to Sequence

    For patients treated with alectinib after at least one other treatment line post-brigatinib, mPFS and mDOT were 5.0 (95% CI: 0.5–18.8) and 11.7 (95% CI: 0.7–21.5) months, respectively, mOS was 19.0 (95% CI: 2.3–NR) months (Figure 3) with ORR of 10% and DCR of 30% (Table 2).

    Discussion

    In this multicenter population of EAP patients with heavily pre-treated advanced ALK+ NSCLCs, alectinib immediately post-brigatinib showed limited overall activity with respective mPFS and mDOT of 4.8 and 7.1 months. Those durations, respectively, were dependent on whether brigatinib was discontinued for toxicity (12.5 and 18.2 months) or progression (3.4 and 5.7 months).

    Published data on post-brigatinib alectinib efficacy against advanced ALK+ NSCLCs are scarce. ALTA-L1-trial results of second-line ALKi, after progression on first-line brigatinib were reported recently. In that post hoc analysis, 40 patients received treatment post-brigatinib, an ALKi for 30, including alectinib for 8 of them.7 For the latter patients given the brigatinib-alectinib sequence, after a median follow-up of 17 months, mPFS and time to treatment discontinuation were 16.1 months and NR, respectively. The considerable difference between those results and ours can probably be explained by our patients having been heavily pre-treated, with a median of three ALKis before alectinib. Reasons for brigatinib discontinuation in the ALTA-L1 trial were not specified, whereas our results revealed very different efficacy profiles depending on whether patients stopped brigatinib because of toxicity or progression.

    To our knowledge, very few studies have examined the therapeutic sequences and efficacy of ALKi according to the cause of discontinuation, progression or toxicity. This seems to be the most important point to emerge from our analyses, all things being equal, of course, as this is a retrospective study with few patients in the analyses carried out. Such data are addressed in the CROWN trial, in the analysis of post-first-line treatments.8

    CROWN has recently revolutionized first-line management of ALK+ stage 4 NSCLC. Previously, lorlatinib was the standard second line TKI in cases of progression with first line alectinib or brigatinib, based on clinical trial7,9 and real-world data.10 More recently, CROWN trial demonstrated lorlatinib superiority over crizotinib as first-line therapy. A post-hoc analysis with 5 years of follow-up showed that the mPFS was NR on lorlatinib (NR [95% CI: 64.3–NR]) and 9.1 months [95% CI: 7.4–19] with crizotinib (HR: 0.19. [95% CI: 0.13–0.27], with respective 5-year mPFS rates of 60% vs 8%.11 Those findings clearly established lorlatinib as a first-line therapy option, but no direct comparison was made with a second-generation ALKi and, thus, the optimal sequence choice is not yet evident. Management after progression on first-line lorlatinib was reported in a CROWN-trial update: 33/149 (22.1%) patients received second-line therapy: 21/33 (63.6%) patients another ALKi, usually alectinib (12/21, 57.1%). On a first ALKi as subsequent post-lorlatinib therapy, mDOT was 9.6 months. Swimmer plots of data tended to show that patients benefiting the most from another ALKi were those who discontinued lorlatinib because of toxicity. Those preliminary data must be confirmed with future CROWN trial updates. Although the brigatinib-alectinib sequence has been poorly studied specifically, switching from one second-generation ALKi to another has been evaluated with other molecules. A single-arm, prospective, Phase II trial on 103 patients who had received a maximum of three treatment lines examined brigatinib efficacy after progression on ceritinib or alectinib.12 Those authors found disappointing clinical activity: ORR of 26.2%, and respective mPFS and mDOT of 3.8 and 6.3 months. Lin et al retrospectively analyzed 22 patients with alectinib-refractory advanced ALK+ NSCLCs in a multicenter population.13 Most of those patients had received brigatinib immediately after alectinib. That strategy had limited efficacy, with PFS at 4.4 months and ORR of 17%. All those studies analyzed second-generation ALKi efficacy in the event of progression, whereas, notably, our study results showed greater efficacy in patients who had discontinued brigatinib because of toxicity.

    The data available for our study population did not allow us to analyze the resistance mechanisms at progression on brigatinib. Such investigations were not routine practice when the brigatinib EAP was ongoing. However, identification of a resistance mutation at disease progression might help adapt subsequent treatments. Unfortunately, information on ALKi activity according to resistance mechanisms determined on rebiopsy specimens obtained at progression are limited and derived from retrospective series. For example, Lin et al had those data for only 9 patients, with tissue or liquid biopsies obtained at progression on alectinib.13 A resistance mutation was found in 6/9 (66.7%) specimens and theoretical brigatinib-susceptibility mutations were found in 5/6 (83.3%) samples. On brigatinib, one patient had a partial response or progressed and three achieved stable disease.

    Our study has several limitations. First is its retrospective design without data monitoring. Treatment assessment was not centralized, so local investigator-assessment bias cannot be excluded. In this real-world study, alectinib efficacy was evaluated in heavily pre-treated patients having received a median of four previous lines. Therefore, we cannot rule out a potential immortality time bias that limits interpretation of the results obtained. However, one of the strengths of this study is the absence of stringent criteria for study inclusion, meaning that the population is representative of real-world, heavily treated patients with advanced ALK+ NSCLCs.14

    Conclusion

    According to the results of our retrospective real-world study, alectinib post-brigatinib showed limited overall activity but seems to remain an interesting option for patients with advanced ALK+ NSCLCs who discontinued brigatinib because of toxicity.

    Data Sharing Statement

    The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

    Ethics Approval

    The study conformed to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and Good Clinical Practice Guidelines and was approved by the ethics committee Ile de France II Protocol: GFPC 02-2019, date of approval: May 25, 2020. N°20.03.24.67745.

    Informed Consent Statement

    Patients received written and oral information on the study and gave their consent to participate in the study and for the use of their medical data for research purposes.

    Author Contributions

    All authors made a significant contribution to the work reported, whether that is in the conception, study design, execution, acquisition of data, analysis and interpretation, or in all these areas; took part in drafting, revising or critically reviewing the article; gave final approval of the version to be published; have agreed on the journal to which the article has been submitted; and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

    Funding

    This study received an academic grant from Takeda.

    Disclosure

    Dr Renaud Descourt reports personal fees and non-financial support from AstraZeneca, Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pfizer, Takeda, and Chugai, outside the submitted work. Prof. Dr Florian Guisier reports grants, personal fees from Roche, grants, personal fees from Takeda, grants, personal fees from Pfizer, during the conduct of the study; personal fees from Astra Zeneca, personal fees from BMS, personal fees from Johnson & Johnson, personal fees from MSD, grants, personal fees from Pfizer, grants, personal fees from Roche, personal fees from Sanofi, grants, personal fees from Takeda, personal fees from Viatris, personal fees from Amgen, personal fees from Regeneron, outside the submitted work; Dr Maurice Pérol reports personal fees, non-financial support from Takeda, personal fees, non-financial support from Roche, personal fees, non-financial support from Pfizer, personal fees, non-financial support from AstraZeneca, personal fees, non-financial support from MSD, personal fees from BMS, personal fees, non-financial support from Janssen, personal fees, non-financial support from Amgen, personal fees from Nuvation Bio, personal fees from AnHeart Therapeutics, personal fees from AbbVie, personal fees from Daiichi Sankyo, outside the submitted work; Dr Jacques Cadranel reports personal fees from AZ, personal fees from Takeda, personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees from Roche, personal fees from MSD, personal fees from Daiichi, outside the submitted work; Dr Helene Doubre reports non-financial support, travel expenses from Takeda, non-financial support, travel expenses from Pfizer, non-financial support, travel expenses from MSD, non-financial support, travel expenses from Novartis, non-financial support from Bristol Myers Squibb, non-financial support from Roche, personal fees, non-financial support, travel expenses from leo Pharma, outside the submitted work; Professor Michael Duruisseaux reports non-financial support from Roche, during the conduct of the study; personal fees, non-financial support from Roche, non-financial support from Takeda, personal fees from Pfizer, outside the submitted work; Dr Stéphane Culine reports personal fees from Astellas, personal fees from Bayer, personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, personal fees from Ipsen, personal fees from Johnson and Johnson, personal fees from Merck, personal fees from MSD, outside the submitted work; Dr Bertrand Mennecier reports personal fees from Takeda for lectures, invitation in congress from Takeda. Professor Olivier Bylicki reports personal fees, travel for congress from MSD, personal fees, travel for congress from ASTRA-ZENECA, outside the submitted work; Dr Christos Chouaid reports grants, personal fees, non-financial support from Boehringer Ingelheim, Hoffman-Roche, Takeda, BMS, MSD, Astra Zeneca, Amgen, Janssen and Pfizer, during the conduct of the study; Prof. Dr Laurent Greillier reports grants, personal fees, non-financial support from BMS, grants, personal fees, non-financial support from MSD, grants, personal fees, non-financial support from Takeda, grants, personal fees, non-financial support from Pfizer, grants, personal fees, non-financial support from Roche, grants, personal fees, non-financial support from Amgen, grants, personal fees, non-financial support from Sanofi, grants, personal fees, non-financial support from J&J, grants, personal fees, non-financial support from Lilly, grants, personal fees, non-financial support from Novartis, grants, personal fees, non-financial support from Regeneron, outside the submitted work. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work.

    References

    1. Hendriks LE, Kerr KM, Menis J, et al. Oncogene-addicted metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: ESMO clinical practice guideline for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2023;34(4):339–357. doi:10.1016/j.annonc.2022.12.009

    2. Camidge DR, Kim HR, Ahn MJ, et al. Brigatinib versus crizotinib in ALK inhibitor-naive advanced ALK-positive NSCLC: final results of phase 3 ALTA-1L trial. J Thorac Oncol. 2021;16(12):2091–2108. doi:10.1016/j.jtho.2021.07.035

    3. Mok T, Camidge DR, Gadgeel SM, et al. Updated overall survival and final progression-free survival data for patients with treatment-naive advanced ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer in the ALEX study. Ann Oncol. 2020;31(8):1056–1064. doi:10.1016/j.annonc.2020.04.478

    4. Chazan G, Franchini F, Shah R, et al. Real-world treatment and outcomes in ALK-rearranged NSCLC: results from a large U.S.-based database. JTO Clin Res Rep. 2024;5(8):100662. doi:10.1016/j.jtocrr.2024.100662

    5. Duruisseaux M, Besse B, Cadranel J, et al. Overall survival with crizotinib and next-generation ALK inhibitors in ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (IFCT-1302 CLINALK): a French nationwide cohort retrospective study. Oncotarget. 2017;8(13):21903–21917. doi:10.18632/oncotarget.15746

    6. Descourt R, Pérol M, Rousseau-Bussac G, et al. Brigatinib for pretreated, ALK-positive, advanced non-small-cell lung cancers: long-term follow-up and focus on post-brigatinib lorlatinib efficacy in the multicenter, real-world BrigALK2 study. Cancers. 2022;14(7):1751. doi:10.3390/cancers14071751

    7. Ahn MJ. Real-world outcomes of 2L ALK TKIs following 1L brigatinib for patients with ALK+ NSCLC from the ALTA-1L Trial. J Thorac Oncol. 2010;5:S200. doi:10.1097/JTO.0b013e3181dd0a8d

    8. Solomon BJ, Bauer TM, Mok TSK, et al. Efficacy and safety of first-line lorlatinib versus crizotinib in patients with advanced, ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: updated analysis of data from the phase 3, randomised, open-label CROWN study. Lancet Respir Med. 2023;11(4):354–366. doi:10.1016/S2213-2600(22)00437-4

    9. Felip E, Shaw AT, Bearz A, et al. Intracranial and extracranial efficacy of lorlatinib in patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer previously treated with second-generation ALK TKIs. Ann Oncol. 2021;32(5):620–630. doi:10.1016/j.annonc.2021.02.012

    10. Baldacci S, Besse B, Avrillon V, et al. Lorlatinib for advanced anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive non-small cell lung cancer: results of the IFCT-1803 LORLATU cohort. Eur J Cancer. 2022;166:51–59. doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2022.01.018

    11. Solomon BJ, Liu G, Felip E, et al. Lorlatinib versus crizotinib in patients with advanced ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer: 5-year outcomes from the phase III CROWN study. J Clin Oncol. 2024;42(29):3400–3409. doi:10.1200/JCO.24.00581

    12. Ou SHI, Nishio M, Ahn MJ, et al. Efficacy of brigatinib in patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC who progressed on alectinib or ceritinib: ALK in lung cancer trial of brigAtinib-2 (ALTA-2). J Thorac Oncol. 2022;17(12):1404–1414. doi:10.1016/j.jtho.2022.08.018

    13. Lin JJ, Zhu VW, Schoenfeld AJ, et al. Brigatinib in patients with alectinib-refractory ALK-positive NSCLC. J Thorac Oncol. 2018;13(10):1530–1538. doi:10.1016/j.jtho.2018.06.005

    14. Mudumba R, Nieva JJ, Padula WV. First-line alectinib, brigatinib, and lorlatinib for advanced anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive non-small cell lung cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Value Health. 2025;28:S1098–3015(25)02284–3. doi:10.1016/j.jval.2025.03.014

    Continue Reading

  • Inside the lab-driven quest for the ultimate high

    Inside the lab-driven quest for the ultimate high

    Later stages for some products include one in which the crude extract is purified, with fats, waxes, lipids, and other solids filtered out. Other products cook for 24 to 36 hours in a vacuum oven to purge away residual solvent, the pressure inside the oven lowered so that the solvent evaporates without any of the good stuff boiling off.

    Using solvents isn’t the only way to make an extract. Raw Garden sends a small amount of its harvest to a partner facility, where it’s turned into a hashish-like product called rosin via a simpler process, using only ice water, heat, and pressure. But hydrocarbon extraction is scalable and highly efficient: Raw Garden’s facility processes around 1,200 pounds of cannabis a day, and has plans to expand.

    This isn’t to say there’s no art to it. A concentrate’s consistency—that is, whether the live resin turns into something creamy or crispy or oily—results from the strain one starts with, as well as small, inspired interventions during extraction. What if we whipped the extract before purging it? What if we cured it so that crystals form? Extract bound for vape cartridges sometimes involves an additional step, in which terpenes are evaporated and collected in a distillation column, then selectively reinserted to achieve specific scent and flavor profiles. In Raw Garden’s vape lab, a colorful aroma wheel shows a hundred-plus fragrances one might allegedly encounter in cannabis, like apricot, sage, pine tar, and espresso. “We’re taking aromatic compounds from plants,” says vice president of agricultural operations Casey Birthisel. “There’s a lot here that’s parallel to the perfume industry.”

    Some medical professionals see more alarming parallels, however, to drugs ostensibly harder than cannabis. The sky-high potency of concentrates has raised red flags, as multiple epidemiological studies have found correlations between their frequent use and increased risks of psychosis and cannabis use disorder, a form of dependence. Those risks seem particularly acute for teenagers. Colorado and Washington, the first states to legalize recreational pot, are among the states where bills to limit THC potency have been introduced, then rejected or withdrawn amid industry pushback.

    Meanwhile, according to analyst Adams, sales of marijuana flower made up about 70 percent of the recreational market when the first legal retailers opened in Colorado in 2014. Today, according to point-of-sale data from Adams and market research firm BDSA, that number has dropped to 40 percent. In the same span, sales of vaping and dabbing products have climbed from around 15 percent of the legal market to 32 percent, though the pace of that growth now seems to be slowing.


    Continue Reading

  • GTA V now has DLSS 4 Multi Frame Generation support

    GTA V now has DLSS 4 Multi Frame Generation support

    Rockstar Games is adding Nvidia’s DLSS 4 Multi Frame Generation support to Grand Theft Auto V Enhanced today. Nvidia is also releasing a new Game Ready driver today that will improve Grand Theft Auto V Enhanced performance, as well as support the enhanced version of Senua’s Saga: Hellblade II that’s available today.

    The DLSS 4 upgrade to GTA V complements the game’s existing ray tracing capabilities, by allowing RTX 50-series owners to enable Multi Frame Generation and generate additional frames to make the motion of gameplay look smoother.

    Senua’s Saga: Hellblade II Enhanced also has DLSS 4 with Multi Frame Generation, as well as a new Dark Rot game mode that debuts with this enhanced version.

    Continue Reading

  • Bella Hull: Doctors Hate Her review – beautifully wrought comedy on having your sanity questioned | Edinburgh festival 2025

    Bella Hull: Doctors Hate Her review – beautifully wrought comedy on having your sanity questioned | Edinburgh festival 2025

    Exactly how fine was the “fine” relationship at the heart of Bella Hull’s show? She greets us with a fixed, manic smile on her face – the mask of her wonderfully honed stage persona, charming and determinedly upbeat on the surface, with something steelier glinting beneath.

    That persona mirrors the show itself, its surface patterned with dreamlike detours and sparkling one-liners, the tendrils of darker truths rising at choice moments.

    An ex is painted as someone with a rigid sense of how things should be. He valued rationality and normalcy; she embraced creativity and astrology. The show charts her realisation that this wasn’t a good match, that she was never truly accepted, and hints at the effects of having your sanity questioned by someone you loved.

    There are surreal moments – her imagined life as one of the mice infesting her flat, her unorthodox solution to childbirth – and routines that take us from her childhood to the current disarray of her London life. One segment on the regularity with which she overhears her waifish flatmate having vigorous sex is particularly fun, her irreverent delivery bringing every line to life.

    It’s this combination of sharp writing and precise performance that makes Hull’s show such a joy to watch. Jokes are piled on jokes, finding surprising angles on everything from personal trainers to plastic waste and Samuel Beckett. She paints a vivid picture of childhood years spent living with her grandma, a barefoot clairvoyant who introduced her to a “diabetic revenge horse”, while a poetic monologue is spun from a family holiday and sets up a memorable visual finale.

    Hull proves revenge is a dish best served stuffed full of punchlines, with a side of the occult.

    Continue Reading

  • Record-Breaking Over 7 Billion People Will See ‘Blood Moon’ Total Lunar Eclipse In September

    Record-Breaking Over 7 Billion People Will See ‘Blood Moon’ Total Lunar Eclipse In September

    There is a great total lunar eclipse coming up in a few weeks, and it will be enjoyed by the vast majority of people on the planet from Oceania to Brazil! The event will happen, depending on your time zone, during the evening between September 7 and 8, and from partiality to the total spectacle of the so-called “blood Moon” and then back to partiality, it will take 3 hours, 29 minutes, and 24 seconds.

    The rest of this article is behind a paywall. Please sign in or subscribe to access the full content.

    If you want to see the whole spectacle from start to finish (including the dimming of the penumbral phase) you have plenty of places to pick from. Most of Asia, a sliver of East Africa, and Western Australia will get the full show. The rest of Africa, Australia, much of Europe, and the east coast of Brazil will get at least part of the totality and the partiality.

    This tells us that 60 percent of the world’s population will be able to see the whole show, and up to 87 percent of it will get at least part of the event – as always, weather permitting. Before our pals in the Americas call foul, we want to remind them that this is the second lunar eclipse happening in 2025, and the first one, which took place in March, was pretty much an American exclusive. It’s important not to hog these cosmic events!

    The orbit of the Moon is slightly slanted with respect to the orbit of the Earth around the Sun. If the two were the same, we would get a lunar and solar eclipse every month. Instead, they tend to happen more rarely, every six months or so (but certain years are better) when the Moon is at a node.

    A node means that the Sun, the Earth, and the Moon are aligned or in syzygy. A total lunar eclipse occurs at full moon when the Sun, the Earth, and the Moon line up, so the Moon passes completely within the shadow. There are partial lunar eclipses, where the Moon doesn’t fully enter the shadow, and penumbral eclipses when the Moon only crosses the half-shadow.

    The total lunar eclipse is also known as the blood Moon because, once in the shadow of the Earth, it turns red. The reason for this is that sunlight filters through the atmosphere of the Earth, and so our planet’s shadow has a bit of a crimson hue, coloring the Moon when no direct sunlight is reaching it.

    One thing that the March eclipse had that’s not happening here is a mission on the Moon to take a picture. Back then, Blue Ghost was operational and captured the incredible view. 

    You can check Time&Date.com for precise timings to see the eclipse at your location. 

    Continue Reading

  • Apriori Bio Announces Collaboration with the Francis Crick Institute

    Apriori Bio Announces Collaboration with the Francis Crick Institute

    Apriori to leverage foundational insights from the Crick’s Legacy Study to further validate Octavia™ platform’s ability to predict viral evolution and vaccine performance

    CAMBRIDGE, Mass., Aug. 12, 2025 /PRNewswire/ — Apriori Bio, a biotechnology company focused on developing variant-resilient vaccines, today announced a research collaboration with the Francis Crick Institute to better understand critical aspects of immune response, with the goal of informing the development of more predictive and effective vaccines against present and emerging viral threats for patient benefit.

    “We are delighted to collaborate with the Francis Crick Institute,” said Craig Williams, MBA, Chief Executive Officer of Apriori Bio and CEO-Partner at Flagship Pioneering. “This collaboration will enhance our capacity to accurately predict viral evolution and develop innovative, prospective vaccine candidates. Together, we aim to enhance the global seasonal strain selection framework and improve vaccine effectiveness for individuals of all ages, immune histories, and geographic locations.”

    The collaboration will leverage output from the Crick’s Legacy Study to further validate Apriori’s biology-informed artificial intelligence platform, Octavia™, to both predict viral evolution and design vaccines that elicit the optimal immune responses against present and emerging viral threats. Legacy is a long-term research initiative between the Crick and the National Institute for Health and Care Research UCLH Biomedical Research Centre, designed to provide insights into immune responses to COVID vaccines and infections.

    “The Legacy Study is an unparalleled resource for understanding how viruses evolve,” said Dr. Emma Wall, a Lead Investigator for the Legacy Study at the Francis Crick Institute. “Together, we have an opportunity to translate meaningful insights that can be used to enhance vaccine design and safeguard communities worldwide by staying ahead of emerging health threats.”

    This public and private sector collaboration is the latest to be facilitated through Flagship Pioneering’s UK initiative. Launched in 2023, the initiative serves as a bridge between the UK’s rich research and life science networks and Flagship and its companies.

    “This collaboration with the Crick, one of the world-leading scientific institutes, underscores Flagship Pioneering’s dedication to leveraging world-class science to accelerate innovation across our portfolio companies,” said Junaid Bajwa, M.D., Senior Partner and Head of the United Kingdom for Flagship Pioneering. “The integration of the Crick’s Legacy Study and Apriori’s Octavia platform demonstrates the immense potential to prepare for and address future health challenges.”

    About Apriori Bio
    Apriori Bio is developing variant-resilient vaccines to better protect human health. Our pioneering approach centers on a unique technology platform, Octavia™. The platform allows us to survey the entire landscape of existing and potential viral variants to design new vaccines that elicit ideal immune responses against present and emerging health challenges. Apriori was founded in 2020 in Flagship Labs, a unit of Flagship Pioneering. For more information, visit www.aprioribio.com or follow us on LinkedIn and X.

    About The Francis Crick Institute
    The Francis Crick Institute is a biomedical discovery institute with the mission of understanding the fundamental biology underlying health and disease. Its work helps improve our understanding of why disease develops which promotes discoveries into new ways to prevent, diagnose and treat disease.

    An independent organisation, its founding partners are the Medical Research Council (MRC), Cancer Research UK, Wellcome, UCL (University College London), Imperial College London and King’s College London.

    The Crick was formed in 2015, and in 2016 it moved into a brand new state-of-the-art building in central London which brings together 1500 scientists and support staff working collaboratively across disciplines, making it the biggest biomedical research facility under a single roof in Europe. For more information, please visit http://crick.ac.uk/

    Media Contact
    [email protected]

    SOURCE Apriori Bio

    Continue Reading