What is Biotechnology: Types, Examples and Applications …

Biotechnology is the use of biological systems found in organisms or the use of the living organisms themselves to make technological advances and adapt those technologies to various different fields. These include applications in various fields from agricultural practice to the medical sector. It does not only include applications in fields that involve the living, but any other field where the information obtained from the biological aspect of an organism can be applied.

Biotechnology is particularly vital when it comes to the development of miniscule and chemical tools as many on the tools biotechnology uses exist at the cellular level. In a bid to understand more regarding biotechnology, here are its types, examples and its applications.

According to Biotechnology Innovation Organization,

Biotechnology is technology based on biology biotechnology harnesses cellular and biomolecular processes to develop technologies and products that help improve our lives and the health of our planet. We have used the biological processes of microorganisms for more than 6,000 years to make useful food products, such as bread and cheese, and to preserve dairy products.

Medical biotechnology is the use of living cells and other cell materials for the purpose of bettering the health of humans. Essentially, it is used for finding cures as well as getting rid of and preventing diseases. The science involved includes the use of these tools for the purpose of research to find different or more efficient ways of maintaining human health, understanding pathogen, and understanding the human cell biology.

Here, the technique is used to produce pharmaceutical drugs as well as other chemicals to combat diseases. It involves the study of bacteria, plant and animal cells to first understand the way they function at a fundamental level.

It heavily involves the study of DNA (Deoxyribonucleic acid) to get to know how to manipulate the genetic makeup of cells to increase the production of beneficial characteristics that humans might find useful such as the production of insulin. The field usually leads to the development of new drugs and treatments, novel to the field.

Vaccines are chemicals that stimulate the bodys immune system to better fight pathogens when they attack the body. They achieve this by inserting attenuated (weakened) versions of the disease into the bodys bloodstream. This causes the body to react as if it was under attack from the non-attenuated version of the disease. The body combats the weakened pathogens and through the process takes note of the cell structure of the pathogens and has some cell remember the disease and store away the information within the body.

When the individual becomes exposed to the actual disease, the body of the individual immediately recognizes it and quickly forms a defense against it since it already has some information on it. This translates to quicker healing and less time being symptomatic.

The attenuated disease pathogens are extracted using biotechnological techniques such as growing the antigenic proteins in genetically engineered crops. An example is the development of an anti-lymphoma vaccine using genetically engineered tobacco plants made to exhibit RNA (A similar chemical to DNA) from malignant (actively cancerous) B-cells.

Strides have been made in the development of antibiotics that combat pathogens for humans. Many plants are grown and genetically engineered to produce the antibodies. The method is more cost effective than using cells or extracting these antibodies from animals as the plants can produce these antibodies in larger quantities.

Agricultural biotechnology focuses on developing genetically modified plants for the purpose of increasing crop yields or introducing characteristics to those plants that provide them with an advantage growing in regions that place some kind of stress factor on the plant namely weather and pests.

In some of the cases, the practice involves scientists identifying a characteristic, finding the gene that causes it, and then putting that gene within another plant so that it gains that desirable characteristic, making it more durable or having it produce larger yields than it previously did.

Biotechnology has provided techniques for the creation of crops that express anti pest characteristics naturally, making them very resistant to pests, as opposed to having to keep dusting them and spraying them with pesticides. An example of this would be the fungus Bacillus thuringiensis genes being transferred to crops.

The reason for this is that the fungus produces a protein (Bt) which is very effective against pests such as the European corn borer. The Bt protein is the desired characteristic scientist would like the plants to have and for this reason, they identified the gene causing Bt protein to express in the fungus and transferred it to corn. The corn then produces the protein toxin naturally, lowering the cost of production by eliminating the cost of dusting the crop with pesticide.

Selective breeding has been a practice humans have engaged in since farming began. The practice involves choosing the animals with the most desirable characteristics to breed with each other so that the resulting offspring would also express these traits. Desirable characteristics included larger animals, animals more resistant to disease and more domicile animals, all geared to making the process of farming as profitable as possible.

This practice has been transferred to the molecular level with the same purpose. Different traits are selected among the animals and once the genetic markers have been pointed out, animals and plants with those traits are selected and bred for those traits to be transferred. A genomic understanding of those traits is what informs the decisions on whether the desired traits will express or get lost as recessive traits which do not express.

This information provides the basis for making informed decisions enhancing the capability of the scientists to predict the expression of those genes. An example is its use in flower production where traits such as color and smell potency are enhanced.

One of the biggest uses of biotechnology is the infusion of nutrients into food in situations such as aid. Therefore, it provides food with heavy nutrients that are necessary in such situations. An example of this application is the production Golden Rice where the rice is infused with beta-carotene. The rice has Vitamin A, which the body can easily synthesise.

There is actually very little land on earth that is arable with some estimates place it at around 20 percent. With an increase in the worlds population, there is a need for the food sources available to be as effective as possible to produce as much food in as little space as possible. There is also need to have the crops grown to be able to make use of the less arable regions of the world.

This means that there is a need to develop crops that can handle these abiotic stresses such as salinity, drought and frost from cold. In Africa and the Middle East, for instance, where the climate can be unforgiving, the practice has played a significant role in the development of crops that can withstand the prevailing harsh climates.

The industrial applications of biotechnology range from the production of cellular structures to the production of biological elements for numerous uses. Examples include the creation of new materials in the construction industry, and the manufacture of beer and wine, washing detergents, and personal care products.

One of the materials with the strongest tensile strength is spider webs. Amongst other materials with the same cross sectional width, spider webs can take more tensional force before breaking than even steel. This silk has created a lot of interest with the possible production of materials made from silk including body armour such as bullet proof jackets. Silk is used because it is stronger than Kevlar (the material most commonly used to make body armour).

Biotechnological techniques have been used to pick the genes found in spiders and their infusion in goats to produce the silk proteins in their milk. With this initiative, it make production easier as goats are much easier to handle compared to spiders and the production of silk via milk also help make the processing and handling much easier compared to handling the actual silk strands.

One of the biggest applications of biotechnology is in the energy production sector. With fears over the dwindling oil resources in the world and their related environmental impacts, there is a need to protect the globes future by finding alternative environmentally friendly fuel sources. Biotechnology is allowing this to happen with advances such as using corn to produce combustible fuel for running car engines. These fuels are good for the environment as they do not produce the greenhouse gases.

Biotechnology is applied in the healthcare sector is the development of pharmaceuticals that have proven problematic to produce though other conventional means because of purity concerns.

A true environmentalist by heart . Founded Conserve Energy Future with the sole motto of providing helpful information related to our rapidly depleting environment. Unless you strongly believe in Elon Musks idea of making Mars as another habitable planet, do remember that there really is no 'Planet B' in this whole universe.

See the original post here:
What is Biotechnology: Types, Examples and Applications ...

The Top Biotech ETFs to Watch in 2020 – 24/7 Wall St.

By Chris LangeJanuary 3, 2020 11:15 am

Companies in the biotech industry face an incredible amount of risk while getting their drugs to market. A study coming back negative or a candidate not being approved could crush a company. On the other hand, a positive clinical trial, or even an update from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), could send shares skyrocketing.

On a company by company basis, this makes investing in biotechs somewhat tricky. However, there is an investment strategy that makes this process much easier.

To mitigate this risk and concern about picking the winners or the losers within the biotech (or any) industry, exchange-traded funds offer a sampling and exposure to this market without an all-or-none risk in any single companys stock. As the saying goes: Theres an ETF for that strategy. ETF Database has collected much of the information about these ETFs, among others, and made it easily accessible for those looking to get into the game. Investors can use a number of ETFs to invest in a risky biotech industry.

iShares Nasdaq Biotechnology ETF (NASDAQ: IBB) has been around since February 2001, and it aims to track the Nasdaq Biotechnology Index. This fund seeks to track the investment results of an index composed of biotechnology and pharmaceutical equities listed on the Nasdaq. Note that this is the largest biotech ETF, with $7.59 billion in assets under management. Its overall expense ratio is 0.47%, and it posted gains of over 22% in 2019. This ETF has a total of 218 holdings. The top 10 holdings include a mix of large-cap domestic biotech companies:

SPDR S&P Biotech ETF (NYSEARCA: XBI) has been around since February 2006 and aims to track the S&P Biotechnology Select Industry Index. This fund seeks to provide exposure to the biotechnology segment of the S&P. It has $4.37 billion in assets under management. Its overall expense ratio is 0.35%, and it traded up 30% over the course of 2019. This fund has 127 holdings. The top 10 holdings include a smattering of U.S. biotechs in the S&P 500:

First Trust NYSE Arca Biotechnology Index Fund (NYSEARCA: FBT) has been around since June 2006 and aims to track the NYSE Arca Biotechnology Index. The fund targets biopharma companies involved with recombinant DNA technology, molecular biology, genetic engineering, monoclonal antibody-based technology, lipid/liposome technology and genomics. It has $1.81 billion in assets under management, its overall expense ratio is 0.57% and it gained over 19% in 2019. This ETF has 31 holdings. The top 10 include mostly domestic biopharma firms:

VanEck Vectors Biotech ETF (NASDAQ: BBH) has been around since December 2011, and it aims to track the MVIS US Listed Biotech 25 Index. This ETF seeks to track the overall performance of companies involved in the development and production, marketing and sales of drugs based on genetic analysis and diagnostic equipment. It was last seen to have $362.6 million in assets under management. Its overall expense ratio is 0.35%, and it traded up nearly 26% in 2019. This fund has a total of 25 holdings. The top 10 holdings include mostly domestic biotech firms:

By Chris Lange

Excerpt from:
The Top Biotech ETFs to Watch in 2020 - 24/7 Wall St.

Puma Biotechnology announces positive trial results – Seeking Alpha

Puma Biotechnology (NYSE:PBYI) presents at ASCO thepositive results from an ongoing Phase II clinical trial of Puma's investigational drug PB272 for the treatment of HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer that has metastasized to the brain.

The multicenter Phase II clinical trial enrolled patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer who have brain metastases. The trial is being performed by the TBCRC and enrolled three cohorts of patients.

We are very pleased with the activity seen in this trial with the combination of neratinib plus capecitabine, sys Puma CEOAlan Auerbach.

As a small molecule that can cross the blood brain barrier, neratinib potentially offers patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer that has metastasized to the CNS a novel HER2 targeted treatment option. We look forward to working with TBCRC on future trials of neratinib in patients with HER2-positive disease metastatic to the CNS," he adds.

Source: Press Release

#ASCO

Read more here:
Puma Biotechnology announces positive trial results - Seeking Alpha

North Forsyth grad plans to study biotechnology – Winston-Salem Journal

As if the stress of senior year isnt enough of a headache, Michael Vega began his final chapter of high school with a serious concussion.

A soccer injury in May 2016 had mandated three months recovery time, stealing a summer of soccer training from the North Forsyth graduate.

It hit me hard that I couldnt play, coming in with a big concussion, said Vega, a two-time all-conference award recipient. I had to jump right back into it.

Vega, 17, was cleared to play in the final round of the Forsyth Cup last year, helping his team secure a victory in the championship round for the second year in a row, making school history.

Vega, who spent three years on the varsity team, said one of his favorite high school moments was scoring the conference-winning goal against Asheboro High School as a sophomore.

It was a great experience; theres nothing like it, said Vega, who plays goalie and center back. I knew half the guys from growing up, so its hard to say good-bye.

While Vega said he will not play soccer in college, he will continue playing with the Hispanic League.

Graduation is bittersweet, but Vega said he is glad to have AP Biology and AP Chemistry behind him and is applying to Forsyth Tech to study biotechnology.

Ive learned to surround myself with the right people and never give up, Vega said. Im excited for graduation.

See more here:
North Forsyth grad plans to study biotechnology - Winston-Salem Journal

Bioverativ to acquire clinical-stage rare disease biotechnology company, True North Therapeutics – Seeking Alpha

Bioverativ (NASDAQ:BIVV) announces that it has entered into a definitive agreement to acquire South San Francisco-based True North Therapeutics, a privately-held, clinical-stage rare disease biotechnology company, for an upfront payment of $400M plus assumed cash.

As part of the acquisition, Bioverativ will obtain worldwide rights to True Norths lead candidate, TNT009, a first-in-class monoclonal antibody in development to treat cold agglutinin disease (CAD).

In May 2017, the FDA granted TNT009 breakthrough therapy designation for the treatment of hemolysis in patients with primary CAD, and plans for the full clinical development program.

The acquisition of True North advances the Company's vision of becoming the leading rare disease company focused on blood disorders.

TNT009 has also received orphan drug designation from the FDA and the European Medicines Agency.

Bioverativ will hold a conference call at 8:30 a.m. ET to discuss the transaction.

Originally posted here:
Bioverativ to acquire clinical-stage rare disease biotechnology company, True North Therapeutics - Seeking Alpha

Lack of collaboration hampers biotechnology effectiveness Experts – TheNewsGuru

Biotechnology experts say lack of collaboration in the face of limited resources will hamper the efficiency and effectiveness of the use and application of biotechnology in Nigeria.

The experts told the News Agency of Nigeria in separate interviews on Friday in Abuja that only synergy would help the nation achieve food security.

Dr Rufus Ebegba, the Director-General, National Biosafety Management Agency (NBMA), said that modern biotechnology was becoming increasingly important in addressing emerging food security, social and economic challenges.

With its perceived and real unintended consequences, regulatory agencies and stakeholders must unite with a sense of purpose, vision, mission and determination to ensure that our nation reap the benefits of biotechnology.

We have an excellent working relationship with, and Memorandums of Understanding with agencies like NAFDAC, SON, the Nigerian Customs Services, NABDA, ARCN, Ministries of Environment, Health and others.

We have been organising workshops and involved in seminars that encourages effective collaboration with other regulatory Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) on the use and application of biotechnology.

This is part of our effort to keep Nigerians abreast of laid down internationally accepted procedures for verification of GM foods and Feed Safety; and determine the future activities to build necessary capacity in the Nigeria biosafety regulatory system, he said.

He said that the agency had put in place world class measures, equipment and international arrangements that ensured the practice of modern biotechnology in Nigeria was one of the safest in the world.

Prof. Benjamin Ubi, the President, Biotechnology Society of Nigeria (BSN), said collaboration in the adoption of biotechnology would facilitate sustainable agricultural production in the country.

He said that the adoption of biotechnology applications was the panacea to the current food challenges facing the country.

Biotechnology, including genetic engineering and production of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs), provides powerful tools for the sustainable development of agriculture, fishery and forestry, as well as meeting the food needs of the population.

GMOs currently account for about 16 per cent of the worlds crops, particularly crops like soybean, maize, cotton and canola, and there are indications that the growing trend will continue.

So, we must eat what we grow and grow what we eat. This means we ought to produce more and agricultural biotechnology is a tool for achieving this, he said.

Ubi also pledged the support of the BSN for the efforts of National Biosafety Management Agency (NBMA) to harness the potential of modern biotechnology.

Link:
Lack of collaboration hampers biotechnology effectiveness Experts - TheNewsGuru

Puma Biotechnology Announces Positive PB272 Phase II Data from TBCRC 022 Trial in Patients with HER2-Positive … – Business Wire (press release)

LOS ANGELES--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Puma Biotechnology, Inc. (Nasdaq: PBYI), a biopharmaceutical company, announced the presentation of positive results from an ongoing Phase II clinical trial (Translational Breast Cancer Research Consortium TBCRC 022) of Puma's investigational drug PB272 (neratinib) for the treatment of HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer that has metastasized to the brain. The data were presented today in an oral presentation at the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) 2017 Annual Meeting in Chicago, Illinois.

The multicenter Phase II clinical trial enrolled patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer who have brain metastases. The trial is being performed by the TBCRC and enrolled three cohorts of patients. Patients in the first cohort (n=40) included those with progressive brain metastases who were administered neratinib monotherapy. Data from this cohort were previously reported at the 2014 ASCO Annual Meeting and published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology in 2016. Patients in the second cohort (n=5) represent patients who had brain metastases which were amenable to surgery and who were administered neratinib monotherapy prior to and after surgical resection. The third cohort (target enrollment=60) enrolled two sub-groups of patients (prior lapatinib-treated and no prior lapatinib) with progressive brain metastases who were administered neratinib in combination with the chemotherapy drug capecitabine. The oral presentation reflects only the patients in the third cohort of patients without prior lapatinib exposure (cohort 3A, n=37), who all had progressive brain metastases at the time of enrollment and who received the combination of capecitabine plus neratinib. A full copy of the oral presentation that was presented at the ASCO Annual Meeting is available on the Puma Biotechnology website. Results from the second cohort and cohort 3B (prior lapatinib-treated) will be presented at a forthcoming medical meeting.

In cohort 3A, 30% of the patients had received prior craniotomy, 65% of the patients had received prior whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT), and 35% had received prior stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) to the brain. No patients had received prior treatment with lapatinib.

The primary endpoint of the trial was central nervous system (CNS) Objective Response Rate according to a composite criteria that included volumetric brain MRI measurements, steroid use, neurological signs and symptoms, and RECIST evaluation for non-CNS sites. The secondary endpoint of the trial was CNS response by Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology-Brain Metastases (RANO-BM) Criteria. The efficacy results from the trial showed that 49% of patients experienced a CNS Objective Response by the composite criteria. The results also showed that the CNS response rate using the RANO-BM criteria was 24%. The median time to CNS progression was 5.5 months and the median overall survival was 13.5 months, though 49% of patients remain alive and survival data are immature.

The results for cohort 3A showed that the most frequently observed severe adverse event for the 37 patients evaluable for safety was diarrhea. Patients received antidiarrheal prophylaxis consisting of high dose loperamide, given together with the combination of capecitabine plus neratinib for the first cycle of treatment in order to try to reduce the neratinib-related diarrhea. Among the 37 patients evaluable for safety, 32% of the patients had grade 3 diarrhea and 41% had grade 2 diarrhea.

Neratinib given in combination with capecitabine showed promising activity in patients with heavily pre-treated HER2-positive disease metastatic to the CNS, said Rachel A. Freedman, MD, MPH, Breast Oncology Center, Susan F. Smith Center for Women's Cancers, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. Despite the introduction of several new treatments for patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer, CNS progression events remain a major source of patient morbidity and mortality. Based on the results from TBCRC-022, we look forward to additional trials with neratinib-based regimens for HER2-positive CNS disease.

We are very pleased with the activity seen in this trial with the combination of neratinib plus capecitabine, said Alan H. Auerbach, CEO and President of Puma Biotechnology. As a small molecule that can cross the blood brain barrier, neratinib potentially offers patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer that has metastasized to the CNS a novel HER2 targeted treatment option. We look forward to working with TBCRC on future trials of neratinib in patients with HER2-positive disease metastatic to the CNS.

About Puma Biotechnology

Puma Biotechnology, Inc. is a biopharmaceutical company with a focus on the development and commercialization of innovative products to enhance cancer care. The Company in-licenses the global development and commercialization rights to three drug candidatesPB272 (neratinib (oral)), PB272 (neratinib (intravenous)) and PB357. Neratinib is a potent irreversible tyrosine kinase inhibitor that blocks signal transduction through the epidermal growth factor receptors, HER1, HER2 and HER4. Currently, the Company is primarily focused on the development of the oral version of neratinib, and its most advanced drug candidates are directed at the treatment of HER2-positive breast cancer. The Company believes that neratinib has clinical application in the treatment of several other cancers as well, including non-small cell lung cancer and other tumor types that over-express or have a mutation in HER2. Further information about Puma Biotechnology can be found at http://www.pumabiotechnology.com.

Forward-Looking Statements

This press release contains forward-looking statements, including statements regarding the development and potential benefits of the Companys drug candidates, the Companys clinical trials and the announcement of data relative to these trials. All forward-looking statements included in this press release involve risks and uncertainties that could cause the Company's actual results to differ materially from the anticipated results and expectations expressed in these forward-looking statements. These statements are based on current expectations, forecasts and assumptions, and actual outcomes and results could differ materially from these statements due to a number of factors, which include, but are not limited to, the fact that the Company has no product revenue and no products approved for marketing, the Company's dependence on PB272, which is still under development and may never receive regulatory approval, the challenges associated with conducting and enrolling clinical trials, the risk that the results of clinical trials may not support the Company's drug candidate claims, even if approved, the risk that physicians and patients may not accept or use the Company's products, the Company's reliance on third parties to conduct its clinical trials and to formulate and manufacture its drug candidates, risks pertaining to securities class action, derivative and defamation lawsuits, the Company's dependence on licensed intellectual property, and the other risk factors disclosed in the periodic and current reports filed by the Company with the Securities and Exchange Commission from time to time, including the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date hereof. The Company assumes no obligation to update these forward-looking statements, except as required by law.

Read this article:
Puma Biotechnology Announces Positive PB272 Phase II Data from TBCRC 022 Trial in Patients with HER2-Positive ... - Business Wire (press release)

iShares Nasdaq Biotechnology Index (ETF) (IBB) Is at a Crossroads – Investorplace.com

By Serge Berger, Head Trader & Strategist, The Steady Trader|Mar 7, 2017, 8:02 am EST Popular Posts: Recent Posts:

Biotechnology stocks as represented by theiShares Nasdaq Biotechnology Index (ETF)(NASDAQ:IBB) have rallied 13% year-to-date. Thats notable considering that over the past 12 months, the IBB ETF has only rallied by about 14%.

Many traders in recent days have pointed to the continued strength in biotech stocks as a sign that the broader market is not yet ready to roll over. But it is notable that the IBB, as a result of the recent rally, has now reached an important technical level on the charts that may offer better technical resistance.

A simple yet effective trick that I repeatedly use to gauge the internal strength of the broader stock market is by checking the pulse of the so calledrisk-on groups. While these groups change over the years, they often include technology and financial stocks. In recent years, biotech, tech as a whole and small-cap stocks, among others, have led the risk-on pack.

Over the past few weeks, biotech stocks and the IBB ETF have showed both absolute and relative strength versus the broader stock market. Through this lens, one could argue that it is premature to get too defensive on the stock market in the near-term and possibly the intermediate-term until biotech stocks begin to back off some.

When I last discussed the state of biotech stocks on Feb. 1,I offered that the IBBs bullish reversal from Jan. 31 could be the beginning of a next swing higher with price targets in the$285-$290 area. Two weeks later, the upper end of this price target had been reached, and last week the IBB ETF further extended this rally into the $300 level.

Now, lets look at the charts.

On the multiyear weekly chart, we see that this recent rally has brought the IBB back to the very upper end of a sideways channel, which now also lines up with the 100-week simple moving average (blue).

Click to Enlarge

This confluence of technical resistance around the $300 area could provide a more meaningful challenge to be overcome.

Next Page

Article printed from InvestorPlace Media, http://investorplace.com/2017/03/ishares-nasdaq-biotechnology-index-etf-ibb-is-at-a-crossroads/.

2017 InvestorPlace Media, LLC

Follow this link:
iShares Nasdaq Biotechnology Index (ETF) (IBB) Is at a Crossroads - Investorplace.com

iShares Nasdaq Biotechnology ETF (IBB): The Quick Guide to IBB … – Investorplace.com

Biotechnology is one of the more tempting and complex areas of the broader healthcare sector investing. However, stock-picking in this space is tricky, which has made biotechnology exchange-traded funds popular with investors. The most popular as well as the largest biotechnology ETF is the iShares Nasdaq Biotechnology Index (ETF) (NASDAQ:IBB).

The $8.2 billion IBBtracks the Nasdaq Biotechnology Index. The funddebuted in 2001, and currently holds 162 stocks.

While IBB has a deep bench relative to other biotechnology ETFs, investors should look under the hood to ensure this is the type of biotech fund they want to be involved with.

For example, investors often hear about biotechnology stocks that deliver jaw-dropping short-term gains on the back of favorable Food & Drug Administration (FDA) news. Then there are the biotechcompanies that are able to prove durable over time, delivering stellar returns for investors for years on end.

While it is hard to say biotechnology is a sector for conservative investors, given the historical volatility associated with the group, IBB can be viewed as one of the more conservative biotechnology ETFs due to its emphasis on the groups biggest names.

IBB is a cap-weighted ETF and as such allocates significant percentages of its weight to the biggest biotechnology names. For example, Celegene Corporation(NASDAQ:CELG), Gilead Sciences, Inc. (NASDAQ:GILD), Biogen Inc(NASDAQ:BIIB) and Amgen, Inc. (NASDAQ:AMGN) combine for nearly 31% of IBBs roster as of this writing.

Another issue to consider with IBB and biotech stocks is that the sector historically trades at valuations that are in excess of that of the healthcare sector and the broader market. Even when biotechnology is cheap by its standards, the group is likely still pricier than healthcare and broader equities benchmarks.

Volatility is also a consideration, as biotechnology stocks are more volatile than the healthcare sector. IBBs three-year standard deviation is 24.2% compared to an equivalent healthcare ETF from the iShares roster with a three-year standard deviation of 13.1%, according to issuer data.

Helped by its emphasis on large-cap biotechnology stocks, the ETF is heavily traded, sports robust liquidity and tight spreads. Those factors help minimize transaction costs and total cost of ownership.

IBB also charges 0.47% per year, or $47 annually on a $10,000 investment.

As of this writing, Todd Shriber did not hold a position in any of the aforementioned securities.

View post:
iShares Nasdaq Biotechnology ETF (IBB): The Quick Guide to IBB ... - Investorplace.com

Puma Biotechnology, Inc. (PBYI) Has Finally Shown Its Full Hand Via The Chart Setup – NY Stock News

Puma Biotechnology, Inc. (PBYI) Has Finally Shown Its Full Hand Via The Chart Setup
NY Stock News
Puma Biotechnology, Inc. (PBYI) has been having a set of eventful trading activity and it is clear from an examination of the charts that traders are now fully aware of the company's key metrics. A deeper exploration of the setup is sure to yield a ...

and more »

Here is the original post:
Puma Biotechnology, Inc. (PBYI) Has Finally Shown Its Full Hand Via The Chart Setup - NY Stock News

Puma Biotechnology Inc (PBYI) Soars 10.04% on February 08 – Equities.com

Market Summary Follow

Puma Biotechnology Inc is a A biopharmaceutical company

PBYI - Market Data & News

PBYI - Stock Valuation Report

Puma Biotechnology Inc (PBYI) had a good day on the market for Wednesday February 08 as shares jumped 10.04% to close at $37.25. About 1.21 million shares traded hands on 9,871 trades for the day, compared with an average daily volume of 966,951 shares out of a total float of 36.82 million. After opening the trading day at $33.85, shares of Puma Biotechnology Inc stayed within a range of $38.85 to $33.65.

With today's gains, Puma Biotechnology Inc now has a market cap of $1.37 billion. Shares of Puma Biotechnology Inc have been trading within a range of $73.27 and $19.74 over the last year, and it had a 50-day SMA of $35.29 and a 200-day SMA of $41.41.

Puma Biotechnology Inc is a biopharmaceutical company. It is engaged in the acquisition, development and commercialization of products to enhance cancer care.

Puma Biotechnology Inc is based out of Los Angeles, CA and has some 156 employees. Its CEO is Alan H. Auerbach.

For a complete fundamental analysis of Puma Biotechnology Inc, check out Equities.coms Stock Valuation Analysis report for PBYI.

Want to invest with the experts? Subscribe to Equities Premium newsletters today! Visit http://www.equitiespremium.com/ to learn more about Guild Investments Market Commentary and Adam Sarhans Find Leading Stocks today.

Puma Biotechnology Inc is also a component of the Russell 2000. The Russell 2000 is one of the leading indices tracking small-cap companies in the United States. It's maintained by Russell Investments, an industry leader in creating and maintaining indices, and consists of the smallest 2000 stocks from the broader Russell 3000 index.

Russell's indices differ from traditional indices like the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) or S&P 500, whose members are selected by committee, because they base membership entirely on an objective, rules based methodology. The 3,000 largest companies by market cap make up the Russell 3000, with the 2,000 smaller companies making up the Russell 2000. It's a simple approach that gives a broad, unbiased look at the small-cap market as a whole.

To get more information on Puma Biotechnology Inc and to follow the companys latest updates, you can visit the companys profile page here: PBYIs Profile. For more news on the financial markets and emerging growth companies, be sure to visit Equities.coms Newsdesk. Also, dont forget to sign-up for our daily email newsletter to ensure you dont miss out on any of our best stories.

All data provided by QuoteMedia and was accurate as of 4:30PM ET.

DISCLOSURE: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors, and do not represent the views of equities.com. Readers should not consider statements made by the author as formal recommendations and should consult their financial advisor before making any investment decisions. To read our full disclosure, please go to: http://www.equities.com/disclaimer

See the original post here:
Puma Biotechnology Inc (PBYI) Soars 10.04% on February 08 - Equities.com

Nasdaq Slips as Biotechnology Shares Decline – Wall Street Journal (subscription)


Wall Street Journal (subscription)
Nasdaq Slips as Biotechnology Shares Decline
Wall Street Journal (subscription)
Declines in biotechnology shares dragged down the Nasdaq Composite, pressuring an index that has soared so far this year. The Nasdaq fell 0.4% Thursday but is up more than 8% in 2017, outperforming both the Dow Jones Industrial Average and the S&P ...

and more »

Read the original post:
Nasdaq Slips as Biotechnology Shares Decline - Wall Street Journal (subscription)

Top Biotechnology Stock Picking: Tenax Therapeutics, Inc. (TENX … – The Independent Republic

Tenax Therapeutics, Inc. (TENX) ended last trading session with a change of 1.3 percent. It trades at an average volume of 1.1M shares versus 3.36M shares recorded at the end of last trading session. The share price of $0.72 is at a distance of 73.16 percent from its 52-week low and down -75.56 percent versus its peak. The company has a market cap of $22.8M and currently has 31.73M shares outstanding. The share price is currently -61.84 percent versus its SMA20, -62.99 percent versus its SMA50, and -68.05 percent versus its SMA200. The stock has a weekly performance of -63.15 percent and is -63.15 percent year-to-date as of the recent close.

On January 31, 2017 Tenax Therapeutics, Inc. (TENX) announced top-line results from its Phase 3 LEVO-CTS trial. The study did not achieve statistically significant reductions in the dual endpoint of death or use of a mechanical assist device at 30 days, nor in the quad endpoint of death, myocardial infarction, need for dialysis, or use of a mechanical assist device at 30 days. However, the study demonstrated statistically significant reductions in two of three secondary endpoints including reduction in low cardiac output syndrome (LCOS) and a reduction in postoperative use of secondary inotropes. Patient visits for data on death through day 90 have not yet been completed. The Company has a meeting scheduled with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to review the preliminary trial data and discuss a path forward to bring this potentially lifesaving treatment to the benefit of patients undergoing serious cardiac surgery.

Intrexon Corporation (XON) recently recorded -2.77 percent change and currently at $21.43 is 5.1 percent away from its 52-week low and down -46.74 percent versus its peak. It has a past 5-day performance of 2.05 percent and trades at an average volume of 1.34M shares. The stock has a 1-month performance of -17.03 percent and is -11.81 percent year-to-date as of the recent close. There were about 118.35M shares outstanding which made its market cap $2.54B. The share price is currently -7.68 percent versus its SMA20, -17.93 percent versus its SMA50, and -19.97 percent versus its SMA200.

On Jan. 24, 2017 Intrexon Corporation (XON) announced that it has entered into a definitive agreement to acquire GenVec, Inc. (GNVC), a clinical-stage company and pioneer in the development of AdenoVerse gene delivery technology.

Intrexon intends to integrate and expand upon GenVecs expertise in adenoviral vectors and cGMP drug product manufacturing to enhance its broad gene transfer capabilities that encompass multiple viral and non-viral platforms. Notably, the combined technologies have the potential to yield the next generation of adenoviral (AdV) delivery through the creation of a scalable manufacturing platform utilizing helper-dependent adenovirus with significantly higher payload capacity of >30kb, as compared to current viral delivery methods ranging from 4.5kb 9kb.

More:
Top Biotechnology Stock Picking: Tenax Therapeutics, Inc. (TENX ... - The Independent Republic

Will Biotechnology Regulations Squelch Food and Farming Innovation? – Genetic Literacy Project

Jon Entine, Executive Director, Genetic Literacy Project,oversaw the assignments and the editing of this series

INTRODUCTION:

Genetically engineered crops and animals (GMOs) have been a controversial public issue since the first products were introduced in the 1990s. They have posed unique challenges for governments to regulate. Although most working scientists in the field hold the opinion that genetic engineering, for the most part, is part of a continuum of the human manipulation of our food supply thats gone on for thousands of years, critics contend differently.

Many crop biotechnology skeptics frame their concerns in quasi-religious terms, as a violation of nature or fears that the increased use of GE foods will lead to a corporate takeover of our seed and food systems, and the adoption of an ecologically destructive industrialized agriculture system. GMOs have become a symbol of the battle over what our global, regional and local food systems should look like going forward.

The clout of the food movement that vocally rejects many aspects of conventional farming has exponentially increased since then, promoted by mainstream journalists, scientists and non-profit groups from Michael Pollan to Consumers Union to the Environmental Working Group. Organic leaders and lobbyists, such as Gary Hirshberg, founder of Stonyfield Organics and Just Label It, openly demonize conventional food and farming in defiance of their commitments agreed to in the 1990s that organic food would not be promoted at the expense of conventional agriculture. Attempts to reign in the unchecked influence of the conventional food critics have repeatedly failed; over much of the past decade, theyve had a sympathetic ear in Washington. Partly in response to the prevailing winds, the USDA has evolved increasingly byzantine regulatory structures when it comes to new GE products.

The Genetic Literacy Project 10-part series Beyond the Science II (Beyond the Science I can be viewed here) commences with this introductory article. Leading scientists, journalists and social scientists explore the ramifications of genetic engineering and so-called new breeding technologies (NBTs), specifically gene-editing technologies such as CRISPR. We will post two articles each week, on Tuesday and Wednesday, over the next 5 weeks.

Regulation is at the heart of this ongoing debate. Many scientists and entrepreneurs have come to view the two key agencies regulating GE in the United States the Food and Drug Administration and Department of Agriculture as places where innovation goes to die. Thats an exaggeration, but not without some truth; regulations are inherently political, and the winds have been blowing against technological breakthroughs in agriculture for much of the last decade. On average, it takes upwards of $125 million and 7-10 years for the Agriculture Department to approve a trait, exhausting almost half of a new products 20-year patent protection. No wonder the agricultural sector is consolidating, and most new products are innovated by larger corporations.

The regulatory climate may be changing, perhaps radically, in the United States and possibly in the United Kingdom, as the result of recent elections.

Many of the old rules and regulations regulating GE crops were set up in the 1980s and early 1990s. They are arguably creaky, overly-restrictive and do not account for dramatic increases in our understanding of how genetic engineering works and the now clear consensus on their safety.

Now with NBTs, which are largely unregulated since the techniques were not foreseen 30 years ago when regulations were first formulated, agricultural genetic research is at an inflection point: Will governments make the same mistake that they did previously and regulate innovation almost out of existence, or will they incorporate reasonable risk-risk and risk-benefit calculations in evaluating which technological advances should proceed with limited regulations?

Decisions on these issues will shape not only food and farming in Europe, North America and the industrialized nations, but the food insecure developing world, which looks to the West for regulatory guidance.

Gene Editing and Animals

The second article in our series, by University of California animal geneticist Alison Van Eenennaam, addresses the challenges of regulating genetically engineered animals. She focuses on dehorned cows, which have been developed without gene editing over many years with, at times, less than optimal results. Should gene editing be evaluated on a case-by-case basis triggered by the novelty of the traits, or should the entire process be heavily regulated the general approach favored by the European Union in regulating more conventional genetic engineering?

Pesticide Debate: How Should Agricultural Chemicals Be Regulated to Encourage Sustainability?

Dave Walton, an Iowa farmer, discusses the brouhaha that has erupted in recent years over the use of glyphosate, the active ingredient in the weed killer originally developed under patent by Monsanto. Many GMO critics are now expressing concerns over pesticide use in conventional agriculture, using glyphosate as a proxy for attacking the technology. Are their concerns appropriate? Walton, who grows both GE and non-GE crops and is director of the Iowa Soybean Association, has used glyphosate on his farm since the introduction of herbicide resistant crops in 1996. He uses on average a soda-sized cup of glyphosate per acre, and the use of the herbicide has allowed him to switch from more toxic chemicals. Most strikingly he discusses the sustainability impact if a glyphosate ban is imposed, as many activists are calling for.

Plant pathologist Steve Savage challenges us to think in a more nuanced way about a popular belief that organic farming is ecologically superior to conventional agriculture. The Agricultural Department has been a fractious mess in recent years in its efforts to oversee and encourage new breeding technologies. When the Clinton administration oversaw the founding of the National Organics Standards Board in 1995, USDA officials extracted the commitment from organic industry that the alternative farming system would not be promoted at the expense of conventional agriculture. After all, study after study, then and now, has established that organic farming offers no safety nor clear ecological benefits.

Let me be clear about one thing, said former Secretary of Agriculture Dan Glickman in December 2000. The organic label is not a statement about food safety, nor is organic a value judgment about nutrition or quality.

But thats not whats happened.

Regulations and the NGO Problem in Africa and Asia

While GE crops were pioneered in the United States and embraced in other western coun- tries outside of Europe, there has been resistance in regions of the world where these innovations could arguably bring the most impact: Africa and poorer sections of Asia. Ma- haletchumy Arujanan, executive director of Malaysian Biotechnology Information Centre and editor-in-chief of The Petri Dish, the first science newspaper in Malaysia, takes on the emerging Asian food security crisis posed by a parallel rise in population and living (and food consumption) standards. She reviews the successes and failures in various countries, and the effective campaigns by anti-GMO NGOs, mostly European funded, to block further biotech innovation.

Margaret Karembu, director of International Service for the Acquisition of Agribiotech Applications, Africa regional office (ISSSA) AfriCenter based in Nairobi, has found a similar pattern of mostly European-funded NGOs attempting to sabotage research and spread misinformation about the basic science of crop biotechnology. Africa is the ultimate organic experiment, and farmers have failed miserably using family agro-ecology techniques for decades. Cracks are beginning to form in the anti-GMO wall erected across the continent and there are hopes that young people will be attracted to farming, lured by the introduction of GE crops and other innovations.

Public Opinion and GMOs

Brandon McFadden, assistant professor in the Food and Resource Economics Department, University of Florida, addresses the complex views of consumers regarding innovation and GE foods. The public has a widely distorted perception of what genetic engineering entails, which helps explain why consumers remain so skeptical about technological innovation in farming.

Julie Kelly, a contributing writer to numerous publications including the Wall Street Journal, National Review and the GLP, takes on Hollywood in her analysis of the celebrity embrace of the anti-GMO movement. Who are the movers and shakers manipulating public opinion in favor of the organic movement and against conventional agriculture? Is the celebrity-backed science misinformation campaign working?

Future of GM Research and How the Public Debate May Evolve

Paul Vincelli, extension professor and Provosts Distinguished Service Professor at the University of Kentucky, has been perturbed about the attack on independent university researchers for working with the biotechnology industry over the years. By law, land grant university scientists are required to work with all stakeholders, particularly corporations who are developing the products used by farmers, including organic farmers. No, scientists who partner with corporations in research and product development are not shills. He rejects the knee jerk belief, advanced by many activist critics of GE crops, that corporate funding necessarily corruptsscience and should be banned.

Finally, risk expert David Ropeik has an optimistic take on the future. He believes 2016 may have been a turning point in the debate over GE foods. Technology rejectionists, from Greenpeace to labeling activists, are sounding increasingly shrill and less scientific. Gene editing, he believes, could undercut claims that GE foods are unsafe because they are unnatural. He is convinced, perhaps optimistically, that GE opponents will soon be viewed as science denialists.

We will see.

Anti-GMO critics cite opinion polls and the votes of anti-GMO legislators in Europe and elsewhere as proof that genetic engineering should be curtailed and more heavily regulated. Thats a rickety platform if one believes in science, however; science is not a popularity contest.

The Genetic Literacy Project is a 501(c)(3) non profit dedicated to helping the public, journalists, policy makers and scientists better communicate the advances and ethical and technological challenges ushered in by the biotechnology and genetics revolution, addressing both human genetics and food and farming. We are one of two websites overseen by the Science Literacy Project; our sister site, the Epigenetics Literacy Project, addresses the challenges surrounding emerging data-rich technologies.Jon Entineis the founder of the Science Literacy Project.

Visit link:
Will Biotechnology Regulations Squelch Food and Farming Innovation? - Genetic Literacy Project

Insights on the Worldwide Biotechnology Reagents Industry to 2024 – Drivers, Challenges and Trends – ResearchAndMarkets.com – Business Wire

DUBLIN--(BUSINESS WIRE)--The "Global Biotechnology Reagents Market 2020-2024" report has been added to ResearchAndMarkets.com's offering.

The biotechnology reagents market is poised to grow by $ 37.87 bn during 2020-2024 progressing at a CAGR of 8% during the forecast period. The report on the biotechnology reagents market provides a holistic analysis, market size and forecast, trends, growth drivers, and challenges, as well as vendor analysis covering around 25 vendors.

The report offers an up-to-date analysis regarding the current global market scenario, latest trends and drivers, and the overall market environment. The market is driven by the presence of high-throughput and novel technologies and high usage of biotechnology reagents in diagnostic and therapeutic applications. In addition, the presence of high-throughput and novel technologies is anticipated to boost the growth of the market as well.

This study identifies the increasing R&D investments by federal agencies and biotechnology firms as one of the prime reasons driving the biotechnology reagents market growth during the next few years.

Companies Mentioned

Key Topics Covered:

1. Executive Summary

2. Market Landscape

3. Market Sizing

4. Five Forces Analysis

5. Market Segmentation by Technology

6. Customer landscape

7. Geographic Landscape

8. Drivers, Challenges, and Trends

9. Vendor Landscape

10. Vendor Analysis

11. Appendix

For more information about this report visit https://www.researchandmarkets.com/r/jdmnpl.

Go here to see the original:
Insights on the Worldwide Biotechnology Reagents Industry to 2024 - Drivers, Challenges and Trends - ResearchAndMarkets.com - Business Wire

List of Biotechnology Colleges in Delhi

Delhi College of Engineering

Profile:

Address: 14875, New Campus Shahbad, Warden Flat, Daulatpur, Engineering College New Delhi

Year Founded: 1941

Website: http://www.dce.edu

Profile:

Address: 4, Patel Marg,Maurice Nagar, Delhi

Year Founded: 1960

Profile:

Address: Ansari Nagar, New Delhi

Year Founded: 1956

Website: http://www.aiims.ac.in

Profile:

Address: Aruna Asaf Ali Marg, New Delhi

Website: www1.nii.res.in

Profile:

Address: Azad Hing Fauj Marg, Sector 3, Dwarka (Pappankalan), New Delhi

Year Founded: 1983

Website: http://www.nsit.ac.in

Profile:

Address: Benito Juarez Road,Dhaula Kuan, New Dehli

Year Founded: 1961

Website: http://www.svc.ac.in

Profile:

Address: F-4, Hauz Khas Enclave, Near Hauz Khas Metro Station, New Delhi

Year Founded: 1961

Website: http://www.ihe-du.com

Profile:

Address: Faculty of Natural Sciences,Jamia Millia Islamia,DELHI , New Delhi

Website: http://www.jmi.ac.in

Profile:

Address: Hamdard Nagar, New Delhi

Year Founded: 1906

Website: http://www.jamiahamdard.edu

Profile:

Address: Hauz Khas Safdarganj Development Area, Hauz Khas, New Delhi

Website: http://www.iitd.ac.in

Profile:

Address: Kalkaji, New Delhi

Website: http://www.deshbandhucollege.ac.in

Profile:

Address: Kashmere Gate, New Delhi

Website: http://www.ggsipu.nic.in

Profile:

Address: Main Campus, Karol Bagh, New Delhi, Delhi

Website: http://www.du.ac.in

Profile:

Address: National Highway 1 New Delhi

Year Founded: 1967

Website: http://www.ssncollege.com

Profile:

Facilities:

Address: New Mehrauli Road, New Delhi

Year Founded: 1970

Website: http://www.jnu.ac.in

Profile:

Facilities:

Address: Ring Road, Raja Garden,New Delhi

Year Founded: 1961

Website: http://www.shivajicollege.ac.in

Profile:

Address: RZ-A-44 Mahipalpur Ext., New Delhi

Year Founded: 1976

Website: http://www.iphhparamedic.in

Profile:

Address: V Floor, Anuvrat Bhawan, 210, Deen Dayal Upadhay Marg, New Delhi

Year Founded: 1990

Website: http://www.bcil.nic.in

Original post:
List of Biotechnology Colleges in Delhi

Beyond Bricks And Mortar: Reimagining Infrastructure Investment To Spur Biotechnology Innovation – Forbes


Forbes
Beyond Bricks And Mortar: Reimagining Infrastructure Investment To Spur Biotechnology Innovation
Forbes
Biotechnology (including not only biopharmaceuticals, but also bioengineered food products, biofuels and biodefense mechanisms) is primed for an infusion of infrastructure investment. By supplementing existing tools with robotics, advanced computing ...

Go here to see the original:
Beyond Bricks And Mortar: Reimagining Infrastructure Investment To Spur Biotechnology Innovation - Forbes

Goodwin Biotechnology Launches a Digitization Initiative by Investing in a Sophisticated Electronic Quality Solution – PRNewswire

FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla., Nov. 6, 2019 /PRNewswire/ --Goodwin Biotechnology, Inc. announced that it has recently licensed an industry leading electronic content and document management solution to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of its Quality systems and operations. This improvement continues to ensure that Goodwin Biotechnology remains uniquely positioned as aqualified and flexible biopharmaceutical Contract Development and Manufacturing Organization (CDMO) that offers an integrated Single Source Solution from Cell Line Development, Process Development and cGMP manufacturing including Scale-Up, cGMP Contract Manufacturing, and Aseptic Fill / Finish of mammalian cell-culture derived monoclonal antibodies, recombinant proteins, vaccines, and Antibody Drug Conjugates (ADCs).

"Acquisition and implementation of this sophisticated electronic solution demonstrates Goodwin's commitment to providing top-tier development and manufacturing services for our clients," noted Karl Pinto, Chief Executive Officer at Goodwin Biotechnology. "Goodwin's past successes supporting our clients through their early- and late-stage clinical trials, and regulatory compliant commercial manufacturing, will be strengthened through this recent investment. These strategic steps demonstrate our commitment to effectively support our clients through all stages of product development and cGMP manufacturing to assure conformance to worldwide regulatory standards." added Mr. Pinto.

About Goodwin Biotechnology, Inc.Goodwin Biotechnologyis a uniquely qualified and flexible, US-based CDMO that offers a Single Source Solution to enhance the value of complex biopharmaceuticals for our clients. With over 26 years of experience as an independent integrated contract manufacturer, Goodwin Biotechnology has worked as a strategic partner with companies of all sizes from small university spin-offs to major research institutes, government agencies and large, established and multi-national biopharmaceutical companies. Based on the impressive track record, Goodwin Biotechnology has received numerous industry awards that span from Frost & Sullivan's Customer Value and Leadership Award for Best Practices in Mammalian Contract Manufacturing to the Biologics cGMP Manufacturer of the Year 2018 by Global Health & Pharma News. Click here to view the press releases! Additional information may be found at http://www.GoodwinBio.com.

For more information, please contact:

SOURCE Goodwin Biotechnology, Inc.

http://www.goodwinbio.com

Visit link:
Goodwin Biotechnology Launches a Digitization Initiative by Investing in a Sophisticated Electronic Quality Solution - PRNewswire

The global single-cell analysis market is projected to reach USD 5.6 billion by 2025 from USD 2.1 billion in 2019, at a CAGR of 17.8% – GlobeNewswire

New York, Feb. 28, 2020 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Reportlinker.com announces the release of the report "Single-cell Analysis Market by Cell Type, Product, Technique, Application, End User - Global Forecasts to 2025" - https://www.reportlinker.com/p04579530/?utm_source=GNW However, the high cost of single-cell analysis products is expected to restrain the growth of this market to a certain extent during the forecast period.

The academic & research laboratories segment accounted for the largest market share in 2018On the basis of end user, the single-cell analysis market is segmented into academic and research laboratories, biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies, hospitals and diagnostic laboratories, and cell banks and IVF centers.The academic and research laboratories segment accounted for the largest market share in 2018.

Factors such as growth in funding for life science research and the increasing number of medical colleges and universities are driving the growth of this end-user segment.

Flow cytometry is the largest technique segment of the single-cell analysis marketBased on technique, the single-cell analysis market is segmented into flow cytometry, NGS, PCR, microscopy, mass spectrometry, and other techniques.The flow cytometry segment accounted for the largest market share in 2018.

The large share of this segment is attributed to the wide usage of flow cytometry in detecting and measuring the physical and chemical characteristics of a population of cells or particles.

North America will continue to dominate the single-cell analysis market in 2025The single-cell analysis market, by region, is segmented into North America, Europe, Asia Pacific, Latin America, and the Middle East & Africa.In 2018, North America accounted for the largest share of the single-cell analysis market.

The large share of North America can be attributed to the increasing drug development activities in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries, rising prevalence of chronic and infectious diseases, and an increase in stem cell research activities.

The breakup of primary participants is as mentioned below: By Company Type - Tier 1: 45%, Tier 2: 30%, and Tier 3: 25% By Designation - C-level: 35%, Director-level: 25%, and Others: 40% By Region - North America: 40%, Europe: 20%, Asia Pacific: 25%, Latin America: 10%, and the Middle East & Africa: 5%

Prominent players in the single-cell analysis market include Becton, Dickinson and Company (US), Danaher Corporation (US), Merck Millipore (US), QIAGEN (Netherlands), Thermo Fisher Scientific (US), General Electric Company (US), 10x Genomics (US), Promega Corporation (US), Illumina (US), Bio-Rad Laboratories (US), Fluidigm Corporation (US), Agilent Technologies (US), NanoString Technologies (US), Tecan Group (Switzerland), Sartorius AG (Germany), Luminex Corporation (US), Takara Bio (Japan), Fluxion Biosciences (US), Menarini Silicon Biosystems (Italy), and LumaCyte (US).

Research Coverage:The report analyzes the single-cell analysis market and aims at estimating the market size and future growth potential of this market based on various segments such as product, cell type, technique, application, end user, and region. The report also provides a competitive analysis of the key players in this market, along with their company profiles, product offerings, recent developments, and key market strategies.

Reasons to Buy the ReportThe report will enrich established firms as well as new entrants/smaller firms to gauge the pulse of the market, which, in turn, would help them garner a greater share of the market. Firms purchasing the report could use one or a combination of the below-mentioned strategies to strengthen their positions in the market.

This report provides insights into: Market Penetration: Comprehensive information on the product portfolios of the top players in the single-cell analysis market. The report analyzes this market by product, application, cell type, technique, end user, and region Market Development: Comprehensive information on the lucrative emerging markets by product, application, cell type, technique, end user, and region Market Diversification: Exhaustive information about products, growing geographies, recent developments, and investments in the single-cell analysis market Competitive Assessment: In-depth assessment of market shares, growth strategies, product offerings, and capabilities of leading players in the single-cell analysis marketRead the full report: https://www.reportlinker.com/p04579530/?utm_source=GNW

About ReportlinkerReportLinker is an award-winning market research solution. Reportlinker finds and organizes the latest industry data so you get all the market research you need - instantly, in one place.

__________________________

Read the rest here:
The global single-cell analysis market is projected to reach USD 5.6 billion by 2025 from USD 2.1 billion in 2019, at a CAGR of 17.8% - GlobeNewswire

The Brokerages Set Puma Biotechnology Inc (PBYI) PT at $70.50 – Petro Global News 24

Puma Biotechnology Inc (NYSE:PBYI) has earned an average recommendation of Hold from the eight analysts that are covering the company. One equities research analyst has rated the stock with a sell recommendation, three have issued a hold recommendation and four have given a buy recommendation to the company. The average 1-year target price among brokers that have updated their coverage on the stock in the last year is $70.50.

Several brokerages have recently weighed in on PBYI. Royal Bank of Canada reissued a sector perform rating and issued a $17.00 price objective (down from $48.00) on shares of Puma Biotechnology in a research report on Thursday, March 2nd. Stifel Nicolaus reissued a buy rating and issued a $88.00 price objective on shares of Puma Biotechnology in a research report on Wednesday, November 30th. Citigroup Inc reissued a buy rating and issued a $88.00 price objective on shares of Puma Biotechnology in a research report on Saturday, March 4th. Zacks Investment Research lowered shares of Puma Biotechnology from a buy rating to a hold rating in a research report on Tuesday, January 10th. Finally, Credit Suisse Group AG reissued an outperform rating on shares of Puma Biotechnology in a research report on Wednesday, January 18th.

Puma Biotechnology (NYSE:PBYI) opened at 44.15 on Tuesday. Puma Biotechnology has a 52-week low of $19.74 and a 52-week high of $73.27. The firms market capitalization is $1.63 billion. The firm has a 50-day moving average of $36.87 and a 200-day moving average of $43.70.

Puma Biotechnology (NYSE:PBYI) last issued its quarterly earnings data on Wednesday, March 1st. The biopharmaceutical company reported ($2.04) earnings per share for the quarter, missing the Thomson Reuters consensus estimate of ($1.92) by $0.12. On average, equities research analysts forecast that Puma Biotechnology will post ($8.32) EPS for the current fiscal year.

In related news, SVP Richard Paul Bryce sold 2,293 shares of the firms stock in a transaction dated Friday, January 20th. The shares were sold at an average price of $33.24, for a total transaction of $76,219.32. Following the transaction, the senior vice president now directly owns 29,237 shares of the companys stock, valued at $971,837.88. The transaction was disclosed in a legal filing with the SEC, which is available through this hyperlink. Also, insider Robert Charnas sold 3,008 shares of the firms stock in a transaction dated Wednesday, February 1st. The stock was sold at an average price of $31.83, for a total transaction of $95,744.64. Following the transaction, the insider now directly owns 28,461 shares in the company, valued at $905,913.63. The disclosure for this sale can be found here. Over the last ninety days, insiders have sold 15,503 shares of company stock worth $511,078. 22.70% of the stock is owned by insiders.

Institutional investors have recently added to or reduced their stakes in the company. UBS Asset Management Americas Inc. raised its position in Puma Biotechnology by 2.4% in the third quarter. UBS Asset Management Americas Inc. now owns 12,891 shares of the biopharmaceutical companys stock worth $864,000 after buying an additional 300 shares in the last quarter. California State Teachers Retirement System raised its position in Puma Biotechnology by 1.0% in the third quarter. California State Teachers Retirement System now owns 52,275 shares of the biopharmaceutical companys stock worth $3,505,000 after buying an additional 500 shares in the last quarter. BlackRock Investment Management LLC raised its position in Puma Biotechnology by 1.2% in the third quarter. BlackRock Investment Management LLC now owns 92,595 shares of the biopharmaceutical companys stock worth $6,208,000 after buying an additional 1,091 shares in the last quarter. Tower Research Capital LLC TRC raised its position in Puma Biotechnology by 253.3% in the third quarter. Tower Research Capital LLC TRC now owns 2,427 shares of the biopharmaceutical companys stock worth $163,000 after buying an additional 1,740 shares in the last quarter. Finally, Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. NY raised its position in Puma Biotechnology by 12.6% in the fourth quarter. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. NY now owns 20,142 shares of the biopharmaceutical companys stock worth $618,000 after buying an additional 2,247 shares in the last quarter. 80.98% of the stock is currently owned by institutional investors and hedge funds.

Puma Biotechnology Company Profile

Puma Biotechnology, Inc is a biopharmaceutical company that focuses on the development and commercialization of products for the treatment of cancer. The Company focuses on in-licensing the global development and commercialization rights to over three drug candidates, including PB272 (neratinib (oral)), which the Company is developing for the treatment of patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 (HER2), positive breast cancer, and patients with non-small cell lung cancer, breast cancer and other solid tumors that have a HER2 mutation; PB272 (neratinib (intravenous)), which the Company is developing for the treatment of patients with advanced cancer, and PB357, which is an orally administered agent.

The rest is here:
The Brokerages Set Puma Biotechnology Inc (PBYI) PT at $70.50 - Petro Global News 24