Departmental research news

Dr Constanza Toro-Valdivieso has been to the ends of the Earth to collect seal poo. Her results show that seemingly healthy seals are contaminated by toxic heavy metals.

The vaccine – known as DIOS-CoVax – has been developed by Professor Jonathan Heeney at the University of Cambridge and spin-out company DIOSynVax. It is envisaged as a booster targeting SARS-CoV-2 and relatives that threaten future coronavirus pandemics.

This next generation vaccine is administered through a needle-free ‘injection’ – a blast of air that delivers it into the skin. It has already been part of safety trials conducted at the NIHR Southampton Clinical Research Facility, but now recruitment is being expanded to Cambridge.

Professor Heeney said: “We’re excited to be bringing our vaccine ‘home’ and are looking to recruit healthy volunteers to help in this crucial stage of development towards what we hope will eventually become a universal coronavirus vaccine.

“Our vaccine is innovative, both in terms of how it aims to protect against thevirus responsible for our current pandemic and future coronaviruses, but also in how it is delivered. If you’re someone who hates needles, our vaccine could be the answer as it’s delivered by a jet of air, not a needle.”

If the clinical trials are successful, the vaccine could be scaled up and manufactured as a powder to boost global vaccination efforts, particularly in low- and middle-income countries.

The clinical trials team at Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust is looking for healthy volunteers aged 18-50 to take part in the study. Volunteers will receive payment for their time, and participation on the trial will last around 12 months with volunteers attending 11 visits. To find out more, contact the Project Management Team at cuh.dioscovaxtrial@nhs.net.

Funding for the development of the vaccine has come from Innovate UK, part of UK Research and Innovation.

DIOSynVax is a spin-out company from the University of Cambridge, established in 2017 with the support of Cambridge Enterprise, the University’s commercialisation arm. Professor Heeney is a Fellow at Darwin College, Cambridge.

Read more at: Cambridge coronavirus vaccine enters clinical trial

Recruitment is underway in Cambridge for volunteers to take part in clinical trials of a revolutionary new needle-free vaccine to protect against SARS-CoV-2 – the virus that causes COVID-19 – and related coronanviruses.

We’re excited to be bringing our vaccine ‘home’ and are looking to recruit healthy volunteers to help in this crucial stage of developmentJonathan HeeneyLloyd Mann (University of Cambridge)Vaccine being administered by needle-free injection into a volunteer's arm

The text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Images, including our videos, are Copyright ©University of Cambridge and licensors/contributors as identified.  All rights reserved. We make our image and video content available in a number of ways – as here, on our main website under its Terms and conditions, and on a range of channels including social media that permit your use and sharing of our content under their respective Terms.

YesLicence type: Attribution

Transmissible cancers, which occur only rarely in the animal kingdom, are spread by the transfer of living cancer cells. In the case of Tasmanian devils, the cells are transferred through biting – a behaviour that is common in devils especially in fights over mates and food.

Tasmanian devils are susceptible to two fatal transmissible cancers called devil facial tumour 1 (DFT1) and devil facial tumour 2 (DFT2) that have caused rapid population decline in recent decades. The two cancers both manifest with disfiguring facial tumours.

In a new study, University of Cambridge researchers, together with a global team of scientists from Europe, Australia and the United States, mapped the emergence and mutations of DFT1 and DFT2 and characterised these cancers’ ongoing evolution. The findings underline the continued threat that transmissible cancers pose to Tasmanian devils.

The results are published today in the journal Science.

“The incredible fact that Tasmanian devils have not one, but two, transmissible cancers, makes it possible to compare their evolution, and this gives us new insights into the key mechanisms involved,” said lead author Elizabeth Murchison, Professor of Comparative Oncology and Genetics at the Department of Veterinary Medicine, University of Cambridge.

“By looking at the mutations that have accumulated in these cancers’ DNA, we can trace the origins and evolution of these diseases. Our results show that the two cancers arose through similar processes and that both have striking signals of ongoing evolution. It is difficult to predict how this continued cancer evolution will impact devils.”

The researchers created an improved ‘reference genome’ – essentially a map of the entire DNA sequence – of the Tasmanian devil and compared this to DNA taken from 119 DFT1 and DFT2 tumours. DFT1 was first observed in 1996 in Tasmania’s northeast and is now widespread throughout Tasmania. DFT2, on the other hand, was first observed in 2014 and remains confined to a small area in Tasmania’s southeast. The scientists identified mutations in the tumours and used these to build ‘family trees’ of how the two cancers had each independently arisen and evolved over time.

By tracking mutations the researchers discovered that DFT2 acquired mutations about three times faster than DFT1. As mutations usually occur during cell division, the most likely explanation is that DFT2 is a faster growing cancer than DFT1, say the researchers, underlining the importance of DFT2 as a threat.

“DFT2 is still not widespread in the devil population, and very little is known about it. We were really startled to see just how quickly it was mutating, alerting us to what could be a very unpredictable threat to the devils in the long term,” said Maximilian Stammnitz, first author of the study.  

The team found that DFT1 arose in the 1980s, up to 14 years before it was first observed, whereas DFT2 emerged between 2009 and 2012, only shortly before it was detected.

Mapping the mutations revealed that DFT1 underwent an explosive transmission event shortly after it emerged. This involved a single infected devil transmitting its tumour to at least six recipient devils.

DFT1 has now spread throughout almost the entire devil population and has recently been reported in the far northwest of Tasmania, one of the few remaining disease-free regions of the state.

Researchers also identified for the first time an instance of DFT1 transmission between a mother and the young in her pouch. Additionally, they found that the incubation period – the time between infection and the emergence of symptoms – can in some cases be a year or more. These findings have important implications for conservation scientists working to protect the species.

“I come from Tasmania and love Tasmanian devils – they have a special place in my heart,” said Murchison. “Transmissible cancers pose an unprecedented and unpredictable threat to Tasmanian devils. This research highlights the continuing importance of monitoring and conservation programmes. It also gives us new insights into the evolutionary mechanisms operating in cancer more broadly, including in human cancers.”

The research was funded by Wellcome, the Gates Cambridge Trust and Eric Guiler Tasmanian Devil Research Grants from the University of Tasmania Foundation.

Reference: M. R. Stammnitz et al. The evolution of two transmissible cancers in Tasmanian devils, Science, DOI: 10.1126/science.abq6453

Scientists have traced the family trees of two transmissible cancers that affect Tasmanian devils and have pinpointed mutations which may drive growth of deadly diseases.

Transmissible cancers pose an unprecedented and unpredictable threat to Tasmanian devils.Professor Elizabeth MurchisonMax StammnitzTasmanian Devil

The text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Images, including our videos, are Copyright ©University of Cambridge and licensors/contributors as identified.  All rights reserved. We make our image and video content available in a number of ways – as here, on our main website under its Terms and conditions, and on a range of channels including social media that permit your use and sharing of our content under their respective Terms.

YesRelated Links: Could cancer drugs help save the Tasmanian devil?

How genetics and DNA testing can pave the way for all puppies to be born free from hereditary illnesses.

This means that animal welfare can now, for the first time, be properly considered alongside other impacts of farming to help identify which farming systems are best.

This is vital for improving animal welfare in livestock production, at a time when demand for meat is rising globally and the way animals are farmed is changing - with concerns about the welfare of intensive and indoor systems.

Animal welfare assessments could also enable consumers to be better informed when choosing what to eat.

Britain has various labelling schemes for meat products to assure consumers that certain standards have been met. The team used their new system to test how the different labels compare in terms of animal welfare.

Farms producing ‘woodland’ labelled pork products scored best for pig welfare, followed by ‘organic’, then free-range, RSPCA assured, Red Tractor, and finally those with no certification.

“We have shown that it’s possible to reliably assess animal welfare on farms. This means decisions about which types of farm are better or worse for animal welfare can be based on proper calculations, rather than assumptions – as is currently the case,” said Dr Harriet Bartlett, first author of the study, who carried out this work while a researcher at the University of Cambridge’s Department of Veterinary Medicine. She is now a Research Associate in Sustainable Food Solutions at the University of Oxford.

Bartlett added: “Now animal welfare can be included in overall assessments of farm sustainability alongside other measures like carbon emissions and biodiversity impacts, so we can make better informed decisions about how we choose to farm and what we choose to eat.”

Coming up with an overall measurement of animal welfare has previously been difficult because of disagreement on which factors are most important. For example, is a health problem more important than a behaviour problem? What level of welfare is good enough?

The new system assesses the quality of an animal’s life through a wide-ranging set of welfare measurements, reflecting a range of concerns about welfare. The results can be integrated into a single score to enable comparison across farms.

This will enable exploration of trade-offs between animal welfare and other issues of concern to consumers, such as the impact of farming on the environment.

The results are published today in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B.

Assessment of the pigs looked at everything from health problems like coughing, sneezing, and lameness, to the way they interacted: biting each other’s ears or tails, or engaging with their environment, for example.

Various scoring methods were tested - giving more or less weight to the different aspects of animal welfare - on 74 pig farming systems in the UK. The team were surprised to find that each method gave broadly the same overall result in terms of which farms, and types of farms, performed best and worst.

“Despite ongoing debate about how to measure animal welfare, we found we can identify which types of farms we might want to encourage and which we shouldn’t with reasonable consistency,” said Professor Andrew Balmford in the University of Cambridge’s Department of Zoology, who was involved in the study.

The new welfare measurements combine quality of life with length of life, and scores can be produced ‘per unit’ of production. The welfare scores can also allow several farms to be grouped together – for example when animals are kept on different farms at different growth stages.

“This work opens up possibilities for greater rolling out of welfare assessment scores in food labelling, including in other species as well as pigs. Until now, the methods available have made this impractical,” said Professor James Wood at the University of Cambridge’s Department of Veterinary Medicine, who was involved in the study.

The technique of ‘Life Cycle Assessment’ is widely used to quantify environmental impacts, such as greenhouse gas emissions and land use, across all stages of farm animal production. But until now there hasn’t been a way of measuring animal welfare that enables valid comparisons across different farming systems, so Life Cycle Assessments do not include it and as a result, welfare concerns have sometimes been overlooked.

Food production accounts for over a quarter of all global greenhouse gas emissions. Making farming systems more sustainable, in the face of growing global demand for meat, is a major challenge for farmers and the government.

‘Woodland’ labelled pork is from farms that provide at least partial tree cover for the pigs, and ‘Organic’ provides outdoor access for the animals. The ‘RSPCA assured’ label is welfare focused, while ‘Free range’ is not a formal assurance, but typically refers to fully outdoor farming systems. Most UK pig farms produce ‘Red Tractor’ labelled pork, which has lower production costs – translating to a lower price for consumers.

This research was funded by the BBSRC, the Royal Society, MRC, and The Alborada Trust.

Reference

Bartlett, H. et al: ‘Advancing the quantitative characterisation of farm animal welfare.’ Proc Roy Soc B. March 2023. DOI 10.1098/rspb.2023.0120

Cambridge University scientists have come up with a system of measuring animal welfare that enables reliable comparison across different types of pig farming.

Harriet BartlettPigs on a farm

The text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Images, including our videos, are Copyright ©University of Cambridge and licensors/contributors as identified.  All rights reserved. We make our image and video content available in a number of ways – as here, on our main website under its Terms and conditions, and on a range of channels including social media that permit your use and sharing of our content under their respective Terms.

YesLicence type: Attribution

A global strategy is launched today to coordinate the complex research activities necessary for a new approach to coronavirus vaccine development. The aim is to develop more effective, longer lasting vaccines against continually emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants, and against new coronaviruses that may emerge in the future.

The Coronavirus Vaccines Research and Development Roadmap (CVR) is led by the US Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP) at the University of Minnesota. It is the product of an international collaboration of 50 scientific experts from around the world, who forged a unified strategy to make these critically needed vaccines a reality.

“The response of the scientific and medical communities to the development and delivery of COVID-19 vaccines has been incredible, but as new variants emerge and immunity begins to wane we need newer technologies. It’s vital that we continue to develop vaccine candidates to help keep us safe from the next virus threats,” said Professor Jonathan Heeney, Head of the Lab of Viral Zoonotics at the University of Cambridge and advisor on the international CVR Taskforce.

Heeney, who is also a Fellow at Darwin College, Cambridge, is leading an ongoing clinical trial to evaluate an innovative coronavirus vaccine he developed at the University of Cambridge and spin-out company DIOSynVax. Administered needle-free using a blast of air, the vaccine primes the immune system to give a broader protective response to coronaviruses and is a step towards developing a future-proofed coronavirus vaccine.

Last year DIOSynVax was awarded $42 million from the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) and the UK Government to support this work.

“The COVID-19 pandemic marks the third time in just twenty years that a coronavirus has emerged to cause a public health crisis,” said Michael T. Osterholm, PhD, MPH, CIDRAP director, University of Minnesota Regents Professor and McKnight Presidential Endowed Chair in Public Health.

He added: “The COVID-19 pandemic taught us the hard lesson that we must be better prepared. Rather than waiting for a fourth coronavirus to emerge — or for the arrival of an especially dangerous SARS-CoV-2 variant — we must act now to develop better, longer lasting and more broadly protective vaccines. If we wait for the next event to happen before we act, we will be too late.”

The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 in 2019 was preceded by an epidemic in 2003 caused by a different coronavirus called SARS-CoV. Then, in 2012, the Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus, or MERS-CoV, emerged. Coronaviruses can carry a high risk of death: for MERS-CoV, about one third of infections result in death, and approximately one in ten for SARS-CoV, although neither spreads easily from person to person.

In contrast, SARS-CoV-2, the virus that caused the COVID-19 pandemic, has a much lower fatality rate, but because it is so highly infectious between people, it had caused worldwide more than 650 million confirmed cases and 6.6 million deaths by the end of 2022. Even more concerning is the threat of a new coronavirus in the future that could be both highly transmissible and highly lethal. In addition, the emergence of new SARS-CoV-2 variants may further jeopardise the significant protection provided by current vaccines against severe disease and death.

The CVR confronts these extraordinary threats with a detailed, comprehensive and coordinated plan to accelerate the development of long-lasting, broadly protective coronavirus vaccines capable of preventing severe disease and death, and potentially protect against infection and transmission. The CVR further emphasises the goal that future broadly protective vaccines must be suitable for all regions worldwide, including remote areas and low- and middle-income countries.

The report highlights different paths to success. One approach could involve a stepwise process, starting with vaccines to protect against variants of SARS-CoV-2. Another approach could focus on vaccines capable of protecting against multiple types of coronaviruses, including those likely to spill over from animals to humans in the future.

The CVR summarises key barriers and gaps and outlines specific goals and milestones for advancing broadly protective coronavirus vaccines. The work is organised into five topic areas:

• Virology. Developing broadly protective coronavirus vaccines requires learning more about the global distribution of coronaviruses circulating in animal reservoirs that have the potential to spill over to humans.
• Immunology. Scientists need to learn more about human immunology, including research that will expand the breadth and durability of immune protection from vaccines and natural infection. Improved understanding of mucosal immunity may unlock new strategies to block infection.
• Vaccinology. Identifying key preferred product characteristics will inform priorities and strategies for vaccine R&D and accelerate discovery. Leveraging new technologies and identifying the best methods to assess vaccine efficacy will further catalyse critical advancements.
• Animal and human infection models for vaccine research. The limited availability of a range suitable animal models is a key barrier to developing broadly protective coronavirus vaccines. Additionally, work is needed to explore the potential role for the safe and effective use of controlled human infection models in coronavirus vaccine research.
• Policy and financing. The successful development and global distribution of broadly protective coronavirus vaccines will require reinvigorating and sustaining a high level of political commitment and long-term investment in vaccine R&D and manufacturing.

“The vaccines that we currently have for COVID-19 are the most important tool that we have in our battle against the pandemic,” said Charlie Weller, PhD, Head of Prevention, Infectious Diseases, at the Wellcome Trust. “But we can do better – by developing vaccines that give us broader protection – protection against new variants, protection from coronaviruses that have not yet emerged but might cause the next pandemic. We can discover new ways to deliver vaccines, such as skin patches or intranasal vaccines – and maybe even vaccines that could block transmission. This roadmap creates the structured plan that will give us the tools we need to better protect ourselves, our families and our communities around the world.”

The report was developed with funding from The Rockefeller Foundation and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

A scientific webinar on the CVR is planned for Thursday, April 20, 2023, 10:00-11:00 EDT. Register for the webinar here.

Reference

Moore, K.A. "A Research and Development (R&D) Roadmap for Broadly Protective Coronavirus Vaccines: A Pandemic Preparedness Strategy." February 2023, Vaccine. DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2023.02.032

Plan will accelerate a new approach to coronavirus vaccines research and development, to protect against COVID-19 variants and future pandemic threats from new coronaviruses

It’s vital that we continue to develop vaccine candidates to help keep us safe from the next virus threatsJonathan HeeneyAndriy Onufriyenko, GettyCOVID-19 variants

The text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Images, including our videos, are Copyright ©University of Cambridge and licensors/contributors as identified.  All rights reserved. We make our image and video content available in a number of ways – as here, on our main website under its Terms and conditions, and on a range of channels including social media that permit your use and sharing of our content under their respective Terms.

YesLicence type: Attribution