Job board update: RheoSense and Daktari

Recent updates from the job board: RheoSense in sunny California is looking for a Technical Marketing Director and Daktari Diagnostics in Boston is looking for a Senior Research Scientist.  Check it out at the job board!

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

List of microfluidics companies: What’s new

Things are constantly changing in the world of commercial microfluidics, with new comings, goings, re-launches, and acquisitions.  We’re now up to 228 companies on the full list of microfluidics companies (also reachable using tab at the top of this page). Below are some additions from the last six months (new to the list, not necessarily new companies):

  • AchiraLabs — rapid, low-cost immunoassay diagnostics
  • Aixtek — fluidic device consulting
  • Arcxis Biotechnologies — molecular diagnostics
  • ElveFlow — instruments for fluid handling and flow control in microfluidic devices
  • InStep NanoPower — human gait energy scavenger
  • Jonsman Innovation — consulting and product development
  • Microplumbers Microsciences — design services for microfluidics and microsensors
  • PositiveID Corp — medical devices and biological detection systems focused on diabetes management, rapid medical testing and airborne bio-threat detection
  • Quorum Technologies — integrates scientific instruments, specializing in microscopes and image processing; commercializing artery-on-a-chip work from the University of Toronto
  • RheoSense — fast, small-footprint microfluidic viscometers/rheometers
  • Rogue Valley Microdevices — Foundry for MEMS and biomedical device fabrication
  • uFluidix — microfluidics manufacturing, with expertise in silicone

My guess is there are still many companies missing from the list. Let me know if you have a company to add!

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

WEST interview with CytonomeST’s Lydia Villa-Komaroff, winner of 2011 Leadership Award

VillaKomaroffWESTAward2011 WEST interview with CytonomeSTs Lydia Villa Komaroff, winner of 2011 Leadership Award

Terrific to see CytonomeST’s CSO Lydia Villa-Komaroff win a 2011 WEST Leadership Award earlier this summer.  CytonomeST is a Boston-area startup developing a clinical-grade, optical, microfluidic cell sorter.

On the WEST site I ran across this interview with Dr. Villa-Komaroff where she discusses her time at CytonomeST, and many other aspects of her career. At the end of the interview she gives hints of the startup’s upcoming launch: “The accomplishment that is just on the horizon – launching CytonomeST’s cell sorter for clinical use – is what I am most proud of today. It feels good to have kept this company alive and to be so close to seeing everything come together successfully.”

Below are a few excerpts — check out the interview for more, including advice for those interested in careers bridging science/business. Inspiring!

Can you tell me about Cytonome, your role as CSO there and the technology that it is developing?

It’s so exciting to be at CytonomeST.  We are developing a cell sorting device using microfluidic chips with parallel microfluidic channels, to get high throughput cell sorting. This will enable separation of human donor cells for bone marrow transplantation, treatment of autoimmune diseases and even conditions such as heart failure.

I was CEO at Cytonome, but upon formation of a partnership that formed CytonomeST, I was able to go back to the role of CSO and focus on the science. Once the engineering of the device is done, I will visit the major medical centers and show people how CytonomeSt’s technology can help them use cell sorting in a clinical setting.  For example, when a patient goes in for a bone marrow transplant today, it is very difficult for investigators to give patients precisely defined cell types from the complex mix of cells in the bone marrow.  There is not a lot of manipulation of the transplant cells during the process as it currently occurs, because it is very difficult to do. Cytonome’s device will allow sorting of donor cells in a way that might prevent graft vs. host disease, which is a common complication of bone marrow transplantation whereby immune cells recognize the recipient cells as foreign and mount an attack.  This is just one area where we believe our product will have a significant impact.

For many people, the fear of start-up costs or not being able to raise enough money, deters them from pursuing entrepreneurial ventures. How did you raise money as a start-up? Are there certain sources of financing that have proven to be most effective to you over the years?

Sometimes funding can come from places where you least expect it, so it’s important to keep an open mind.  For Cytonome, it was very difficult to get VC funding during the economic downturn and we eventually found funding by forming what at first glance is an unlikely partnership.   We formed a joint venture with an agricultural firm, and it has been a wonderful experience.  The investment enabled the company to stay on track; and at least as important, the partnership brought us our current CEO, John Sharpe, an optical physicist with extensive experience in building cell sorters, who is absolutely tailor-made for CytonomeST. John’s knowledge, experience, and leadership skills allowed me to go from CEO back to CSO – and back to the science.

As we talked to potential funders there was a great deal of excitement about Cytonome’s technology, the potential market, and the business model. But convincing someone actually to give you money because you have a good disruptive innovation ultimately is a very difficult.  Remember – everyone out there is making a similar argument, and truly disruptive technologies are few and far between.

At the end of the day you just have to grit your teeth, get out into the world, and find some money so you can prove the value of the technology before the company runs dry. No money, no company. Having a viable product is only the beginning.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Microfluidics and food safety

6110845248 6ea8a58e5e1 Microfluidics and food safety

Cantaloupes are especially susceptible to contamination since microbes find it easy to live on their textured rinds. (Image credit: Brandon Quester/News21)

Could microfluidic technology help deliver safer food?  While most lab-on-a-chip devices are aimed at the medical and life science research markets, a growing number of researchers and companies are investigating applications related to food and agriculture. The recent E. coli outbreak in Germany showed how devastating foodborne illness can be, in terms of human life, illness and economic impact.

There are many startups currently working on rapid, lab-on-a-chip tests for detecting pathogens in the clinic, and some of these are also investigating the food safety market. A few areas I’d like to hear more about:

  • Can microscale diagnostics adequately test large volumes of food? How useful is spot-checking a truckload of sprouts?
    • One public health researcher described the challenges of testing milk for pathogens: “…the problem of testing to ensure safety is complicated by several factors: (1) milk contamination occurs sporadically, (2) contamination may not be evenly distributed in a product, (3) extremely small amounts are infectious, and (4) extremely small numbers (below the detectable limit) of organisms present in the product may proliferate to levels that reach unacceptable risks after testing.”
    • While rapid spot-checking for pathogens is probably better than nothing, is it good enough to have an impact?
  • How would sample preparation be done for a variety of different food types/textures?
    • Are there certain types of foods (e.g., fruits or meats) where the sample must be destroyed to be tested, vs. liquid foods (e.g., milk) which could be tested without destroying the product?  Or can you adequately test a solid food without destroying the sample?
  • Could improved pathogen testing help decrease use of antibiotics in farm animals?
    • The current widespread use of antibiotics in farm animals endangers human life by encouraging the development of resistant microorganism strains.  Could better diagnostics coupled with better conditions for livestock reduce the industry’s heavy reliance on antibiotics?

What do you think about the potential impact of microfluidic technology in the food industry?

For more:

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | 2 Comments

Microfluidics news roundup: September 10 2011

Possibly the biggest recent news — PerkinElmer buying Caliper Life Sciences!  As a Bostonian, it’s great to see Caliper being bought by another Massachusetts-based company.  More from the past few weeks:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | Leave a comment

Job post update from the Wyss Institute

Just got an updated job post from the Wyss Institute for a postdoctoral position in respiratory cell biology and physiology for the development of biomimetic microsystems aimed at modeling pulmonary disorders. Check it out here at the job board!

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Microfluidics news roundup: August 1 2011

Some headlines from the past couple months. It’s been a busy summer in the microfluidics/lab-on-a-chip world! Have you run across other news to share?

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Two new posts at the Job board!

If you haven’t checked it out lately, head over to the Job board to see two recent postings, one for a position in Toronto as Manager/Director of Platform & Automation Engineering, and one for a Postdoctoral Position in Biomimetic Microsystems at the Wyss Institute at Harvard. (edited 8/18/2011 with updated job description)

Remember that the Job board has its own RSS feed and can be reached by clicking the “Job board” tab at the top of the page.  If you’re an employer looking to post an opening, please contact me.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Takeaways from the 2011 Wyss Institute Microfluidics & Medicine Symposium (part 2)

wyss microfluidics Takeaways from the 2011 Wyss Institute Microfluidics & Medicine Symposium (part 2)

Continuing with part 2 of insights shared at the Wyss Institute’s Symposium on Microfluidics & Medicine held in May 2011. (Part 1 is here.)

Device Design Insights

  • Simplify, simplify, simplify!
    • “Nothing must be more complex than absolutely necessary.” Keep the design simple, including fluidics and cartridge/instrument interfacing. (Jaap den Toonder, Philips)
    • New directions: Computerless chips & channel-less fluid patterns. Reduce external, off-chip instrumentation. (Shuichi Takayama, University of Michigan) 
  • Reduce costs of materials and detection elements 
    • Avoid costly elements in the disposable cartridge – optical detection preferred over Si-integrated GMR. (Jaap den Toonder, Philips)
    • At MGH with the CTC-chip they’ve had a design progression from expensive, Si-based DRIE chips to herringbone mixer design, now made of cyclic olefin. (Mehmet Toner, MGH)
    • At MGH the main cost for the disposable is the antibodies, not the plastic cartridge itself.  (Mehmet Toner, MGH)
    • At Diagnostics for All the fabrication cost per chip is 1/300 of one cent using paper microfluidic technology from the Whitesides Lab. (Una Ryan, Diagnostics for All)
    • New device must consider cost, convenience, connectivity, consolidation. Abbott’s i-STAT device wins on all except cost. (Larry Kricka, Univ. of Pennsylvania)

Commercialization Insights

  • Commercialization can take a long time (both for an individual company/product, and for a field as a whole)
    • For years the laser was a solution looking for a problem, but it’s now very successful. Is microfluidics similar? (Stephen Quake, Stanford)
    • At RainDance Technologies, it took three years to develop how to do biology in the droplets. (Darren Link, RainDance Technologies)
  • The widespread dominance of PDMS in academia may be hindering commercialization
    • We need more materials to help propel commercial success. In 2010, 40% of devices in Lab on a Chip were PDMS. (Harp Minhas, Lab on a Chip)
    • Although many academic groups use PDMS, commercial microfluidics companies are driven toward plastics due to cost. Transitioning from PDMS to plastic often means that the chemistries need to be reworked, costing time and money.
  • Understanding the business angle is crucial
    • Significant challenges here, since most microfluidics companies are spun out of academia and founders may have little-to-no business experience. You need an appreciation for business side of things. (Abe Lee, UC Irvine)
    • The sooner you can get to the customers and understand what they want/need, the better. (Darren Link, RainDance) 
  • Standards could make development more efficient (but not everyone wants standards)
    • We need more standards in microfluidics so people aren’t building everything from scratch. (Harp Minhas, Lab on a Chip)
    • However, not everyone in the industry wants standards because many are developing their own proprietary systems. Disposables manufacturers want standards to grow their markets.
  • When are microfluidic systems a good fit?
    • The Yanik group at MIT also created a non-microfluidic system to interface with existing micro-well-plate formats.
    • Point of care is better fit for microfluidics compared with central hospital labs. The potential of microfluidic point of care (POC) diagnostics to reduce hospital visits is a real prospect for the future. There’s also potential for new retail sites for POC testing. (Larry Kricka, Univ. of Pennsylvania)
  • The future: how will microfluidics be incorporated into society?
    • The healthcare model must undergo a paradigm shift; individuals must be more involved in their own healthcare, motivating more point-of-care in vitro diagnostics. (Harp Minhas, Lab on a Chip)
    • Commercialization is the next step needed to drive the level of investment needed to develop microfluidic technology. What are the new capabilities coming from microfluidics? Competing on cost alone is challenging, but it’s also valuable to think about the cheapest way of doing something. Computers led to technologies that you’d never have expected. Will the same be true for microfluidics? (George Whitesides, Harvard)
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Takeaways from the 2011 Wyss Institute Microfluidics & Medicine Symposium (part 1)

wyss microfluidics Takeaways from the 2011 Wyss Institute Microfluidics & Medicine Symposium (part 1)

Image source: Wyss Institute

Last month I attended the Wyss Institute’s Symposium on Microfluidics and Medicine, a fantastic gathering of some of the most influential people in microfluidics from around the world. While many speakers were from academia, it was different from a typical academic conference because (in the spirit of the new Wyss Insitute) the focus was on how microfluidics could be launched into society. This was a great opportunity to hear from leaders in the field about the state of microfluidics today, and where things might be going in terms of commercialization. For an official recap, click here. Part 1 below summarizes some of the applications mentioned by speakers. 

(Stay tuned for Part 2, which will summarize insights on design and commercialization…)

Summary of Microfluidic Applications:

  • Improving drug discovery/development:
    • David Weitz, Harvard University
      • Will droplets replace robotics for high-throughput screening in the biotech and pharmaceutical industries? 
      • Spinout Habsel looking at droplets for screening antibodies. Possibility to directly mine human immune repertoire. 
    • Mehmet Fatih Yanik, MIT
    • Don Ingber, Director of the Wyss Institute
      • How could organs-on-chips improve drug discovery/development? Could they replace some animal studies? 
    • Shuichi Takayama,University of Michigan
      • How to close the gap between unnatural in vitro cell culture conditions and more realistic in vivo conditions?
  • Diagnostics
    • Jaap den Toonder, Philips / University of Technology of Eindhoven
    • Mehmet Toner, Massachusetts General Hospital
      • Microfluidic diagnostics for capturing rare circulating tumor cells (CTCs). The number of CTCs tracks with shrinking tumor volume in a responding patient, but once you capture the live CTCs, you can also monitor whether the captured CTCs are dividing.  CTCs could be a form of “liquid biopsy” to monitor how non-small cell lung cancer patient responds to gefitinib (Iressa) & explore cancer genetics.
      • CD4 cell counting for HIV (developed with Bill Rodriguez of Daktari Diagnostics): how to selectively capture T-cells but not monocytes? 
      • Early stage work on multiscale particle manipulation for sepsis and other applications. 
    • Rustem Ismagilov, University of Chicago
      • Microfluidics could be used in global health to measure viral load and monitor potential failure of antiretroviral therapies. 
      • Microfluidic SlipChip for handheld RPA.
    • Aaron Wheeler, University of Toronto 
      • Digital microfluidics could be used for quantifying hormones in fine-needle microaspirate cancer tissue samples.  
      • Another application for digital microfluidics: analysis of dried blood spots for newborn screening. 140,000 samples are processed per year in Ontario alone.  
  • Medical devices/therapeutics
  • Bioengineering
    • Justin Williams, University of Wisconsin-Madison 
      • Microfluidic platform for perfusion of functioning brain slices, enabling further experimentation.  
      • Can we take the same kinds of design principles used for computer chips to lay out neurons on a chip? 
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment
//