the Oxford Scientist Another pharmacogenomic test is the HLA-B gene test, which also tests for variants of a gene in patients. The HLA-B gene has several variations depicted by different numbers. For example, pa‐ tients with a HLA-B*1502 gene variant cannot take Carbamazepine to treat epilepsy and seizures, as they have a higher risk of developing adverse re‐ actions. Patients with a HLA-B*5801 gene variant can develop a potentially life threatening dermato‐ logical disorder called Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis if given a medication used to decrease high blood
“Personalised medicine and Pharmacogenomics testing offer the possibility of more precise therapeutics for several drugs and disorders.” uric acid levels. These pharmacogenomic tests are not widely used in hospitals, mainly due to con‐ cerns about costs, which can range from around £100 to £2,000. Another reason is due to the chal‐ lenge of showing how these tests results can be utilised clinically to improve patient outcomes. As researchers continue to study genotypeguided drug therapies with the goal of improving clinical outcomes, some focus has been put on re‐ search that can help identify novel molecular tar‐ gets that drive disease progression in certain individuals. It is likely that these targets are relat‐ ively uncommon, and drug development will be difficult, but the benefits will be huge. In an effort to shed more light on the future development of personalised medicine, the Centre for Personalised Medicine at University of Oxford serves as a com‐ munication and engagement vehicle for students, academics, clinicians and the public to explore the benefits and challenges of personalised medicine. Although much work remains to be done in the field, personalised medicine offers an opportunity to transform the future of healthcare. Sandra Adele is studying for a Masters in Pharmacology at Green Templeton College.
24
Particle P
How accelerators sweeten up the Standa
"T
here is nothing new to be discovered in physics now. All that remains is more precise measure‐ ment”. This famous quote by Lord Kelvin in
1900 spoke of a perspective shattered almost immediately by a stream of significant discoveries, such as the discovery of the electron in 1897, the nucleus of the atom in 1911, and the proton in 1919. Suddenly, our understanding of the “building blocks” of our world had completely changed. The atom, once accepted to be absolutely indivisible, was now just a doorway into an untouched realm of discovery. Throughout the years, a new model of the fundamental particles, forces, and interactions of the universe was developed: The Standard Model of particle physics. Behind the dawn and growth of this new era was the innovation of accelerators and colliders. Accelerators focus and boost subatomic particles to higher energies and velocities using electromagnetic fields to produce well-focused and high-energy beams. In many ways, the utility of accelerators and colliders can be equated
“The atom, once accepted to be absolutely indivisible, was now just a doorway into an untouched realm of discovery” to piñatas. Only when you beat the piñata do you realise what is inside of it. Colliders operate on the same principle, with the impact being between two particle beams and the highly anticipated sweets corresponding to subatomic particles we might discover. The harder the impact, the more sweets come out. Therefore, if you handed a toddler the stick, you would get far fewer sweets than if a grown teenager were to beat the piñata open.
W
hat does all of this mean? We simply do not have ac‐ cess to studying many particles until we reach high
enough collisional energies. And just like the toddler needs time and funds to grow into a teenager, accelerators also need time and funds to advance and reach these higher potential collisional energies. Accelerator physicists are simply playing
Sophie Littlewood
