Chemical & Engineering News Digital Edition ... - IMM@BUCT

GOVERNMENT & POLICY
BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES
STANDARDS
NIST LOOKS TO HELP make biosciences measurements uniform
NEW DISCOVERIES in the biological sciences
and biotechnology have the potential
to transform health care, energy, national
security, the environment, manufacturing,
agriculture, and many more areas that impact
society. But measurement standards
haven’t kept up with the rate of discovery,
making it difficult for research to move beyond
the laboratory.
The National Institute of Standards &
Technology (NIST), well-known for its
metrology expertise in an expansive array
of physical science and engineering disciplines,
is taking the situation seriously and
beefing up its efforts in the biosciences
area. To that end, NIST joined forces with
the University of Maryland Biotechnology
Institute (UMBI) and held a meeting in
October to address the measurement challenges
faced by the biosciences.
The three-day meeting included heads
of metrology institutes from around the
world and people with an interest in providing
confidence in measurements in
complex biological systems. The goal of the
gathering was to help NIST prioritize its
efforts.
“We are sitting at a perfect storm between
the rapid pace of discovery in the
biosciences and the impact that it’s having
on all of the fields of science,” Patrick D.
Gallagher, acting director of NIST, said in
his introductory remarks at the meeting.
NIST has a specific mission “to promote
U.S. innovation and industrial competitiveness
by advancing measurement science,
standards, and technology in ways
that enhance economic security and improve
our quality of life,” Gallagher said.
“It’s simply impossible to touch any one
of the major societal areas and not realize
that the biosciences and biotechnology will
be a major player.”
“We are sitting between the rapid pace of
discovery in the biosciences and the impact
it’s having on all of the fields of science.”
WWW.CEN-ONLINE.ORG 21 NOVEMBER 3, 2008
The measurement challenges posed by
the biosciences are immense, and overcoming
them will likely require international
collaboration. “Biology or biotech is
global today. If we could leverage both human
resources and financial resources to
go after many of these desires for new measurement
tools, it would benefit the global
market,” said Jennie C. Hunter-Cevera,
president of UMBI.
Because of the global nature of this area,
NIST is looking to its counterparts around
the world for input regarding the development
of standards and measurement tools
for the biosciences.
At the meeting, Alejandro Herrero Molina,
director of the European Commission’s
Joint Research Centre Institute for Reference
Materials & Measurements, offered his
views on what are likely to be important metrology
issues in the biosciences in Europe
over the next five to 10 years. He provided
examples such as confirming the authenticity
of food products or detecting fraud,
distinguishing organically grown crops from
conventional ones, and characterizing allergens
both before and after food processing.
Genetic testing, personalized medicine,
and genetically modified crops for nonfood
industrial applications are also important
areas that need standards, he noted.
In general, meeting participants raised
concerns about the lack of access to appropriate
information technology databases,
the inability to transfer data from one type
of measurement platform to another, and
the need for dynamic, real-time measurements.
By creating universal standards,
NIST could help ensure that databases are
connected and can talk to each other, meeting
participants suggested.
Attendees also pointed out that there
are few standards with respect to how genetics
and protein data are assessed. They
specifically noted the areas of synthetic
biology and systems medicine. Developing
such assessment standards is one place
where NIST should focus its efforts, attendees
said.
One important example of the need for
standards in medicine that was raised by
several people at the meeting is the reliability
of routine health-related measurements.
For example, a test as common as
the one for the risk of prostate cancer can
be unreliable because a universal standard
does not exist. “The value you get for
prostate-specific antigen depends on what
calibrator was used. You can go from being
at risk to being so healthy that you can
be ignored on the basis of not a change in
you, but a difference in the standard that
is used,” Craig Jackson, a consultant and
retired biochemistry professor from Washington
University with experience in the
in vitro diagnostics industry, explained to
C&EN after the meeting.
TWO AREAS that NIST is currently thinking
about are standards for medical imaging
and protein measurement science,
according to Willie E. May, director of
NIST’s Chemical Science & Technology
Laboratory. Optical and chemical imaging
tools could allow rapid, real-time measurements,
he added.
Funding this effort will require some
tough decisions. NIST does not have the
staffing and the core competencies needed
to address those areas and so would need
to ask Congress for additional financing,
May noted.
Getting such additional funding may not
be possible in the current budget crunch.
As a result, the agency is also taking a close
look at all of its units, including the chemical
sciences, to see whether some of those
resources can be reallocated to the biosciences.
In fact, NIST already has redirected
funds to get started on developing biosciences
standards.
“NIST has about $6 million specifically
for work in the biosciences,” May said. “We
are doing more than we’ve been appropriated.
So each of the major organizational
units has made decisions to reprogram
some of their existing resources to support
activities in the biosciences.”
The October meeting undoubtedly gave
NIST more ideas to think about as it prioritizes
its next formal request to Congress
for additional money in biosciences.—
BRITT ERICKSON