OMICS: A Journal of Integrative Biology, New Rochelle, New York.
Senior Advisor and Writer, Emerging Technology Governance and Responsible Innovation, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
OMICS. 2020 Feb;24(2):62-80. doi: 10.1089/omi.2019.0220. Epub 2020 Jan 28.
Precision/personalized medicine is a hot topic in health care. Often presented with the motto "the right drug, for the right patient, at the right dose, and the right time," precision medicine is a theory for rational therapeutics as well as practice to individualize health interventions (e.g., drugs, food, vaccines, medical devices, and exercise programs) using biomarkers. Yet, an alien visitor to planet Earth reading the contemporary textbooks on diagnostics might think precision medicine requires only two biomolecules omnipresent in the literature: nucleic acids (e.g., DNA) and proteins, known as the first and second alphabet of biology, respectively. However, the precision/personalized medicine community has tended to underappreciate the third alphabet of life, the "sugar code" (i.e., the information stored in glycans, glycoproteins, and glycolipids). This article brings together experts in precision/personalized medicine science, pharmacoglycomics, emerging technology governance, cultural studies, contemporary art, and responsible innovation to critically comment on the sociomateriality of the three alphabets of life together. First, the current transformation of targeted therapies with personalized glycomedicine and glycan biomarkers is examined. Next, we discuss the reasons as to why unraveling of the sugar code might have lagged behind the DNA and protein codes. While social scientists have historically noted the importance of constructivism (e.g., how people interpret technology and build their values, hopes, and expectations into emerging technologies), life scientists relied on the material properties of technologies in explaining why some innovations emerge rapidly and are more popular than others. The concept of sociomateriality integrates these two explanations by highlighting the inherent entanglement of the social and the material contributions to knowledge and what is presented to us as reality from everyday laboratory life. Hence, we present a hypothesis based on a sociomaterial conceptual lens: because materiality and synthesis of glycans are not directly driven by a template, and thus more complex and open ended than sequencing of a finite length genome, social construction of expectations from unraveling of the sugar code versus the DNA code might have evolved differently, as being future-uncertain versus future-proof, respectively, thus potentially explaining the "sugar lag" in precision/personalized medicine diagnostics over the past decades. We conclude by introducing systems scientists, physicians, and biotechnology industry to the concept, practice, and value of responsible innovation, while glycomedicine and other emerging biomarker technologies (e.g., metagenomics and pharmacomicrobiomics) transition to applications in health care, ecology, pharmaceutical/diagnostic industries, agriculture, food, and bioengineering, among others.
精准/个性化医学是医疗保健领域的热门话题。它通常以“为合适的患者,在合适的时间,给予合适剂量的合适药物”为口号,是一种合理治疗药物的理论,也是使用生物标志物将健康干预措施(例如药物、食品、疫苗、医疗器械和运动方案)个体化的实践。然而,一个外星访客如果阅读当代关于诊断的教科书,可能会认为精准医学只需要生物文献中两种无处不在的生物分子:核酸(例如 DNA)和蛋白质,分别被称为生物学的第一和第二字母。然而,精准/个性化医学领域一直低估了生命的第三个字母,即“糖码”(即储存在聚糖、糖蛋白和糖脂中的信息)。本文汇集了精准/个性化医学科学、药物糖组学、新兴技术治理、文化研究、当代艺术和负责任创新领域的专家,共同批判性地评论生命的三个字母的社会物质性。首先,本文检查了个体化糖医学和聚糖生物标志物靶向治疗的当前转变。接下来,我们讨论了为什么糖码的解开可能落后于 DNA 和蛋白质编码。虽然社会科学家从历史上就注意到了建构主义的重要性(例如,人们如何解释技术以及将他们的价值观、希望和期望融入新兴技术),但生命科学家则依赖于技术的物质特性来解释为什么有些创新迅速出现,而有些则更受欢迎。社会物质性概念通过突出知识的社会和物质贡献的内在纠缠以及从日常实验室生活呈现给我们的现实,整合了这两种解释。因此,我们基于社会物质概念提出了一个假设:由于聚糖的物质性和合成不是直接由模板驱动的,因此比有限长度基因组的测序更复杂且开放,因此解开糖码与 DNA 码的社会期望构建可能进化不同,分别为未来不确定和未来证明,从而可能解释过去几十年精准/个性化医学诊断中的“糖滞后”。最后,我们通过向系统科学家、医生和生物技术行业介绍负责任创新的概念、实践和价值,引入精准/个性化医学中的糖组学和其他新兴生物标志物技术(例如宏基因组学和药物微生物组学)过渡到医疗保健、生态学、制药/诊断行业、农业、食品和生物工程等领域的应用。