first_imgTerms and conditions for this competition can be viewed hereReturnOne wayMulti-cityFromAdd nearby airports ToAdd nearby airportsDepart14/08/2019Return21/08/2019Cabin Class & Travellers1 adult, EconomyDirect flights onlySearch flights Map What the prize includes:-Flights for two (to the maximum value of £500)-Three nights’ accommodation at the exclusive Radisson hotel-Cultural tour of Glasgow City-Tickets to 6 shows at the Edinburgh Festivals, including the Royal Edinburgh Military Tattoo-Dates: Thursday 25th August – Sunday 28th August.For a chance to win this great prize just ENTER HERE You’ll begin your trip in beautiful Glasgow, Scotland’s centre of shopping, dining and nightlife. Here, you’ll enjoy a three night stay at the exclusive Radisson Blu Glasgow hotel and a tour of Glasgow’s cultural centre.The beautiful festival city of Edinburgh is less than one hour away where you can look forward to experiencing the world’s largest cultural explosion with shows ranging from theatre and dance to literature and music, and even a pair of tickets to the world famous Royal Edinburgh Military Tattoo. Update, 8 August. Congratulations to the winner, Elizabeth Low. Enjoy your trip!Skyscanner, in conjunction with Radisson Blu and EdinburghFestivals.co.uk are offering you the chance to win a trip to Scotland’s Two Great Cities, which includes flights, accommodation and tickets for two, to six amazing shows – a prize with a total value of over £1200! RelatedRemain in the UK: The best cities in Britain to visit in 2019Seeking a city break without spending a lot of cash? Given the current political and economic situation post-Brexit vote, you might want to consider a staycation if you’re looking to get the best value from your hard-earned ££. Yes there’s London and Edinburgh, but what about Nottingham or Liverpool? There…How to experience the Edinburgh Festival Fringe on a budgetHopping from show to show, catching the buzz in a pop-up beer garden, spotting your favourite comedian/children’s TV star/D list celebrity on Princes Street: the Edinburgh Festival Fringe is worth every penny. All those tickets and meals out don’t come cheap though, so if you’re Fringing frugally this August, arm…Edinburgh Festival Fringe 101: A first-timer’s guideEvery August, Edinburgh transforms from being Scotland’s prim and proper capital to the eclectic, eccentric and downright crazy city that hosts the Edinburgh Festival Fringe – the biggest arts festival in the world.last_img read more

read more

first_img Sign up for our daily newsletter Get more great content like this delivered right to you! Country Country * Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia, Plurinational State of Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Congo, the Democratic Republic of the Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Curaçao Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands (Malvinas) Faroe Islands Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and McDonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Republic of Iraq Ireland Isle of Man Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Korea, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Republic of Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People’s Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Macedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Moldova, Republic of Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island Norway Oman Pakistan Palestine Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Barthélemy Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Martin (French part) Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Sint Maarten (Dutch part) Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania, United Republic of Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of Vietnam Virgin Islands, British Wallis and Futuna Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Click to view the privacy policy. Required fields are indicated by an asterisk (*) But none has made quite as good a story as that of VTS-270, a potential treatment for the rare, incurable, inherited disease Niemann-Pick type C-1 (NPC). It was shepherded through early development by an NCATS-orchestrated collaboration and then handed off to the small Gaithersburg, Maryland, company, Vtesse. Now, however, an early chapter in that story is getting a rewrite that raises questions about whether participants in the collaboration downplayed a key setback. When Francis Collins, the director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), proposed a new translational medicine center at NIH 5 years ago, he met with plenty of skepticism. Former Merck & Co. CEO Roy Vagelos told a congressional committee that the idea that the $600 million NIH effort could surmount drug development problems that industry has failed to solve was like believing “in fairies.”So Chris Austin, the Collins protégé who has run the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) in Bethesda, Maryland, since soon after its launch, has been under plenty of pressure to produce success stories. And NCATS has had some, such as the discovery that an existing antihistamine, chlorcyclizine, blocks the ability of the hepatitis C virus to infect cells. Through a brute-force chemical screen in the midst of the 2014 Ebola epidemic, NCATS researchers also identified 53 compounds that block that virus from entering cells. Vtesse is currently running a late-stage clinical trial of the drug, a large sugar molecule known as a cyclodextrin, in which it is injected by lumbar puncture into the spinal fluid of children with the disease (see “Why are people fighting over a promising treatment for a fatal childhood disease”). However, there was a big bump along the road to the current trial, when the NCATS-convened team, in a first attempt, injected the drug directly into the brain ventricles—the cisterns that hold cerebrospinal fluid—using an implanted reservoir normally deployed to inject brain cancer chemotherapy. The reservoirs of two of three children quickly became infected and the trial was put on clinical hold on 30 April 2013.That study—called an ICV trial for “intracerebroventricular” drug administration—is back in the limelight because a mother of two children afflicted with NPC recently asked for a correction in an article that appeared in the journal Current Topics in Medicinal Chemistry. Written by 25 authors, it described the collaboration between government, academic researchers, and disease advocacy groups that led to the ICV trial as a model of the teamwork that can speed drugs through early development, boosting their chances of being commercialized. The paper was submitted to the journal 9 days after the trial was put on clinical hold, was revised 2 months later, and was not published until 2014. However, it nowhere mentions the failure of the trial and the abandonment of the direct brain route of administration. Chris Hempel, the mother of 12-year-old twin girls with NPC and a prominent figure among advocates for development of NPC therapies, last week pointed out the omission to the journal’s editor, Allen Reitz in Doylestown, Pennsylvania. (One of Hempel’s daughters suffered a stroke after ICV administration of cyclodextrin, although not as part of the NIH trial; it was being administered separately under a compassionate use protocol approved by the Food and Drug Administration.) Reitz now says he is preparing to run a correction. It will read:“It has come to our attention that at the time of submission of this manuscript and during peer review that the Phase I Clinical Trial as described involving ICV administration using an Ommaya reservoir was in fact already on clinical hold. Dr. [Elizabeth] Ottinger, senior author on this paper, has updated the clinical status of this program to say that the trial was subsequently resumed using the intrathecal (IT) route of administration.”  In an email to Science, Reitz added: “Even though the focus of the paper was on the collaboration, which is a good thing, and the paper was well-written, the authors had a responsibility to accurately represent the state of the collaboration at that point in time.” Reitz emphasizes, however, that the physicians running the trial did quickly make the information public. In a 45-minute conference call convened by the National Niemann-Pick Disease Foundation 3 days after the trial was put on hold, they updated NPC parents about the setback and the hold.Austin and the other authors believe the correction is unnecessary. He wrote to Science: “The theme of the particular issue of the journal in which the article was published was collaborative science, and therefore the article was focused on the process and collaborative environment contributing to the development of the drug. The information regarding the clinical trial is currently being written for submission to a research journal. The senior authors did not agree with the published corrigendum, and albeit to no avail, explicitly had asked the editor for the opportunity of a discussion before he published it.” Emaillast_img read more

read more