美国生物防御产业政策和管理分析及启示

本文简要介绍了生物防御产业的定义和特点,分析了美国生物防御产业政策制定和管理措施等方面的经验和启示,同时结合国内的发展现状,提出要加强生物防御产业发展,增强生物防御能力的若干对策建议.     

美国生物防御对策研究与国家战略储备药物分析

美国政府为应对日趋严峻的生物恐怖威胁,出台了一系列针对生化袭击的法规和研究计划.本文研究了以生物盾牌计划为核心的美国国家生物防御应对策略及其衍生计划,包括卫生与公众服务部( DHHS)/生物医学高级研究发展局(BARDA)生物恐怖应对计划及预算方案、以疾控中心(CDC)病原体清单为基础的顶级核化生威胁对策方案及其他重要病原体生物防御治疗研究计划等.分析了目前以上述研究为依托纳入国家战略储备体系的药物及研发趋势.     

美国生物防御2010年发展态势分析

本文分析了美国生物防御领域2010年年度进展及发展态势,包括重要文件传递了政府高度关注生物威胁的信息,投入大量经费加强生物防御能力建设,通过开发前沿技术强化了生物威胁的应对能力,以及不断寻找目前生物防御的不足之处以利于进一步改进。     

美国生物防御特需药物研发现状分析及启示

生物防御特需药物是反生物战、反生物恐怖以及应对突发生物事件的重要手段,加强国家生物防御特需药物研发能力是维护国家主权领土完整、维护国家利益拓展和遂行非战争军事行动等保障国家和军队生物安全的基础和关键。当前,国际生物防御科技进展迅猛,世界主要发达国家日益重视生物防御特需药物的研究、开发与储备。该文以美国为例,分析其生物防御特需药物研发现状及主要特点,并提出加强我国相关研究的对策建议。     

美国生物安全防御体系建设及对中国的启示

新型冠状病毒肺炎疫情造成的大量人员伤亡及经济损失让各国不得不重新审视生物安全防御体系建设。随着基因编辑、人工智能等技术的迅速发展,使得对病原的改造、对特定种群的感染及智能化袭击逐渐成为可能。美国在生物安全防御体系建设方面一直处于世界领先地位。本文从美国生物安全防御政策法规的制定、生物安全防御领域投入的经费分析、生物监测及预警体系建设现状、高等级生物安全实验室建设现状这四个方面对美国生物安全防御体系建设的历史、演进、经验进行总结,并列举对中国生物安全防御体系建设的启示,以期为完善我国生物安全防御体系建设提供参考。     

生物恐怖的现实威胁与医学对策

本文分析了生物恐怖的现实威胁,从医学科技的角度总结了发达国家反生物恐怖的经验,讨论了我国生物防御能力建设面临的关键问题,提出了国家生物防御能力的发展策略.     

美国重要病毒性生物恐怖剂疫苗研发情况分析

生物恐怖问题由来已久,美国炭疽邮件事件之后更是引起全球的广泛关注.病毒性生物恐怖剂是实施生物恐怖的重要手段,而疫苗是预防疾病发生的有效工具.该文主要介绍了美国针对天花病毒、埃博拉病毒、马尔堡病毒、拉沙病毒和马秋波病毒等病毒性生物恐怖剂的疫苗研发情况,包括具有应用前景的候选疫苗及其研发机构、所处研发阶段等,针对我国生物恐...     

日本生物防御系统建设及对我国的启示

日本国内对生物恐怖威胁一直高度重视,其生物防御系统在应对生物恐怖威胁的过程中逐渐发展起来.该文回顾了日本生物防御力量的发展历程,归纳其法规体系和应对机制建设,调研现有应急力量构成,并分析日生物防御的优缺点,以期为我国生物防御能力建设提供借鉴.     

美国生物恐怖应对多级实验室网络对我国的启示

近年来,我国政府高度重视反生物恐怖能力建设,但仍有许多需要完善的地方,研究分析美国生物恐怖防御实验室网络建设的经验对于我国做好反生物恐怖基础设施建设具有重要的启示和现实意义。1美国生物恐怖应对多级实验室网络简介为了使生物恐怖的应对更为有效,1999年,美国疾病预防控制中心(CDC)召开了一个专家会议,研究生物病原体应对清单。其判断标准为病原体引起大规模疾病的能力,病原体通过气溶胶或其他方式播散的能力,病原体在人群中传播的能力,人员的易感性等[1]。根据这些指标,病原体及生物毒素被分为A、B、C三类。根据该CDC公布的分…     

美国生物防御能力建设的特点与启示

生物武器、生物恐怖和新发传染病是当今国际社会面临的重大安全问题。美国高度重视生物防御能力建设,将生物防御能力建设纳入国家安全战略,不断提升其国家生物防御能力水平。本文简要分析了美国生物防御能力建设的主要特点,包括明确的生物防御战略、充分的预防预警准备、有效的后果处置能力、强大的科技支撑体系等,希望能对我国及其他发展中国家的生物防御能力建设有所启示。     

Radiopeptide imaging and therapy in the United States

Radiolabeled peptides targeted against receptors on the cell surface have been shown to be remarkably specific and effective in the diagnosis and therapy of malignant disease. Much of the early work in this field took place outside the United States, but in recent years the research effort within the United States has accelerated. Most of the initial studies in the United States focused on somatostatin receptor ligands. (111)In-pentetreotide was approved in 1994 and has been used extensively in the diagnosis and management of a wide variety of neuroendocrine tumors, particularly carcinoid. This work was extended to (99m)Tc-labeled analogs, and the most successful, (99m)Tc-depreotide, was approved in 1999. This agent was found to be accurate in the diagnosis of lung cancer, but it was not particularly successful because it was supplanted by (18)F-FDG imaging with positron tomography. More recently, studies with (68)Ga-labeled somatostatin analogs were initiated in the United States. This effort was delayed relative to that in other parts of the world because of difficulty in obtaining the necessary generators and regulatory uncertainty, both of which are less of a problem currently. Several ligands are being developed to image melanoma through targeting of the melanocyte-stimulating hormone receptor. Other ligands are being developed to use the arginine-glycine-aspartate oligopeptide to target angiogenesis and to use bombesin analogs to target the gastrin-releasing peptide receptor for the diagnosis and potential therapy of prostate cancer. Peptide dimers that target 2 receptors simultaneously are also being constructed, potentially increasing the selectivity of the approach significantly. Radiopeptide therapy has been explored with these ligands, initially with high-dose (111)In-pentetreotide. This step has been followed by U.S. participation in several trials with (90)Y-, (177)Lu-, and (188)Re-labeled analogs. Some of these agents are now available clinically outside the United States, and it is important to design and conduct the appropriate trials so that this therapy can be offered within the United States.     

Analysis of economics and use of MR imaging units in the United States in 1990

Personnel from the 72 facilities with the most experience in MR imaging were surveyed, and 45 questionnaires were returned with data to study the economics and use of MR imaging facilities. The data from 1990 were compared with results of studies done in 1985 and 1987. The facilities studied were highly selected, and the data and conclusions are unlikely to be representative of all MR facilities currently operational in the United States. The "typical" MR unit operated about 66 hr per week and imaged 68 patients. Most procedures were examinations of the head and spine (73%), with examinations of bone and joint increasing in frequency (17%). Scheduling delays for both inpatients and outpatients have decreased since 1987, indicating that clinical demand is being met by MR facilities. The global (technical plus professional) charge for an examination was approximately $950, and the charge for IV contrast material was an additional $200. IV contrast material was used in approximately 40% of head and 20% of spine studies. The typical MR units in 1990 was used to examine more than 3000 patients per year at a charge of approximately $750 each for the technical component. Technical billings for each unit were approximately $2.3 million, and net revenues were almost $1.9 million. We estimate the annual operating cost of an MR unit in 1990 was $1.3 million, so the typical MR unit had an annual net profit of approximately $500,000. This is a considerable improvement from the economic position in 1985, when each MR unit was losing approximately $400,000 annually. We conclude that experienced MR imaging facilities are now profitable owing to increased efficiency and continually rising charges. We suggest the economic historical pattern demonstrated by MR imaging (large losses initially followed by profitability within several years owing to increased efficiency and higher charges) is a typical pattern for many new technologies with the current medical payment system in the United States.