Remembering Edmund Klein: the Father of Immunotherapy

Edmund Klein's seminal research in oncology transformed medicine. He would now be 100 years old. This extraordinary physician-scientist has been dubbed the Father of Immunotherapy and was honored with the highest American recognition in medicine, the Lasker Award, often a prelude to the Nobel Prize.

[Nobel laureates and cancer]

The Nobel Prize originated in 1895 when Alfred Nobel signed his will, leaving a large part of his wealth to the creation of the Nobel Foundation and the establishment of this prize, with the vision that people could help improve humanity through knowledge, science, and humanism. The Nobel Prize has been awarded in areas such as physics, physiology or medicine, chemistry, literature, peace, and economics. 943 people and 25 organizations have been awarded since 1901 to this day. The history and knowledge commemorated in the Nobel Prize have allowed an integral development in the understanding, diagnosis, therapy, and scientific progress in different types of cancer, laying the foundations and being the inspiration for thousands of scientists worldwide who work hard in the area of oncology. GLOBOCAN estimates indicated that there were approximately 19 million new cancer cases globally and almost 10 million cancer deaths in 2020 alone; hence, this study reviews and brings together the main scientific discoveries awarded with the Nobel Prize in the area of physiology or medicine and chemistry, which contributed to the knowledge, diagnosis and/or treatment of cancer from 1901 to 2021.

The Nobel Prize of Physiology or Medicine, 1923: controversies on the discovery of the antidiabetic hormone

AIMS

To analyze the main contributions to the discovery of the antidiabetic hormone in the period between 1889, the year in which Oskar Minkowski demonstrated that complete pancreatectomy in dogs caused diabetes, and the year 1923, the date in which the clinical use of insulin was consolidated. A main objective has been to review the controversies that followed the Nobel Prize and to outline the role of the priority rule in Science.

METHODS

We have considered the priority rule defined by Robert Merton in 1957, which takes into account the date of acceptance of the report of a discovery in an accredited scientific journal and/or the granting of a patent, complemented by the criteria set out by Ronald Vale and Anthony Hyman (2016) regarding the transfer of information to the scientific community and its validation by it. The awarding of the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in October 1923 has represented a frame of reference. The claims and disputes regarding the prioritization of the contributions of the main researchers in the organotherapy of diabetes have been analyzed through the study of their scientific production and the debate generated in academic institutions.

MAIN RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

(1) According to the criteria of Merton, Vale and Hyman, the priority of the discovery of the antidiabetic hormone corresponds to the investigations developed in Europe by E. Gley (1900), GL Zülzer (1908) and NC Paulescu (1920). (2) The active principle of the pancreatic extracts developed by Zülzer (acomatol), Paulescu (pancreina) and Banting and Best (insulin) was the same. (3) JB Collip succeeded in isolating the active ingredient from the pancreatic extract in January 1922, eliminating impurities to the point of enabling its use in the clinic. (4) In 1972, the Nobel Foundation modified the purpose of the 1923 Physiology or Medicine award to Banting and Macleod by introducing a new wording: "the credit for having produced the pancreatic hormone in a practical available form" (instead of "for the discovery of insulin").

[Laveran, the Pasteurian researcher]

At the end of his professorial mandate at the Val de Grâce hospital, Alphonse Laveran, who was Chief Doctor, was appointed to Lille and then Nantes. These assignments however deprived him of a hospital service where he could carry on his research. In 1896, faced with the inflexibility of his military hierarchy, he applied for early retirement; he was then 50 years old. Dr Roux welcomed him to the Pasteur Institute as a honorary department head, where he started a second career as a volunteer. He would spend the following 25 years there, addressing the great protozoology issues. Together with Félix Mesnil, he undertook the study of trypanosomiasis and leishmaniases. In 1907 he was awarded the Nobel Prize in physiology and medicine to honor "his work on the role of protozoa as pandemic vectors". He allocated a large part of his prize money to set up a parasitology laboratory at the Pasteur Institute, where all the discoveries and observations carried out in the colonies would converge. In 1908, he funded the Society of Exotic Pathology. He authored no less than 600 publications where his memorable research is recorded. Despite his somewhat outwardly rigid appearance, the man proved to be of amiable approach thanks to "the simplicity of his manners, his amenity and his great heart".

The co-production of normal science: A social history of high-temperature superconductivity research in China (1987-2008)

The discovery of high-temperature superconductivity (HTS) was a momentous event. This article explores the social and institutional history of HTS research in China between 1987 and 2008. Desire for a Nobel Prize shaped the Chinese state's initial push to establish the National Superconductivity Research Program. Yet, after the enthusiasm for HTS research cooled, and even after a Nobel Prize for HTS was awarded to non-Chinese scientists, financial and institutional support for the research continued. This process fostered the 'to live' ethos of science, which has replaced the Nobel Prize dream as a central mechanism of interaction between the state and science in China. Indeed, Chinese HTS research not only survived, but also produced an abundance of 'normal science' discoveries. This pattern continued after 2008, when Japanese scientists made the groundbreaking innovation of iron-based superconductivity and Chinese scientists quickly turned their attention to this sub-field. They published many papers pushing the field forward slightly, rather than making the largest scientific advances. The mutual interaction between the state and scientists underpinned this phenomenon: On the one hand, the productivity of normal science has helped to maintain state legitimacy. On the other hand, the evaluation and incentive systems, as well as deep-rooted cultural features such as officialism, utilitarianism, and the foregrounding of politics lead scientists to opportunistically pursue normal science. The state and scientists have co-produced a regime of normal science.

The 2022 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for the development of click chemistry and bioorthogonal chemistry

The 2022 Nobel Prize in Chemistry recognized the development of biorthogonal chemical ligation reactions known as click chemistry in biomedicine. This concept has catalyzed significant progress in sensing and diagnosis, chemical biology, materials chemistry, and drug discovery and delivery. In proteomics, the ability to incorporate a click tag into proteins has propelled development of powerful new methods for selective enrichment of protein complexes that inform understanding of protein networks. It also has had a strong influence on the ability to enrich for protein post-translational modifications. This feature article summarizes the impacts of biorthogonal click chemistry on proteomics.

Nieves López-Salas

"The most important quality of a mentor is empathy, understanding that every person is unique and has or is experiencing a different reality and needs different advice … My science 'heroes' are Marie Curie, for her two Nobel Prizes and two Carbon Queens, Rosalind Franklin and Mildred Dresselhaus …" Find out more about Nieves López-Salas in her Introducing … Profile.

Ancient DNA pioneer Svante Pääbo wins Nobel

By sequencing ancient hominins' DNA, Pääbo explored "what makes us uniquely human".

Of Flies and Men—The Discovery of TLRs

In 2011, the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine was awarded to three immunologists: Bruce A. Beutler, Jules A. Hoffmann, and Ralph M. Steinman. While Steinman was honored for his work on dendritic cells and adaptive immunity, Beutler and Hoffman received the prize for their contributions to discoveries in innate immunity. In 1996, Hoffmann found the toll gene to be crucial for mounting antimicrobial responses in fruit flies, first implicating this developmental gene in immune signaling. Two years later, Beutler built on this observation by describing a Toll-like gene, tlr4, as the receptor for the bacterial product LPS, representing a crucial step in innate immune activation and protection from bacterial infections in mammals. These publications spearheaded research in innate immune sensing and sparked a huge interest regarding innate defense mechanisms in the following years and decades. Today, Beutler and Hoffmann’s research has not only resulted in the discovery of the role of multiple TLRs in innate immunity but also in a much broader understanding of the molecular components of the innate immune system. In this review, we aim to collect the discoveries leading up to the publications of Beutler and Hoffmann, taking a close look at how early advances in both developmental biology and immunology converged into the research awarded with the Nobel Prize. We will also discuss how these discoveries influenced future research and highlight the importance they hold today.

The continuum of insulin development viewed in the context of a collaborative process toward leveraging science to save lives: Following the trail of publications and patents one century after insulin's first use in humans

Nearly 100 years ago, diabetes, a disease expected to reach global prevalence of at least 10% within the decade, was a fatal diagnosis. This year of 2022 marks a century since insulin, a lifesaving treatment for those living with diabetes, was purified, tested in humans, and brought to the bedside through widespread commercial production, thus saving countless lives. Insulin's arrival to the world stage was acknowledged with the 1923 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for "the discovery of insulin", the first among several Prizes awarded to honor scientific work on insulin. This initial awarding has been the subject of significant controversy since, as numerous other scientists paved the way towards the ultimate success, and priority for the true "discovery of insulin" has been argued for many other scientists. The intention and regulations around the Nobel Prize nomination and award process presented herein offer insight into the 1923 Nobel prize designation for the Toronto group, which distinguished itself in the accomplishment by their success in purifying insulin from pancreatic extract and in bringing insulin to worldwide production and the homes of those who needed it. However, a continuous, collaborative process involving contributors spanning centuries and continents was required for the development, rather than discovery, of insulin therapy and its benefits to humanity. This should be the story's enduring legacy. The prior 100 years have witnessed a series of significant innovations in insulin development and therapeutics, but both a cure for diabetes and equitable insulin access remain out of reach and require inspired attention and continuous diligent efforts.