Second Genome company logo

The profile is currenly unclaimed by the seller. All information is provided by CB Insights.

secondgenome.com

Founded Year

2009

Stage

Series B - II | Alive

Total Raised

$63.7M

Last Raised

$8.4M | 6 yrs ago

About Second Genome

Second Genome brings microbiome science to the discovery and development of therapeutic products. The company has established a pipeline of microbiome modulators that impact infection, immunity and metabolic diseases. Second Genome's development pipeline is fueled by novel technologies for identifying, screening and scientifically validating product candidates and microbial biomarkers. Second Genome's technologies have been rigorously validated through partnerships with leading pharmaceutical and nutrition companies, as well as academic and governmental research institutions.

Second Genome Headquarter Location

1000 Marina Blvd Suite #500

Brisbane, California, 94005,

United States

650-440-4606

Predict your next investment

The CB Insights tech market intelligence platform analyzes millions of data points on venture capital, startups, patents , partnerships and news mentions to help you see tomorrow's opportunities, today.

Expert Collections containing Second Genome

Expert Collections are analyst-curated lists that highlight the companies you need to know in the most important technology spaces.

Second Genome is included in 2 Expert Collections, including Omics.

O

Omics

275 items

B

Biopharma Tech

838 items

Second Genome Patents

Second Genome has filed 18 patents.

The 3 most popular patent topics include:

  • Inflammations
  • Lactobacillaceae
  • Probiotics
patents chart

Application Date

Grant Date

Title

Related Topics

Status

5/4/2018

3/15/2022

Clusters of differentiation, Cytokines, Interleukins, Monoclonal antibodies, Immune system

Grant

Application Date

5/4/2018

Grant Date

3/15/2022

Title

Related Topics

Clusters of differentiation, Cytokines, Interleukins, Monoclonal antibodies, Immune system

Status

Grant

Latest Second Genome News

Progress made toward understanding best non-invasive tests for NASH, fibrosis diagnosis

Nov 15, 2021

Source: Sanyal AJ. Primary results of the NIMBLE stage 1-NASH CRN study of circulating biomarkers for nonalcoholic steatohepatitis and its activity and fibrosis stage. Disclosures: Sanyal reports serving on an advisory committee or review panel for Axcella Health; consulting for 89Bio, Affyimmune, Albireo, Allergan, Amra, Ardelyx, Astra Zeneca, BASF, Bird Rock, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chemomab, Cirius, Conatus, ENYO, Echosens, Elsevier, Fractyl, Genentech, General Electric, GENFIT, Gilead, HemoShear, Immuron, IFMO, Innovate, Intercept, Inventiva, Janssen, Lilly, Lipocine, Mallinckrodt, NGM Bio, Nimbus, Nitto Denko, NorthSea Therapeutics, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, OWL, Perspectum, Pfizer, Poxel, Redx, Sagimet, Salix, Sanofi, Servier, Second Genome, Sunrise, Takeda, Terns, Teva, UpToDate and Zydus; working for Sanyal Bio; receiving grant/research support from Allergan, Boehringer Ingelheim, Intercept, Inventiva, Bristol Myers, Cirius Therapeutics, Cumberland, Echosens, Galectin, Galmed, Gilead, Intercept, Karius, Madrigal, Mallinckrodt, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Salix, Second Genome, Sequana and Thera technologies; and holding stock in Akarna, Durect, Exhalenz, Galmed, Genfit, Indalo, Sanyal Bio, Tiziana. ADD TOPIC TO EMAIL ALERTS Receive an email when new articles are posted on Please provide your email address to receive an email when new articles are posted on . Subscribe ADDED TO EMAIL ALERTS Back to Healio We were unable to process your request. Please try again later. If you continue to have this issue please contact customerservice@slackinc.com . Back to Healio To streamline and validate diagnosis of and clinical trials in non-alcoholic steatohepatitis, one group is on a mission to determine the best non-invasive tests for all physicians to use, according to a presentation. “As you know, there are many noninvasive tests that are in development, but there are very few that are actually approved for any context of use,” Arun J. Sanyal, MBBS, MD, professor in the department of internal medicine in the division of gastroenterology, hepatology and nutrition at Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, said during The Liver Meeting Digital Experience. “In this cross-sectional analysis of multiple biomarker panels in the same blood sample from a highly phenotyped NAFLD population, multiple biomarkers met a priori criteria for preliminary success. ... There was differential performance across biomarkers for both NASH and for fibrosis making it likely that future combinatorial approaches could be used to enhance diagnostic position .” NIMBLE collaboration In the NIMBLE collaboration with the NASH Clinical Research Network (CRN), researchers looked at 1,073 preselected patients with NAFLD (n = 220) or NASH (n = 853) distributed across fibrosis stages: F0 (n = 222; mean age, 47.8 years; 44.6% men; 71.2% white), F1 (n = 114; mean age, 48.1 years; 45.6% men; 59.6% white), F2 (n = 262; mean age, 51.7 years; 38.9% men; 76.2% white), F3 (n = 277; mean age, 54.4 years; 32.9% men; 78.9% white) and F4 (n = 198; mean age, 56.2 years; 30.3% men; 86.2% white). They analyzed results from the following tests performed within 90 days of a liver biopsy: NIS4 (Genfit), the Enhanced Liver Fibrosis score (ELF, Siemens Healthineers), FibroMeter VCTE (FM-VCTE, Echosens), PRO-C3 (Nordic Biosciences) and the One-Way Lipidomics (OWL, OWLiver). Each technique was compared to FIB4 and ALT. “We have to really parse it down very finely to think about whether we are going to use it for diagnosis, to establish prognosis, for monitoring disease, for predicting treatment response. Each one is sort of considered a different context of use and each one has to be evaluated independently ,” Sanyal said. “We felt our immediate focus was to try to identify the population that is at risk for having more liver outcomes.” The NIS4 test met criteria for diagnosis of NASH and NAFLD Activity Score (NAS) of 4 or greater, while NIS4, ELF and FM-VCTE all met criteria for diagnosis of F2 or higher. ELF and FM-VCTE improved for F3 and F4. In looking for NASH diagnosis, the group showed NIS4 had an area under the curve (AUROC) of 0.832 vs. ALT’s 0.678, positioning it to be accurate (P < .001). Similarly, NIS4 outperformed ALT for the NAFLD activity score with an AUROC of 0.815 vs. ALT’s 0.726 (P < .001). The OWL liver panel provides results specifically as a yes or no, so Sanyal explained there is no AUROC for this test, but it did provide 63.3 for sensitivity and 75.4 for specificity. Sanyal showed that the ELF test performed at 0.828 AUROC (P < .001) and “progressively improved” to 0.855 (P < .001) at cirrhosis level, making it superior to both the baseline and FIB4 as its comparator. PRO-C3 showed to be superior to the unit line but not to FIB4 and “with increasing fibrosis, the performance declined,” Sanyal said. The FibroMeter VTCE was performed in 393 patients, showing an AUROC from 0.841 to 0.897 as fibrosis progressed, making it superior to the unit line and to FIB4 (all P < .001). Sanyal noted this subset of patients was the only one to have a FibroScan (Echosens) performed within the pre-set time period. “Lastly, I want to point out that FIB4 also had fairly robust diagnostic characteristics for these fibrosis-related endpoints,” Sanyal said in his presentation. Next steps This initial stage of the NIMBLE study laid the groundwork, Sanyal said, by clarifying sensitivity and specificity for this group of who would most benefit from knowing the status of their disease. “The basis for looking at all of these were really based on panels whose laboratory analytic robustness is already established and meets regulatory standards, so we think when you take the totality of all of this data, we now have made substantial progress toward meeting the evidence burden for biomarker qualification for enrichment of the diagnostic context of use for people who have NASH with significant fibrosis which is stage 2 or higher,” Sanyal said. “We are very excited about these results.” In stage 2 of NIMBLE, Sanyal said these biomarkers will be integrated with imaging workstreams to address disease monitoring types of use and build to truly predictive models. “It is time to include the liver as a critical end organ that is associated with type 2 diabetes. Diabetologists are often focused on kidney disease, heart disease, eye disease, etc, but many of these patients, especially those who progress to bridging fibrosis and cirrhosis, will die of their liver disease,” he said. “Since most of those patients have type 2 diabetes, it behooves us now to increase awareness within the diabetes population but coupled with giving them tools to identify this in their routine practice.” “NIMBLE is an advanced qualification plan. We want something approved that every doctor can use in the next 2 years,” Sanyal said. Read more about

Second Genome Web Traffic

Rank
Page Views per User (PVPU)
Page Views per Million (PVPM)
Reach per Million (RPM)
CBI Logo

Second Genome Rank

  • When was Second Genome founded?

    Second Genome was founded in 2009.

  • Where is Second Genome's headquarters?

    Second Genome's headquarters is located at 1000 Marina Blvd, Brisbane.

  • What is Second Genome's latest funding round?

    Second Genome's latest funding round is Series B - II.

  • How much did Second Genome raise?

    Second Genome raised a total of $63.7M.

Discover the right solution for your team

The CB Insights tech market intelligence platform analyzes millions of data points on vendors, products, partnerships, and patents to help your team find their next technology solution.

Request a demo

CBI websites generally use certain cookies to enable better interactions with our sites and services. Use of these cookies, which may be stored on your device, permits us to improve and customize your experience. You can read more about your cookie choices at our privacy policy here. By continuing to use this site you are consenting to these choices.