HUMAN PRACTICES

Professor - Section for Pharmacology and Pharmaceutical Biosciences

Points of discussion: We began considering different methods to use in a real life functioning patch and we contacted Professor Winther-Larsen to talk about artificial membranes and how they could be applied in a monitoring device.

Summary of meeting: We had received great ideas and inspirations from the last researchers, however we needed to understand the different ways to create a functioning patch better. We contacted Professor Winther-Larsen in order to get more advice during the early conceptualization of the project and to discuss ideas including the use of artificial membranes, as well as which methods of implementation would be more useful. We discussed artificial membranes and microfluidics with the professor. The idea would be used for the concept of the patch design. We considered how to make sure that the patch is delivering interstitial fluid inside our measuring mechanism and how it binds our receptors inside. We discussed particularly how to include the receptor protein potentially directly in the membrane . The professor also recommended other possible researchers to assist us with the use of artificial membranes.

Implementation of discussion points: Professor Winther-Larsen meant that it will be quite difficult to attach a receptor protein directly inside the membrane in such a short timeline and recommended that we consider other more affordable and quick measuring methods for a real life working cortisol patch. She also gilded us to continue some other relevant researchers to help us along.

Researcher - Department of Medical Biochemistry

Points of discussion: We wished to discuss more concrete methods of measuring the binding of cortisol to its ligand, as a proof of concept until we built a more sturdy model of our cortisol monitoring device as we needed to consider how to make it as affordable as we could and many concepts seemed to not be in the ranges we required.

Summary of meeting: As we were considering what methods to use to show proof of our cortisol binding its ligand, when we reached the last stage of our project idea, we contacted Bjørn Dalhus. We focused our conversation on the surface plasmon resonance and the possibility of using this method to detect the binding of the target protein. We wished to understand the plasmon method better to see if we could utilize it for our patch idea. He helped us understand that it is not for continuous binding measurements and would not work for our patch. In addition, on June 7th when talking about surface plasmon resonance, he helped us realize that while this method is used to detect if a ligand had bound the target protein, it does not quantify the amount of bound ligand

Later, we also contacted him to perform a Microscale Thermophoresis assay (MST assay) to demonstrate that our protein receptors GR binds to cortisol successfully (will be performed during October 2024).

Implementation of discussion points: We ended up working with Bjørn Dalhus on the MST assay to show proof of our ligand binding cortisol in a laboratory setting, which will help us have a good proof of concept while we are considering other methods to apply for our real life cortisol measuring device.

Professor - Section for Genetics and Evolutionary Biology

Points of discussion: We contacted Rein to practice our presentation and present our results so far after our summer in the laboratory in order to receive his feedback and insight as he has helped many past iGEM teams at the University of Oslo.

Summary of meeting: After summer and our intense lab work experiments, we had a presentation with Rein about the final version of our project and the updates that we had at the moment. We discussed better ways to communicate our ideas, the results and updates that we had done so far and how to pitch our ideas to different audiences.

Implementation of discussion points: We adjusted some data points that were not complete and changed the layout of our presentation following the feedback from Rein.

Senior Innovation Advisor in the Growth House(Veksthuset)

Points of discussion: We wished to receive feedback on our presentation and our work so far as well as hardware that we had considered building using 3D to have as a model for our cortisol patch.

Summary of meeting: We met with Nicolay Berard-Andersen, who is the Senior Innovation Advisor in the Growth House(Veksthuset), affiliated with the University of Oslo, to present to him our research and how far we have come with our idea. He gave us valuable feedback on what more is needed to be accomplished to get a successful presentation as well as give us more resources on people to contact for further advice. He also advised us on our 3D design and gave us relevant resources to work with.

Implementation of discussion points: We began our 3D print model after our discussion and improved parts of our presentation that were not relevant to our work so far.

Leader of the Insj group, University of Oslo

Points of discussion: We wished to receive feedback on our presentation and our pitch so far, due to her experience with working in Insj

Summary of meeting: We had a wonderful discussion with Amruutha Kishore, leader of the Insj group at the University of Oslo, by email, discussing the different aspects of the project and how to communicate our idea to the university students that are interested in innovation. Amrutha gave us feedback on our presentation, our idea pitch and gave us the opportunity to present at the opening of the University of Oslo iHUB Student Innovation Office Space.

Implementation of discussion points: We implemented her feedback on our presentation and will actively work with her and Insj to promote synthetic biology and iGEM further.

Senior Adviser at the Centre for Digital Life Norway (DLN)

Points of discussion: We wished to receive feedback on or work so far, ethics and moral dilemmas that could arise from the use of a cortisol patch on humans as well as our pitch

Summary of meeting: Anamika Chatterjee, Senior Adviser at the Centre for Digital Life Norway (DLN), was one of our last contacts during our project and gave us tremendous feedback on the ethics and possible pitfalls of a wearable cortisol monitoring device. She discussed the importance of inclusion, autonomy and privacy that is involved with making a complicated medical device such as our cortisol monitoring device, and the effect it could have on the everyday user.

Implementation of discussion points: Her feedback was very relevant and highly important. Her feedback made us delve deeper into the meaning of the cortisol patch when it is going to be actively used and not just the idea of the patch. We have addressed her feedback, under Hardware in our wiki.

PhD Researcher at University of Minnesota

Summary of meeting: We contacted Dr. Culma in the beginning of our project due to his experience with relevant projects. His experience allowed us to receive multiple different techniques that he has worked with that can be valuable for our project. The meeting helped us with an early conceptualization of the project and to decide the method that we will use for our binding assay, between protein binding (MR or GR), aptamers, Immunostaining or MIP. He mentioned using Glucocorticoid receptor(GR) binding in a continuous measuring monitoring device, instead of the Mineralocorticoid Receptor we had considered so far in the project.

Implementation of discussion points:We began settling on the idea of using a protein binding continuous measuring monitoring device after our discussion with Dr. Culma and looking into the GR he recommended for us.

Lecturer - Section for Pharmaceutics and Social Pharmacy

Points of discussion: We wished to discuss the use of artificial membranes on a working cortisol patch with Professor Azumah

Summary of meeting: We talked to Professor Joseph Azumah and received his help with the early conceptualization of the project and to discuss ideas including the use of artificial membranes that could be possibly used on a final version of the device. He encouraged us to further investigate our idea to use artificial membranes and lipid bilayers, but mentioned the cost and time is greater than we have available. Our main point of discussion was about the usage of artificial lipid bilayers and vesicles as well as protein incorporation in those bilayers. We received generally positive feedback however it seemed like this idea would not fit the synthetic biology concept of iGEM and recommended exploring other routes. Since then, we decided not to go that path with this particular project but meeting him was nonetheless interesting and encouraging

Implementation of discussion points: We did not use artificial membranes as a result of our talk with Professor Azumah as his feedback began pointing us in another direction for our monitoring patch

Professor of medicine - Clinical biochemistry

Points of discussion: We wished to discuss our continuous measuring methods in order to settle on which receptor to use for our project, as well as how we could implement our idea to work with interstitial fluid.

Summary of meeting: We talked to Jens Petter Berg at an early stage of our project and received the most important and helpful guidance from him. We had our longest meeting in our project with Professor Jens Petter Berg, as we referred to him to conceptualize our idea into using a protein binding approach as the best way to produce constant measurement of cortisol levels in the interstitial fluid. We narrowed down our idea to a continuous monitoring method using the Glucocorticoid receptor (GR) with his help as well as getting to explore hospital grade cortisol testing using interstitial fluid that we had not experienced before. In this talk we also shared ideas regarding how the detection patch would be able to have a longer useful lifespan and a lower saturation process on the cortisol ligand process

Implementation of discussion points: Using the feedback from Jens Petter Berg, we settled into our idea and began ordering the necessary equipment needed for us to work with our wet lab procedures. We also settled our project design to include the GR binding of cortisol for our monitoring device.

Communication officer of the Science and Technology Museum of Oslo

Points of discussion: We discussed how our communication to the public can be more effective, as well as possible collaboration and sponsorships between our team and the Science and Technology Museum of Oslo.

Summary of meeting: Gro Ellefsen, the communication officer of the Science and Technology Museum of Oslo, invited our team for a potential collaboration and to join the 3-day stand days, in order to better promote our project. Gro provided us with tips on how to promote our events on social media and also shared our information with the followers of the museum. She assisted us in instigating a sponsorship deal between the museum and our team.

Implementation of discussion points: We took part in a 3-day Stand organized by Science Days and the Science and Technology Museum after Gros recommendation and sponsorship, which counted towards our excellence medal for Education.

Advisor for Invent2

Points of discussion: We wished to discuss our presentation with Gerbrand as well as receive further feedback on our pitch and our 3D model.

Summary of meeting: We met Gerbrand Koster, who is an Advisor for Invent2 affiliated with the University of Oslo, and received valuable feedback on our presentation and our idea pitch. Gerbrand helped us recognise some communication mistakes in our presentation as well as help us with feedback on our 3D-Print of our device, which he firmly believed we should make different samples of, with the available data we have. He also granted us some good resources to use further.

Implementation of discussion points: We finalized the 3D print idea with Gerbrands help and began printing different 3D prints with materials and models until we found the one that worked best.