Dissection of QTL effects for root traits using a chromosome arm-specific mapping population in bread wheat

A high-resolution chromosome arm-specific mapping population was used in an attempt to locate/detect gene(s)/QTL for different root traits on the short arm of rye chromosome 1 (1RS) in bread wheat. This population consisted of induced homoeologous recombinants of 1RS with 1BS, each originating from a different crossover event and distinct from all other recombinants in the proportions of rye and wheat chromatin present. It provides a simple and powerful approach to detect even small QTL effects using fewer progeny. A promising empirical Bayes method was applied to estimate additive and epistatic effects for all possible marker pairs simultaneously in a single model. This method has an advantage for QTL analysis in minimizing the error variance and detecting interaction effects between loci with no main effect. A total of 15 QTL effects, 6 additive and 9 epistatic, were detected for different traits of root length and root weight in 1RS wheat. Epistatic interactions were further partitioned into inter-genomic (wheat and rye alleles) and intra-genomic (rye–rye or wheat–wheat alleles) interactions affecting various root traits. Four common regions were identified involving all the QTL for root traits. Two regions carried QTL for almost all the root traits and were responsible for all the epistatic interactions. Evidence for inter-genomic interactions is provided. Comparison of mean values supported the QTL detection

Integrated genetic map and genetic analysis of a region associated with root traits on the short arm of rye chromosome 1 in bread wheat

A rye–wheat centric chromosome translocation 1RS.1BL has been widely used in wheat breeding programs around the world. Increased yield of translocation lines was probably a consequence of increased root biomass. In an effort to map loci-controlling root characteristics, homoeologous recombinants of 1RS with 1BS were used to generate a consensus genetic map comprised of 20 phenotypic and molecular markers, with an average spacing of 2.5 cM. Physically, all recombination events were located in the distal 40% of the arms. A total of 68 recombinants was used and recombination breakpoints were aligned and ordered over map intervals with all the markers, integrated together in a genetic map. This approach enabled dissection of genetic components of quantitative traits, such as root traits, present on 1S. To validate our hypothesis, phenotyping of 45-day-old wheat roots was performed in five lines including three recombinants representative of the entire short arm along with bread wheat parents ‘Pavon 76’ and Pavon 1RS.1BL. Individual root characteristics were ranked and the genotypic rank sums were subjected to Quade analysis to compare the overall rooting ability of the genotypes. It appears that the terminal 15% of the rye 1RS arm carries gene(s) for greater rooting ability in wheat

The role of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonists in the treatment of patients with advanced hormone-dependent prostate cancer in the UK.

PURPOSE: Comparing gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists and agonists as androgen deprivation therapy for advanced prostate cancer (PC). METHODS: This article stems from a round-table meeting in December 2014 to compare the properties of GnRH agonists and antagonists in the published literature in order to identify the patient groups most likely to benefit from GnRH antagonist therapy. A broad PubMed and congress abstract search was carried out in preparation for the meeting to ensure that the latest data and opinion were available for the discussions. RESULTS: In randomised, controlled trials, GnRH antagonist therapy provides more rapid suppression of luteinising hormone, follicle-stimulating hormone and testosterone than GnRH agonist treatment. Compared with the GnRH agonist, there is evidence of improved disease control by a GnRH antagonist, with longer interval to prostate-specific antigen progression and greater reduction of serum alkaline phosphatase. In a post hoc analysis of six randomised trials, the risk of cardiac events within 1 year of initiating therapy was significantly lower among men receiving GnRH antagonist than agonist. Pre-clinical laboratory data suggest a number of mechanisms whereby GnRH antagonist therapy may benefit men with pre-existing cardiovascular disease (CVD), the most plausible hypothesis being that, unlike GnRH agonists, GnRH antagonists do not activate T lymphocytes, which act to increase atherosclerotic plaque rupture. CONCLUSION: When making treatment decisions, clinicians should consider comorbidities, particularly CVD, in addition to effects on PC. GnRH antagonists may be appropriate in patients with significant CV risk, existing osteopenia, lower urinary tract symptoms and significant metastatic disease

Focal Therapy: Patients, Interventions, and Outcomes-A Report from a Consensus Meeting.

Focal therapy as a treatment option for localized prostate cancer (PCa) is an increasingly popular and rapidly evolving field

Active surveillance for prostate cancer: a narrative review of clinical guidelines

In the past decade active surveillance (AS) of men with localized prostate cancer has become an increasingly popular management option, and a range of clinical guidelines have been published on this topic. Existing guidelines regarding AS for prostate cancer vary widely, but predominantly state that the most suitable patients for AS are those with pretreatment clinical stage T1c or T2 tumours, serum PSA levels <10 ng/ml, biopsy Gleason scores of 6 or less, a maximum of one or two tumour-positive biopsy core samples and/or a maximum of 50% of cancer per core sample. Following initiation of an AS programme, most guidelines recommend serial serum PSA measurements, digital rectal examinations and surveillance biopsies to check for and identify pathological indications of tumour progression. Definitions of disease reclassification and progression differ among guidelines and multiple criteria for initiation of definitive treatment are proposed. The variety of descriptions of criteria for clinically insignificant prostate cancer indicates a lack of consensus on optimal AS and intervention thresholds. A single set of guidelines are needed in order to reduce variations in clinical practice and to optimize clinical decision-making. To enable truly evidence-based guidelines, further research that combines existing evidence, while also gathering information from more long-term studies is needed.This study is linked to a larger project, the Movember Foundation's Global Action Plan on active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer (GAP3), which is collaboration between institutions, hospitals and research centres in Australia, Canada, France, Finland, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, UK and the USA. The Movember Foundation has invested €1,664,950 in the GAP3 project in order to create the largest centralized database on AS in men with prostate cancer to date, comprising around 40% of all global patient data on AS. The funder did not play any role in the study design, collection, analysis or interpretation of data, or in the drafting of this paper