The global field of multi-family offices: An institutionalist perspective

We apply the notion of the organisational field to internationally operating multi-family offices. These organisations specialise on the preservation of enterprising and geographically dispersed families’ fortunes. They provide their services across generations and countries. Based on secondary data of Bloomberg’s Top 50 Family Offices, we show that they constitute a global organisational field that comprises two clusters of homogeneity. Clients may decide between two different configurations of activities, depending on their preferences regarding asset management, resource management, family management, and service architecture. The findings also reveal that multi-family offices make relatively similar value propositions all over the world. The distinctiveness of the clusters within the field is not driven by the embeddedness of the multi-family offices in different national environments or their various degrees of international experience. Rather, it is weakly affected by two out of four possible value propositions, namely the exclusiveness and the transparency of services

Novel simple sequence repeats (SSRs) detected by ND-FISH in heterochromatin of Drosophila melanogaster

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In recent years, substantial progress has been made in understanding the organization of sequences in heterochromatin regions containing single-copy genes and transposable elements. However, the sequence and organization of tandem repeat DNA sequences, which are by far the majority fraction of <it>D. melanogaster </it>heterochromatin, are little understood.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>This paper reports that the heterochromatin, as well as containing long tandem arrays of pentanucleotide satellites (AAGAG, AAGAC, AATAT, AATAC and AACAC), is also enriched in other simple sequence repeats (SSRs) such as A, AC, AG, AAG, ACT, GATA and GACA. Non-denaturing FISH (ND-FISH) showed these SSRs to localize to the chromocentre of polytene chromosomes, and was used to map them on mitotic chromosomes. Different distributions were detected ranging from single heterochromatic clusters to complex combinations on different chromosomes. ND-FISH performed on extended DNA fibres, along with Southern blotting, showed the complex organization of these heterochromatin sequences in long tracts, and revealed subclusters of SSRs (several kilobase in length) flanked by other DNA sequences. The chromosomal characterization of C, AAC, AGG, AAT, CCG, ACG, AGC, ATC and ACC provided further detailed information on the SSR content of <it>D. melanogaster </it>at the whole genome level.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>These data clearly show the variation in the abundance of different SSR motifs and reveal their non-random distribution within and between chromosomes. The greater representation of certain SSRs in <it>D. melanogaster </it>heterochromatin suggests that its complexity may be greater than previously thought.</p

Pharmacokinetic and -dynamic modelling of G-CSF derivatives in humans

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is routinely applied to support recovery of granulopoiesis during the course of cytotoxic chemotherapies. However, optimal use of the drug is largely unknown. We showed in the past that a biomathematical compartment model of human granulopoiesis can be used to make clinically relevant predictions regarding new, yet untested chemotherapy regimen. In the present paper, we aim to extend this model by a detailed pharmacokinetic and -dynamic modelling of two commonly used G-CSF derivatives Filgrastim and Pegfilgrastim.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Model equations are based on our physiological understanding of the drugs which are delayed absorption of G-CSF when applied to the subcutaneous tissue, dose-dependent bioavailability, unspecific first order elimination, specific elimination in dependence on granulocyte counts and reversible protein binding. Pharmacokinetic differences between Filgrastim and Pegfilgrastim were modelled as different parameter sets. Our former cell-kinetic model of granulopoiesis was essentially preserved, except for a few additional assumptions and simplifications. We assumed a delayed action of G-CSF on the bone marrow, a delayed action of chemotherapy and differences between Filgrastim and Pegfilgrastim with respect to stimulation potency of the bone marrow. Additionally, we incorporated a model of combined action of Pegfilgrastim and Filgrastim or endogenous G-CSF which interact via concurrent receptor binding. Unknown pharmacokinetic or cell-kinetic parameters were determined by fitting the predictions of the model to available datasets of G-CSF applications, chemotherapy applications or combinations of it. Data were either extracted from the literature or were received from cooperating clinical study groups. Model predictions fitted well to both, datasets used for parameter estimation and validation scenarios as well. A unique set of parameters was identified which is valid for all scenarios considered. Differences in pharmacokinetic parameter estimates between Filgrastim and Pegfilgrastim were biologically plausible throughout.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>We conclude that we established a comprehensive biomathematical model to explain the dynamics of granulopoiesis under chemotherapy and applications of two different G-CSF derivatives. We aim to apply the model to a large variety of chemotherapy regimen in the future in order to optimize corresponding G-CSF schedules or to individualize G-CSF treatment according to the granulotoxic risk of a patient.</p