Non-Invasive Exploration of Neonatal Gastric Epithelium by Using Exfoliated Epithelial Cells

Background & Aims: In preterm infants, exfoliated gastric epithelial cells can be retrieved from aspirates sampled through the naso-gastric feeding tube. Our aims were to determine (1) whether the recovery of exfoliated cells is feasible at any time from birth through the removal of the nasogastric tube, (2) whether they can be grown in culture in vitro, and (3) whether the physiological state of exfoliated cells expressing H+/K+-ATPases reflects that of their counterparts remaining in situ at the surface of the gastric epithelium in neonatal rat pups. Methods: In infants, gastric fluid aspirates were collected weekly after birth or every 3 hours over 24-h periods, and related to clinical parameters (Biocollection PROG/09/18). In rat pups submitted to a single fasting/refeeding cycle, we explored circadian exfoliation with the cellular counter-parts in the gland. All samples were analyzed by confocal imaging and Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay. Results: Epithelial cells were identified by microscopy using membrane-bound anti-H+/K+ ATPases antibody, assessed for nucleus integrity, and the expression of selected proteins (autophagy, circadian clock). On 34 infants, the H+/K+-ATPasepositive cells were consistently found quiescent, regardless of gestational age and feeding schedule from day-5 of life to the day of removal of the naso-gastric tube. By logistic regression analysis, we did find a positive correlation between the intensity of exfoliation (cellular loss per sample) and the postnatal age (p,0.001). The H+/K+ ATPase-positive cell

Institutional shared resources and translational cancer research

The development and maintenance of adequate shared infrastructures is considered a major goal for academic centers promoting translational research programs. Among infrastructures favoring translational research, centralized facilities characterized by shared, multidisciplinary use of expensive laboratory instrumentation, or by complex computer hardware and software and/or by high professional skills are necessary to maintain or improve institutional scientific competitiveness. The success or failure of a shared resource program also depends on the choice of appropriate institutional policies and requires an effective institutional governance regarding decisions on staffing, existence and composition of advisory committees, policies and of defined mechanisms of reporting, budgeting and financial support of each resource. Shared Resources represent a widely diffused model to sustain cancer research; in fact, web sites from an impressive number of research Institutes and Universities in the U.S. contain pages dedicated to the SR that have been established in each Center, making a complete view of the situation impossible. However, a nation-wide overview of how Cancer Centers develop SR programs is available on the web site for NCI-designated Cancer Centers in the U.S., while in Europe, information is available for individual Cancer centers. This article will briefly summarize the institutional policies, the organizational needs, the characteristics, scientific aims, and future developments of SRs necessary to develop effective translational research programs in oncology

Diverse values of nature for sustainability

Data availability: All the data are freely available online. The supplementary information provides links to Zenodo with specific DOIs where the data are stored for free use.Supplementary information is available online at https://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs41586-023-06406-9/MediaObjects/41586_2023_6406_MOESM1_ESM.docx . The Supplementary Information includes three parts. Part A explains how the paper is associated with the IPBES Values Assessment. Part B provides details about each of the 29 review protocols. Part C offers information about the case study of Chilika Lagoon, India, that is used in the main paper.Copyright © The Author(s) 2023. Twenty-five years since foundational publications on valuing ecosystem services for human well-being1,2, addressing the global biodiversity crisis3 still implies confronting barriers to incorporating nature’s diverse values into decision-making. These barriers include powerful interests supported by current norms and legal rules such as property rights, which determine whose values and which values of nature are acted on. A better understanding of how and why nature is (under)valued is more urgent than ever4. Notwithstanding agreements to incorporate nature’s values into actions, including the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF)5 and the UN Sustainable Development Goals6, predominant environmental and development policies still prioritize a subset of values, particularly those linked to markets, and ignore other ways people relate to and benefit from nature7. Arguably, a ‘values crisis’ underpins the intertwined crises of biodiversity loss and climate change8, pandemic emergence9 and socio-environmental injustices10. On the basis of more than 50,000 scientific publications, policy documents and Indigenous and local knowledge sources, the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) assessed knowledge on nature’s diverse values and valuation methods to gain insights into their role in policymaking and fuller integration into decisions7,11. Applying this evidence, combinations of values-centred approaches are proposed to improve valuation and address barriers to uptake, ultimately leveraging transformative changes towards more just (that is, fair treatment of people and nature, including inter- and intragenerational equity) and sustainable futures.We received no specific funding for this work; all authors involved in IPBES do so on a voluntary basis. The IPBES Values Assessment was made possible thanks to many generous contributions, including non-earmarked contributions to the IPBES trust fund from governments. All donors are listed on the IPBES website www.ipbes.net/donors. U.P. acknowledges BC3’s Maria de Maeztu excellence accreditation 2023–2026 (reference no. CEX2021-001201-M) provided by grant no. MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033