Multidisciplinary cancer care in Spain, or when the function creates the organ: qualitative interview study

Background The Spanish National Health System recognised multidisciplinary care as a health priority in 2006, when a national strategy for promoting quality in cancer care was first published. This institutional effort is being implemented on a co-operative basis within the context of Spain's decentralised health care system, so a high degree of variability is to be expected. This study was aimed to explore the views of professionals working with multidisciplinary cancer teams and identify which barriers to effective team work should be considered to ensure implementation of health policy. Methods Qualitative interview study with semi-structured, one-to-one interviews. Data were examined inductively, using content analysis to generate categories and an explanatory framework. 39 professionals performing their tasks, wholly or in part, in different multidisciplinary cancer teams were interviewed. The breakdown of participants' medical specialisations was as follows: medical oncologists (n = 10); radiation oncologists (n = 8); surgeons (n = 7); pathologists or radiologists (n = 6); oncology nurses (n = 5); and others (n = 3). Results Teams could be classified into three models of professional co-operation in multidisciplinary cancer care, namely, advisory committee, formal co-adaptation and integrated care process. The following barriers to implementation were posed: existence of different gateways for the same patient profile; variability in development and use of clinical protocols and guidelines; role of the hospital executive board; outcomes assessment; and the recording and documenting of clinical decisions in a multidisciplinary team setting. All these play a key role in the development of cancer teams and their ability to improve quality of care. Conclusion Cancer team development results from an specific adaptation to the hospital environment. Nevertheless, health policy plays an important role in promoting an organisational approach that changes the way in which professionals develop their clinical practice

Multidisciplinary cancer care in Spain, or when the function creates the organ: qualitative interview study

Background The Spanish National Health System recognised multidisciplinary care as a health priority in 2006, when a national strategy for promoting quality in cancer care was first published. This institutional effort is being implemented on a co-operative basis within the context of Spain's decentralised health care system, so a high degree of variability is to be expected. This study was aimed to explore the views of professionals working with multidisciplinary cancer teams and identify which barriers to effective team work should be considered to ensure implementation of health policy. Methods Qualitative interview study with semi-structured, one-to-one interviews. Data were examined inductively, using content analysis to generate categories and an explanatory framework. 39 professionals performing their tasks, wholly or in part, in different multidisciplinary cancer teams were interviewed. The breakdown of participants' medical specialisations was as follows: medical oncologists (n = 10); radiation oncologists (n = 8); surgeons (n = 7); pathologists or radiologists (n = 6); oncology nurses (n = 5); and others (n = 3). Results Teams could be classified into three models of professional co-operation in multidisciplinary cancer care, namely, advisory committee, formal co-adaptation and integrated care process. The following barriers to implementation were posed: existence of different gateways for the same patient profile; variability in development and use of clinical protocols and guidelines; role of the hospital executive board; outcomes assessment; and the recording and documenting of clinical decisions in a multidisciplinary team setting. All these play a key role in the development of cancer teams and their ability to improve quality of care. Conclusion Cancer team development results from an specific adaptation to the hospital environment. Nevertheless, health policy plays an important role in promoting an organisational approach that changes the way in which professionals develop their clinical practice

Genome Sequence of Brucella abortus Vaccine Strain S19 Compared to Virulent Strains Yields Candidate Virulence Genes

The Brucella abortus strain S19, a spontaneously attenuated strain, has been used as a vaccine strain in vaccination of cattle against brucellosis for six decades. Despite many studies, the physiological and molecular mechanisms causing the attenuation are not known. We have applied pyrosequencing technology together with conventional sequencing to rapidly and comprehensively determine the complete genome sequence of the attenuated Brucella abortus vaccine strain S19. The main goal of this study is to identify candidate virulence genes by systematic comparative analysis of the attenuated strain with the published genome sequences of two virulent and closely related strains of B. abortus, 9–941 and 2308. The two S19 chromosomes are 2,122,487 and 1,161,449 bp in length. A total of 3062 genes were identified and annotated. Pairwise and reciprocal genome comparisons resulted in a total of 263 genes that were non-identical between the S19 genome and any of the two virulent strains. Amongst these, 45 genes were consistently different between the attenuated strain and the two virulent strains but were identical amongst the virulent strains, which included only two of the 236 genes that have been implicated as virulence factors in literature. The functional analyses of the differences have revealed a total of 24 genes that may be associated with the loss of virulence in S19. Of particular relevance are four genes with more than 60bp consistent difference in S19 compared to both the virulent strains, which, in the virulent strains, encode an outer membrane protein and three proteins involved in erythritol uptake or metabolism

Depth-specific fluctuations of gene expression and protein abundance modulate the photophysiology in the seagrass Posidonia oceanica

Here we present the results of a multiple organizational level analysis conceived to identify acclimative/adaptive strategies exhibited by the seagrass Posidonia oceanica to the daily fluctuations in the light environment, at contrasting depths. We assessed changes in photophysiological parameters, leaf respiration, pigments, and protein and mRNA expression levels. The results show that the diel oscillations of P. oceanica photophysiological and respiratory responses were related to transcripts and proteins expression of the genes involved in those processes and that there was a response asynchrony between shallow and deep plants probably caused by the strong differences in the light environment. The photochemical pathway of energy use was more effective in shallow plants due to higher light availability, but these plants needed more investment in photoprotection and photorepair, requiring higher translation and protein synthesis than deep plants. The genetic differentiation between deep and shallow stands suggests the existence of locally adapted genotypes to contrasting light environments. The depth-specific diel rhythms of photosynthetic and respiratory processes, from molecular to physiological levels, must be considered in the management and conservation of these key coastal ecosystems.Portuguese funds from FCT - Foundation for Science and Technology [UID/Multi/04326/2013]; SZN PhD fellowship via the Open University; ESF COST Action Seagrass Productivity: From Genes to Ecosystem Management [ES0906]info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

THE CONCISE GUIDE TO PHARMACOLOGY 2021/22: G protein-coupled receptors

The Concise Guide to PHARMACOLOGY 2021/22 is the fifth in this series of biennial publications. The Concise Guide provides concise overviews, mostly in tabular format, of the key properties of nearly 1900 human drug targets with an emphasis on selective pharmacology (where available), plus links to the open access knowledgebase source of drug targets and their ligands (www.guidetopharmacology.org), which provides more detailed views of target and ligand properties. Although the Concise Guide constitutes over 500 pages, the material presented is substantially reduced compared to information and links presented on the website. It provides a permanent, citable, point-in-time record that will survive database updates. The full contents of this section can be found at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/bph.15538. G protein-coupled receptors are one of the six major pharmacological targets into which the Guide is divided, with the others being: ion channels, nuclear hormone receptors, catalytic receptors, enzymes and transporters. These are presented with nomenclature guidance and summary information on the best available pharmacological tools, alongside key references and suggestions for further reading. The landscape format of the Concise Guide is designed to facilitate comparison of related targets from material contemporary to mid-2021, and supersedes data presented in the 2019/20, 2017/18, 2015/16 and 2013/14 Concise Guides and previous Guides to Receptors and Channels. It is produced in close conjunction with the Nomenclature and Standards Committee of the International Union of Basic and Clinical Pharmacology (NC-IUPHAR), therefore, providing official IUPHAR classification and nomenclature for human drug targets, where appropriate

The Concise Guide to PHARMACOLOGY 2023/24: G protein-coupled receptors.

The Concise Guide to PHARMACOLOGY 2023/24 is the sixth in this series of biennial publications. The Concise Guide provides concise overviews, mostly in tabular format, of the key properties of approximately 1800 drug targets, and about 6000 interactions with about 3900 ligands. There is an emphasis on selective pharmacology (where available), plus links to the open access knowledgebase source of drug targets and their ligands (https://www.guidetopharmacology.org), which provides more detailed views of target and ligand properties. Although the Concise Guide constitutes almost 500 pages, the material presented is substantially reduced compared to information and links presented on the website. It provides a permanent, citable, point-in-time record that will survive database updates. The full contents of this section can be found at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/bph.16177. G protein-coupled receptors are one of the six major pharmacological targets into which the Guide is divided, with the others being: ion channels, nuclear hormone receptors, catalytic receptors, enzymes and transporters. These are presented with nomenclature guidance and summary information on the best available pharmacological tools, alongside key references and suggestions for further reading. The landscape format of the Concise Guide is designed to facilitate comparison of related targets from material contemporary to mid-2023, and supersedes data presented in the 2021/22, 2019/20, 2017/18, 2015/16 and 2013/14 Concise Guides and previous Guides to Receptors and Channels. It is produced in close conjunction with the Nomenclature and Standards Committee of the International Union of Basic and Clinical Pharmacology (NC-IUPHAR), therefore, providing official IUPHAR classification and nomenclature for human drug targets, where appropriate

The informational roles and psychological health of members of 10 oncology multidisciplinary teams in the UK

We report here the different roles undertaken by the members of 10 multidisciplinary cancer teams in conveying information to patients during their care. Team members completed an Informational Roles Questionnaire measuring an individual's perception of their major role and that of their colleagues in giving information to patients. They also completed two standard psychological health measures, the General Health Questionnaire and Maslach Burnout Inventory. The information giving roles of the surgeon, oncologist, radiologist and clinical nurse specialist were well recognised by their colleagues; however, other team members' roles were more ambiguous and less well understood. The clinical nurse specialist provided the broadest information coverage for patients. Few professional groups regularly informed patients about clinical trials and family history and the clinical nurse specialist was often the only person to deal with patients' sexual well being, consequently these areas are likely to receive poor coverage. Probable psychiatric morbidity (GHQ> or =4) in teams ranged from 5 to 27%. High levels of emotional exhaustion were particularly apparent in team leaders and nurses and feelings of low levels of personal accomplishment were prevalent in the histopathologists and radiologists. Putative benefits to patients and healthcare professionals from multidisciplinary team working may not be realised without investment in team training