7 research outputs found
Replication and robustness in developmental research.
Replications and robustness checks are key elements of the scientific method and a staple in many disciplines. However, leading journals in developmental psychology rarely include explicit replications of prior research conducted by different investigators, and few require authors to establish in their articles or online appendices that their key results are robust across estimation methods, data sets, and demographic subgroups. This article makes the case for prioritizing both explicit replications and, especially, within-study robustness checks in developmental psychology. It provides evidence on variation in effect sizes in developmental studies and documents strikingly different replication and robustness-checking practices in a sample of journals in developmental psychology and a sister behavioral science-applied economics. Our goal is not to show that any one behavioral science has a monopoly on best practices, but rather to show how journals from a related discipline address vital concerns of replication and generalizability shared by all social and behavioral sciences. We provide recommendations for promoting graduate training in replication and robustness-checking methods and for editorial policies that encourage these practices. Although some of our recommendations may shift the form and substance of developmental research articles, we argue that they would generate considerable scientific benefits for the field. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved)
LRG1 destabilizes tumor vessels and restricts immunotherapeutic potency
Background:
A poorly functioning tumor vasculature is pro-oncogenic and may impede the delivery of therapeutics. Normalizing the vasculature, therefore, may be beneficial. We previously reported that the secreted glycoprotein leucine-rich α-2-glycoprotein 1 (LRG1) contributes to pathogenic neovascularization. Here, we investigate whether LRG1 in tumors is vasculopathic and whether its inhibition has therapeutic utility.
Methods:
Tumor growth and vascular structure were analyzed in subcutaneous and genetically engineered mouse models in wild-type and Lrg1 knockout mice. The effects of LRG1 antibody blockade as monotherapy, or in combination with co-therapies, on vascular function, tumor growth, and infiltrated lymphocytes were investigated.
Findings:
In mouse models of cancer, Lrg1 expression was induced in tumor endothelial cells, consistent with an increase in protein expression in human cancers. The expression of LRG1 affected tumor progression as Lrg1 gene deletion, or treatment with a LRG1 function-blocking antibody, inhibited tumor growth and improved survival. Inhibition of LRG1 increased endothelial cell pericyte coverage and improved vascular function, resulting in enhanced efficacy of cisplatin chemotherapy, adoptive T cell therapy, and immune checkpoint inhibition (anti-PD1) therapy. With immunotherapy, LRG1 inhibition led to a significant shift in the tumor microenvironment from being predominantly immune silent to immune active.
Conclusions:
LRG1 drives vascular abnormalization, and its inhibition represents a novel and effective means of improving the efficacy of cancer therapeutics.
Funding:
Wellcome Trust (206413/B/17/Z), UKRI/MRC (G1000466, MR/N006410/1, MC/PC/14118, and MR/L008742/1), BHF (PG/16/50/32182), Health and Care Research Wales (CA05), CRUK (C42412/A24416 and A17196), ERC (ColonCan 311301 and AngioMature 787181), and DFG (CRC1366)
Recommended from our members
Replication and robustness in developmental research.
Replications and robustness checks are key elements of the scientific method and a staple in many disciplines. However, leading journals in developmental psychology rarely include explicit replications of prior research conducted by different investigators, and few require authors to establish in their articles or online appendices that their key results are robust across estimation methods, data sets, and demographic subgroups. This article makes the case for prioritizing both explicit replications and, especially, within-study robustness checks in developmental psychology. It provides evidence on variation in effect sizes in developmental studies and documents strikingly different replication and robustness-checking practices in a sample of journals in developmental psychology and a sister behavioral science-applied economics. Our goal is not to show that any one behavioral science has a monopoly on best practices, but rather to show how journals from a related discipline address vital concerns of replication and generalizability shared by all social and behavioral sciences. We provide recommendations for promoting graduate training in replication and robustness-checking methods and for editorial policies that encourage these practices. Although some of our recommendations may shift the form and substance of developmental research articles, we argue that they would generate considerable scientific benefits for the field. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved)