Four Regional Marine Biodiversity Studies: Approaches and Contributions to Ecosystem-Based Management

We compare objectives and approaches of four regional studies of marine biodiversity: Gulf of Maine Area Census of Marine Life, Baltic Sea History of Marine Animal Populations, Great Barrier Reef Seabed Biodiversity Project, and Gulf of Mexico Biodiversity Project. Each program was designed as an "ecosystem" scale but was created independently and executed differently. Each lasted 8 to 10 years, including several years to refine program objectives, raise funding, and develop research networks. All resulted in improved baseline data and in new, or revised, data systems. Each contributed to the creation or evolution of interdisciplinary teams, and to regional, national, or international science-management linkages. To date, there have been differing extents of delivery and use of scientific information to and by management, with greatest integration by the program designed around specific management questions. We evaluate each research program's relative emphasis on three principal elements of biodiversity organization: composition, structure, and function. This approach is used to analyze existing ecosystem-wide biodiversity knowledge and to assess what is known and where gaps exist. In all four of these systems and studies, there is a relative paucity of investigation on functional elements of biodiversity, when compared with compositional and structural elements. This is symptomatic of the current state of the science. Substantial investment in understanding one or more biodiversity element(s) will allow issues to be addressed in a timely and more integrative fashion. Evaluating research needs and possible approaches across specific elements of biodiversity organization can facilitate planning of future studies and lead to more effective communication between scientists, managers, and stakeholders. Building a general approach that captures how various studies have focused on different biodiversity elements can also contribute to meta-analyses of worldwide experience in scientific research to support ecosystem-based management

Clinical effectiveness of olaparib monotherapy in germline BRCA-mutated, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer in a real-world setting: phase IIIb LUCY interim analysis

© 2021 Elsevier LtdBackground: In the phase III OlympiAD trial, olaparib significantly increased progression-free survival (PFS) compared with chemotherapy of physician's choice in patients with germline BRCA-mutated (gBRCAm), human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2)-negative metastatic breast cancer (mBC). The phase IIIb LUCY trial assessed the clinical effectiveness of olaparib in similar patients, in a setting reflecting clinical practice. Methods: This open-label, single-arm trial of olaparib (300 mg, twice daily) enrolled patients with BRCAm, HER2-negative mBC who had received taxane and/or anthracycline in the (neo)adjuvant/metastatic setting and not more than two lines of prior chemotherapy for mBC. Patients with hormone receptor–positive mBC had progressed on at least one line of endocrine therapy in an adjuvant/metastatic setting and were unsuitable for further endocrine treatment. This interim analysis was planned after 160 PFS events. Results: Of 563 patients screened, 252 patients with gBRCAm were enrolled and received at least one dose of olaparib. The median investigator-assessed PFS was 8.11 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.93–8.67; 166/252 events [65.9% maturity]). The investigator-assessed clinical response rate was 48.6%, and median time to first subsequent treatment or death was 9.66 months (95% CI, 8.67–11.14). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs; >20% patients) were nausea, anaemia, asthenia, vomiting and fatigue. Eleven patients (4.4%) discontinued treatment because of a TEAE. Grade 3 or higher TEAEs occurred in 64 patients (25.4%), including anaemia (33 patients; 13.1%). Conclusion: Olaparib was clinically effective in patients with gBRCAm, HER2-negative mBC with safety outcomes consistent with previous findings. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03286842.

Clinical effectiveness and safety of olaparib in BRCA-mutated, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer in a real-world setting: final analysis of LUCY

PurposeThe interim analysis of the phase IIIb LUCY trial demonstrated the clinical effectiveness of olaparib in patients with germline BRCA-mutated (gBRCAm), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative metastatic breast cancer (mBC), with median progression-free survival (PFS) of 8.11 months, which was similar to that in the olaparib arm of the phase III OlympiAD trial (7.03 months). This prespecified analysis provides final overall survival (OS) and safety data.MethodsThe open-label, single-arm LUCY trial of olaparib (300 mg, twice daily) enrolled adults with gBRCAm or somatic BRCA-mutated (sBRCAm), HER2-negative mBC. Patients had previously received a taxane or anthracycline for neoadjuvant/adjuvant or metastatic disease and up to two lines of chemotherapy for mBC.ResultsOf 563 patients screened, 256 (gBRCAm, n = 253; sBRCAm, n = 3) were enrolled. In the gBRCAm cohort, median investigator-assessed PFS (primary endpoint) was 8.18 months and median OS was 24.94 months. Olaparib was clinically effective in all prespecified subgroups: hormone receptor status, previous chemotherapy for mBC, previous platinum-based chemotherapy (including by line of therapy), and previous cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor use. The most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were nausea (55.3%) and anemia (39.2%). Few patients (6.3%) discontinued olaparib owing to a TEAE. No deaths associated with AEs occurred during the study treatment or 30-day follow-up.ConclusionThe LUCY patient population reflects a real-world population in line with the licensed indication of olaparib in mBC. These findings support the clinical effectiveness and safety of olaparib in patients with gBRCAm, HER2-negative mBC.Clinical trial registrationClinical trials registration number: NCT0328684

\u3ci\u3eDrosophila\u3c/i\u3e Muller F Elements Maintain a Distinct Set of Genomic Properties Over 40 Million Years of Evolution

The Muller F element (4.2 Mb, ~80 protein-coding genes) is an unusual autosome of Drosophila melanogaster; it is mostly heterochromatic with a low recombination rate. To investigate how these properties impact the evolution of repeats and genes, we manually improved the sequence and annotated the genes on the D. erecta, D. mojavensis, and D. grimshawi F elements and euchromatic domains from the Muller D element. We find that F elements have greater transposon density (25–50%) than euchromatic reference regions (3–11%). Among the F elements, D. grimshawi has the lowest transposon density (particularly DINE-1: 2% vs. 11–27%). F element genes have larger coding spans, more coding exons, larger introns, and lower codon bias. Comparison of the Effective Number of Codons with the Codon Adaptation Index shows that, in contrast to the other species, codon bias in D. grimshawi F element genes can be attributed primarily to selection instead of mutational biases, suggesting that density and types of transposons affect the degree of local heterochromatin formation. F element genes have lower estimated DNA melting temperatures than D element genes, potentially facilitating transcription through heterochromatin. Most F element genes (~90%) have remained on that element, but the F element has smaller syntenic blocks than genome averages (3.4–3.6 vs. 8.4–8.8 genes per block), indicating greater rates of inversion despite lower rates of recombination. Overall, the F element has maintained characteristics that are distinct from other autosomes in the Drosophila lineage, illuminating the constraints imposed by a heterochromatic milieu