OltreMare - Un progetto per il futuro della Biodiversità del Mediterraneo

Osservatorio e comunicazione. Questo progetto narra dello sguardo degli artisti dell’Accademia di Belle Arti di Palermo sul lavoro di ricerca portato avanti dall’IAS - CNR (ex IAMC) riguardo all’osservazione e alla tutela della Biodiversità e costituisce uno strumento eccellente di comunicazione per un pubblico quanto mai ampio. La divulgazione della scienza è un’attività complessa e sicuramente necessita di competenze e attitudini multidisciplinari oltreché di motivazione ed entusiasmo. La comunicazione delle tematiche scientifiche, di per sè ostiche nella traduzione al grande pubblico, grazie alla forza e all’immediatezza tipica dell’espressione artistica diventa prodigioso spunto di riflessione e di osservazione, sia per i giovani che per la comunità intera. Grazie al progetto Osservatorio della Biodiversità Siciliana, sono state realizzate da partners con competenze istituzionali complementari , quali l’Accademia di Belle Arti di Palermo e l’IAS - CNR di Capo Granitola, delle azioni didattiche e creative di valore scientifico espresse con straordinaria forza e bellezza. La sinergia creata, nata da un rapporto consolidato ormai da tempo, ha portato ad uno scambio tra ricercatori e professori che si sono messi in gioco in uno sforzo congiunto per avvicinare le proprie competenze. In seguito ad un’intensa attività di coordinamento e pianificazione dei lavori, si è riusciti a portare avanti un progetto ambizioso e imponente, coinvolgendo moltissimi ambiti scientifici e altrettante cattedre, sensibilizzando così gli artisti ai temi della Biodiversità. Le opere prodotte, accompagnate da schede scientifiche, hanno dunque acquisito un valore, oltreché artistico, didattico, e restano come testimonianze oggettive, nel percorso culturale, per i visitatori dell’Osservatorio. Questa collaborazione conferma l’importanza e l’opportunità di unire arte e scienza per esaltare la percezione della ricerca scientifica da parte della comunità e ,ancora una volta, si conferma come, per fare “cose straordinarie”, siano più importanti i rapporti umani piuttosto che le competenze tecniche. A tal proposito, un ringraziamento sentito al Prof. Calogero Piro che, con passione e dedizione, ha reso possibile questa esperienza, e al gruppo di Comunicazione EDU Lab dell’IAS - CNR, che è stato, per me, un supporto indispensabile per la realizzazione di questo complesso progetto

Silence of the Lambs: The Immunological and Molecular Mechanisms of COVID-19 in Children in Comparison with Adults

Children infected by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) can suffer from severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, compared to adults and the elderly, susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection in children seems to be lower; when infection does develop, most infected children remain asymptomatic or develop a mild disease. Understanding why children seem generally protected from severe COVID-19 and only rarely develop clinical conditions that can cause hospitalization, admission to the pediatric intensive care unit and death can be important. More details on the mechanism of action of SARS-CoV-2 could be defined. Moreover, the role played by children in virus diffusion should be better analyzed, and the development of effective preventive and therapeutic measures against COVID-19 could be favored. The main aim of this paper is to discuss the present knowledge on immunological and molecular mechanisms that could explain differences in COVID-19 clinical manifestations between children and adults. Literature analysis showed that although most children are clearly protected from the development of severe COVID-19, the reasons for this peculiarity are not fully understood. Developmental variations in immune system function together with the potential role of repeated antigen stimulation in the first periods of life on innate immunity are widely studied. As the few children who develop the most severe form of pediatric COVID-19 have certain alterations in the immune system response to SARS-CoV-2 infection, studies about the relationships between SARS-CoV-2 and the immune system of the host are essential to understand the reasons for the age-related differences in the severity of COVID-19

Adjuvant anastrozole versus exemestane versus letrozole, upfront or after 2 years of tamoxifen, in endocrine-sensitive breast cancer (FATA-GIM3): a randomised, phase 3 trial

Background: Uncertainty exists about the optimal schedule of adjuvant treatment of breast cancer with aromatase inhibitors and, to our knowledge, no trial has directly compared the three aromatase inhibitors anastrozole, exemestane, and letrozole. We investigated the schedule and type of aromatase inhibitors to be used as adjuvant treatment for hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer. Methods: FATA-GIM3 is a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial of six different treatments in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer. Eligible patients had histologically confirmed invasive hormone receptor-positive breast cancer that had been completely removed by surgery, any pathological tumour size, and axillary nodal status. Key exclusion criteria were hormone replacement therapy, recurrent or metastatic disease, previous treatment with tamoxifen, and another malignancy in the previous 10 years. Patients were randomly assigned in an equal ratio to one of six treatment groups: oral anastrozole (1 mg per day), exemestane (25 mg per day), or letrozole (2·5 mg per day) tablets upfront for 5 years (upfront strategy) or oral tamoxifen (20 mg per day) for 2 years followed by oral administration of one of the three aromatase inhibitors for 3 years (switch strategy). Randomisation was done by a computerised minimisation procedure stratified for oestrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER2 status; previous chemotherapy; and pathological nodal status. Neither the patients nor the physicians were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival. The minimum cutoff to declare superiority of the upfront strategy over the switch strategy was assumed to be a 2% difference in disease-free survival at 5 years. Primary efficacy analyses were done by intention to treat; safety analyses included all patients for whom at least one safety case report form had been completed. Follow-up is ongoing. This trial is registered with the European Clinical Trials Database, number 2006-004018-42, and ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00541086. Findings: Between March 9, 2007, and July 31, 2012, 3697 patients were enrolled into the study. After a median follow-up of 60 months (IQR 46–72), 401 disease-free survival events were reported, including 211 (11%) of 1850 patients allocated to the switch strategy and 190 (10%) of 1847 patients allocated to upfront treatment. 5-year disease-free survival was 88·5% (95% CI 86·7–90·0) with the switch strategy and 89·8% (88·2–91·2) with upfront treatment (hazard ratio 0·89, 95% CI 0·73–1·08; p=0·23). 5-year disease-free survival was 90·0% (95% CI 87·9–91·7) with anastrozole (124 events), 88·0% (85·8–89·9) with exemestane (148 events), and 89·4% (87·3 to 91·1) with letrozole (129 events; p=0·24). No unexpected serious adverse reactions or treatment-related deaths occurred. Musculoskeletal side-effects were the most frequent grade 3–4 events, reported in 130 (7%) of 1761 patients who received the switch strategy and 128 (7%) of 1766 patients who received upfront treatment. Grade 1 musculoskeletal events were more frequent with the upfront schedule than with the switch schedule (924 [52%] of 1766 patients vs 745 [42%] of 1761 patients). All other grade 3–4 adverse events occurred in less than 2% of patients in either group. Interpretation: 5 years of treatment with aromatase inhibitors was not superior to 2 years of tamoxifen followed by 3 years of aromatase inhibitors. None of the three aromatase inhibitors was superior to the others in terms of efficacy. Therefore, patient preference, tolerability, and financial constraints should be considered when deciding the optimal treatment approach in this setting. Funding: Italian Drug Agency