The perils of project-based work: Attempting resistance to extreme work practices in video game development

This article examines two blogs written by the spouses of game developers about extreme and exploitative working conditions in the video game industry and the associated reader comments. The wives of these video game developers and members of the game community decry these working conditions and challenge dominant ideologies about making games. This article contributes to the work intensification literature by challenging the belief that long hours are necessary and inevitable to make successful games, discussing the negative toll of extreme work on workers and their families, and by highlighting that the project-based structure of game development both creates extreme work conditions and inhibits resistance. It considers how extreme work practices are legitimized through neo-normative control mechanisms made possible through project-based work structures and the perceived imperative of a race or ‘crunch’ to meet project deadlines. The findings show that neo-normative control mechanisms create an insularity within project teams and can make it difficult for workers to resist their own extreme working conditions, and at times to even understand them as extreme

MTL-CEBPA, a Small Activating RNA Therapeutic Upregulating C/EBP-α, in Patients with Advanced Liver Cancer: A First-in-Human, Multicenter, Open-Label, Phase I Trial.

PURPOSE: Transcription factor C/EBP-α (CCAAT/enhancer-binding protein alpha) acts as a master regulator of hepatic and myeloid functions and multiple oncogenic processes. MTL-CEBPA is a first-in-class small activating RNA oligonucleotide drug that upregulates C/EBP-α. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a phase I, open-label, dose-escalation trial of MTL-CEBPA in adults with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with cirrhosis, or resulting from nonalcoholic steatohepatitis or with liver metastases. Patients received intravenous MTL-CEBPA once a week for 3 weeks followed by a rest period of 1 week per treatment cycle in the dose-escalation phase (3+3 design). RESULTS: Thirty-eight participants have been treated across six dose levels (28-160 mg/m2) and three dosing schedules. Thirty-four patients were evaluable for safety endpoints at 28 days. MTL-CEBPA treatment-related adverse events were not associated with dose, and no maximum dose was reached across the three schedules evaluated. Grade 3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in nine (24%) patients. In 24 patients with HCC evaluable for efficacy, an objective tumor response was achieved in one patient [4%; partial response (PR) for over 2 years] and stable disease (SD) in 12 (50%). After discontinuation of MTL-CEBPA, seven patients were treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs); three patients had a complete response with one further PR and two with SD. CONCLUSIONS: MTL-CEBPA is the first saRNA in clinical trials and demonstrates an acceptable safety profile and potential synergistic efficacy with TKIs in HCC. These encouraging phase I data validate targeting of C/EBP-α and have prompted MTL-CEBPA + sorafenib combination studies in HCC

Maraviroc for previously treated patients with R5 HIV-1 infection

BACKGROUND CC chemokine receptor 5 antagonists are a new class of antiretroviral agents. METHODS We conducted two double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 studies--Maraviroc versus Optimized Therapy in Viremic Antiretroviral Treatment-Experienced Patients (MOTIVATE) 1 and MOTIVATE 2--with patients who had R5 human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) only. They had been treated with or had resistance to three antiretroviral-drug classes and had HIV-1 RNA levels of more than 5000 copies per milliliter. The patients were randomly assigned to one of three antiretroviral regimens consisting of maraviroc once daily, maraviroc twice daily, or placebo, each of which included optimized background therapy (OBT) based on treatment history and drug-resistance testing. Safety and efficacy were assessed after 48 weeks. RESULTS A total of 1049 patients received the randomly assigned study drug; the mean baseline HIV-1 RNA level was 72,400 copies per milliliter, and the median CD4 cell count was 169 per cubic millimeter. At 48 weeks, in both studies, the mean change in HIV-1 RNA from baseline was greater with maraviroc than with placebo: -1.66 and -1.82 log(10) copies per milliliter with the once-daily and twice-daily regimens, respectively, versus -0.80 with placebo in MOTIVATE 1, and -1.72 and -1.87 log(10) copies per milliliter, respectively, versus -0.76 with placebo in MOTIVATE 2. More patients receiving maraviroc once or twice daily had HIV-1 RNA levels of less than 50 copies per milliliter (42% and 47%, respectively, vs. 16% in the placebo group in MOTIVATE 1; 45% in both maraviroc groups vs. 18% in MOTIVATE 2; P<0.001 for both comparisons in each study). The change from baseline in CD4 counts was also greater with maraviroc once or twice daily than with placebo (increases of 113 and 122 per cubic millimeter, respectively, vs. 54 in MOTIVATE 1; increases of 122 and 128 per cubic millimeter, respectively, vs. 69 in MOTIVATE 2; P<0.001 for both comparisons in each study). Frequencies of adverse events were similar among the groups. CONCLUSIONS Maraviroc, as compared with placebo, resulted in significantly greater suppression of HIV-1 and greater increases in CD4 cell counts at 48 weeks in previously treated patients with R5 HIV-1 who were receiving OBT. (ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00098306 and NCT00098722.

Why has work effort become more intense?

It is hypothesized that technological and organizational changes are an important source of work intensification, and supportive evidence is found using establishment data for Britain in the 1990s. Work intensification has also been stimulated by the use of high-commitment human resources policies. A reduction in union power and a rise in the use of temporary agency workers and contractors were positively associated with work intensification; however, their impact during the 1990s was modest

Why has work effort become more intense?

It is hypothesized that technological and organizational changes are an important source of work intensification, and supportive evidence is found using establishment data for Britain in the 1990s. Work intensification has also been stimulated by the use of high-commitment human resources policies. A reduction in union power and a rise in the use of temporary agency workers and contractors were positively associated with work intensification; however, their impact during the 1990s was modest