Vitamin D supplementation and breast cancer prevention : a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

In recent years, the scientific evidence linking vitamin D status or supplementation to breast cancer has grown notably. To investigate the role of vitamin D supplementation on breast cancer incidence, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing vitamin D with placebo or no treatment. We used OVID to search MEDLINE (R), EMBASE and CENTRAL until April 2012. We screened the reference lists of included studies and used the “Related Article” feature in PubMed to identify additional articles. No language restrictions were applied. Two reviewers independently extracted data on methodological quality, participants, intervention, comparison and outcomes. Risk Ratios and 95% Confident Intervals for breast cancer were pooled using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 test. In sensitivity analysis, we assessed the impact of vitamin D dosage and mode of administration on treatment effects. Only two randomized controlled trials fulfilled the pre-set inclusion criteria. The pooled analysis included 5372 postmenopausal women. Overall, Risk Ratios and 95% Confident Intervals were 1.11 and 0.74–1.68. We found no evidence of heterogeneity. Neither vitamin D dosage nor mode of administration significantly affected breast cancer risk. However, treatment efficacy was somewhat greater when vitamin D was administered at the highest dosage and in combination with calcium (Risk Ratio 0.58, 95% Confident Interval 0.23–1.47 and Risk Ratio 0.93, 95% Confident Interval 0.54–1.60, respectively). In conclusions, vitamin D use seems not to be associated with a reduced risk of breast cancer development in postmenopausal women. However, the available evidence is still limited and inadequate to draw firm conclusions. Study protocol code: FARM8L2B5L

From Sacred to Scientific: Epic Religion, Spectacular Science, and Charlton Heston’s Science Fiction Cinema

This paper analyses how long-1960s cinema responded to and framed public discourses surrounding religion and science. This approach allows for a discussion that extends beyond a critical study of the scholarly debates that surround the place of religion in science during a transitional period. Charlton Heston was an epic actor who went from literally playing God in The Ten Commandments (1956) to playing “god” as a messianic scientist in The Omega Man (1971). Best known for playing Moses, Heston became an unlikely science-based cinema star during the early 1970s. He was re-imagined as a scientist, but the religiosity of his established persona was inescapable. Heston and the science-based films he starred in capitalized upon the utopian promises of real science, and also the fears of the vocal activist counterculture. Planet of the Apes (1968), Omega Man (1971), Soylent Green (1973), and other science-based films made between 1968-1977 were bleak countercultural warnings about excessive consumerism, uncontrolled science, nuclear armament, irreversible environmental damage, and eventual human extinction. In this paper I argue that Heston’s transition from biblical epic star to science-fiction anti-hero represents the way in which the role and interpretation of science changed in post-classical cinema. Despite the shift from religious epic to science-based spectacle, religion remained a faithful component of Hollywood output indicating the ongoing connection between science and religion in US culture. I will consider the transition from sacred to science-based narratives and how religion was utilised across the production process of films that commented upon scientific advances

A gene-expression screen identifies a non-toxic sumoylation inhibitor that mimics SUMO-less human LRH-1 in liver.

SUMO-modification of nuclear proteins has profound effects on gene expression. However, non-toxic chemical tools that modulate sumoylation in cells are lacking. Here, to identify small molecule sumoylation inhibitors we developed a cell-based screen that focused on the well-sumoylated substrate, human Liver Receptor Homolog-1 (hLRH-1, NR5A2). Our primary gene-expression screen assayed two SUMO-sensitive transcripts, APOC3 and MUC1, that are upregulated by SUMO-less hLRH-1 or by siUBC9 knockdown, respectively. A polyphenol, tannic acid (TA) emerged as a potent sumoylation inhibitor in vitro (IC50 = 12.8 µM) and in cells. TA also increased hLRH-1 occupancy on SUMO-sensitive transcripts. Most significantly, when tested in humanized mouse primary hepatocytes, TA inhibits hLRH-1 sumoylation and induces SUMO-sensitive genes, thereby recapitulating the effects of expressing SUMO-less hLRH-1 in mouse liver. Our findings underscore the benefits of phenotypic screening for targeting post-translational modifications, and illustrate the potential utility of TA for probing the cellular consequences of sumoylation

A gene-expression screen identifies a non- toxic sumoylation inhibitor that mimics SUMO-less human LRH-1 in liver

Abstract SUMO-modification of nuclear proteins has profound effects on gene expression. However, non-toxic chemical tools that modulate sumoylation in cells are lacking. Here, to identify small molecule sumoylation inhibitors we developed a cell-based screen that focused on the wellsumoylated substrate, human Liver Receptor Homolog-1 (hLRH-1, NR5A2). Our primary geneexpression screen assayed two SUMO-sensitive transcripts, APOC3 and MUC1, that are upregulated by SUMO-less hLRH-1 or by siUBC9 knockdown, respectively. A polyphenol, tannic acid (TA) emerged as a potent sumoylation inhibitor in vitro (IC 50 = 12.8 mM) and in cells. TA also increased hLRH-1 occupancy on SUMO-sensitive transcripts. Most significantly, when tested in humanized mouse primary hepatocytes, TA inhibits hLRH-1 sumoylation and induces SUMOsensitive genes, thereby recapitulating the effects of expressing SUMO-less hLRH-1 in mouse liver. Our findings underscore the benefits of phenotypic screening for targeting post-translational modifications, and illustrate the potential utility of TA for probing the cellular consequences of sumoylation

Factors associated with biomedical research participation within community‐based samples across 3 National Cancer Institute–designated cancer centers

BackgroundEngaging diverse populations in biomedical research, including biospecimen donation, remains a national challenge. This study examined factors associated with an invitation to participate in biomedical research, intent to participate in biomedical research in the future, and participation in biomedical research and biospecimen donation among a diverse, multilingual, community-based sample across 3 distinct geographic areas.MethodsThree National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers engaged in community partnerships to develop and implement population health assessments, reaching a convenience sample of 4343 participants spanning their respective catchment areas. Data harmonization, multiple imputation, and multivariable logistic modeling were used.ResultsAfrican Americans, Hispanic/Latinos, and other racial minority groups were more likely to be offered opportunities to participate in biomedical research compared to whites. Access to care, history of cancer, educational level, survey language, nativity, and rural residence also influenced opportunity, intent, and actual participation in biomedical research.ConclusionsTraditionally underserved racial and ethnic groups reported heightened opportunity and interest in participating in biomedical research. Well-established community partnerships and long-standing community engagement around biomedical research led to a diverse sample being reached at each site and may in part explain the current study findings. However, this study illustrates an ongoing need to establish trust and diversify biomedical research participation through innovative and tailored approaches. National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers have the potential to increase opportunities for diverse participation in biomedical research through community partnerships and engagement. Additional work remains to identify and address system-level and individual-level barriers to participation in both clinical trials and biospecimen donation for research