A new hammer to crack an old nut : interspecific competitive resource capture by plants is regulated by nutrient supply, not climate

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Is Context-aware Reasoning = Case-based Reasoning?

The purpose of this paper is to explore the similarities and differences and then argue for the potential synergies between two methodologies, namely Context-aware Reasoning and Case-based Reasoning, that are amongst the tools which can be used for intelligent environment (IE) system development. Through a case study supported by a review of the literature, we argue that context awareness and case based reasoning are not equal and are complementary methodologies to solve a domain specific problem, rather, the IE development paradigm must build a cooperation between these two approaches to overcome the individual drawbacks and to maximise the success of the IE systems

Evaluation of the current knowledge limitations in breast cancer research: a gap analysis

BACKGROUND A gap analysis was conducted to determine which areas of breast cancer research, if targeted by researchers and funding bodies, could produce the greatest impact on patients. METHODS Fifty-six Breast Cancer Campaign grant holders and prominent UK breast cancer researchers participated in a gap analysis of current breast cancer research. Before, during and following the meeting, groups in seven key research areas participated in cycles of presentation, literature review and discussion. Summary papers were prepared by each group and collated into this position paper highlighting the research gaps, with recommendations for action. RESULTS Gaps were identified in all seven themes. General barriers to progress were lack of financial and practical resources, and poor collaboration between disciplines. Critical gaps in each theme included: (1) genetics (knowledge of genetic changes, their effects and interactions); (2) initiation of breast cancer (how developmental signalling pathways cause ductal elongation and branching at the cellular level and influence stem cell dynamics, and how their disruption initiates tumour formation); (3) progression of breast cancer (deciphering the intracellular and extracellular regulators of early progression, tumour growth, angiogenesis and metastasis); (4) therapies and targets (understanding who develops advanced disease); (5) disease markers (incorporating intelligent trial design into all studies to ensure new treatments are tested in patient groups stratified using biomarkers); (6) prevention (strategies to prevent oestrogen-receptor negative tumours and the long-term effects of chemoprevention for oestrogen-receptor positive tumours); (7) psychosocial aspects of cancer (the use of appropriate psychosocial interventions, and the personal impact of all stages of the disease among patients from a range of ethnic and demographic backgrounds). CONCLUSION Through recommendations to address these gaps with future research, the long-term benefits to patients will include: better estimation of risk in families with breast cancer and strategies to reduce risk; better prediction of drug response and patient prognosis; improved tailoring of treatments to patient subgroups and development of new therapeutic approaches; earlier initiation of treatment; more effective use of resources for screening populations; and an enhanced experience for people with or at risk of breast cancer and their families. The challenge to funding bodies and researchers in all disciplines is to focus on these gaps and to drive advances in knowledge into improvements in patient care

Immunohistochemical expression of insulin-like growth factor binding protein-3 in invasive breast cancers and ductal carcinoma in situ: implications for clinicopathology and patient outcome

INTRODUCTION: Insulin-like growth factor binding protein-3 (IGFBP-3) differentially modulates breast epithelial cell growth through insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-dependent and IGF-independent pathways and is a direct (IGF-independent) growth inhibitor as well as a mitogen that potentiates EGF (epidermal growth factor) and interacts with HER-2. Previously, high IGFBP-3 levels in breast cancers have been determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and immunoradiometric assay methods. In vitro, IGFBP-3's mechanisms of action may involve cell membrane binding and nuclear translocation. To evaluate tumour-specific IGFBP-3 expression and its subcellular localisation, this study examined immunohistochemical IGFBP-3 expression in a series of invasive ductal breast cancers (IDCs) with synchronous ductal carcinomas in situ (DCIS) in relation to clinicopathological variables and patient outcome. METHODS: Immunohistochemical expression of IGFBP-3 was evaluated with the sheep polyclonal antiserum (developed in house) with staining performed as described previously. RESULTS: IGFBP-3 was evaluable in 101 patients with a variable pattern of cytoplasmic expression (positivity of 1+/2+ score) in 85% of invasive and 90% of DCIS components. Strong (2+) IGFBP-3 expression was evident in 32 IDCs and 40 cases of DCIS. A minority of invasive tumours (15%) and DCIS (10%) lacked IGFBP-3 expression. Nuclear IGFBP-3 expression was not detectable in either invasive cancers or DCIS, with a consistent similarity in IGFBP-3 immunoreactivity in IDCs and DCIS. Positive IGFBP-3 expression showed a possible trend in association with increased proliferation (P = 0.096), oestrogen receptor (ER) negativity (P = 0.06) and HER-2 overexpression (P = 0.065) in invasive tumours and a strong association with ER negativity (P = 0.037) in DCIS. Although IGFBP-3 expression was not an independent prognosticator, IGFBP-3-positive breast cancers may have shorter disease-free and overall survivals, although these did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Increased breast epithelial IGFBP-3 expression is a feature of tumorigenesis with cytoplasmic immunoreactivity in the absence of significant nuclear localisation in IDCs and DCIS. There are trends between high levels of IGFBP-3 and poor prognostic features, suggesting that IGFBP-3 is a potential mitogen. IGFBP-3 is not an independent prognosticator for overall survival or disease-free survival, to reflect its dual effects on breast cancer growth regulated by complex pathways in vivo that may relate to its interactions with other growth factors

Structure of the St. Louis encephalitis virus postfusion envelope trimer

St. Louis encephalitis virus (SLEV) is a mosquito-borne flavivirus responsible for several human encephalitis outbreaks over the last 80 years. Mature flavivirus virions are coated with dimeric envelope (E) proteins that mediate attachment and fusion with host cells. E is a class II fusion protein, the hallmark of which is a distinct dimer-to-trimer rearrangement that occurs upon endosomal acidification and insertion of hydrophobic fusion peptides into the endosomal membrane. Herein, we report the crystal structure of SLEV E in the posfusion trimer conformation. The structure revealed specific features that differentiate SLEV E from trimers of related flavi- and alphaviruses. SLEV E fusion loops have distinct intermediate spacing such that they are positioned further apart than previously observed in flaviviruses but closer together than Semliki Forest virus, an alphavirus. Domains II and III (DII and DIII) of SLEV E also adopt different angles relative to DI, which suggests that the DI-DII joint may accommodate spheroidal motions. However, trimer interfaces are well conserved among flaviviruses, so it is likely the differences observed represent structural features specific to SLEV function. Analysis of surface potentials revealed a basic platform underneath flavivirus fusion loops that may interact with the anionic lipid head groups found in membranes. Taken together, these results highlight variations in E structure and assembly that may direct virus-specific interactions with host determinants to influence pathogenesis

INTERVAL (investigation of NICE technologies for enabling risk-variable-adjusted-length) dental recalls trial: a multicentre randomised controlled trial investigating the best dental recall interval for optimum, cost-effective maintenance of oral health in dentate adults attending dental primary care

Background Traditionally, patients at low risk and high risk of developing dental disease have been encouraged to attend dental recall appointments at regular intervals of six months between appointments. The lack of evidence for the effect that different recall intervals between dental check-ups have on patient outcomes, provider workload and healthcare costs is causing considerable uncertainty for the profession and patients, despite the publication of the NICE Guideline on dental recall. The need for primary research has been highlighted in the Health Technology Assessment Group’s systematic review of routine dental check-ups, which found little evidence to support or refute the practice of encouraging 6-monthly dental check-ups in adults. The more recent Cochrane review on recall interval concluded there was insufficient evidence to draw any conclusions regarding the potential beneficial or harmful effects of altering the recall interval between dental check-ups. There is therefore an urgent need to assess the relative effectiveness and cost-benefit of different dental recall intervals in a robust, sufficiently powered randomised control trial (RCT) in primary dental care. Methods This is a four year multi-centre, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial with blinded outcome assessment based in dental primary care in the UK. Practitioners will recruit 2372 dentate adult patients. Patient participants will be randomised to one of three groups: fixed-period six month recall, risk-based recall, or fixed-period twenty-four month recall. Outcome data will be assessed through clinical examination, patient questionnaires and NHS databases. The primary outcomes measure gingival inflammation/bleeding on probing and oral health-related quality of life. Discussion INTERVAL will provide evidence for the most clinically-effective and cost-beneficial recall interval for maintaining optimum oral health in dentate adults attending general dental practice

Outcome after extended follow-up in a prospective study of operable breast cancer: key factors and a prognostic index

In 1990, 215 patients with operable breast cancer were entered into a prospective study of the prognostic significance of five biochemical markers and 15 other factors (pathological/chronological/patient). After a median follow-up of 6.6 years, there were 77 recurrences and 77 deaths (59 breast cancer-related). By univariate analysis, patient outcome related significantly to 13 factors. By multivariate analysis, the most important of nine independent factors were: number of nodes involved, steroid receptors (for oestrogen or progestogen), age, clinical or pathological tumour size and grade. Receptors and grade exerted their influence only in the first 3 years. Progestogen receptors (immunohistochemical) and oestrogen receptors (biochemical) were of similar prognostic significance. The two receptors were correlated (r=+0.50, P=0.001) and displaced each other from the analytical model but some evidence for the additivity of their prognostic values was seen when their levels were discordant

Host preferences and differential contributions of deciduous tree species shape mycorrhizal species richness in a mixed Central European forest

Mycorrhizal species richness and host ranges were investigated in mixed deciduous stands composed of Fagus sylvatica, Tilia spp., Carpinus betulus, Acer spp., and Fraxinus excelsior. Acer and Fraxinus were colonized by arbuscular mycorrhizas and contributed 5% to total stand mycorrhizal fungal species richness. Tilia hosted similar and Carpinus half the number of ectomycorrhizal (EM) fungal taxa compared with Fagus (75 putative taxa). The relative abundance of the host tree the EM fungal richness decreased in the order Fagus > Tilia >> Carpinus. After correction for similar sampling intensities, EM fungal species richness of Carpinus was still about 30–40% lower than that of Fagus and Tilia. About 10% of the mycorrhizal species were shared among the EM forming trees; 29% were associated with two host tree species and 61% with only one of the hosts. The latter group consisted mainly of rare EM fungal species colonizing about 20% of the root tips and included known specialists but also putative non-host associations such as conifer or shrub mycorrhizas. Our data indicate that EM fungal species richness was associated with tree identity and suggest that Fagus secures EM fungal diversity in an ecosystem since it shared more common EM fungi with Tilia and Carpinus than the latter two among each other