Higher-order chromatin organization defines Progesterone Receptor and PAX2 binding to regulate estradiol-primed endometrial cancer gene expression

Estrogen (E2) and Progesterone (Pg), via their specific receptors (ER and PR respectively), are major determinants in the development and progression of endometrial malignancies. Here, we have studied how E2 and the synthetic progestin R5020 affect genomic functions in Ishikawa endometrial cancer cells. Using ChIPseq in cells exposed to the corresponding hormones, we identified cell specific binding sites for ER (ERbs) and PR (PRbs), which mostly correspond to independent sites but both adjacent to sites bound by PAX2. Analysis of long-range interactions by Hi-C showed enrichment of regions co-bound by PR and PAX2 inside TADs that contain differentially progestin-regulated genes. These regions, which we call “progestin control regions” (PgCRs), exhibit an open chromatin state prior to the exposure to the hormone. Our observations suggest that endometrial response to progestins in differentiated endometrial tumor cells results in part from binding of PR together with partner transcription factors to PgCRs, compartmentalizing hormone-independent open chromatin.Fil: la Greca, Alejandro Damián. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Fundación de Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental; ArgentinaFil: Bellora, Nicolás. Comision Nacional de Energia Atomica. Gerencia de Area de Aplicaciones de la Tecnologia Nuclear. Instituto de Tecnologias Nucleares Para la Salud.; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Patagonia Norte. Instituto de Investigaciones en Biodiversidad y Medioambiente. Universidad Nacional del Comahue. Centro Regional Universidad Bariloche. Instituto de Investigaciones en Biodiversidad y Medioambiente; ArgentinaFil: Le Dily, Francois. Centro de Regulación Genómica; España. Universitat Pompeu Fabra; EspañaFil: Jara, Rodrigo Agustin. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Fundación de Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental; ArgentinaFil: Quilez Oliete, Javier. Centro de Regulación Genómica; EspañaFil: Villanueva, José Luis. Centro de Regulación Genómica; EspañaFil: Vidal, Enrique. Centro de Regulación Genómica; EspañaFil: Merino, Gabriela Alejandra. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba; ArgentinaFil: Fresno Rodríguez, Cristóbal. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba; ArgentinaFil: Tarifa Reischle, Inti Carlos. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Fundación de Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental; ArgentinaFil: Vallejo, Griselda. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Fundación de Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental; ArgentinaFil: Vicent, Guillermo P.. Centro de Regulación Genómica; EspañaFil: Fernandez, Elmer Andres. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba; ArgentinaFil: Beato, Miguel. Centro de Regulación Genómica; España. Universitat Pompeu Fabra; EspañaFil: Saragueta, Patricia Esther. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Fundación de Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental. Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental; Argentin

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries