The Solar Orbiter Science Activity Plan: translating solar and heliospheric physics questions into action

Solar Orbiter is the first space mission observing the solar plasma both in situ and remotely, from a close distance, in and out of the ecliptic. The ultimate goal is to understand how the Sun produces and controls the heliosphere, filling the Solar System and driving the planetary environments. With six remote-sensing and four in-situ instrument suites, the coordination and planning of the operations are essential to address the following four top-level science questions: (1) What drives the solar wind and where does the coronal magnetic field originate?; (2) How do solar transients drive heliospheric variability?; (3) How do solar eruptions produce energetic particle radiation that fills the heliosphere?; (4) How does the solar dynamo work and drive connections between the Sun and the heliosphere? Maximising the mission’s science return requires considering the characteristics of each orbit, including the relative position of the spacecraft to Earth (affecting downlink rates), trajectory events (such as gravitational assist manoeuvres), and the phase of the solar activity cycle. Furthermore, since each orbit’s science telemetry will be downloaded over the course of the following orbit, science operations must be planned at mission level, rather than at the level of individual orbits. It is important to explore the way in which those science questions are translated into an actual plan of observations that fits into the mission, thus ensuring that no opportunities are missed. First, the overarching goals are broken down into specific, answerable questions along with the required observations and the so-called Science Activity Plan (SAP) is developed to achieve this. The SAP groups objectives that require similar observations into Solar Orbiter Observing Plans, resulting in a strategic, top-level view of the optimal opportunities for science observations during the mission lifetime. This allows for all four mission goals to be addressed. In this paper, we introduce Solar Orbiter’s SAP through a series of examples and the strategy being followed

Tables des surfaces de déblai et de remblai, des largeurs d'emprise et des longueurs des talus, relatives à un chemin de fer à deux voies ou à une route de 10 mètres de largeur entre fossés... par F. Lefort,...

Appartient à l’ensemble documentaire : EnPC000Appartient à l’ensemble documentaire : EnPCcorp12Appartient à l’ensemble documentaire : EnPCthèm02Avec mode text

Therapeutic Management of Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Revolution in Every Decade

Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) oncogenesis is mainly driven by VHL gene inactivation, leading to overexpression of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). The use of tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKIs) directed against VEGF and its receptor (VEGFR) revolutionised the management of metastatic renal cancer in the 2000s. The more recent development of next-generation TKIs such as cabozantinib or lenvatinib has made it possible to bypass some of the mechanisms of resistance to first-generation anti-VEGFR TKIs. During the decade 2010–2020, the development of immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) therapies revolutionised the management of many solid cancers, including RCC, in first- and subsequent-line settings. Dual ICB or ICB plus anti-VEGFR TKI combinations are now the standard of care for patients with advanced clear cell RCC. To optimise these combination therapies while preserving patient quality of life, escalation and de-escalation strategies are being evaluated in prospective randomised trials, based on patient selection according to their prognosis risk. Finally, new therapeutic approaches, such as targeting hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF) and the development of innovative treatments using antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), CAR-T cells, or radiopharmaceuticals, are all potential candidates to improve further patient survival

Combinations of Anti-Angiogenic Agents and Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Renal Cell Carcinoma: Best Option?

Over the past decade, major advances have been made in the treatment of advanced and metastatic renal cell carcinomas, specifically clear cell carcinomas. For many years the optimal approach was sequential; thus, monotherapies [principally tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs)] targeting angiogenesis until toxicity or progressive disease developed. The rationale was the common mechanisms of action of the targeting agents and avoidance of the risk of overlapping toxicities. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are effective monotherapies, and combinations thereof with anti-angiogenic agents were thus later considered. Synergistic interactions were reported in vitro. Clinical efficacy was evident in three pivotal phase III trials with axitinib-pembrolizumab, cabozantinib-nivolumab, and lenvatinib-pembrolizumab combinations. Two other combinations showed interesting results but did not improve overall survival. However, the data aided our understanding of the new therapeutic approaches. A combination of the ICIs nivolumab and ipilimumab was the first to evidence better progression-free and overall survival compared to sunitinib in patients with intermediate or unfavourable prognoses as evaluated by the International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC). Here we focus on the TKI-ICI combinations, emphasising the rationale of their use and the clinical results. To date, no biomarker facilitating the selection of an optimal treatment by disease and patient status has been reported

Chloroplast microsatellite polymorphisms in Vitis spp

[EN] The use of consensus chloroplast microsatellites primers for dicotyledonous chloroplast genomes revealed the existence of intra and interspecific length variation within the genus Vitis. Three chloroplast microsatellite loci were found to be polymorphic in samples of Vitis vinifera, Vitis berlandieri, Vitis riparia, and Vitis rupestris out of a total of 10 consensus primer pairs tested. These polymorphisms were always due to a variable number of mononucleotide residues within A and (or) T stretches in the amplified regions. Chloroplast microsatellite polymorphisms were used to demonstrate the maternal inheritance of chloroplast in V. vinifera and to characterise the chloroplast haplotypes present in wine grape cultivars of this species grown in Spain and Greece. The different distribution of haplotype frequencies in the two ends of the Mediterranean growth area suggests the existence of independent domestication events for grapevine.Key words: Vitis, grapevine, chloroplast microsatellites, chloroplast haplotypes, chloroplast inheritance, grapevine domestication.[ES] L’emploi d’amorces consensus pour l’ADN chloroplastique chez les dicotylédones révèle la présence de variabilité intra- et interspécifique au sein du genre Vitis. Trois locus microsatellites chloroplastiques se sont avérés polymorphes chez le Vitis vinifera, le Vitis barlandieri, le Vitis riparia et le Vitis rupestris parmi un ensemble de dix amorces consensus employées. Ces polymorphismes étaient presque toujours dus à un nombre variable de nucléotides A ou T au sein d’une suite mononucléotidique dans la région amplifiée. Les polymorphismes de l’ADN chloroplastique ont été employés pour démontrer l’hérédité maternelle du chloroplaste chez le V. vinifera et pour caractériser les haplotypes chloroplastiques présents chez les cépages à vin cultivés en Espagne et en Grèce. La distribution différente quant à la fréquence des haplotypes aux deux extrémités de la zone méditerranéenne de culture suggère des événements indé- pendants de domestication de la vigne.This research was funded by projects PETRI95-0282 and CM 07G/0045/2000. Support for research activity at the Centro Nacional de Biotecnología is provided through a specific agreement, Centro Superior de Investigaciones Científicas – Instituto Nacional de Investigación y Tecnología Agraria y Alimentaria (CSIC–INIA).Peer reviewe

Prognostic Role of Inflammasome Components in Human Colorectal Cancer.

International audience(1) We wanted to assess the prognostic impact of inflammasomes involved in gut epithelial homeostasis and the development of human colorectal cancer (CRC). (2) We investigated the expression of inflammasome components in colonic epithelial cells at the protein level in patient tissues, through an immunofluorescence assay. (3) In a cohort of 104 patients, we found that all inflammasome components were downregulated in CRC. Loss of epithelial (but not stromal) expression of NLRP6, caspase-1 and IL-18 was associated with an increased mortality of 72%, 58% and 68% respectively and to disease progression into metastasis. The loss of epithelial and stromal IL-18 but not NLRP6, was associated to lower tumor immune infiltrates in the lymphoid compartment and higher Programmed cell Death receptor 1 (PD-1) expression. Finally, we found that combined downregulation of IL-18 and NLRP6 was associated with a worse outcome. Indeed, 5-year survival rates were 26% for the NLRP6low/IL-18low tumors, compared to 64.4% for the entire cohort. This downregulation was associated with a more advanced disease ( < 0.0001) and a trend to lower lymphoid cell infiltration. (4) We identified critical inflammasome markers that may help in better stratifying patients for prognosis in CRC and could help clinicians to determine which patients may benefit from immunotherapies

Clinical and Biological Differences between Upper Tract Carcinoma and Bladder Urothelial Cancer, Including Implications for Clinical Practice

Upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) is a rare disease included, along with the much more frequent urothelial bladder cancer (BUC), in the family of urothelial carcinomas (UCs). However, while UTUCs and BUCs share several features, their epidemiological, clinical, pathological, and biological differences must be considered to establish an optimal therapeutic strategy. This review examines the clinical differences between UTUC and BUC, as well as the main results obtained by molecular screening of the two diseases. The findings of clinical trials, performed in peri-operative and metastatic settings and assessing systemic treatments in UC, are summarised. A comparison of the data obtained for UTUC and BUC suggests improved therapeutic approaches, both in regards to routine practice and future drug development

Comprehensive analyses of immune tumor microenvironment in papillary renal cell carcinoma

International audienceBackground: Papillary renal cell carcinoma (pRCC) is the most common non-clear cell RCC, and associated with poor outcomes in the metastatic setting. In this study, we aimed to comprehensively evaluate the immune tumor microenvironment (TME), largely unknown, of patients with metastatic pRCC and identify potential therapeutic targets.Methods: We performed quantitative gene expression analysis of TME using Microenvironment Cell Populations-counter (MCP-counter) methodology, on two independent cohorts of localized pRCC (n=271 and n=98). We then characterized the TME, using immunohistochemistry (n=38) and RNA-sequencing (RNA-seq) (n=30) on metastatic pRCC from the prospective AXIPAP trial cohort.Results: Unsupervised clustering identified two \&quot;TME subtypes\&quot;, in each of the cohorts: the \&quot;immune-enriched\&quot; and the \&quot;immune-low\&quot;. Within AXIPAP trial cohort, the \&quot;immune-enriched\&quot; cluster was significantly associated with a worse prognosis according to the median overall survival to 8 months (95% CI, 6 to 29) versus 37 months (95% CI, 20 to NA, p=0.001). The two immune signatures, Teff and JAVELIN Renal 101 Immuno signature, predictive of response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) in clear cell RCC, were significantly higher in the \&quot;immune-enriched\&quot; group (adjusted p&lt;0.05). Finally, five differentially overexpressed genes were identified, corresponding mainly to B lymphocyte populations.Conclusion: For the first time, using RNA-seq and immunohistochemistry, we have highlighted a specific immune TME subtype of metastatic pRCC, significantly more infiltrated with T and B immune population. This \&quot;immune-enriched\&quot; group appears to have a worse prognosis and could have a potential predictive value for response to immunotherapy, justifying the confirmation of these results in a cohort of metastatic pRCC treated with CPI and in combination with targeted therapies.Trial registration number: NCT02489695

Immune checkpoint inhibitor rechallenge in patients who previously experienced immune-related inflammatory arthritis: a multicentre observational study

Objective Another course of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is often considered in patients with cancer progression and previous immune-related adverse events, including inflammatory arthritis (ICI-IA), but there are limited data regarding safety of ICI rechallenge in this setting. We aimed to assess the rate and clinical features associated with ICI-IA flare/recurrence on ICI rechallenge.Methods We conducted a multicentre observational study including cancer patients with ICI-IA who started a second course of ICI more than 3 months after ICI discontinuation in four French university hospitals. Primary outcome was the frequency of ICI flare/recurrence after ICI rechallenge.Results Twenty-three patients were included. At the time of ICI rechallenge, 18 patients reported no symptoms of ICI-IA (78%) and 5 had grade 1 (22%), 11 patients (48%) were not receiving any ICI-IA treatment, 11 (48%) were still on prednisone, 2 (9%) were on conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and 1 (4%) on anti-IL-6. ICI-IA flare/recurrence occurred in 12 patients (52%) with a median time of 1 month after ICI rechallenge. ICI-IA phenotype, disease activity and ICI-IA treatment at the time of ICI rechallenge did not differ according to ICI-IA flare/recurrence status.Conclusion In this first observational study of ICI-IA patients rechallenged with ICI, about half of the patients experienced ICI-IA flare/recurrence with a similar phenotype but occurring earlier than the initial ICI-IA, warranting close monitoring during the first month of retreatment. Risk of flare did not differ according to baseline immunosuppressive treatment at the time of rechallenge