From the fringes to the State: the transformation of the Falange into a State Party

The early years of the Francoist regime saw the rise to power of the Falange Española. A fascist and minority party in the times of the Second Republic, the Falange grew rapidly and exponentially after the outbreak of the war, soon seeing itself at the helm of the single party established in April 1937. The Falange was transformed into a conduit between state and society, and the only channel for the participation of the people in the construction and development of the New State until 1945. This transformation, which owed as much to the civil war and Spanish peculiarities, as to the interactions between Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy, entailed its necessary bureaucratisation but it did not imply its complete de-politicisation. Therefore, this essay contends, the party’s importance to the construction of the regime cannot be dismissed simply as a failed attempt to instate a fascist dictatorship in Spain. Moreover, if, as Glenda Sluga has argued, the Spanish Civil War was one of ‘the most obvious examples of transnational links in the history of interwar fascism and anti-fascism’, it seems necessary to explore the Spanish case within a broader European context, if we want to properly understand the post-liberal departure of the 1930–1940s

Crop Updates 2005 - Lupins and Pulses

This session covers sixty five papers from different authors: 1. 2004 LUPIN AND PULSE INDUSTRY HIGHLIGHTS, Peter White Department of Agriculture 2. BACKGROUND, Peter White Department of Agriculture 2004 REGIONAL ROUNDUP 3. Northern Agricultural Region, Martin Harries, Department of Agriculture 4. Central Agricultural Region, Ian Pritchard, Department of Agriculture 5. Great Southern and Lakes, Rodger Beermier, Department of Agriculture 6. Esperance Port Zone, Mark Seymour, Department of Agriculture, and David Syme, The Grain Pool of WA LUPIN AND PULSE PRODUCTION AGRONOMY AND GENETIC IMPROVEMENT 7. Lupin, Martin Harries, Department of Agriculture 8. Narrow-leafed lupin breeding, Bevan Buirchell, Department of Agriculture 9. Yellow lupin breeding in Western Australia, Kedar Adhikari, Mark Sweetingham and Bevan Buirchell, Department of Agriculture 10. WALAB2000 - First Anthracnose resistant albus lupins, Kedar Adhikari, Bevan Buirchell, MarkSweetingham and Geoff Thomas, Department of Agriculture 11. Improving lupin grain quality and yield through genetic manipulation of key physiological traits, Jon Clements1 and Bevan Buirchell2,1CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 2Department of Agriculture 12. Lupin alkaloids in four Australian species, Shao Fang Wang, Chemistry Centre (WA), CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 13. Improving lupin tolerance to herbicides of metribuzin, isoxaflutole and carfentrazone-ethyl, Ping Si1, Mark Sweetingham12, Bevan Buirchell12, David Bowran2 and Huaan Yang12 , 1CLIMA, The University of Western Australia, 2Department of Agriculture 14. Combined cultural and shielded sprayer herbicide application for weed management, Martin Harries and Mike Baker Department of Agriculture 15. Field testing of lupin seed of various sources with and without post maturity, pre harvest rain for field establishment, Martin Harries, Wayne Parker, Mike Baker, Department of Agriculture 16. Lupin seed rate by wide row spacing, Martin Harries, Bob French, Damien Owen D’arcy, Department of Agriculture 17. How environment influences row spacing response in lupins, Bob French, Department of Agriculture 18. The effect of wider row spacing on lupin architecture, growth and nutrient uptake dynamics, Bill Bowden and Craig Scanlan, Department of Agriculture 19. Fertiliser placement and application rate in wide rows, Martin Harries, Damien Owen D’arcy, Department of Agriculture 20. The pros and cons of cowing lupins in ‘wide’ rows, Wayne Parker, Bob French and Martin Harries, Department of Agriculture 21. Investigation into the influence of row orientation in lupin crops, Jeff Russell1 and Angie Roe2, 1Department of Agriculture, 2Farm Focus Consultants 22. Making the most of Mandelup, Greg Shea and Chris Matthews, Department of Agriculture 23. The effect of wild radish density and lupin cultivars on their competition at Merredin, Shahab Pathan, Abul Hashem and Bob French, Department of Agriculture 24. The potential of pearl lupin (Lupinus mutabilis) for southern Australia, Jon Clements1, Mark Sweetingham2, Bevan Buirchell2, Sofia Sipsas2, Geoff Thomas2, John Quealy1, Roger Jones2, Clive Francis1, Colin Smith2 and Gordon Francis1, 1CLIMA, University of Western Australia 2Department of Agriculture 25. Field pea, Mark Seymour, Department of Agriculture 26. Breeding highlights, Tanveer. Khan and Bob French, Department of Agriculture 27. Variety evaluation, Tanveer Khan, Kerry Regan, Jenny Garlinge and Rod Hunter, Department of Agriculture 28. Large scale field pea variety trials, Martin Harries, Department of Agriculture 29. Kaspa demonstrations, Rodger Beermier, Mark Seymour, Ian Pritchard, Graham Mussell, Department of Agriculture 30. Field pea harvesting demonstration at Merredin, Glen Riethmuller, Greg Shea and Bob French, Department of Agriculture 31. Does Kaspa respond differently to disease, fungicides, time of sowing or seed rate, Mark Seymour, Department of Agriculture 32. Field pea response to foliar Manganese in mallee district, Mark Seymour, Department of Agriculture 33. Kaspa harvesting observations 2004, Mark Seymour, Ian Pritchard, Glen Riethmuller, Department of Agriculture 34. ‘Blackspot Manager’ for understanding blackspot of peas and ascochyta blight management, Moin Salam and Jean Galloway, Department of Agriculture 35. 250,000 ha of field pea in WA – Is it sustainable? Larn McMurray1 and Mark Seymour2, 1South Australian Research and Development Institute, 2Department of Agriculture 36. Desi chickpea, Wayne Parker, Department of Agriculture 37. Breeding highlights, Tanveer Khan1,2 and Kadambot Siddique2,1Department of Agriculture, 2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 38. Variety evaluation, Tanveer Khan, Kerry Regan, Jenny Garlinge and Rod Hunter, Department of Agriculture 39. Large scale variety testing of desi chickpeas, Martin Harries, Greg Shea, Mike Baker, Dirranie Kirby, Department of Agriculture 40. Desi variety chickpea trial, Martin Harries and Murray Blyth, Department of Agriculture 41. Seeding rates and row spacing of chickpea desi, Martin Harries, MurrayBlyth, Damien Owen D’arcy, Department of Agriculture 42. Molecular characterisation of chickpea wild relatives, Fucheng Shan, Heather Clarke and Kadambot Siddique, CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 43. Plant phosphorus status has a limited influence on the concentration of phosphorus-mobilising carboxylates in the rhizosphere of chickpea, Madeleine Wouterlood, Hans Lambers and Erik Veneklaas, The University of Western Australia 44. Kabuli chickpea, Kerry Regan, Department of Agriculture, and CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 45. ‘Kimberly Large’ A high quality and high yielding new variety for the Ord River Irrigation Area, Kerry Regan1,2, Kadambot Siddique2, Peter White1,2, Peter Smith1 and Gae Plunkett1,1Department of Agriculture, 2CLIMA, University of Western Australia 46. Development of ascochyta resistant and high quality varieties for Australia, Kadambot Siddique1, Kerry Regan1,2, Tim Pope1 and Mike Baker2, 1CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 2Department of Agriculture 47. Towards double haploids in chickpeas and field pea, Janine Croser, Julia Wilson and Kadambot Siddique, CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 48. Crossing chickpea with wild Cicer relatives to introduce resistance to disease and tolerance to environmental stress, Heather Clarke and Kadambot Siddique, CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 49. Faba bean, Peter White, Department of Agriculture 50. Germplasm evaluation, Peter White1,2, Kerry Regan1,2, Tim Pope2, Martin Harries1, Mark Seymour1, Rodger Beermier1 and Leanne Young1, 1Department of Agriculture, 2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 51. Lentil, Kerry Regan, Department of Agriculture, and CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 52. Variety and germplasm evaluation, Kerry Regan1,2, Tim Pope2, Leanne Young1, Martin Harries1, Murray Blyth1 and Michael Materne3, 1Department of Agriculture, 2CLIMA, University of Western Australia, 3Department of Primary Industries, Victoria 53. Lathyrus species, Kadambot Siddique1, Kerry Regan2, and Colin Hanbury2, 1CLIMA, the University of Western Australia, 2Department of Agricultur

Adding 6 months of androgen deprivation therapy to postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer: a comparison of short-course versus no androgen deprivation therapy in the RADICALS-HD randomised controlled trial

Background Previous evidence indicates that adjuvant, short-course androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) improves metastasis-free survival when given with primary radiotherapy for intermediate-risk and high-risk localised prostate cancer. However, the value of ADT with postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy is unclear. Methods RADICALS-HD was an international randomised controlled trial to test the efficacy of ADT used in combination with postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Key eligibility criteria were indication for radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer, prostate-specific antigen less than 5 ng/mL, absence of metastatic disease, and written consent. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to radiotherapy alone (no ADT) or radiotherapy with 6 months of ADT (short-course ADT), using monthly subcutaneous gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogue injections, daily oral bicalutamide monotherapy 150 mg, or monthly subcutaneous degarelix. Randomisation was done centrally through minimisation with a random element, stratified by Gleason score, positive margins, radiotherapy timing, planned radiotherapy schedule, and planned type of ADT, in a computerised system. The allocated treatment was not masked. The primary outcome measure was metastasis-free survival, defined as distant metastasis arising from prostate cancer or death from any cause. Standard survival analysis methods were used, accounting for randomisation stratification factors. The trial had 80% power with two-sided α of 5% to detect an absolute increase in 10-year metastasis-free survival from 80% to 86% (hazard ratio [HR] 0·67). Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN40814031, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00541047. Findings Between Nov 22, 2007, and June 29, 2015, 1480 patients (median age 66 years [IQR 61–69]) were randomly assigned to receive no ADT (n=737) or short-course ADT (n=743) in addition to postoperative radiotherapy at 121 centres in Canada, Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. With a median follow-up of 9·0 years (IQR 7·1–10·1), metastasis-free survival events were reported for 268 participants (142 in the no ADT group and 126 in the short-course ADT group; HR 0·886 [95% CI 0·688–1·140], p=0·35). 10-year metastasis-free survival was 79·2% (95% CI 75·4–82·5) in the no ADT group and 80·4% (76·6–83·6) in the short-course ADT group. Toxicity of grade 3 or higher was reported for 121 (17%) of 737 participants in the no ADT group and 100 (14%) of 743 in the short-course ADT group (p=0·15), with no treatment-related deaths. Interpretation Metastatic disease is uncommon following postoperative bed radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy. Adding 6 months of ADT to this radiotherapy did not improve metastasis-free survival compared with no ADT. These findings do not support the use of short-course ADT with postoperative radiotherapy in this patient population

Duration of androgen deprivation therapy with postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer: a comparison of long-course versus short-course androgen deprivation therapy in the RADICALS-HD randomised trial

Background Previous evidence supports androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with primary radiotherapy as initial treatment for intermediate-risk and high-risk localised prostate cancer. However, the use and optimal duration of ADT with postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy remains uncertain. Methods RADICALS-HD was a randomised controlled trial of ADT duration within the RADICALS protocol. Here, we report on the comparison of short-course versus long-course ADT. Key eligibility criteria were indication for radiotherapy after previous radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer, prostate-specific antigen less than 5 ng/mL, absence of metastatic disease, and written consent. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to add 6 months of ADT (short-course ADT) or 24 months of ADT (long-course ADT) to radiotherapy, using subcutaneous gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogue (monthly in the short-course ADT group and 3-monthly in the long-course ADT group), daily oral bicalutamide monotherapy 150 mg, or monthly subcutaneous degarelix. Randomisation was done centrally through minimisation with a random element, stratified by Gleason score, positive margins, radiotherapy timing, planned radiotherapy schedule, and planned type of ADT, in a computerised system. The allocated treatment was not masked. The primary outcome measure was metastasis-free survival, defined as metastasis arising from prostate cancer or death from any cause. The comparison had more than 80% power with two-sided α of 5% to detect an absolute increase in 10-year metastasis-free survival from 75% to 81% (hazard ratio [HR] 0·72). Standard time-to-event analyses were used. Analyses followed intention-to-treat principle. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN40814031, and ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT00541047 . Findings Between Jan 30, 2008, and July 7, 2015, 1523 patients (median age 65 years, IQR 60–69) were randomly assigned to receive short-course ADT (n=761) or long-course ADT (n=762) in addition to postoperative radiotherapy at 138 centres in Canada, Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. With a median follow-up of 8·9 years (7·0–10·0), 313 metastasis-free survival events were reported overall (174 in the short-course ADT group and 139 in the long-course ADT group; HR 0·773 [95% CI 0·612–0·975]; p=0·029). 10-year metastasis-free survival was 71·9% (95% CI 67·6–75·7) in the short-course ADT group and 78·1% (74·2–81·5) in the long-course ADT group. Toxicity of grade 3 or higher was reported for 105 (14%) of 753 participants in the short-course ADT group and 142 (19%) of 757 participants in the long-course ADT group (p=0·025), with no treatment-related deaths. Interpretation Compared with adding 6 months of ADT, adding 24 months of ADT improved metastasis-free survival in people receiving postoperative radiotherapy. For individuals who can accept the additional duration of adverse effects, long-course ADT should be offered with postoperative radiotherapy. Funding Cancer Research UK, UK Research and Innovation (formerly Medical Research Council), and Canadian Cancer Society

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

Understanding general practitioner and pharmacist preferences for pharmacogenetic testing in primary care: a discrete choice experiment

Pharmacogenetic testing in the United Kingdom’s National Health Service (NHS) has historically been reactive in nature, undertaken in the context of single gene-drug relationships in specialist settings. Using a discrete choice experiment we aimed to identify healthcare professional preferences for development of a pharmacogenetic testing service in primary care in the NHS. Respondents, representing two professions groups (general practitioners or pharmacists), completed one of two survey versions, asking them to select their preferred pharmacogenetic testing service in the context of a presentation of low mood or joint pain. Responses from 235 individuals were included. All respondents preferred pharmacogenetic testing over no testing, though preference heterogeneity was identified. Both professional groups, but especially GPs, were highly sensitive to service design, with uptake varying depending on the service offered. This study demonstrates uptake of a pharmacogenetic testing service is impacted by service design and highlights key areas which should be prioritised within future initiatives

A neuroethics framework for the Australian Brain Initiative

Neuroethics is central to the Australian Brain Initiative’s aim to sustain a thriving and responsible neurotechnology industry. Diverse and inclusive community and stakeholder engagement and a trans-disciplinary approach to neuroethics will be key to the success of the Australian Brain Initiative