Large Fragment Pre-S Deletion and High Viral Load Independently Predict Hepatitis B Relapse after Liver Transplantation

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) associated end-stage liver diseases are the leading causes of liver transplantation (LT) in Taiwan. Relapse of hepatitis B occurs after LT, raising the risk of graft failure and reducing patient survival. Although several oral antiviral agents have been approved for anti-HBV treatment, lamivudine (LAM) remained to be the most widely used preventive regimen in Taiwan. While several clinical predictors have been identified for hepatitis B relapse, the predictive roles of the histopathological characteristics in liver explants as well as the genotypic features of the viruses in pre-LT serum samples have not been assessed. Between September 2002 and August 2009, 150 consecutive hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) positive patients undergoing LT were included for outcome analysis following assessment of the clinicopathological and virological factors prior to LT. Kaplan-Meier analyses discovered that pre-operative LAM treatment ≤3 months; membranous distribution and higher expression of tissue HBsAg in liver explants; preoperative viral load ≧106 copies/ml; and presence of large fragment (>100 base pairs) pre-S deletion (LFpreSDel) correlated significantly with hepatitis B relapse. Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that the presence of LFpreSDel (P = 0.001) and viral load ≧106 copies/mL (P = 0.023) were independent predictors for hepatitis B relapse. In conclusion, besides high viral load, LFpreSDel mutation is an important independent predictor for hepatitis B relapse after LT. More aggressive preventive strategies should be applied for patients carrying these risk factors

Corporate Entrepreneurship:From Structures to Mindset

Corporate entrepreneurship dispersed throughout an organization and leveraging the entrepreneurial potential of all its employees bears significant benefits for those organizations that embrace it. However, it appears more difficult to instill and requires strong investment in the development of human capital and entrepreneurial mindset among the employees and across the organization. In this chapter, we discuss the essence of corporate entrepreneurship mindset and show that across an organization, there might be different entrepreneurial mindsets that correspond to different people, opportunities, and contexts. Although different, they all lead to enactment of entrepreneurial projects. This chapter, thus, contributes to the discussion regarding the nature of corporate entrepreneurial mindsets, and their development and stimulation within an organization, from both academic and practical view

Kinetochore fiber formation in animal somatic cells : dueling mechanisms come to a draw

Author Posting. © The Author, 2005. This is the author's version of the work. It is posted here by permission of Springer for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Chromosoma 114 (2005): 310-318, doi:10.1007/s00412-005-0028-2.The attachment to and movement of a chromosome on the mitotic spindle is mediated by the formation of a bundle of microtubules (MTs) that tethers the kinetochore on the chromosome to a spindle pole. The origin of these “kinetochore fibers” (K-fibers) has been investigated for over 125 years. As noted in 1944 by Schrader, there are only three possible ways to form a K-fiber: either it a) grows from the pole until it contacts the kinetochore; b) grows directly from the kinetochore; or c) it forms as a result of an interaction between the pole and the chromosome. Since Schrader’s time it has been firmly established that K-fibers in centrosome-containing animal somatic cells form as kinetochores capture MTs growing from the spindle pole (route a). It is now similarly clear that in cells lacking centrosomes, including plants and many animal oocytes, K-fibers “self-assemble” from MTs generated by the chromosomes (route b). Can animal somatic cells form K-fibers in the absence of centrosomes by the “self-assembly” pathway? In 2000 the answer to this question was shown to be a resounding “yes”. With this result, the next question became whether the presence of a centrosome normally suppresses K-fiber self-assembly, or if this route works concurrently with centrosome-mediated K-fiber formation. This question, too, has recently been answered: observations on untreated live animal cells expressing GFP-tagged tubulin clearly show that kinetochores can nucleate the formation of their associated MTs in the presence of functional centrosomes. The concurrent operation of these two “dueling” routes for forming K-fibers in animals helps explain why the attachment of kinetochores and the maturation of K-fibers occur as quickly as it does on all chromosomes within a cell.The work is sponsored by NIH grant GMS 40198

Are researchers deliberately bypassing the technology transfer office? An analysis of TTO awareness

Most universities committed to the commercialization of academic research have established technology transfer offices (TTOs). Nonetheless, many researchers bypass these TTOs and take their inventions directly to the marketplace. While TTO bypassing has typically been portrayed as deliberate and undesirable behavior, we argue that it could be unintentional as many researchers may simply be unaware of the TTO’s existence. Taking an information-processing perspective and using data on 3250 researchers in 24 European universities, we examine researcher attributes associated with TTO awareness. Our evidence confirms that only a minority of researchers are aware of the existence of a TTO at their university. TTO awareness is greater among researchers who possess experience as entrepreneurs, closed many research and consulting contracts with industry partners, conduct research in medicine, engineering or life sciences, or occupy postdoctoral positions. Policy implications of these findings are discussed

Anticipation in entrepreneurship

Entrepreneurship is a forward looking activity that embodies implicit imaginaries. If we remove the notion of a future from the field of entrepreneurship, field would cease to exist as its whole rationale is prospective. Entrepreneurship creates future value (Schumpeter 1934) through creative destruction; in uncertain contexts (Knight 1923) and with ‘alertness’ to opportunity (Kirzner 1982). Entrepreneurial opportunity em-braces anticipation as imaginative reason, strategically employed and motivated by aspiration. Entrepreneurial effectuation is concerned with the controllable aspects of an unpredictable future. Entrepreneuring is a process (Steyaert 2007) producing ontological emergence. Entrepreneurship is expressed in action and produces change. Nadin observes that anticipation relates to the perception of change (Nadin 2010) and is always expressed in action (Nadin 2015). Entrepreneurial identity is sig-nificant and the models embodied in an anticipatory system are what comprise its individuality; what distinguish it uniquely from other sys-tems. A change in these models is a change of identity (Rosen et al. 2012, p370). Entrepreneurship is relational and is coupled with other ac-tors in the environment, generating a sense of shared anticipation, or anticipatory coupling. Anticipatory coupling as a social phenomenon seems ripe for further research. Being emplaced, entrepreneuring practice involve sensing and anticipation (Antonacopoulou and Fuller 2019). Although anticipation is a natural activity, the effectiveness of anticipation can be improved through greater awareness in each of these sets of processes, among others. We suggest that the dynamics of emergence require anticipations of multiple forms of value. Seeing entrepreneurship from an anticipatory standpoint brings more to the fore the nature of values in practice. Further research can help reveal the anticipatory work is done in entrepreneurship to maintain the anticipatory capacity of the enterprise and of the interdependent relationships that maintain the enterprise