Exploring what lies behind public preferences for avoiding health losses caused by lapses in healthcare safety and patient lifestyle choices

© 2013 Singh et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0),which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.This article has been made available through the Brunel Open Access Publishing Fund.Background: Although many studies have identified public preferences for prioritising health care interventions based on characteristics of recipient or care, very few of them have examined the reasons for the stated preferences. We conducted an on-line person trade-off (PTO) study (N=1030) to investigate whether the public attach a premium to the avoidance of ill health associated with alternative types of responsibilities: lapses in healthcare safety, those caused by individual action or lifestyle choice; or genetic conditions. We found that the public gave higher priority to prevention of harm in a hospital setting such as preventing hospital associated infections than genetic disorder but drug administration errors were valued similar to genetic disorders. Prevention of staff injuries, lifestyle diseases and sports injuries, were given lower priority. In this paper we aim to understand the reasoning behind the responses by analysing comments provided by respondents to the PTO questions. Method: A majority of the respondents who participated in the survey provided brief comments explaining preferences in free text responses following PTO questions. This qualitative data was transformed into explicit codes conveying similar meanings. An overall coding framework was developed and a reliability test was carried out. Recurrent patterns were identified in each preference group. Comments which challenged the assumptions of hypothetical scenarios were also investigated. Results: NHS causation of illness and a duty of care were the most cited reasons to prioritise lapses in healthcare safety. Personal responsibility dominated responses for lifestyle related contexts, and many respondents mentioned that health loss was the result of the individual’s choice to engage in risky behaviour. A small proportion of responses questioned the assumptions underlying the PTO questions. However excluding these from the main analysis did not affect the conclusions. Conclusion: Although some responses indicated misunderstanding or rejection of assumptions we put forward, the results were still robust. The reasons put forward for responses differed between comparisons but responsibility was the most frequently cited. Most preference elicitation studies only focus on eliciting numerical valuations but allowing for qualitative data can augment understanding of preferences as well as verifying results.EPSRC through the MATCH programme(EP/F063822/1 and EP/G012393/1) and HERG within Brunel University

Evaluation of the national Cleanyourhands campaign to reduce Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia and Clostridium difficile infection in hospitals in England and Wales by improved hand hygiene: four year, prospective, ecological, interrupted time series study

Objective To evaluate the impact of the Cleanyourhands campaign on rates of hospital procurement of alcohol hand rub and soap, report trends in selected healthcare associated infections, and investigate the association between infections and procurement

Allelic expression analysis of the osteoarthritis susceptibility locus that maps to MICAL3

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>A genome-wide association scan with subsequent replication study that involved over 67,000 individuals of European ancestry has produced evidence of association of single nucleotide polymorphism rs2277831 to primary osteoarthritis (OA) with a P-value of 2.9 × 10^-5. rs2277831, an A/G transition, is located in an intron of <it>MICAL3</it>. This gene is located on chromosome 22q11.21 and the association signal encompasses two additional genes, <it>BCL2L13 </it>and <it>BID</it>. It is becoming increasingly apparent that many common complex traits are mediated by <it>cis</it>-acting regulatory polymorphisms that influence, in a tissue-specific manner, gene expression or transcript stability.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We used total and allelic expression analysis to assess whether the OA association to rs2277831 is mediated by an influence on MICAL3, BCL2L13 or BID expression. Using RNA extracted from joint tissues of 60 patients who had undergone elective joint replacement surgery, we assessed whether rs2277831 correlated with allelic expression of either of the three genes by: 1) measuring the expression of each gene by quantitative PCR and then stratifying the data by genotype at rs2277831 and 2) accurately discriminating and quantifying the mRNA synthesised from the alleles of OA patients using allelic-quantitative PCR.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We found no evidence for a correlation between gene expression and genotype at rs2277831, with P-values of 0.09 for <it>BCL2L13</it>, 0.07 for <it>BID </it>and 0.33 for <it>MICAL3</it>. In the allelic expression analysis we observed several examples of significant (p < 0.05) allelic imbalances, with an allelic expression ratio of 2.82 observed in <it>BCL2L13 </it>(P = 0.004), 2.09 at <it>BID </it>(P = 0.001) and the most extreme case being at <it>MICAL3</it>, with an allelic expression ratio of 5.47 (P = 0.001). However, there was no correlation observed between the pattern of allelic expression and the genotype at rs2277831.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>In the tissues that we have studied, our data do not support our hypothesis that the association between rs2277831 and OA is due to the effect this SNP has on <it>MICAL3, BCL2L13 </it>or <it>BID </it>gene expression. Instead, our data point towards other functional effects accounting for the OA associated signal.</p

Pharmacodynamic evaluation and safety assessment of treatment with antibodies to serum amyloid P component in patients with cardiac amyloidosis: an open-label Phase 2 study and an adjunctive immuno-PET imaging study.

BACKGROUND: In a Phase I study treatment with the serum amyloid P component (SAP) depleter miridesap followed by monoclonal antibody to SAP (dezamizumab) showed removal of amyloid from liver, spleen and kidney in patients with systemic amyloidosis. We report results from a Phase 2 study and concurrent immuno-positron emission tomography (PET) study assessing efficacy, pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, safety and cardiac uptake (of dezamizumab) following the same intervention in patients with cardiac amyloidosis. METHODS: Both were uncontrolled open-label studies. After SAP depletion with miridesap, patients received ≤ 6 monthly doses of dezamizumab in the Phase 2 trial (n = 7), ≤ 2 doses of non-radiolabelled dezamizumab plus [89Zr]Zr-dezamizumab (total mass dose of 80 mg at session 1 and 500 mg at session 2) in the immuno-PET study (n = 2). Primary endpoints of the Phase 2 study were changed from baseline to follow-up (at 8 weeks) in left ventricular mass (LVM) by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and safety. Primary endpoint of the immuno-PET study was [89Zr]Zr-dezamizumab cardiac uptake assessed via PET. RESULTS: Dezamizumab produced no appreciable or consistent reduction in LVM nor improvement in cardiac function in the Phase 2 study. In the immuno-PET study, measurable cardiac uptake of [89Zr]Zr-dezamizumab, although seen in both patients, was moderate to low. Uptake was notably lower in the patient with higher LVM. Treatment-associated rash with cutaneous small-vessel vasculitis was observed in both studies. Abdominal large-vessel vasculitis after initial dezamizumab dosing (300 mg) occurred in the first patient with immunoglobulin light chain amyloidosis enrolled in the Phase 2 study. Symptom resolution was nearly complete within 24 h of intravenous methylprednisolone and dezamizumab discontinuation; abdominal computed tomography imaging showed vasculitis resolution by 8 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Unlike previous observations of visceral amyloid reduction, there was no appreciable evidence of amyloid removal in patients with cardiac amyloidosis in this Phase 2 trial, potentially related to limited cardiac uptake of dezamizumab as demonstrated in the immuno-PET study. The benefit-risk assessment for dezamizumab in cardiac amyloidosis was considered unfavourable after the incidence of large-vessel vasculitis and development for this indication was terminated. Trial registration NCT03044353 (2 February 2017) and NCT03417830 (25 January 2018)

Pharmacodynamic evaluation and safety assessment of treatment with antibodies to serum amyloid P component in patients with cardiac amyloidosis: an open-label Phase 2 study and an adjunctive immuno-PET imaging study.

BACKGROUND: In a Phase I study treatment with the serum amyloid P component (SAP) depleter miridesap followed by monoclonal antibody to SAP (dezamizumab) showed removal of amyloid from liver, spleen and kidney in patients with systemic amyloidosis. We report results from a Phase 2 study and concurrent immuno-positron emission tomography (PET) study assessing efficacy, pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, safety and cardiac uptake (of dezamizumab) following the same intervention in patients with cardiac amyloidosis. METHODS: Both were uncontrolled open-label studies. After SAP depletion with miridesap, patients received ≤ 6 monthly doses of dezamizumab in the Phase 2 trial (n = 7), ≤ 2 doses of non-radiolabelled dezamizumab plus [89Zr]Zr-dezamizumab (total mass dose of 80 mg at session 1 and 500 mg at session 2) in the immuno-PET study (n = 2). Primary endpoints of the Phase 2 study were changed from baseline to follow-up (at 8 weeks) in left ventricular mass (LVM) by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and safety. Primary endpoint of the immuno-PET study was [89Zr]Zr-dezamizumab cardiac uptake assessed via PET. RESULTS: Dezamizumab produced no appreciable or consistent reduction in LVM nor improvement in cardiac function in the Phase 2 study. In the immuno-PET study, measurable cardiac uptake of [89Zr]Zr-dezamizumab, although seen in both patients, was moderate to low. Uptake was notably lower in the patient with higher LVM. Treatment-associated rash with cutaneous small-vessel vasculitis was observed in both studies. Abdominal large-vessel vasculitis after initial dezamizumab dosing (300 mg) occurred in the first patient with immunoglobulin light chain amyloidosis enrolled in the Phase 2 study. Symptom resolution was nearly complete within 24 h of intravenous methylprednisolone and dezamizumab discontinuation; abdominal computed tomography imaging showed vasculitis resolution by 8 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Unlike previous observations of visceral amyloid reduction, there was no appreciable evidence of amyloid removal in patients with cardiac amyloidosis in this Phase 2 trial, potentially related to limited cardiac uptake of dezamizumab as demonstrated in the immuno-PET study. The benefit-risk assessment for dezamizumab in cardiac amyloidosis was considered unfavourable after the incidence of large-vessel vasculitis and development for this indication was terminated. Trial registration NCT03044353 (2 February 2017) and NCT03417830 (25 January 2018)

Formate overflow drives toxic folate trapping in MTHFD1 inhibited cancer cells

Cancer cells fuel their increased need for nucleotide supply by upregulating one-carbon (1C) metabolism, including the enzymes methylenetetrahydrofolate dehydrogenase-cyclohydrolase 1 and 2 (MTHFD1 and MTHFD2). TH9619 is a potent inhibitor of dehydrogenase and cyclohydrolase activities in both MTHFD1 and MTHFD2, and selectively kills cancer cells. Here, we reveal that, in cells, TH9619 targets nuclear MTHFD2 but does not inhibit mitochondrial MTHFD2. Hence, overflow of formate from mitochondria continues in the presence of TH9619. TH9619 inhibits the activity of MTHFD1 occurring downstream of mitochondrial formate release, leading to the accumulation of 10-formyl-tetrahydrofolate, which we term a 'folate trap'. This results in thymidylate depletion and death of MTHFD2-expressing cancer cells. This previously uncharacterized folate trapping mechanism is exacerbated by physiological hypoxanthine levels that block the de novo purine synthesis pathway, and additionally prevent 10-formyl-tetrahydrofolate consumption for purine synthesis. The folate trapping mechanism described here for TH9619 differs from other MTHFD1/2 inhibitors and antifolates. Thus, our findings uncover an approach to attack cancer and reveal a regulatory mechanism in 1C metabolism.In this study, Green, Marttila, Kiweler et al. characterize one-carbon metabolism rewiring in response to a dual MTHFD1 and MTHFD2 inhibitor. This work provides insight into one-carbon fluxes, and reveals a previously uncharacterized vulnerability in cancer cells created by folate trapping

Crop Updates 2005 - Farming Systems

This session covers forty four papers from different authors: PLENARY 1. 2005 Outlook, David Stephens and Nicola Telcik, Department of Agriculture FERTILITY AND NUTRITION 2. The effect of higher nitrogen fertiliser prices on rotation and fertiliser strategies in cropping systems, Ross Kingwell, Department of Agriculture and University of Western Australia 3. Stubble management: The short and long term implications for crop nutrition and soil fertility, Wayne Pluske, Nutrient Management Systems and Bill Bowden, Department of Agriculture 4. Stubble management: The pros and cons of different methods, Bill Bowden, Department of Agriculture, Western Australia and Mike Collins, WANTFA 5. Effect of stubble burning and seasonality on microbial processes and nutrient recycling, Frances Hoyle, The University of Western Australia 6. Soil biology and crop production in Western Australian farming systems, D.V. Murphy, N. Milton, M. Osman, F.C. Hoyle, L.K Abbott, W.R. Cookson and S. Darmawanto, The University of Western Australia 7. Urea is as effective as CAN when no rain for 10 days, Bill Crabtree, Crabtree Agricultural Consulting 8. Fertiliser (N,P,S,K) and lime requirements for wheat production in the Merredin district, Geoff Anderson, Department of Agriculture and Darren Kidson, Summit Fertilizers 9. Trace element applications: Up-front verses foliar? Bill Bowden and Ross Brennan, Department of Agriculture 10. Fertcare®, Environmental Product Stewardship and Advisor Standards for thee Fertiliser Industry, Nick Drew, Fertilizer Industry Federation of Australia (FIFA) SOIL AND LAND MANAGEMENT 11. Species response to row spacing, density and nutrition, Bill Bowden, Craig Scanlan, Lisa Sherriff, Bob French and Reg Lunt, Department of Agriculture 12. Investigation into the influence of row orientation in lupin crops, Jeff Russell, Department of Agriculture and Angie Roe, Farm Focus Consultants 13. Deriving variable rate management zones for crops, Ian Maling, Silverfox Solutions and Matthew Adams, DLI 14. In a world of Precision Agriculture, weigh trailers are not passé, Jeff Russell, Department of Agriculture 15. Cover crop management to combat ryegrass resistance and improve yields, Jeff Russell, Department of Agriculture and Angie Roe, Farm Focus Consultants 16. ARGT home page, the place to find information on annual ryegrass toxicity on the web, Dr George Yan, BART Pty Ltd 17. Shallow leading tine (SLT) ripper significantly reduces draft force, improves soil tilth and allows even distribution of subsoil ameliorants, Mohammad Hamza, Glen Riethmuller and Wal Anderson, Department of Agriculture PASTURE ANS SUMMER CROP SYSTEMS 18. New annual pasture legumes for Mediteranean farming systems, Angelo Loi, Phil Nichols, Clinton Revell and David Ferris, Department of Agriculture 19. How sustainable are phase rotations with Lucerne? Phil Ward, CSIRO Plant Industry 20. Management practicalities of summer cropping, Andrea Hills and Sally-Anne Penny, Department of Agriculture 21. Rainfall zone determines the effect of summer crops on winter yields, Andrea Hills, Sally-Anne Penny and David Hall, Department of Agriculture 22. Summer crops and water use, Andrea Hills, Sally-Anne Penny and David Hall, Department of Agriculture, and Michael Robertson and Don Gaydon, CSIRO Brisbane 23. Risk analysis of sorgum cropping, Andrea Hills and Sally-Anne Penny, Department of Agriculture, and Dr Michael Robertson and Don Gaydon, CSIRO Brisbane FARMER DECISION SUPPORT AND ADOPTION 24. Variety release and End Point Royalties – a new system? Tress Walmsley, Department of Agriculture 25. Farming system analaysis using the STEP Tool, Caroline Peek and Megan Abrahams, Department of Agriculture 26. The Leakage Calculator: A simple tool for groundwater recharge assessment, Paul Raper, Department of Agriculture 27. The cost of Salinity Calculator – your tool to assessing the profitability of salinity management options, Richard O’Donnell and Trevor Lacey, Department of Agriculture 28. Climate decision support tools, Meredith Fairbanks and David Tennant, Department of Agriculture 29. Horses for courses – using the best tools to manage climate risk, Cameron Weeks, Mingenew-Irwin Group/Planfarm and Richard Quinlan, Planfarm Agronomy 30. Use of seasonal outlook for making N decisions in Merredin, Meredith Fairbanks and Alexandra Edward, Department of Agriculture 31. Forecasts and profits, Benefits or bulldust? Chris Carter and Doug Hamilton, Department of Agriculture 32. A tool to estimate fixed and variable header and tractor depreciation costs, Peter Tozer, Department of Agriculture 33. Partners in grain: ‘Putting new faces in new places’, Renaye Horne, Department of Agriculture 34. Results from the Grower group Alliance, Tracey Gianatti, Grower Group Alliance 35. Local Farmer Group Network – farming systems research opportunities through local groups, Paul Carmody, Local Farmer Group Network GREENHOUSE GAS AND CLIMATE CHANGE 36. Changing rainfall patterns in the grainbelt, Ian Foster, Department of Agriculture 37. Vulnerability of broadscale agriculture to the impacts of climate change, Michele John, CSIRO (formerly Department of Agriculture) and Ross George, Department of Agriculture 38. Impacts of climate change on wheat yield at Merredin, Imma Farré and Ian Foster, Department of Agriculture 39. Climate change, land use suitability and water security, Ian Kininmonth, Dennis van Gool and Neil Coles, Department of Agriculture 40. Nitrous oxide emissions from cropping systems, Bill Porter, Department of Agriculture, Louise Barton, University of Western Australia 41. The potential of greenhouse sinks to underwrite improved land management in Western Australia, Richard Harper and Peter Ritson, CRC for Greenhouse Accounting and Forest Products Commission, Tony Beck, Tony Beck Consulting Services, Chris Mitchell and Michael Hill, CRC for Greenhouse Accounting 42. Removing uncertainty from greenhouse emissions, Fiona Barker-Reid, Will Gates, Ken Wilson and Rob Baigent, Department of Primary Industries - Victoria and CRC for Greenhouse Accounting (CRCGA), and Ian Galbally, Mick Meyer and Ian Weeks, CSIRO Atmospheric Research and CRCGA 43. Greenhouse in Agriculture Program (GIA), Traci Griffin, CRC for Greenhouse Accounting 44. Grains Greenhouse Accounting framework, D. Rodriguez, M. Probust, M. Meyers, D. Chen, A. Bennett, W. Strong, R. Nussey, I. Galbally and M. Howden CONTACT DETAILS FOR PRINCIPAL AUTHOR

Crop Updates 2007 - Farming Systems

This session covers forty papers from different authors: 1. Quality Assurance and industry stewardship, David Jeffries, Better Farm IQ Manager, Cooperative Bulk Handling 2. Sothis: Trifolium dasyurum (Eastern Star clover), A. Loi, B.J. Nutt and C.K. Revell, Department of Agriculture and Food 3. Poor performing patches of the paddock – to ameliorate or live with low yield? Yvette Oliver1, Michael Robertson1, Bill Bowden2, Kit Leake3and Ashley Bonser3, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems1, Department of Food and Agriculture2, Kellerberrin Farmer3 4. What evidence is there that PA can pay? Michael Robertson, CSIRO Floreat, Ian Maling, SilverFox Solutions and Bindi Isbister, Department of Agriculture and Food 5.The journey is great, but does PA pay? Garren Knell, ConsultAg; Alison Slade, Department of Agriculture and Food, CFIG 6. 2007 Seasonal outlook, David Stephens and Michael Meuleners, Department of Agriculture and Food 7. Towards building farmer capacity to better manage climate risk, David Beard and Nicolyn Short, Department of Agriculture and Food 8. A NAR farmers view of his farming system in 2015, Rob Grima, Department of Agriculture and Food 9. Biofuels opportunities in Australia, Ingrid Richardson, Food and Agribusiness Research, Rabobank 10. The groundwater depth on the hydrological benefits of lucerne and the subsequent recharge values, Ruhi Ferdowsian1and Geoff Bee2; 1Department of Agriculture and Food, 2Landholder, Laurinya, Jerramungup 11. Subsoil constraints to crop production in the high rainfall zone of Western Australia, Daniel Evans1, Bob Gilkes1, Senthold Asseng2and Jim Dixon3; 1University of Western Australia, 2CSIRO Plant Industry, 3Department of Agriculture and Food 12. Prospects for lucerne in the WA wheatbelt, Michael Robertson, CSIRO Floreat, Felicity Byrne and Mike Ewing, CRC for Plant-Based Management of Dryland Salinity, Dennis van Gool, Department of Agriculture and Food 13. Nitrous oxide emissions from a cropped soil in the Western Australian grainbelt, Louise Barton1, Ralf Kiese2, David Gatter3, Klaus Butterbach-Bahl2, Renee Buck1, Christoph Hinz1and Daniel Murphy1,1School of Earth and Geographical Sciences, The University of Western Australia, 2Institute for Meteorology and Climate Research, Atmospheric Environmental Research, Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany, 3The Department of Agriculture and Food 14. Managing seasonal risk is an important part of farm management but is highly complex and therefore needs a ‘horses for courses’ approach, Cameron Weeks, Planfarm / Mingenew-Irwin Group, Dr Michael Robertson, Dr Yvette Oliver, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems and Dr Meredith Fairbanks, Department of Agriculture and Food 15. Novel use application of clopyralid in lupins, John Peirce, and Brad Rayner Department of Agriculture and Food 16. Long season wheat on the South Coast – Feed and grain in a dry year – a 2006 case study, Sandy White, Department of Agriculture and Food 17. Wheat yield response to potassium and the residual value of PKS fertiliser drilled at different depths, Paul Damon1, Bill Bowden2, Qifu Ma1 and Zed Rengel1; Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences, The University of Western Australia1, Department of Agriculture and Food2 18. Saltbush as a sponge for summer rain, Ed Barrett-Lennard and Meir Altman, Department of Agriculture and Food and CRC for Plant-based Management of Dryland Salinity 19. Building strong working relationships between grower groups and their industry partners, Tracey M. Gianatti, Grower Group Alliance 20. To graze or not to graze – the question of tactical grazing of cereal crops, Lindsay Bell and Michael Robertson, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems 21. Can legume pastures and sheep replace lupins? Ben Webb and Caroline Peek, Department of Agriculture and Food 22. EverGraze – livestock and perennial pasture performance during a drought year, Paul Sanford, Department of Agriculture and Food, and CRC for Plant-based Management of Dryland Salinity 23. Crop survival in challenging times, Paul Blackwell1, Glen Riethmuller1, Darshan Sharma1and Mike Collins21Department of Agriculture and Food, 2Okura Plantations, Kirikiri New Zealand 24. Soil health constraints to production potential – a precision guided project, Frank D’Emden, and David Hall, Department of Agriculture and Food 25. A review of pest and disease occurrence in 2006, Mangano, G.P. and Severtson, D.L., Department of Agriculture and Food 26. e-weed – an information resource on seasonal weed management issues, Vanessa Stewart and Julie Roche, Department of Agriculture and Food 27. Review of Pesticide Legislation and Policies in Western Australia, Peter Rutherford, BSc (Agric.), Pesticide Legislation Review, Office of the Chief Medical Adviser, WA Department of Health 28. Future wheat yields in the West Australian wheatbelt, Imma Farré and Ian Foster, Department of Agriculture and Food, Stephen Charles, CSIRO Land and Water 29. Organic matter in WA arable soils: What’s active and what’s not, Frances Hoyle, Department of Agriculture and Food, Australia and Daniel Murphy, UWA 30. Soil quality indicators in Western Australian farming systems, D.V. Murphy1, N. Milton1, M. Osman1, F.C. Hoyle2, L.K Abbott1, W.R. Cookson1and S. Darmawanto1; 1UWA, 2Department of Agriculture and Food 31. Impact of stubble on input efficiencies, Geoff Anderson, formerly employed by Department of Agriculture and Food 32. Mixed farming vs All crop – true profit, not just gross margins, Rob Sands and David McCarthy, FARMANCO Management Consultants, Western Australia 33. Evaluation of Local Farmer Group Network – group leaders’ surveys 2005 and 2006, Paul Carmody, Local Farmer Group Network, Network Coordinator, UWA 34. Seeding rate and nitrogen application and timing effects in wheat, J. Russell, Department of Agriculture and Food, J. Eyres, G. Fosbery and A. Roe, ConsultAg, Northam 35. Foliar fungicide application and disease control in barley, J. Russell, Department of Agriculture and Food, J. Eyres, G. Fosbery and A. Roe, ConsultAg, Northam 36. Brown manuring effects on a following wheat crop in the central wheatbelt, , J. Russell, Department of Agriculture and Food, J. Eyres, G. Fosbery and A. Roe, ConsultAg, Northam 37. Management of annual pastures in mixed farming systems – transition from a dry season, Dr Clinton Revell and Dr Phil Nichols; Department of Agriculture and Food 38. The value of new annual pastures in mixed farm businesses of the wheatbelt, Dr Clinton Revell1, Mr Andrew Bathgate2and Dr Phil Nichols1; 1Department of Agriculture and Food, 2Farming Systems Analysis Service, Albany 39. The influence of winter SOI and Indian Ocean SST on WA winter rainfall, Meredith Fairbanks and Ian Foster, Department of Agriculture and Food 40. Market outlook – Grains, Anne Wilkins, Market Analyst, Grains, Department of Agriculture and Foo