Estudio de la microviscosidad de la Hemoglobina A (HbA) y la Hemoglobina S (HbS) en condiciones de desoxigenación espontánea

La microviscosidad de la hemoglobina A y la hemoglobina S es analizada en muestras con concentración intracelular, durante el proceso de desoxigenación espontánea y a 36 ºC, empleando glutatión y carbonmonoxihemoglobina, marcados con 4-maleimido-tempo. El glutatión marcado muestra un comportamiento constante de la microviscosidad de la hemoglobina S durante el estudio. La carbonmonoxihemoglobina marcada muestra un incremento de la microviscosidad durante el proceso de polimerización de la hemoglobina S, lo cual pudiera explicar el comportamiento de los tiempos de relajación magnética protónica determinados en otros artículos para las mismas muestras. Tanto el glutatión como la carbonmonoxihemoglobina marcados, reportan un comportamiento constante de la microviscosidad en la hemoglobina A.The Microviscosity of hemoglobin A and hemoglobin S are analyzed in samples of intracellular concentration, during the free deoxygenation process and at 36 ºC, using Glutathione and Carbonmonoxihemoglobin labeled with 4-maleimido-tempo. Labeled Glutathione shows a constant behaviour of the hemoglobin S microviscosity during the study. Labeled Carbonmonoxihemoglobin shows an increase of the microviscosity during the hemoglobin S polymerization process, which could explain the proton relaxation times behaviour determined in other articles for the same samples. Labeled Glutathione and Carbonmoxihemoglobing report constant behaviour of microviscosity in hemoglobin A.Fil: Lores, M.. Universidad de Oriente; CubaFil: Cabal, C.. Universidad de Oriente; CubaFil: Nascimento, Otaciro R.. Universidade de Sao Paulo; BrasilFil: Gennaro, Ana Maria. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Santa Fe. Instituto de Desarrollo Tecnológico para la Industria Química. Universidad Nacional del Litoral. Instituto de Desarrollo Tecnológico para la Industria Química; Argentin

The New World of RNA Diagnostics and Therapeutics

The 5th Workshop IRE on Translational Oncology was held in Rome (Italy) on 27-28 March at the IRCCS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute. This meeting entitled The New World of RNA diagnostics and therapeutics highlightes the significant progress in the RNA field made over the last years. Research moved from pure discovery towards the development of diagnostic biomarkers or RNA-base targeted therapies seeking validation in several clinical trials. Non-coding RNAs in particular have been the focus of this workshop due to their unique properties that make them attractive tools for the diagnosis and therapy of cancer.This report collected the presentations of many scientists from different institutions that discussed recent oncology research providing an excellent overview and representative examples for each possible application of RNA as biomarker, for therapy or to increase the number of patients that can benefit from precision oncology treatment.In particular, the meeting specifically emphasized two key features of RNA applications: RNA diagnostic (Blandino, Palcau, Sestito, Díaz Méndez, Cappelletto, Pulito, Monteonofrio, Calin, Sozzi, Cheong) and RNA therapeutics (Dinami, Marcia, Anastasiadou, Ryan, Fattore, Regazzo, Loria, Aharonov)

The new world of RNA diagnostics and therapeutics

The 5th Workshop IRE on Translational Oncology was held in Rome (Italy) on 27–28 March at the IRCCS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute. This meeting entitled “The New World of RNA diagnostics and therapeutics” highlightes the significant progress in the RNA field made over the last years. Research moved from pure discovery towards the development of diagnostic biomarkers or RNA-base targeted therapies seeking validation in several clinical trials. Non-coding RNAs in particular have been the focus of this workshop due to their unique properties that make them attractive tools for the diagnosis and therapy of cancer. This report collected the presentations of many scientists from different institutions that discussed recent oncology research providing an excellent overview and representative examples for each possible application of RNA as biomarker, for therapy or to increase the number of patients that can benefit from precision oncology treatment. In particular, the meeting specifically emphasized two key features of RNA applications: RNA diagnostic (Blandino, Palcau, Sestito, Díaz Méndez, Cappelletto, Pulito, Monteonofrio, Calin, Sozzi, Cheong) and RNA therapeutics (Dinami, Marcia, Anastasiadou, Ryan, Fattore, Regazzo, Loria, Aharonov)

Future perspectives in melanoma research: meeting report from the “Melanoma Bridge”, Napoli, December 5th-8th 2013

The fourth “Melanoma Bridge Meeting” took place in Naples, December 5 to 8th, 2013. The four topics discussed at this meeting were: Diagnosis and New Procedures, Molecular Advances and Combination Therapies, News in Immunotherapy, and Tumor Microenvironment and Biomarkers. Until recently systemic therapy for metastatic melanoma patients was ineffective, but recent research in tumor biology and immunology has led to the development of new targeted and immunotherapeutic agents that prolong progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). New therapies, such as mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway inhibitors, like BRAF and MEK inhibitors, as well as other signaling pathways inhibitors, are being tested in metastatic melanoma either as monotherapy or in combination, and have yielded promising results. Improved survival rates have also been observed with immune therapy for patients with metastatic melanoma. Immune-modulating antibodies came to the forefront with anti-CTLA-4, programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) and PD-1 ligand 1 (PD-L1) pathway blocking antibodies that result in durable responses in a subset of melanoma patients. Agents targeting other immune inhibitory (e.g., Tim-3) or immune stimulating (e.g., CD137) receptors and other approaches such as adoptive cell transfer demonstrate clinical benefit in melanoma as well. This meeting’s specific focus was on advances in targeted therapy and immunotherapy. Both combination targeted therapy approaches and different immunotherapies were discussed. Similarly to the previous meetings, the importance of biomarkers for clinical application as markers for diagnosis, prognosis and prediction of treatment response was an integral part of the meeting. Significant consideration was given to issues surrounding the development of novel therapeutic targets as further study of patterns of resistance to both immunologic and targeted drugs are paramount to future drug development to guide existing and future therapies. The overall emphasis on biomarkers supports novel concepts toward integrating biomarkers into contemporary clinical management of patients with melanoma across the entire spectrum of disease stage. Translation of the knowledge gained from the biology of tumor microenvironment across different tumors represents a bridge to impact on prognosis and response to therapy in melanoma

Assessment of genetically modified maize MON 95379 for food and feed uses, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA‐GMO‐NL‐2020‐170)

Genetically modified maize MON 95379 was developed to confer insect protection against certain lepidopteran species. These properties were achieved by introducing the cry1B.868 and cry1Da_7 expression cassettes. The molecular characterisation data and bioinformatic analyses do not identify issues requiring food/feed safety assessment. None of the identified differences in the agronomic/phenotypic and compositional characteristics tested between maize MON 95379 and its conventional counterpart needs further assessment. The GMO Panel does not identify safety concerns regarding the toxicity and allergenicity of the Cry1B.868 and Cry1Da_7 proteins as expressed in maize MON 95379. The GMO Panel finds no evidence that the genetic modification impacts the overall safety of maize MON 95379. In the context of this application, the consumption of food and feed from maize MON 95379 does not represent a nutritional concern in humans and animals. Therefore, no post-market monitoring of food/feed is considered necessary. In the case of accidental release of viable maize MON 95379 grains into the environment, this would not raise environmental safety concerns. The post-market environmental monitoring plan and reporting intervals are in line with the intended uses of maize MON 95379. The GMO Panel concludes that maize MON 95379 is as safe as its conventional counterpart and the tested non-GM maize varieties with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment

Assessment of genetically modified maize DP4114 × MON 89034 × MON 87411 × DAS‐40278‐9 and subcombinations, for food and feed uses, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA GMO‐NL‐2020‐171)

Genetically modified maize DP4114 × MON 89034 × MON 87411 × DAS-40278-9 was developed by crossing to combine four single events: DP4114, MON 89034, MON 87411 and DAS-40278-9. The GMO Panel previously assessed the four single maize events and two of the subcombinations and did not identify safety concerns. No new data on the single maize events or the assessed subcombinations were identified that could lead to modification of the original conclusions on their safety. The molecular characterisation, comparative analysis (agronomic, phenotypic and compositional characteristics) and the outcome of the toxicological, allergenicity and nutritional assessment indicate that the combination of the single maize events and of the newly expressed proteins in the four-event stack maize does not give rise to food and feed safety and nutritional concerns. Therefore, no post-market monitoring of food/feed is considered necessary. In the case of accidental release of viable four-event stack maize grains into the environment, this would not raise environmental safety concerns. The GMO Panel assessed the likelihood of interactions among the single events in eight of the maize subcombinations not previously assessed and concludes that these are expected to be as safe as the single events, the previously assessed subcombinations and the four-event stack maize. The post-market environmental monitoring plan and reporting intervals are in line with the intended uses of maize DP4114 × MON 89034 × MON 87411 × DAS-40278-9. Post-market monitoring of food/feed is not considered necessary. The GMO Panel concludes that the four-event stack maize and its subcombinations are as safe as its non-GM comparator and the tested non-GM maize varieties with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment

Associations between changes in habitual sleep duration and lower self-rated health among COVID-19 survivors: findings from a survey across 16 countries/regions

Background: Self-rated health (SRH) is widely recognized as a clinically significant predictor of subsequent mortality risk. Although COVID-19 may impair SRH, this relationship has not been extensively examined. The present study aimed to examine the correlation between habitual sleep duration, changes in sleep duration after infection, and SRH in subjects who have experienced SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods: Participants from 16 countries participated in the International COVID Sleep Study-II (ICOSS-II) online survey in 2021. A total of 10,794 of these participants were included in the analysis, including 1,509 COVID-19 individuals (who reported that they had tested positive for COVID-19). SRH was evaluated using a 0-100 linear visual analog scale. Habitual sleep durations of 9 h were defined as short and long habitual sleep duration, respectively. Changes in habitual sleep duration after infection of ≤ -2 h and ≥ 1 h were defined as decreased or increased, respectively. Results: Participants with COVID-19 had lower SRH scores than non-infected participants, and those with more severe COVID-19 had a tendency towards even lower SRH scores. In a multivariate regression analysis of participants who had experienced COVID-19, both decreased and increased habitual sleep duration after infection were significantly associated with lower SRH after controlling for sleep quality (β = −0.056 and −0.058, respectively, both p < 0.05); however, associations between current short or long habitual sleep duration and SRH were negligible. Multinomial logistic regression analysis showed that decreased habitual sleep duration was significantly related to increased fatigue (odds ratio [OR] = 1.824, p < 0.01), shortness of breath (OR = 1.725, p < 0.05), diarrhea/nausea/vomiting (OR = 2.636, p < 0.01), and hallucinations (OR = 5.091, p < 0.05), while increased habitual sleep duration was significantly related to increased fatigue (OR = 1.900, p < 0.01). Conclusions: Changes in habitual sleep duration following SARS-CoV-2 infection were associated with lower SRH. Decreased or increased habitual sleep duration might have a bidirectional relation with post-COVID-19 symptoms. Further research is needed to better understand the mechanisms underlying these relationships for in order to improve SRH in individuals with COVID-19.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Assessment of genetically modified maize MON 87419 for food and feed uses, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA‐GMO‐NL‐2017‐140)

Genetically modified maize MON 87419 was developed to confer tolerance to dicamba- and glufosinate-based herbicides. These properties were achieved by introducing the dmo and pat expression cassettes. The molecular characterisation data and bioinformatic analyses do not identify issues requiring food/feed safety assessment. None of the identified differences in the agronomic/phenotypic and compositional characteristics tested between maize MON 87419 and its conventional counterpart needed further assessment, except for the levels of arginine and protein in grains which did not raise safety and nutritional concerns. The GMO Panel does not identify safety concerns regarding the toxicity and allergenicity of the dicamba mono-oxygenase (DMO) and phosphinothricin N-acetyltransferase (PAT) proteins as expressed in maize MON 87419. The GMO Panel finds no evidence that the genetic modification impacts the overall safety of maize MON 87419. In the context of this application, the consumption of food and feed from maize MON 87419 does not represent a nutritional concern in humans and animals. The GMO Panel concludes that maize MON 87419 is as safe as the conventional counterpart and non-GM maize varieties tested, and no post-market monitoring of food/feed is considered necessary. In the case of accidental release of viable maize MON 87419 grains into the environment, this would not raise environmental safety concerns. The postmarket environmental monitoring plan and reporting intervals are in line with the intended uses of maize MON 87419. The GMO Panel concludes that maize MON 87419 is as safe as its conventional counterpart and the tested non-GM maize varieties with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment

Assessment of genetically modified maize GA21 × T25 for food and feed uses, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA‐GMO‐DE‐2016‐137)

Genetically modified maize GA21 x T25 was developed by crossing to combine two single events: GA21 and T25. The GMO Panel previously assessed the two single maize events and did not identify safety concerns. No new data on the single maize events were identified that could lead to modification of the original conclusions on their safety. The molecular characterisation, comparative analysis (agronomic, phenotypic and compositional characteristics) and the outcome of the toxicological, allergenicity and nutritional assessment indicate that the combination of the single maize events and of the newly expressed proteins in maize GA21 x T25 does not give rise to food and feed safety and nutritional concerns. The GMO Panel concludes that maize GA21 x T25, as described in this application, is as safe as its conventional counterpart and the non-GM reference varieties tested, and no post-market monitoring of food and feed is considered necessary. In the case of accidental release of viable maize GA21 x T25 grains into the environment, this would not raise environmental safety concerns. The post-market environmental monitoring plan and reporting intervals are in line with the intended uses of maize GA21 x T25. Post-market monitoring of food and feed is not considered necessary. The GMO Panel concludes that maize GA21 x T25 is as safe as its conventional counterpart and the non-GM reference varieties tested, with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment

Assessment of genetically modified Maize MON 87429 for food and feed uses, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA‐GMO‐NL‐2019‐161)

Maize MON 87429 was developed to confer tolerance to dicamba, glufosinate, quizalofop and 2,4-D herbicides. The molecular characterisation data and bioinformatic analyses do not identify issues requiring food/feed safety assessment. None of the identified differences in the agronomic/phenotypic and compositional characteristics tested between maize MON 87429 and its conventional counterpart needs further assessment, except for the levels of phytic acid in grains, which do not raise nutritional and safety concerns. The GMO Panel does not identify safety concerns regarding the toxicity and allergenicity of the DMO, PAT, FT_T and CP4 EPSPS proteins as expressed in maize MON 87429. The GMO Panel finds no evidence that the genetic modification impacts the overall safety of maize MON 87429. In the context of this application, the consumption of food and feed from maize MON 87429 does not represent a nutritional concern in humans and animals. The GMO Panel concludes that maize MON 87429 is as safe as the conventional counterpart and non-GM maize reference varieties tested, and no post-market monitoring of food/feed is considered necessary. In the case of accidental release of viable maize MON 87429 grains into the environment, this would not raise environmental safety concerns. The post-market environmental monitoring plan and reporting intervals are in line with the intended uses of maize MON 87429. The GMO Panel concludes that maize MON 87429, as described in this application, is as safe as its conventional counterpart and the tested non-GM maize reference varieties with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment