Search

The nanoparticles of bentonite can be easily synthesized by hydrothermal treatment with microwave-assisted method. The products were characterized by XRD, FTIR, BET, SEM, EDS, and DLS. Results have revealed that the nano-bentonite was in nanometer scale with particles size of 200–300 nm. The SEM analysis of the nano-bentonite dispersion showed that a decrease in agglomeration and surface roughness. The nano-bentonite possessed high surface area (152.4 m2.g−1) and pore volume (0.25 cm3.g−1). Additionally, nanocomposite hydrogels (NB/PAA) were synthesized through the free-radical polymerization of acrylic acid (PAA) in the presence of the as-synthesized nano-bentonite (NB). The presence of NB in hydrogel matrix may improve the tensile strength of hydrogel. The tensile strength of the hydrogel increases from 0.294 to 1.609 MPa when NB content was 1.0% (NB10/PAA). Under the optimum conditions, the nanocomposite hydrogels (NB10/PAA) exhibited high water absorption capacity of 420.0 g w a t e r . g h y d r o g e l − 1 . These findings contribute to the sustainable development and green chemistry.

The advent of immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in modern oncology has significantly improved survival in several cancer settings. A subgroup of women with breast cancer (BC) has immunogenic infiltration of lymphocytes with expression of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1). These patients may potentially benefit from ICI targeting the programmed death 1 (PD-1)/PD-L1 signaling axis. The use of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) as predictive and prognostic biomarkers has been under intense examination. Emerging data suggest that TILs are associated with response to both cytotoxic treatments and immunotherapy, particularly for patients with triple-negative BC. In this review from The International Immuno-Oncology Biomarker Working Group, we discuss (a) the biological understanding of TILs, (b) their analytical and clinical validity and efforts toward the clinical utility in BC, and (c) the current status of PD-L1 and TIL testing across different continents, including experiences from low-to-middle-income countries, incorporating also the view of a patient advocate. This information will help set the stage for future approaches to optimize the understanding and clinical utilization of TIL analysis in patients with BC. ispartof: NPJ BREAST CANCER vol:7 issue:1 ispartof: location:United States status: published

Purpose: It is not known whether the risk of breast cancer among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers after age 60 is high enough to justify intensive screening or prophylactic surgery. Thus, we conducted a prospective analysis of breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers from age 60 until age 80. Methods: Subjects had no history of cancer and both breasts intact at age 60 (n = 699). Women were followed until a breast cancer diagnosis, prophylactic bilateral mastectomy or death. We calculated the annual cancer rate and cumulative incidence of breast cancer (invasive and in situ) from age 60 to age 80. We assessed the associations between hormone replacement therapy, family history of breast cancer and bilateral oophorectomy and breast cancer risk. Results: Over a mean follow-up of 7.9years, 61 invasive and 20 in situ breast cancers were diagnosed in the cohort. The mean annual rate of invasive breast cancer was 1.8% for BRCA1 mutation carriers and 1.7% for BRCA2 mutation carriers. The cumulative risk of invasive breast cancer from age 60 to 80 was 20.1% for women with a BRCA1 mutation and was 17.3% for women with a BRCA2 mutation. Hormone replacement therapy, family history and oophorectomy were not associated with breast cancer risk. Conclusions: Findings from this large prospective study indicate that the risk of developing breast cancer remains high after age 60 in both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. These findings warrant further evaluation of the role of breast cancer screening in older mutation carriers.

Background: Weight gain and other anthropometric measures on the risk of ovarian cancer for women with BRCA mutations are not known. We conducted a prospective analysis of weight change since age 18, height, body mass index (BMI) at age 18, and current BMI and the risk of developing ovarian cancer among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Methods: In this prospective cohort study, height, weight, and weight at age 18 were collected at study enrollment. Weight was updated biennially. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for ovarian cancer. Results: This study followed 4,340 women prospectively. There were 121 incident cases of ovarian cancer. Weight gain of more than 20 kg since age 18 was associated with a 2-fold increased risk of ovarian cancer, compared with women who maintained a stable weight (HR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.13-3.54; P = 0.02). Current BMI of 26.5 kg/m(2) or greater was associated with an increased risk of ovarian cancer in BRCA1 mutation carriers, compared with those with a BMI less than 20.8 kg/m(2) (Q4 vs. Q1 HR, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.04-4.36; P = 0.04). There were no significant associations between height or BMI at age 18 and risk of ovarian cancer. Conclusions: Adult weight gain is a risk factor for ovarian cancer in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. Impact: These findings emphasize the importance of maintaining a healthy body weight throughout adulthood in women at high risk for ovarian cancer.

The Jost function formalism is extended with use of the complex potential in this paper. We derive the Jost function by taking into account the dual state which is defined by the complex conjugate the complex Hamiltonian. By using the unitarity of the S-matrix which is defined by the Jost function, the optical theorem with the complex potential is also derived. The role of the imaginary part of the complex potential for both the bound states and the scattering states is figured out. The numerical calculation is performed by using the complex Woods-Saxon potential, and some numerical results are demonstrated to confirmed the properties of extended Jost function formalism.

Purpose It is not known whether the risk of breast cancer among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers after age 60 is high enough to justify intensive screening or prophylactic surgery. Thus, we conducted a prospective analysis of breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers from age 60 until age 80. Methods Subjects had no history of cancer and both breasts intact at age 60 (n = 699). Women were followed until a breast cancer diagnosis, prophylactic bilateral mastectomy or death. We calculated the annual cancer rate and cumulative incidence of breast cancer (invasive and in situ) from age 60 to age 80. We assessed the associations between hormone replacement therapy, family history of breast cancer and bilateral oophorectomy and breast cancer risk. Results Over a mean follow-up of 7.9 years, 61 invasive and 20 in situ breast cancers were diagnosed in the cohort. The mean annual rate of invasive breast cancer was 1.8% for BRCA1 mutation carriers and 1.7% for BRCA2 mutation carriers. The cumulative risk of invasive breast cancer from age 60 to 80 was 20.1% for women with a BRCA1 mutation and was 17.3% for women with a BRCA2 mutation. Hormone replacement therapy, family history and oophorectomy were not associated with breast cancer risk. Conclusions Findings from this large prospective study indicate that the risk of developing breast cancer remains high after age 60 in both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. These findings warrant further evaluation of the role of breast cancer screening in older mutation carriers.

A new design of coaxial rotary joint (RJ) made compact by applying “folded” choke quarter-wave impedance transformer is proposed for very high-frequency surveillance radar. The final prototype, which measures L $388\,\,\text {mm} \times \text {D}\,\,106$ mm, demonstrated 0.04-dB insertion loss and 28-dB return loss within the operating frequency range of 150–170 MHz. The RJ is able to handle peak power of 15 kW during experiments. By avoiding reliability issues inherent in contacting RJ, the lifetime and stability of the whole radar system would be remarkably enhanced.

Background The CryptoDex trial showed dexamethasone was associated with poorer clinical outcomes and slower fungal clearance in HIV-associated cryptococcal meningitis. We analysed CSF cytokine concentrations from CrytpoDex participants over the first week of treatment to investigate potential mechanisms of harm and test two hypotheses: dexamethasone reduced pro-inflammatory cytokine concentrations leading to poorer outcomes; and leukotriene A4 hydrolase (LTA4H) genotype (previously associated with dexamethasone responsiveness in tuberculous meningitis) influenced dexamethasone’s clinical impact. Methods We included participants from Vietnam, Thailand, and Uganda. We measured CSF concentrations of IFN-γ, TNF-α, GM-CSF, IL-6, IL-12p70, IL-8, MCP-1, MIP-1α, IL-4, IL-10, and IL-17 from days 1 to 7 of treatment using the Luminex system. We determined LTA4H genotype using a TaqMan genotyping assay of the promoter region SNP rs17525495. We assessed the impact of dexamethasone on cytokine concentration dynamics and the association between cytokine concentration dynamics and fungal clearance with mixed effect models. We measure the influence of LTA4H genotype on outcomes with Cox regression models. Results Dexamethasone increased the rate of TNF-α concentration decline (-0.13 pg/ml/day (95%CI -0.22 to -0.06) p=0.03), which was associated with slower fungal clearance (correlation -0.62 (-0.83 to -0.26)). LTA4H genotype had no statistically significant impact on outcome or response to dexamethasone therapy. Better clinical outcomes were associated with higher baseline concentrations of IFN-γ. Conclusions Dexamethasone may slow fungal clearance and worsen outcomes by increasing the rate of decline of TNF-α concentration.

Background: We previously reported significant associations between genetic variants in insulin receptor substrate 1 (IRS1) and breast cancer risk in women carrying BRCA1 mutations. The objectives of this study were to investigate whether the IRS1 variants modified ovarian cancer risk and were associated with breast cancer risk in a larger cohort of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Methods:IRS1 rs1801123, rs1330645, and rs1801278 were genotyped in samples from 36 centers in the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA). Data were analyzed by a retrospective cohort approach modeling the associations with breast and ovarian cancer risks simultaneously. Analyses were stratified by BRCA1 and BRCA2 status and mutation class in BRCA1 carriers. Results: Rs1801278 (Gly972Arg) was associated with ovarian cancer risk for both BRCA1 (HR, 1.43; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.06–1.92; P = 0.019) and BRCA2 mutation carriers (HR, 2.21; 95% CI, 1.39–3.52, P = 0.0008). For BRCA1 mutation carriers, the breast cancer risk was higher in carriers with class II mutations than class I mutations (class II HR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.28–2.70; class I HR, 0.86; 95%CI, 0.69–1.09; Pdifference, 0.0006). Rs13306465 was associated with ovarian cancer risk in BRCA1 class II mutation carriers (HR, 2.42; P = 0.03). Conclusion: The IRS1 Gly972Arg single-nucleotide polymorphism, which affects insulin-like growth factor and insulin signaling, modifies ovarian cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers and breast cancer risk in BRCA1 class II mutation carriers. Impact: These findings may prove useful for risk prediction for breast and ovarian cancers in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 21(8); 1362–70. ©2012 AACR.

An expeditious and stereoselective construction of C-14-epimer of the tetracyclic hydrophenanthrene framework of the morphine alkaloids is described. The core structure is obtained in nine steps in 11% overall yield from shikimic acid via three key transformations: (i) coupling of shikimic acid with 2-iodoisovanillin at C-3 by double SN2 inversion to form the aryl ether 5; (ii) an intramolecular Heck reaction to construct the dihydrobenzofuran ring and (iii) a McMurry coupling to furnish the hydrophenanthrene core.

Women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation face a high lifetime risk of breast cancer.1 It is important to identify risk factors for breast cancer among genetically predisposed women, to devise strategies to minimize the risk. Several lines of evidence link diabetes and breast cancer.2,3 Insulin resistance and hyperinsulinemia, which predispose to diabetes, may increase the risk of breast cancer in the general population,4 and hyperinsulinemia may promote the growth of pre-existing breast neoplasms.5 Furthermore, a high body mass index (BMI) is a risk factor for both breast cancer recurrence and for insulin resistance.6–8 It is also of interest to establish whether diabetes (or any of the drugs used to treat diabetes) influences the risk of breast cancer in BRCA carriers. The risk of future diabetes may also be increased in women after a diagnosis of breast cancer.9 This risk may be mediated by common risk factors, such as high BMI or insulin resistance, or diabetes may be a late effect of breast cancer treatment. It is important to explore the impact of these factors on the risk of diabetes in women with BRCA mutations. In this cohort of BRCA carriers, we sought to determine whether diabetes increases the risk of breast cancer in BRCA carriers, and to identify risk factors for diabetes in this high-risk population.

Physicians are often approached by young women with a BRCA mutation and a recent history of breast cancer who wish to have a baby. They wish to know if pregnancy impacts upon their future risks of cancer recurrence and survival. To date, there is little information on the survival experience of women who carry a mutation in one of the BRCA genes and who become pregnant. From an international multi-center cohort study of 12,084 women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation, we identified 128 case subjects who were diagnosed with breast cancer while pregnant or who became pregnant after a diagnosis of breast cancer. These women were age-matched to 269 mutation carriers with breast cancer who did not become pregnant (controls). Subjects were followed from the date of breast cancer diagnosis until the date of last follow-up or death from breast cancer. The Kaplan–Meier method was used to estimate 15-year survival rates. The hazard ratio for survival associated with pregnancy was calculated using a left-truncated Cox proportional hazard model, adjusting for other prognostic factors. Among women who were diagnosed with breast cancer when pregnant or who became pregnant thereafter, the 15-year survival rate was 91.5 %, compared to a survival of 88.6 % for women who did not become pregnant (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.76; 95 % CI 0.31–1.91; p = 0.56). Pregnancy concurrent with or after a diagnosis of breast cancer does not appear to adversely affect survival among BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License.-- CIMBA et al., BRCA1-associated breast and ovarian cancer risks can be modified by common genetic variants. To identify further cancer risk-modifying loci, we performed a multi-stage GWAS of 11,705 BRCA1 carriers (of whom 5,920 were diagnosed with breast and 1,839 were diagnosed with ovarian cancer), with a further replication in an additional sample of 2,646 BRCA1 carriers. We identified a novel breast cancer risk modifier locus at 1q32 for BRCA1 carriers (rs2290854, P = 2.7 × 10(-8), HR = 1.14, 95% CI: 1.09-1.20). In addition, we identified two novel ovarian cancer risk modifier loci: 17q21.31 (rs17631303, P = 1.4 × 10(-8), HR = 1.27, 95% CI: 1.17-1.38) and 4q32.3 (rs4691139, P = 3.4 × 10(-8), HR = 1.20, 95% CI: 1.17-1.38). The 4q32.3 locus was not associated with ovarian cancer risk in the general population or BRCA2 carriers, suggesting a BRCA1-specific association. The 17q21.31 locus was also associated with ovarian cancer risk in 8,211 BRCA2 carriers (P = 2×10(-4)). These loci may lead to an improved understanding of the etiology of breast and ovarian tumors in BRCA1 carriers. Based on the joint distribution of the known BRCA1 breast cancer risk-modifying loci, we estimated that the breast cancer lifetime risks for the 5% of BRCA1 carriers at lowest risk are 28%-50% compared to 81%-100% for the 5% at highest risk. Similarly, based on the known ovarian cancer risk-modifying loci, the 5% of BRCA1 carriers at lowest risk have an estimated lifetime risk of developing ovarian cancer of 28% or lower, whereas the 5% at highest risk will have a risk of 63% or higher. Such differences in risk may have important implications for risk prediction and clinical management for BRCA1 carriers., The study was supported by NIH grant CA128978, an NCI Specialized Program of Research Excellence (SPORE) in Breast Cancer (CA116201), a U.S. Department of Defense Ovarian Cancer Idea award (W81XWH-10-1-0341), grants from the Breast Cancer Research Foundation and the Komen Foundation for the Cure; Cancer Research UK grants C12292/A11174 and C1287/A10118; the European Commission's Seventh Framework Programme grant agreement 223175 (HEALTH-F2-2009-223175). Breast Cancer Family Registry Studies (BCFR): supported by the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health under RFA # CA-06-503 and through cooperative agreements with members of the Breast Cancer Family Registry (BCFR) and Principal Investigators, including Cancer Care Ontario (U01 CA69467), Cancer Prevention Institute of California (U01 CA69417), Columbia University (U01 CA69398), Fox Chase Cancer Center (U01 CA69631), Huntsman Cancer Institute (U01 CA69446), and University of Melbourne (U01 CA69638). The Australian BCFR was also supported by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, the New South Wales Cancer Council, the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation (Australia), and the Victorian Breast Cancer Research Consortium. Melissa C. Southey is a NHMRC Senior Research Fellow and a Victorian Breast Cancer Research Consortium Group Leader. Carriers at FCCC were also identified with support from National Institutes of Health grants P01 CA16094 and R01 CA22435. The New York BCFR was also supported by National Institutes of Health grants P30 CA13696 and P30 ES009089. The Utah BCFR was also supported by the National Center for Research Resources and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, NIH grant UL1 RR025764, and by Award Number P30 CA042014 from the National Cancer Institute. Baltic Familial Breast Ovarian Cancer Consortium (BFBOCC): BFBOCC is partly supported by Lithuania (BFBOCC-LT), Research Council of Lithuania grant LIG-19/2010, and Hereditary Cancer Association (Paveldimo vėžio asociacija)., Latvia (BFBOCC-LV) is partly supported by LSC grant 10.0010.08 and in part by a grant from the ESF Nr.2009/0220/1DP/1.1.1.2.0/09/APIA/VIAA/​016.BRCA-gene mutations and breast cancer in South African women (BMBSA): BMBSA was supported by grants from the Cancer Association of South Africa (CANSA) to Elizabeth J. van Rensburg. Beckman Research Institute of the City of Hope (BRICOH): Susan L. Neuhausen was partially supported by the Morris and Horowitz Families Endowed Professorship. BRICOH was supported by NIH R01CA74415 and NIH P30 CA033752. Copenhagen Breast Cancer Study (CBCS): The CBCS study was supported by the NEYE Foundation. Spanish National Cancer Centre (CNIO): This work was partially supported by Spanish Association against Cancer (AECC08), RTICC 06/0020/1060, FISPI08/1120, Mutua Madrileña Foundation (FMMA) and SAF2010-20493. City of Hope Cancer Center (COH): The City of Hope Clinical Cancer Genetics Community Research Network is supported by Award Number RC4A153828 (PI: Jeffrey N. Weitzel) from the National Cancer Institute and the Office of the Director, National Institutes of Health. CONsorzio Studi ITaliani sui Tumori Ereditari Alla Mammella (CONSIT TEAM): CONSIT TEAM was funded by grants from Fondazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro (Special Project “Hereditary tumors”), Italian Association for Cancer Research (AIRC, IG 8713), Italian Minitry of Health (Extraordinary National Cancer Program 2006, “Alleanza contro il Cancro” and “Progetto Tumori Femminili), Italian Ministry of Education, University and Research (Prin 2008) Centro di Ascolto Donne Operate al Seno (CAOS) association and by funds from Italian citizens who allocated the 5×1000 share of their tax payment in support of the Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale Tumori, according to Italian laws (INT-Institutional strategic projects ‘5×1000’). German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ): The DKFZ study was supported by the DKFZ. The Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Research Group Netherlands (HEBON): HEBON is supported by the Dutch Cancer Society grants NKI1998-1854, NKI2004-3088, NKI2007-3756, the NWO grant 91109024, the Pink Ribbon grant 110005, and the BBMRI grant CP46/NWO., Epidemiological study of BRCA1 & BRCA2 mutation carriers (EMBRACE): EMBRACE is supported by Cancer Research UK Grants C1287/A10118 and C1287/A11990. D. Gareth Evans and Fiona Lalloo are supported by an NIHR grant to the Biomedical Research Centre, Manchester. The Investigators at The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust are supported by an NIHR grant to the Biomedical Research Centre at The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust. Rosalind A. Eeles and Elizabeth Bancroft are supported by Cancer Research UK Grant C5047/A8385. Fox Chase Cancer Canter (FCCC): The authors acknowledge support from The University of Kansas Cancer Center and the Kansas Bioscience Authority Eminent Scholar Program. Andrew K. Godwin was funded by 5U01CA113916, R01CA140323, and by the Chancellors Distinguished Chair in Biomedical Sciences Professorship. German Consortium of Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (GC-HBOC): The German Consortium of Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (GC-HBOC) is supported by the German Cancer Aid (grant no 109076, Rita K. Schmutzler) and by the Center for Molecular Medicine Cologne (CMMC). Genetic Modifiers of cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers (GEMO): The GEMO study was supported by the Ligue National Contre le Cancer; the Association “Le cancer du sein, parlons-en!” Award and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research for the “CIHR Team in Familial Risks of Breast Cancer” program. Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG): This study was supported by National Cancer Institute grants to the Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) Administrative Office and Tissue Bank (CA 27469), Statistical and Data Center (CA 37517), and GOG's Cancer Prevention and Control Committtee (CA 101165). Drs. Mark H. Greene and Phuong L. Mai were supported by funding from the Intramural Research Program, NCI, NIH. Hospital Clinico San Carlos (HCSC): HCSC was supported by RETICC 06/0020/0021, FIS research grant 09/00859, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitivity, and the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF)., Helsinki Breast Cancer Study (HEBCS): The HEBCS was financially supported by the Helsinki University Central Hospital Research Fund, Academy of Finland (132473), the Finnish Cancer Society, the Nordic Cancer Union, and the Sigrid Juselius Foundation. Study of Genetic Mutations in Breast and Ovarian Cancer patients in Hong Kong and Asia (HRBCP): HRBCP is supported by The Hong Kong Hereditary Breast Cancer Family Registry and the Dr. Ellen Li Charitable Foundation, Hong Kong. Molecular Genetic Studies of Breast and Ovarian Cancer in Hungary (HUNBOCS): HUNBOCS was supported by Hungarian Research Grant KTIA-OTKA CK-80745 and the Norwegian EEA Financial Mechanism HU0115/NA/2008-3/ÖP-9. Institut Català d'Oncologia (ICO): The ICO study was supported by the Asociación Española Contra el Cáncer, Spanish Health Research Foundation, Ramón Areces Foundation, Carlos III Health Institute, Catalan Health Institute, and Autonomous Government of Catalonia and contract grant numbers: ISCIIIRETIC RD06/0020/1051, PI09/02483, PI10/01422, PI10/00748, 2009SGR290, and 2009SGR283. International Hereditary Cancer Centre (IHCC): Supported by the Polish Foundation of Science. Katarzyna Jaworska is a fellow of International PhD program, Postgraduate School of Molecular Medicine, Warsaw Medical University. Iceland Landspitali–University Hospital (ILUH): The ILUH group was supported by the Icelandic Association “Walking for Breast Cancer Research” and by the Landspitali University Hospital Research Fund. INterdisciplinary HEalth Research Internal Team BReast CAncer susceptibility (INHERIT): INHERIT work was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research for the “CIHR Team in Familial Risks of Breast Cancer” program, the Canadian Breast Cancer Research Alliance grant 019511 and the Ministry of Economic Development, Innovation and Export Trade grant PSR-SIIRI-701. Jacques Simard is Chairholder of the Canada Research Chair in Oncogenetics., Istituto Oncologico Veneto (IOVHBOCS): The IOVHBOCS study was supported by Ministero dell'Istruzione, dell'Università e della Ricerca and Ministero della Salute (“Progetto Tumori Femminili” and RFPS 2006-5-341353,ACC2/R6.9”). Kathleen Cuningham Consortium for Research into Familial Breast Cancer (kConFab): kConFab is supported by grants from the National Breast Cancer Foundation and the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) and by the Queensland Cancer Fund; the Cancer Councils of New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania, and South Australia; and the Cancer Foundation of Western Australia. Amanda B. Spurdle is an NHMRC Senior Research Fellow. The Clinical Follow Up Study was funded from 2001–2009 by NHMRC and currently by the National Breast Cancer Foundation and Cancer Australia #628333. Mayo Clinic (MAYO): MAYO is supported by NIH grant CA128978, an NCI Specialized Program of Research Excellence (SPORE) in Breast Cancer (CA116201), a U.S. Department of Defence Ovarian Cancer Idea award (W81XWH-10-1-0341) and grants from the Breast Cancer Research Foundation and the Komen Foundation for the Cure. McGill University (MCGILL): The McGill Study was supported by Jewish General Hospital Weekend to End Breast Cancer, Quebec Ministry of Economic Development, Innovation, and Export Trade. Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC): The MSKCC study was supported by Breast Cancer Research Foundation, Niehaus Clinical Cancer Genetics Initiative, Andrew Sabin Family Foundation, and Lymphoma Foundation. Modifier Study of Quantitative Effects on Disease (MODSQUAD): MODSQUAD was supported by the European Regional Development Fund and the State Budget of the Czech Republic (RECAMO, CZ.1.05/2.1.00/03.0101). Women's College Research Institute, Toronto (NAROD): NAROD was supported by NIH grant: 1R01 CA149429-01. National Cancer Institute (NCI): Drs. Mark H. Greene and Phuong L. Mai were supported by the Intramural Research Program of the US National Cancer Institute, NIH, and by support services contracts NO2-CP-11019-50 and N02-CP-65504 with Westat, Rockville, MD. National Israeli Cancer Control Center (NICCC): NICCC is supported by Clalit Health Services in Israel. Some of its activities are supported by the Israel Cancer Association and the Breast Cancer Research Foundation (BCRF), NY. N. N. Petrov Institute of Oncology (NNPIO): The NNPIO study has been supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (grants 11-04-00227, 12-04-00928, and 12-04-01490), the Federal Agency for Science and Innovations, Russia (contract 02.740.11.0780), and through a Royal Society International Joint grant (JP090615). The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center (OSU-CCG): OSUCCG is supported by the Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center., South East Asian Breast Cancer Association Study (SEABASS): SEABASS is supported by the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, Ministry of Higher Education (UM.C/HlR/MOHE/06) and Cancer Research Initiatives Foundation. Sheba Medical Centre (SMC): The SMC study was partially funded through a grant by the Israel Cancer Association and the funding for the Israeli Inherited Breast Cancer Consortium. Swedish Breast Cancer Study (SWE-BRCA): SWE-BRCA collaborators are supported by the Swedish Cancer Society. The University of Chicago Center for Clinical Cancer Genetics and Global Health (UCHICAGO): UCHICAGO is supported by grants from the US National Cancer Institute (NIH/NCI) and by the Ralph and Marion Falk Medical Research Trust, the Entertainment Industry Fund National Women's Cancer Research Alliance, and the Breast Cancer Research Foundation. University of California Los Angeles (UCLA): The UCLA study was supported by the Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center Foundation and the Breast Cancer Research Foundation. University of California San Francisco (UCSF): The UCSF study was supported by the UCSF Cancer Risk Program and the Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center. United Kingdom Familial Ovarian Cancer Registries (UKFOCR): UKFOCR was supported by a project grant from CRUK to Paul Pharoah. University of Pennsylvania (UPENN): The UPENN study was supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) (R01-CA102776 and R01-CA083855), Breast Cancer Research Foundation, Rooney Family Foundation, Susan G. Komen Foundation for the Cure, and the Macdonald Family Foundation. Victorian Familial Cancer Trials Group (VFCTG): The VFCTG study was supported by the Victorian Cancer Agency, Cancer Australia, and National Breast Cancer Foundation. Women's Cancer Research Initiative (WCRI): The WCRI at the Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Cedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, is funded by the American Cancer Society Early Detection Professorship (SIOP-06-258-01-COUN).

The objective is to estimate the risk of breast cancer in women who carry a deleterious BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation, according to parental origin of mutation. We conducted a cohort study of women with a BRCA1 mutation (n = 1523) or BRCA2 mutation (n = 369) who had not been diagnosed with breast or ovarian cancer. For each woman, the pedigree was reviewed and the origin of the mutation was assigned as probable paternal or maternal. The hazard ratio (HR) for developing breast cancer in the follow-up period was estimated for women with a paternal mutation compared to a maternal mutation. The risk of breast cancer was modestly higher in women with a paternal BRCA1 mutation compared to women with a maternal BRCA1 mutation (HR = 1.46; 95% CI = 0.99-2.16) but the difference was not significant (p = 0.06). The parental mutation origin did not affect the risk in women with a BRCA2 mutation. Our results are consistent with the hypothesis that there is an increased risk of breast cancer among women with a paternally inherited BRCA1 mutation compared to a maternally inherited mutation. However, the data are not sufficiently compelling to justify different screening recommendations for the two subgroups.

In reseach on industrial Ethernet network for network based-control systems, delay time on the whole network is always attended. In order to reduce the end-to-end delay time, this paper proposes an algorithm to distribute network devices into sub-networks by optimising the intra-network communication through federal switch and minimising the worst case of end-to-end delay time. There are also the illustrative example result to perform for this algorithm.

BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers have elevated risks of breast and ovarian cancers. The risks for cancers at other sites remain unclear. Melanoma has been associated with BRCA2 mutations in some studies, however, few surveys have included non-melanoma skin cancer. We followed 2729 women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation for an average of 5.0 years. These women were asked to report new cases of cancer diagnosed in themselves or in their family. The risks of skin cancer were compared for probands with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. Of 1779 women with a BRCA1 mutation, 29 developed skin cancer in the follow-up period (1.6%). Of the 950 women with a BRCA2 mutation, 28 developed skin cancer (3.0%) (OR = 1.83 for BRCA2 versus BRCA1; 95% CI 1.08-3.10; P = 0.02). The odds ratio for basal cell carcinoma was higher (OR = 3.8; 95% CI 1.5-9.4; P = 0.002). BRCA2 mutation carriers are at increased risk for skin cancer, compared with BRCA1 carriers, in particular for basal cell carcinoma.

International audience; Germline BRCA1 mutations predispose to breast cancer. To identify genetic modifiers of this risk, we performed a genome-wide association study in 1,193 individuals with BRCA1 mutations who were diagnosed with invasive breast cancer under age 40 and 1,190 BRCA1 carriers without breast cancer diagnosis over age 35. We took forward 96 SNPs for replication in another 5,986 BRCA1 carriers (2,974 individuals with breast cancer and 3,012 unaffected individuals). Five SNPs on 19p13 were associated with breast cancer risk (P-trend = 2.3 x 10(-9) to Ptrend = 3.9 x 10(-7)), two of which showed independent associations (rs8170, hazard ratio (HR) = 1.26, 95% CI 1.17-1.35; rs2363956 HR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.80-0.89). Genotyping these SNPs in 6,800 population-based breast cancer cases and 6,613 controls identified a similar association with estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer (rs2363956 per-allele odds ratio (OR) = 0.83, 95% CI 0.75-0.92, P-trend = 0.0003) and an association with estrogen receptor-positive disease in the opposite direction (OR = 1.07, 95% CI 1.01-1.14, P-trend = 0.016). The five SNPs were also associated with triple-negative breast cancer in a separate study of 2,301 triple-negative cases and 3,949 controls (Ptrend = 1 x 10(-7) to Ptrend = 8 x 10(-5); rs2363956 per-allele OR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.74-0.87, P-trend = 1.1 x 10(-7)).

Background: Hormone therapy (HT) is commonly given to women to alleviate the climacteric symptoms associated with menopause. There is concern that this treatment may increase the risk of breast cancer. The potential association of HT and breast cancer risk is of particular interest to women who carry a mutation in BRCA1 because they face a high lifetime risk of breast cancer and because many of these women take HT after undergoing prophylactic surgical oophorectomy at a young age. Methods: We conducted a matched case-control study of 472 postmenopausal women with a BRCA1 mutation to examine whether or not the use of HT is associated with subsequent risk of breast cancer. Breast cancer case patients and control subjects were matched with respect to age, age at menopause, and type of menopause (surgical or natural). Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated with conditional logistic regression. Statistical tests were two-sided. Results: In this group of BRCA1 mutation carriers, the adjusted OR for breast cancer associated with ever use of HT compared with never use was 0.58 (95% CI = 0.35 to 0.96; P =. 03). In analyses by type of HT, an inverse association with breast cancer risk was observed with use of estrogen only (OR = 0.51, 95% CI = 0.27 to 0.98; P =. 04); the association with use of estrogen plus progesterone was not statistically significant (OR = 0.66, 95% CI = 0.34 to 1.27; P =. 21). Conclusion: Among postmenopausal women with a BRCA1 mutation, HT use was not associated with increased risk of breast cancer; indeed, in this population, it was associated with a decreased risk.

Among women with a mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2, the risk of breast cancer is high, but it may be modified by exogenous and endogenous factors. There is concern that exposure to carcinogens in cigarette smoke may increase the risk of cancer in mutation carriers. We conducted a matched case-control study of 2,538 cases of breast cancer among women with a BRCA1 (n = 1,920) or a BRCA2 (n = 618) mutation. One non-affected mutation carrier control was selected for each case, matched on mutation, country of birth, and year of birth. Odds ratios were calculated using conditional logistic regression, adjusted for oral contraceptive use and parity. Ever-smoking was not associated with an increased breast cancer risk among BRCA1 carriers (OR = 1.09; 95% CI 0.95-1.24) or among BRCA2 carriers (OR = 0.81; 95% CI 0.63-1.05). The result did not differ when cases were restricted to women who completed the questionnaire within two years of diagnosis. A modest, but significant increase in risk was seen among BRCA1 carriers with a past history of smoking (OR = 1.27; 95% CI 1.06-1.50), but not among current smokers (OR = 0.95; 0.81-1.12). There appears to be no increase in the risk of breast cancer associated with current smoking in BRCA1 or BRCA2 carriers. There is a possibility of an increased risk of breast cancer among BRCA1 carriers associated with past smoking. There may be different effects of carcinogens in BRCA mutation carriers, depending upon the timing of exposure.

On July 1, 2004, fosinopril sodium became the angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE) inhibitor of choice at the San Diego Veterans Affairs Healthcare System (VAHS). Problems arose when the drug’s manufacturer decreased fosinopril’s production, as the drug’s patent was nearing expiration. The

We have isolated 5′ cDNA clones encoding a member of the cellular myosin heavy chain gene family from human leukocytes. The predicted amino acid sequence shows 93% identity to a chicken cellular myosin heavy chain, 76% to chicken smooth muscle, and 40% to human sarcomeric myosin heavy chain. The mRNA is expressed as a 7.4- to 7.9-kb doublet in many nonmuscle cells, and is upregulated in myeloid cell lines on induction from a proliferating to a differentiated state. Antisera raised against a peptide made from the predicted amino acid sequence specifically reacts with a 224-Kd polypeptide in leukocyte cell lines, and the protein is also upregulated during the induction of monocytic and granulocytic differentiation in these cells. The gene for this cellular myosin heavy chain maps to chromosome 22, bands q12.3-q13.1, demonstrating that it is not located in the previously described sarcomeric gene clusters on chromosomes 14 and 17. This cellular myosin heavy chain may be a major contractile protein responsible for movement in myeloid cell lines because no mRNA for sarcomeric myosin heavy chain is detected in these cells.

The reaction of t -BuLi with cyclizable 1° and 2° alkyl halide radical probes at low temperature produced stab]e cyclized and uncyclized organolithium products as well as cyclized hydrocarbons which clearly indicate the presence of radical intermediates during the course of these reactions.

(endo)-5-(2-haloethyl)-2-norbornenes have been synthesized, and their corresponding radicals generated by reaction with sodium, magnesium, sodium naphthalenide and tri-n-butyltin hydride in the presence of AIBN to produce both straight chain and cyclized products. This probe cyclizes substantially faster than the often used 5-hexenyl halide probes.

L'echange halogene-metal est etudie en faisant reagir le t-butyllithium avec une serie d'halogenoalcanes contenant une sonde radicalaire cyclisable afin d'evaluer l'occurrence d'un intermediaire radicalaire dans la reaction

The validity of using a cyclizable alkyl iodide as a radical probe on reaction with LiAlH 4 and other nucleophiles has been recently questioned. Both previously presented data as well as new data presented here makes it clear that the cyclized products formed in the reactions studied are indeed formed to a significant extent via an electron transfer process involving a radical precursor.

Les alcools du titre sont convertis en les bromures et chlorures correspondants en l'absence de solvant par reaction avec le tribromoborane et le tetrachlorostannane, respectivement. De plus les bromures et chlorures precedents peuvent etre interconvertis par transhalogenation avec les memes reactifs et en l'absence de solvant

L'echange halogene-metal est etudie en faisant reagir le t-butyllithium avec une serie d'halogenoalcanes contenant une sonde radicalaire cyclisable afin d'evaluer l'occurrence d'un intermediaire radicalaire dans la reaction

Background BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA) mutation carriers face a high lifetime risk of developing ovarian cancer. Oral contraceptives are protective in this population; however, the impact of other types of contraception (e.g. intrauterine devices, implants, injections) is unknown. We undertook a matched case-control study to evaluate the relationship between type of contraception and risk of ovarian cancer among women with BRCA mutations. Methods A total of 1733 matched pairs were included in this analysis. Women were matched according to year of birth, date of study entry, country of residence, BRCA mutation type and history of breast cancer. Detailed information on hormonal, reproductive and lifestyle exposures were collected from a routinely administered questionnaire. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) associated with each contraceptive exposure. Results Ever use of any contraceptive was significantly associated with reduced risk of ovarian cancer (OR = 0.62; 95% CI 0.52–0.75; P < 0.0001), which was driven by significant inverse associations with oral contraceptives (OR = 0.66; 95% CI 0.54–0.79; P < 0.0001) and contraceptive implants (OR = 0.30; 95% CI 0.12–0.73; P = 0.008). We observed a similar effect with use of injections (OR = 0.37; 95% CI 0.10–1.38; P = 0.14), but this did not achieve significance. No significant associations were observed between patterns of intrauterine device use and risk of ovarian cancer. Conclusions These findings support a protective effect of oral contraceptives and implants on risk of ovarian cancer among women with BRCA mutations. The possible protective effect of injections requires further evaluation.

Approximately 1% of the Ashkenazi Jewish population carries the BRCA2 6174delT (c.5946del) pathogenic variant. It is important to have accurate knowledge of the risks of breast and ovarian cancer associated with this specific variant so that women may be counseled accordingly. In this prospective study, we estimated the risks of breast and ovarian cancer associated with the 6174delT variant compared with the risks for other pathogenic variants in the BRCA2 gene. The annual risk for developing breast cancer was significantly lower in 246 women who carried the 6174delT variant compared with 721 non-Jewish women who carried a variant at any other locus in BRCA2 (1.2% per year vs. 2.4% per year, p = 0.003). We estimated the cumulative risk of breast cancer from age 30 to 70 to be 39% for carriers of the BRCA2 6174delT variant and 61% for carriers of other BRCA2 variants. The annual risk for ovarian or fallopian tube cancer was 0.51% per year for the 233 women who carried the 6174delT variant compared to 0.22% per year for the 1128 carriers of other BRCA2 variants; the difference was not significant. Lower risks for breast cancer associated with 6174delT may not impact screening and prevention choices, however, the discussion should be based on accurate risk assessment.

Purpose: Following a diagnosis of breast cancer, BRCA mutation carriers face an increased risk of developing a second (contralateral) cancer in the unaffected breast. It is important to identify predictors of contralateral cancer in order to make informed decisions about bilateral mastectomy. The impact of bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (i.e., oophorectomy) on the risk of developing contralateral breast cancer is unclear. Thus, we conducted a prospective study of the relationship between oophorectomy and the risk of contralateral breast cancer in 1781 BRCA1 and 503 BRCA2 mutation carriers with breast cancer. Methods: Women were followed from the date of diagnosis of their first breast cancer until the date of diagnosis of a contralateral breast cancer, bilateral mastectomy, date of death, or date of last follow-up. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of contralateral breast cancer associated with oophorectomy. Oophorectomy was included as a time-dependent covariate. We performed a left-censored analysis for those women who reported a primary breast cancer prior to study entry (i.e., from completion of baseline questionnaire). Results: After an average of 9.8years of follow-up, there were 179 (7.8%) contralateral breast cancers diagnosed. Oophorectomy was not associated with the risk of developing a second breast cancer (HR 0.92; 95% CI 0.68–1.25). The relationship did not vary by BRCA mutation type or by age at diagnosis of the first breast cancer. There was some evidence for a decreased risk of contralateral breast cancer among women with an ER-positive primary breast cancer, but this was based on a small number of events (n = 240). Conclusion: Overall, our findings suggest that oophorectomy has little impact on the risk of contralateral breast cancer