EVERSUN: A phase 2 trial of alternating sunitinib and everolimus as first-line therapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma

Background We hypothesised that alternating inhibitors of the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) and mammalian target of rapamycin pathways would delay the development of resistance in advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). Patients and methods A single-arm, two-stage, multicentre, phase 2 trial to determine the activity, feasibility, and safety of 12-week cycles of sunitinib 50 mg daily 4 weeks on / 2 weeks off, alternating with everolimus 10 mg daily for 5 weeks on / 1 week off, until disease progression or prohibitive toxicity in favourable or intermediate-risk aRCC. The primary end point was proportion alive and progression-free at 6 months (PFS6m). The secondary end points were feasibility, tumour response, overall survival (OS), and adverse events (AEs). The correlative objective was to assess biomarkers and correlate with clinical outcome. Results We recruited 55 eligible participants from September 2010 to August 2012. Demographics: mean age 61, 71% male, favourable risk 16%, intermediate risk 84%. Cycle 2 commenced within 14 weeks for 80% of participants; 64% received ≥22 weeks of alternating therapy; 78% received ≥22 weeks of any treatment. PFS6m was 29/55 (53%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 40% to 66%). Tumour response rate was 7/55 (13%; 95% CI 4% to 22%, all partial responses). After median follow-up of 20 months, 47 of 55 (86%) had progressed with a median progression-free survival of 8 months (95% CI 5–10), and 30 of 55 (55%) had died with a median OS of 17 months (95% CI 12–undefined). AEs were consistent with those expected for each single agent. No convincing prognostic biomarkers were identified. Conclusions The EVERSUN regimen was feasible and safe, but its activity did not meet pre-specified values to warrant further research. This supports the current approach of continuing anti-VEGF therapy until progression or prohibitive toxicity before changing treatment.

Trick or treaty?: The Australian debate over the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement

The secretive 2011 Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement – known in short by the catchy acronym ACTA – is a controversial trade pact designed to provide for stronger enforcement of intellectual property rights. The preamble to the treaty reads like pulp fiction – it raises moral panics about piracy, counterfeiting, organised crime, and border security. The agreement contains provisions on civil remedies and criminal offences; copyright law and trademark law; the regulation of the digital environment; and border measures. Memorably, Susan Sell called the international treaty a TRIPS Double-Plus Agreement, because its obligations far exceed those of the World Trade Organization's TRIPS Agreement 1994, and TRIPS-Plus Agreements, such as the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement 2004. ACTA lacks the language of other international intellectual property agreements, which emphasise the need to balance the protection of intellectual property owners with the wider public interest in access to medicines, human development, and transfer of knowledge and technology. In Australia, there was much controversy both about the form and the substance of ACTA. While the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade was a partisan supporter of the agreement, a wide range of stakeholders were openly critical. After holding hearings and taking note of the position of the European Parliament and the controversy in the United States, the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties in the Australian Parliament recommended the deferral of ratification of ACTA. This was striking as representatives of all the main parties agreed on the recommendation. The committee was concerned about the lack of transparency, due process, public participation, and substantive analysis of the treaty. There were also reservations about the ambiguity of the treaty text, and its potential implications for the digital economy, innovation and competition, plain packaging of tobacco products, and access to essential medicines. The treaty has provoked much soul-searching as to whether the Trick or Treaty reforms on the international treaty-making process in Australia have been compromised or undermined. Although ACTA stalled in the Australian Parliament, the debate over it is yet to conclude. There have been concerns in Australia and elsewhere that ACTA will be revived as a ‘zombie agreement’. Indeed, in March 2013, the Canadian government introduced a bill to ensure compliance with ACTA. Will it be also resurrected in Australia? Has it already been revived? There are three possibilities. First, the Australian government passed enhanced remedies with respect to piracy, counterfeiting and border measures in a separate piece of legislation – the Intellectual Property Laws Amendment (Raising the Bar) Act 2012 (Cth). Second, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade remains supportive of ACTA. It is possible, after further analysis, that the next Australian Parliament – to be elected in September 2013 – will ratify the treaty. Third, Australia is involved in the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations. The government has argued that ACTA should be a template for the Intellectual Property Chapter in the Trans-Pacific Partnership. The United States Trade Representative would prefer a regime even stronger than ACTA. This chapter provides a portrait of the Australian debate over ACTA. It is the account of an interested participant in the policy proceedings. This chapter will first consider the deliberations and recommendations of the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties on ACTA. Second, there was a concern that ACTA had failed to provide appropriate safeguards with respect to civil liberties, human rights, consumer protection and privacy laws. Third, there was a concern about the lack of balance in the treaty’s copyright measures; the definition of piracy is overbroad; the suite of civil remedies, criminal offences and border measures is excessive; and there is a lack of suitable protection for copyright exceptions, limitations and remedies. Fourth, there was a worry that the provisions on trademark law, intermediary liability and counterfeiting could have an adverse impact upon consumer interests, competition policy and innovation in the digital economy. Fifth, there was significant debate about the impact of ACTA on pharmaceutical drugs, access to essential medicines and health-care. Sixth, there was concern over the lobbying by tobacco industries for ACTA – particularly given Australia’s leadership on tobacco control and the plain packaging of tobacco products. Seventh, there were concerns about the operation of border measures in ACTA. Eighth, the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties was concerned about the jurisdiction of the ACTA Committee, and the treaty’s protean nature. Finally, the chapter raises fundamental issues about the relationship between the executive and the Australian Parliament with respect to treaty-making. There is a need to reconsider the efficacy of the Trick or Treaty reforms passed by the Australian Parliament in the 1990s.

A Submission to the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties on the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 (# ACTA)

“If Hollywood could order intellectual property laws for Christmas, what would they look like? This is pretty close.” David Fewer “While European and American IP maximalists have pushed for TRIPS-Plus provisions in FTAs and bilateral agreements, they are now pushing for TRIPS-Plus-Plus protections in these various forums.” Susan Sell “ACTA is a threat to the future of a free and open Internet.” Alexander Furnas “Implementing the agreement could open a Pandora's box of potential human rights violations.” Amnesty International. “I will not take part in this masquerade.” Kader Arif, Rapporteur for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 in the European Parliament Executive Summary As an independent scholar and expert in intellectual property, I am of the view that the Australian Parliament should reject the adoption of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. I would take issue with the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade’s rather partisan account of the negotiations, the consultations, and the outcomes associated with the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. In my view, the negotiations were secretive and biased; the local consultations were sometimes farcical because of the lack of information about the draft texts of the agreement; and the final text of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 is not in the best interests of Australia, particularly given that it is a net importer of copyright works and trade mark goods and services. I would also express grave reservations about the quality of the rather pitiful National Interest Analysis – and the lack of any regulatory impact statement – associated with the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. The assertion that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 does not require legislative measures is questionable – especially given the United States Trade Representative has called the agreement ‘the highest-standard plurilateral agreement ever achieved concerning the enforcement of intellectual property rights.’ It is worthwhile reiterating that there has been much criticism of the secretive and partisan nature of the negotiations surrounding the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. Sean Flynn summarizes these concerns: "The negotiation process for ACTA has been a case study in establishing the conditions for effective industry capture of a lawmaking process. Instead of using the relatively transparent and inclusive multilateral processes, ACTA was launched through a closed and secretive “‘club approach’ in which like-minded jurisdictions define enforcement ‘membership’ rules and then invite other countries to join, presumably via other trade agreements.” The most influential developing countries, including Brazil, India, China and Russia, were excluded. Likewise, a series of manoeuvres ensured that public knowledge about the specifics of the agreement and opportunities for input into the process were severely limited. Negotiations were held with mere hours notice to the public as to when and where they would be convened, often in countries half away around the world from where public interest groups are housed. Once there, all negotiation processes were closed to the public. Draft texts were not released before or after most negotiating rounds, and meetings with stakeholders took place only behind closed doors and off the record. A public release of draft text, in April 2010, was followed by no public or on-the-record meetings with negotiators." Moreover, it is disturbing that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 has been driven by ideology and faith, rather than by any evidence-based policy making Professor Duncan Matthews has raised significant questions about the quality of empirical evidence used to support the proposal of Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011: ‘There are concerns that statements about levels of counterfeiting and piracy are based either on customs seizures, with the actual quantities of infringing goods in free circulation in any particular market largely unknown, or on estimated losses derived from industry surveys.’ It is particularly disturbing that, in spite of past criticism, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade has supported the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011, without engaging the Productivity Commission or the Treasury to do a proper economic analysis of the proposed treaty. Kader Arif, Rapporteur for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 in the European Parliament, quit his position, and said of the process: "I want to denounce in the strongest possible manner the entire process that led to the signature of this agreement: no inclusion of civil society organisations, a lack of transparency from the start of the negotiations, repeated postponing of the signature of the text without an explanation being ever given, exclusion of the EU Parliament's demands that were expressed on several occasions in our assembly. As rapporteur of this text, I have faced never-before-seen manoeuvres from the right wing of this Parliament to impose a rushed calendar before public opinion could be alerted, thus depriving the Parliament of its right to expression and of the tools at its disposal to convey citizens' legitimate demands.” Everyone knows the ACTA agreement is problematic, whether it is its impact on civil liberties, the way it makes Internet access providers liable, its consequences on generic drugs manufacturing, or how little protection it gives to our geographical indications. This agreement might have major consequences on citizens' lives, and still, everything is being done to prevent the European Parliament from having its say in this matter. That is why today, as I release this report for which I was in charge, I want to send a strong signal and alert the public opinion about this unacceptable situation. I will not take part in this masquerade." There have been parallel concerns about the process and substance of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 in the context of Australia. I have a number of concerns about the substance of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. First, I am concerned that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 fails to provide appropriate safeguards in respect of human rights, consumer protection, competition, and privacy laws. It is recommended that the new Joint Parliamentary Committee on Human Rights investigate this treaty. Second, I argue that there is a lack of balance to the copyright measures in the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 – the definition of piracy is overbroad; the suite of civil remedies, criminal offences, and border measures is excessive; and there is a lack of suitable protection for copyright exceptions, limitations, and remedies. Third, I discuss trade mark law, intermediary liability, and counterfeiting. I express my concerns, in this context, that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 could have an adverse impact upon consumer interests, competition policy, and innovation in the digital economy. I also note, with concern, the lobbying by tobacco industries for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 – and the lack of any recognition in the treaty for the capacity of countries to take measures of tobacco control under the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Fourth, I note that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 provides no positive obligations to promote access to essential medicines. It is particularly lamentable that Australia and the United States of America have failed to implement the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health 2001 and the WTO General Council Decision 2003. Fifth, I express concerns about the border measures in the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. Such measures lack balance – and unduly favour the interests of intellectual property owners over consumers, importers, and exporters. Moreover, such measures will be costly, as they involve shifting the burden of intellectual property enforcement to customs and border authorities. Interdicting, seizing, and destroying goods may also raise significant trade issues. Finally, I express concern that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 undermines the role of existing international organisations, such as the United Nations, the World Intellectual Property Organization and the World Trade Organization, and subverts international initiatives such as the WIPO Development Agenda 2007. I also question the raison d'être, independence, transparency, and accountability of the proposed new ‘ACTA Committee’. In this context, I am concerned by the shift in the position of the Labor Party in its approach to international treaty-making in relation to intellectual property. The Australian Parliament adopted the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement 2004, which included a large Chapter on intellectual property. The treaty was a ‘TRIPs-Plus’ agreement, because the obligations were much more extensive and prescriptive than those required under the multilateral framework established by the TRIPS Agreement 1994. During the debate over the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement 2004, the Labor Party expressed the view that it would seek to mitigate the effects of the TRIPS-Plus Agreement, when at such time it gained power. Far from seeking to ameliorate the effects of the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement 2004, the Labor Government would seek to lock Australia into a TRIPS-Double Plus Agreement – the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. There has not been a clear political explanation for this change in approach to international intellectual property. For both reasons of process and substance, I conclude that the Australian Parliament and the Australian Government should reject the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. The Australian Government would do better to endorse the Washington Declaration on Intellectual Property and the Public Interest 2011, and implement its outstanding obligations in respect of access to knowledge, access to essential medicines, and the WIPO Development Agenda 2007. The case study of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 highlights the need for further reforms to the process by which Australia engages in international treaty-making.

Agent-based simulation as a component of mixed methods in entrepreneurship research

As a new research method supplementing the existing qualitative and quantitative approaches, agent-based modelling and simulation (ABMS) may fit well within the entrepreneurship field because the core concepts and basic premises of entrepreneurship coincide with the characteristics of ABMS (McKelvey, 2004; Yang & Chandra, 2013). Agent-based simulation is a simulation method based on agent-based models. The agentbased models are composed of heterogeneous agents and their behavioural rules. By repeatedly carrying out agent-based simulations on a computer, the simulations reproduce each agent’s behaviour, their interactive process, and the emerging macroscopic phenomenon according to the flow of time. Using agent-based simulations, researchers may investigate temporal or dynamic effects of each agent’s behaviours.

Young drivers’ responses to anti-speeding advertisements: Comparison of self-report and objective measures of persuasive processing and outcomes

Objective Self-report measures are typically used to assess the effectiveness of road safety advertisements. However, psychophysiological measures of persuasive processing (i.e., skin conductance response [SCR]) and objective driving measures of persuasive outcomes (i.e., in-vehicle GPS devices) may provide further insights into the effectiveness of these advertisements. This study aimed to explore the persuasive processing and outcomes of two anti-speeding advertisements by incorporating both self-report and objective measures of speeding behaviour. In addition, this study aimed to compare the findings derived from these different measurement approaches. Methods Young drivers (N = 20, Mage = 21.01 years) viewed either a positive or negative emotion-based anti-speeding television advertisement. Whilst viewing the advertisement, SCR activity was measured to assess ad-evoked arousal responses. The RoadScout® GPS device was then installed into participants’ vehicles for one week to measure on-road speed-related driving behaviour. Self-report measures assessed persuasive processing (emotional and arousal responses) and actual driving behaviour. Results There was general correspondence between the self-report measures of arousal and the SCR and between the self-report measure of actual driving behaviour and the objective driving data (as assessed via the GPS devices). Conclusions This study provides insights into how psychophysiological and GPS devices could be used as objective measures in conjunction with self-report measures to further understand the persuasive processes and outcomes of emotion-based anti-speeding advertisements.

Pro-angiogenic and anti-angiogenic factors in the degradation of osteoarthritic cartilage

This project has determined angiogenic and anti-angiogenic factors in osteoarthritis cartilage. The work has expanded our knowledge and understanding of the importance of anti-angiogenic factors in maintaining cartilage homeostasis. This study also tested the concept of topical application of anti-angiogenic treatment strategy for osteoarthritis.

Sports anti-siphoning laws and the controversy of sports broadcasting: A case study of Pakistan

Controversies between private and public broadcasters over the broadcasting of live sports, especially cricket, during important sports events have emerged as a serious legal issue in Pakistan. Controversy between Geo Super and Pakistan Television over live telecast of the ICC Cricket World Cup is a typical example of such controversies. An aggressive legal battle, during a most important cricketing event, not only hampered the enjoyment of cricket viewers across the country but also gave Pakistan a bad name across the globe. This article discusses in detail this controversy and highlights lacunas in the existing sports broadcasting regime of Pakistan. There are no clear and well defined sports broadcasting laws in Pakistan. The Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) rules are of general nature. Secondly, PEMRA rules are not comprehensive and explicit enough to provide clear guidelines about sports broadcasting. This may be a possible reason why sports broadcasting controversies reach the highest court in Pakistan, the Supreme Court of Pakistan. Despite these ugly battles between broadcasters, the government of Pakistan has never given due importance to this issue and no efforts have been made at any level to come up with legislation on sports broadcasting to avoid such controversies or to resolve them amicably in the light of well-defined laws on this subject. The purpose of this article is to draw the attention of the concerned authorities towards this important issue because in future more such controversies may be expected in the absence of a sports broadcasting regime in the country.

Budesonide and Formoterol Reduce Early Innate Anti-Viral Immune Responses In Vitro

Asthma is a chronic inflammatory airways disease in which respiratory viral infections frequently trigger exacerbations. Current treatment of asthma with combinations of inhaled corticosteroids and long acting beta2 agonists improves asthma control and reduces exacerbations but what impact this might have on innate anti-viral immunity is unclear. We investigated the in vitro effects of asthma drugs on innate anti-viral immunity. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) from healthy and asthmatic donors were cultured for 24 hours with the Toll-like receptor 7 agonist, imiquimod, or rhinovirus 16 (RV16) in the presence of budesonide and/or formoterol. Production of proinflammatory cytokines and expression of anti-viral intracellular signalling molecules were measured by ELISA and RT-PCR respectively. In PBMC from healthy donors, budesonide alone inhibited IP-10 and IL-6 production induced by imiquimod in a concentration-dependent manner and the degree of inhibition was amplified when budesonide and formoterol were used in combination. Formoterol alone had little effect on these parameters, except at high concentrations (10−6 M) when IL-6 production increased. In RV16 stimulated PBMC, the combination of budesonide and formoterol inhibited IFNα and IP-10 production in asthmatic as well as healthy donors. Combination of budesonide and formoterol also inhibited RV16-stimulated expression of the type I IFN induced genes myxovirus protein A and 2′, 5′ oligoadenylate synthetise. Notably, RV16 stimulated lower levels of type Myxovirus A and oligoadenylate synthase in PBMC of asthmatics than control donors. These in vitro studies demonstrate that combinations of drugs commonly used in asthma therapy inhibit both early pro-inflammatory cytokines and key aspects of the type I IFN pathway. These findings suggest that budesonide and formoterol curtail excessive inflammation induced by rhinovirus infections in patients with asthma, but whether this inhibits viral clearance in vivo remains to be determined.

The window of opportunity: A relevant concept for axial spondyloarthritis

The window of opportunity is a concept critical to rheumatoid arthritis treatment. Early treatment changes the outcome of rheumatoid arthritis treatment, in that response rates are higher with earlier disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug treatment and damage is substantially reduced. Axial spondyloarthritis is an inflammatory axial disease encompassing both nonradiographic axial spondyloarthritis and established ankylosing spondylitis. In axial spondyloarthritis, studies of magnetic resonance imaging as well as tumor necrosis factor inhibitor treatment and withdrawal studies all suggest that early effective suppression of inflammation has the potential to reduce radiographic damage. This potential would suggest that the concept of a window of opportunity is relevant not only to rheumatoid arthritis but also to axial spondyloarthritis. The challenge now remains to identify high-risk patients early and to commence treatment without delay. Developments in risk stratification include new classification criteria, identification of clinical risk factors, biomarkers, genetic associations, potential antibody associations and an ankylosing spondylitis-specific microbiome signature. Further research needs to focus on the evidence for early intervention and the early identification of high-risk individuals.

Antibody treatments of inflammatory arthritis

Inflammatory arthropathies such as rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, and psoriatic arthritis are extremely common in the community, with a prevalence of up to 5%, and they cause substantial morbidity. The development of anti-TNF agents for use initially in rheumatoid arthritis, and subsequently more broadly in inflammatory arthritis, represents the biggest advance in management of these conditions since the introduction of corticosteroid agents, and is a major vindication of public funded arthritis research. However, there are limitations of even these highly effective agents. A significant minority of patients with inflammatory arthritis do not respond to these anti-TNF agents, they are associated with substantial risk of toxicity, require parenteral administration, and are extremely expensive. New antibody treatments in development can be divided into anti-cytokine agents, cell-targeted therapies, co-stimulation inhibitors, and treatments aimed at preventing joint erosion consequent on inflammation. This review discusses the state of the art in the development of these agents for management of this common group of diseases.

Anti-staphylococcal activity of C-methyl flavanones from propolis of Australian stingless bees (Tetragonula carbonaria) and fruit resins of Corymbia torelliana (Myrtaceae)

Propolis of Australian stingless bees (Tetragonula carbonaria, Meliponini) originating from Corymbia torelliana (Myrtaceae) fruit resins was tested for its antimicrobial activities as well as its flavonoid contents. This study aimed at the isolation, structural elucidation and antibacterial testing of flavanones of C. torelliana fruit resins that are incorporated into stingless bee propolis. Flavanones of this study were elucidated by spectroscopic and spectrometric methods including UV, 1D and 2D NMR, EI-MS, ESI-MS and HR-MS. The results indicated known C-methylated flavanones namely, 1 (2S)-cryptostrobin, its regioisomer 2 (2S)- stroboponin, 3 (2S)- cryptostrobin 7-methyl ether, and 6 (2S)- desmethoxymatteucinol, and known flavanones 4 (2S)- pinostrobin and 5 (2S)- pinocembrin as markers for C. torelliana fruit resins and one propolis type. Ethanolic preparations of propolis were shown to be active against Staphylococcus aureus (ATCC 25923) and to a lesser extent against Pseudomonas aeruginosa (ATCC 27853). C. torelliana flavanones inhibited the growth of S. aureus therefore contributing to the antibacterial effects observed for Australian stingless bee propolis extracts.

Atmospheric pressure gas plasma-induced colorectal cancer cell death is mediated by Nox2-ASK1 apoptosis pathways and oxidative stress is mitigated by Srx-Nrf2 anti-oxidant system

Atmospheric pressure gas plasma (AGP) generates reactive oxygen species (ROS) that induce apoptosis in cultured cancer cells. The majority of cancer cells develop a ROS-scavenging anti-oxidant system regulated by Nrf2, which confers resistance to ROS-mediated cancer cell death. Generation of ROS is involved in the AGP-induced cancer cell death of several colorectal cancer cells (Caco2, HCT116 and SW480) by activation of ASK1-mediated apoptosis signaling pathway without affecting control cells (human colonic sub-epithelial myofibroblasts; CO18, human fetal lung fibroblast; MRC5 and fetal human colon; FHC). However, the identity of an oxidase participating in AGP-induced cancer cell death is unknown. Here, we report that AGP up-regulates the expression of Nox2 (NADPH oxidase) to produce ROS. RNA interference designed to target Nox2 effectively inhibits the AGP-induced ROS production and cancer cell death. In some cases both colorectal cancer HT29 and control cells showed resistance to AGP treatment. Compared to AGP-sensitive Caco2 cells, HT29 cells show a higher basal level of the anti-oxidant system transcriptional regulator Nrf2 and its target protein sulfiredoxin (Srx) which are involved in cellular redox homeostasis. Silencing of both Nrf2 and Srx sensitized HT29 cells, leads to ROS overproduction and decreased cell viability. This indicates that in HT29 cells, Nrf2/Srx axis is a protective factor against AGP-induced oxidative stress. The inhibition of Nrf2/Srx signaling should be considered as a central target in drug-resistant colorectal cancer treatments.

Polysaccharopeptide enhanced the anti-cancer effect of gamma-tocotrienol through activation of AMPK

Background Prostate cancer (PCa) frequently relapses after hormone ablation therapy. Unfortunately, once progressed to the castration resistant stage, the disease is regarded as incurable as prostate cancer cells are highly resistant to conventional chemotherapy. Method We recently reported that the two natural compounds polysaccharopeptide (PSP) and Gamma-tocotrienols (γ-T3) possessed potent anti-cancer activities through targeting of CSCs. In the present study, using both prostate cancer cell line and xenograft models, we seek to investigate the therapeutic potential of combining γ-T3 and PSP in the treatment of prostate cancer. Result We showed that in the presence of PSP, γ-T3 treatment induce a drastic activation of AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK). This was accompanied with inactivation of acetyl-CoA carboxylase (ACC), as evidenced by the increased phosphorylation levels at Ser 79. In addition, PSP treatment also sensitized cancer cells toward γ-T3-induced cytotoxicity. Furthermore, we demonstrated for the first time that combination of PSP and γ-T3 treaments significantly reduced the growth of prostate tumor in vivo. Conclusion Our results indicate that PSP and γ-T3 treaments may have synergistic anti-cancer effect in vitro and in vivo, which warrants further investigation as a potential combination therapy for the treatment of cancer.

Evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis of ankylosing spondylitis: Results from the Australian 3E initiative in rheumatology

• As part of the 3E program, we conducted a systematic literature review and gathered consensus from 23 practising Australian rheumatologists to develop guidelines for early identification of ankylosing spondylitis and specialist referral. • In three rounds of break-out sessions followed by discussion and voting, the specialist panel addressed three questions related to diagnosis of ankylosing spondylitis: In individuals with back pain, what are the early clinical features that suggest ankylosing spondylitis? How useful is imaging in identifying early ankylosing spondylitis? Based on which clinical features should a general practitioner refer a patient to a rheumatologist for further evaluation? • The panel agreed on six recommendations related to the three questions: 1a. Early clinical features to suggest ankylosing spondylitis include inflammatory back pain and age at symptom onset < 45 years. 1b. The absence of symptomatic response to an appropriate course of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs makes the diagnosis of ankylosing spondylitis less likely. 1c. Raised inflammatory markers are supportive, but their absence does not rule out the diagnosis of ankylosing spondylitis. 2a. Despite low sensitivity to detect changes of early ankylosing spondylitis, plain radiographs of the pelvis and spine are appropriate initial imaging techniques. 2b. Magnetic resonance imaging is a useful imaging modality for detecting early changes of ankylosing spondylitis. 3. Individuals with inflammatory back pain should be referred to a rheumatologist for further evaluation. • Effective dissemination and implementation of these recommendations are important to standardise the approach to early diagnosis of ankylosing spondylitis.

Nutritional impact of antipseudomonas intravenous antibiotic courses in cystic fibrosis

Editor,—In their study of cystic fibrosis patients who were nutritionally assessed at the start and end of a 14 day period of home intravenous antibiotic treatment for chest disease, Vicet al concluded that increased weight was a result of increased fat storage.1 While this may in part be true, their methodology dictates caution in drawing conclusions....