What to do if your child is being bullied

Many of us have experienced being a victim of a bully at some time in our lives. We know how humiliated and hurt we were. If you find out your child is being bullied we want to jump in and sort it out straight away. However, it is better to remain clam and have a conversation with your child, not an interrogation and make a plan. About a quarter of children say they have been bullied at some time and yet many will not tell us for fear of retaliation from the bully or because of what we might do.

Prognostic factors for malignant mesothelioma in 142 patients : validation of CALGB and EORTC prognostic scoring systems

Background The incidence of malignant mesothelioma is increasing. There is the perception that survival is worse in the UK than in other countries. However, it is important to compare survival in different series based on accurate prognostic data. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) and the Cancer and Leukaemia Group B (CALGB) have recently published prognostic scoring systems. We have assessed the prognostic variables, validated the EORTC and CALGB prognostic groups, and evaluated survival in a series of 142 patients. Methods Case notes of 142 consecutive patients presenting in Leicester since 1988 were reviewed. Univariate analysis of prognostic variables was performed using a Cox proportional hazards regression model. Statistically significant variables were analysed further in a forward, stepwise multivariate model. EORTC and CALGB prognostic groups were derived, Kaplan-Meier survival curves plotted, and survival rates were calculated from life tables. Results Significant poor prognostic factors in univariate analysis included male sex, older age, weight loss, chest pain, poor performance status, low haemoglobin, leukocytosis, thrombocytosis, and non-epithelial cell type (p<0.05). The prognostic significance of cell type, haemoglobin, white cell count, performance status, and sex were retained in the multivariate model. Overall median survival was 5.9 (range 0-34.3) months. One and two year survival rates were 21.3% (95% CI 13.9 to 28.7) and 3.5% (0 to 8.5), respectively. Median, one, and two year survival data within prognostic groups in Leicester were equivalent to the EORTC and CALGB series. Survival curves were successfully stratified by the prognostic groups. Conclusions This study validates the EORTC and CALGB prognostic scoring systems which should be used both in the assessment of survival data of series in different countries and in the stratification of patients into randomised clinical studies.

lacZ transduced human breast cancer xenografts as an in vivo model for the study of invasion and metastasis

A number of human cancer cell lines have been described as being invasive and metastatic in immune incompetent animals. However, it is difficult to assess metastatic spread of a subcutaneously injected or inoculated cell line, since an exact detection of all microfoci of human tumour cells in the animals by usual histological procedures would require extensive sectioning of the whole animal. To overcome this problem, we transduced human breast cancer cells with a replication-defective Moloney murine leukaemia retroviral vector (M-MuLV) containing both neo(R) (neomycin resistance) and lacZ genes. The resulting cell lines were selected for antibiotic (G418) resistance, and cell-sorted for lacZ expression. lacZ continued to be expressed in cultured cells for at least 20 passages without further G418 selection. The lacE gene codes for β-D-galactosidase, and cells expressing this gene stain blue with the chromogenic substrate X-gal. The lacZ-expressing cells retained the pre-transduction ability to traverse Matrigel in vitro, to form subcutaneous tumours in nude mice, and to grow invasively with the formation of metastases. X-gal staining showed high specificity, staining the tumour cells but not the surrounding mouse tissue on either whole tissue blocks or histological sections. The staining procedure was highly sensitive, allowing detection of microfoci of human cancer cells, and quantitative estimation of the metastatic capacity of the cells. These results indicate that lacZ transduction of human tumour cells is a powerful means of studying human cancer cell invasion and metastases in vivo.

Clinicopathological relevance of BRAF mutations in human cancer

BRAF represents one of the most frequently mutated protein kinase genes in human tumours. The mutation is commonly tested in pathology practice. BRAF mutation is seen in melanoma, papillary thyroid carcinoma (including papillary thyroid carcinoma arising from ovarian teratoma), ovarian serous tumours, colorectal carcinoma, gliomas, hepatobiliary carcinomas and hairy cell leukaemia. In these cancers, various genetic aberrations of the BRAF proto-oncogene, such as different point mutations and chromosomal rearrangements, have been reported. The most common mutation, BRAF V600E, can be detected by DNA sequencing and immunohistochemistry on formalin fixed, paraffin embedded tumour tissue. Detection of BRAF V600E mutation has the potential for clinical use as a diagnostic and prognostic marker. In addition, a great deal of research effort has been spent in strategies inhibiting its activity. Indeed, recent clinical trials involving BRAF selective inhibitors exhibited promising response rates in metastatic melanoma patients. Clinical trials are underway for other cancers. However, cutaneous side effects of treatment have been reported and therapeutic response to cancer is short-lived due to the emergence of several resistance mechanisms. In this review, we give an update on the clinical pathological relevance of BRAF mutation in cancer. It is hoped that the review will enhance the direction of future research and assist in more effective use of the knowledge of BRAF mutation in clinical practice.

The empire of cancer: Gene patents and cancer voices

In his book, The Emperor of All Maladies, Siddhartha Mukherjee writes a history of cancer — "It is a chronicle of an ancient disease — once a clandestine, 'whispered-about' illness — that has metamorphosed into a lethal shape-shifting entity imbued with such penetrating metaphorical, medical, scientific, and political potency that cancer is often described as the defining plague of our generation." Increasingly, an important theme in the history of cancer is the role of law, particularly in the field of intellectual property law. It is striking that a number of contemporary policy debates over intellectual property and public health have concerned cancer research, diagnosis, and treatment. In the area of access to essential medicines, there has been much debate over Novartis’ patent application in respect of Glivec, a treatment for leukaemia. India’s Supreme Court held that the Swiss company’s patent application violated a safeguard provision in India’s patent law designed to stop evergreening. In the field of tobacco control, the Australian Government introduced plain packaging for tobacco products in order to address the health burdens associated with the tobacco epidemic. This regime was successfully defended in the High Court of Australia. In the area of intellectual property and biotechnology, there have been significant disputes over the Utah biotechnology company Myriad Genetics and its patents in respect of genetic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2, which are related to breast cancer and ovarian cancer. The Federal Court of Australia handed down a decision on the validity of Myriad Genetics’ patent in respect of genetic testing for BRCA1 in February 2013. The Supreme Court of the United States heard a challenge to the validity of Myriad Genetics’ patents in this area in April 2013, and handed down a judgment in July 2013. Such disputes have involved tensions between intellectual property rights, and public health. This article focuses upon one of these important test cases involving intellectual property, public health, and cancer research. In June 2010, Cancer Voices Australia and Yvonne D’Arcy brought an action in the Federal Court of Australia against the validity of a BRCA1 patent — held by Myriad Genetics Inc, the Centre de Recherche du Chul, the Cancer Institute of Japan and Genetic Technologies Limited. Yvonne D’Arcy — a Brisbane woman who has had treatment for breast cancer — maintained: "I believe that what they are doing is morally and ethically corrupt and that big companies should not control any parts of the human body." She observed: "For my daughter, I've had her have [sic] mammograms, etc, because of me but I would still like her to be able to have the test to see if the mutation gene is in there from me." The applicants made the following arguments: "Genes and the information represented by human gene sequences are products of nature universally present in each individual, and the information content of a human gene sequence is fixed. Genetic variations or mutations are products of nature. The isolation of the BRCA1 gene mutation from the human body constitutes no more than a medical or scientific discovery of a naturally occurring phenomenon and does not give rise to a patentable invention." The applicants also argued that "the alleged invention is not a patentable invention in that, so far as claimed in claims 1–3, it is not a manner of manufacture within the meaning of s 6 of the Statute of Monopolies". The applicants suggested that "the alleged invention is a mere discovery". Moreover, the applicants contended that "the alleged invention of each of claims 1-3 is not a patentable invention because they are claims for biological processes for the generation of human beings". The applicants, though, later dropped the argument that the patent claims related to biological processes for the generation of human beings. In February 2013, Nicholas J of the Federal Court of Australia considered the case brought by Cancer Voices Australia and Yvonne D’Arcy against Myriad Genetics. The judge presented the issues in the case, as follows: "The issue that arises in this case is of considerable importance. It relates to the patentability of genes, or gene sequences, and the practice of 'gene patenting'. Briefly stated, the issue to be decided is whether under the Patents Act 1990 (Cth) a valid patent may be granted for a claim that covers naturally occurring nucleic acid — either deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) or ribonucleic acid (RNA) — that has been 'isolated'". In this context, the word "isolated" implies that naturally occurring nucleic acid found in the cells of the human body, whether it be DNA or RNA, has been removed from the cellular environment in which it naturally exists and separated from other cellular components also found there. The genes found in the human body are made of nucleic acid. The particular gene with which the patent in suit is concerned (BRCA1) is a human breast and ovarian cancer disposing gene. Various mutations that may be present in this gene have been linked to various forms of cancer including breast cancer and ovarian cancer.' The judge held in this particular case that Myriad Genetics’ patent claims were a "manner of manufacture" under s 6 of the Statute of Monopolies and s 18(1)(a) of the Patents Act 1990 (Cth). The matter is currently under appeal in the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia. This article interprets the dispute over Myriad Genetics in light of the scholarly work of Nobel Laureate Professor Joseph Stiglitz on inequality. Such work has significant explanatory power in the context of intellectual property and biotechnology. First, Stiglitz has contended that "societal inequality was a result not just of the laws of economics, but also of how we shape the economy — through politics, including through almost every aspect of our legal system". Stiglitz is concerned that "our intellectual property regime … contributes needlessly to the gravest form of inequality." He maintains: "The right to life should not be contingent on the ability to pay." Second, Stiglitz worries that "some of the most iniquitous aspects of inequality creation within our economic system are a result of 'rent-seeking': profits, and inequality, generated by manipulating social or political conditions to get a larger share of the economic pie, rather than increasing the size of that pie". He observes that "the most iniquitous aspect of this wealth appropriation arises when the wealth that goes to the top comes at the expense of the bottom." Third, Stiglitz comments: "When the legal regime governing intellectual property rights is designed poorly, it facilitates rent-seeking" and "the result is that there is actually less innovation and more inequality." He is concerned that intellectual property regimes "create monopoly rents that impede access to health both create inequality and hamper growth more generally." Finally, Stiglitz has recommended: "Government-financed research, foundations, and the prize system … are alternatives, with major advantages, and without the inequality-increasing disadvantages of the current intellectual property rights system.’" This article provides a critical analysis of the Australian litigation and debate surrounding Myriad Genetics’ patents in respect of genetic testing for BRCA1. First, it considers the ruling of Nicholas J in the Federal Court of Australia that Myriad Genetics’ patent was a manner of manufacture as it related to an artificially created state of affairs, and not mere products of nature. Second, it examines the policy debate over gene patents in Australia, and its relevance to the litigation involving Myriad Genetics. Third, it examines comparative law, and contrasts the ruling by Nicholas J in the Federal Court of Australia with developments in the United States, Canada, and the European Union. Fourth, this piece considers the reaction to the decision of Nicholas at first instance in Australia. Fifth, the article assesses the prospects of an appeal to the Full Federal Court of Australia over the Myriad Genetics’ patents. Finally, this article observes that, whatever happens in respect of litigation against Myriad Genetics, there remains controversy over Genetic Technologies Limited. The Melbourne firm has been aggressively licensing and enforcing its related patents on non-coding DNA and genomic mapping.

Polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) modulates CD38 expression, absorbs retinoic acid and may perturb retinoid signalling

Polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) is the most commonly used material in the manufacture of customized cell culture devices. While there is concern that uncured PDMS oligomers may leach into culture medium and/or hydrophobic molecules may be absorbed into PDMS structures, there is no consensus on how or if PDMS influences cell behaviour. We observed that human umbilical cord blood (CB)-derived CD34+ cells expanded in standard culture medium on PDMS exhibit reduced CD38 surface expression, relative to cells cultured on tissue culture polystyrene (TCP). All-trans retinoic acid (ATRA) induces CD38 expression, and we reasoned that this hydrophobic molecule might be absorbed by PDMS. Through a series of experiments we demonstrated that ATRA-mediated CD38 expression was attenuated when cultures were maintained on PDMS. Medium pre-incubated on PDMS for extended durations resulted in a time-dependant reduction of ATRA in the medium and increasingly attenuated CD38 expression. This indicated a time-dependent absorption of ATRA into the PDMS. To better understand how PDMS might generally influence cell behaviour, Ingenuity Pathway Analysis (IPA) was used to identify potential upstream regulators. This analysis was performed for differentially expressed genes in primary cells including CD34+ haematopoietic progenitor cells, mesenchymal stromal cells (MSC), and keratinocytes, and cell lines including prostate cancer epithelial cells (LNCaP), breast cancer epithelial cells (MCF-7), and myeloid leukaemia cells (KG1a). IPA predicted that the most likely common upstream regulator of perturbed pathways was ATRA. We demonstrate here that ATRA is absorbed by PDMS in a time-dependent manner and results in the concomitant reduced expression of CD38 on the cell surface of CB-derived CD34+ cells.