Preaching to Princes: John Burgess and George Hakewill in the Royal Pulpit

This article examines a previously unnoticed link between the Puritan John Burgess and the Calvinist conformist George Hakewill. In 1604 Burgess preached a court sermon so outspoken and critical of James I’s religious policy that he was imprisoned. Nearly twenty years later, however, Hakewill chose to incorporate extended passages from Burgess’s sermon into the series of sermons, King David’s vow (1621), preached to Prince Charles’s household. This article considers why Burgess’s sermon became so resonant for Hakewill in the early 1620s and also demonstrates how Hakewill deliberately sought to moderate Burgess’s strident polemic. In so doing the article provides important new evidence for the politically attuned sermon culture at Prince Charles’s court in the early 1620s and also suggests how, as the parameters for clerical conformity shifted in the latter years of James’s reign, Calvinist conformists found a new appeal in the works of moderate Puritans. I

Jagged/Notch signalling is required for a subset of TGFβ1 responses in human kidney epithelial cells.

The Jagged/Notch pathway has been implicated in TGFß1 responses in epithelial cells in diabetic nephropathy and other fibrotic conditions in vivo. Here, we identify that Jagged/Notch signalling is required for a subset of TGFß1-stimulated gene responses in human kidney epithelial cells in vitro. TGFß1 treatment of HK-2 and RPTEC cells for 24 h increased Jagged1 (a Notch ligand) and Hes1 (a Notch target) mRNA. This response was inhibited by co-incubation with Compound E, an inhibitor of ?-secretase (GSI), an enzyme required for Notch receptor cleavage and transcription regulation. In both cell types, TGFß1-responsive genes associated with epithelial–mesenchymal transition such as E-cadherin and vimentin were also affected by ?-secretase inhibition, but other TGFß1 targets such as connective tissue growth factor (CTGF) and thrombospondin-1 (THBS1) were not. TGFß1-induced changes in Jagged1 expression preceded EMT-associated gene changes, and co-incubation with GSI altered TGFß1-induced changes in cell shape and cytoskeleton. Transfection of cells with the activated, cleaved form of Notch (NICD) triggered decreased expression of E-cadherin in the absence of TGFß1, but did not affect a-smooth muscle actin expression, suggesting differential requirements for Notch signalling within the TGFß1-responsive gene subset. Increased Jagged1 expression upon TGFß1 exposure required Smad3 signalling, and was also regulated by PI3K and ERK. These data suggest that Jagged/Notch signalling is required for a subset of TGFß1-responsive genes, and that complex signalling pathways are involved in the crosstalk between TGFß1 and Notch cascades in kidney epithelia.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Producers and Consumers in EU E-Commerce Law by John Dickie, Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2005 (ISBN 1-841-13454-6)"

Book Review

Common Breast Cancer Susceptibility Alleles and the Risk of Breast Cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation Carriers: Implications for Risk Prediction

The known breast cancer susceptibility polymorphisms in FGFR2, TNRC9/TOX3, MAP3K1, LSP1, and 2q35 confer increased risks of breast cancer for BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. We evaluated the associations of 3 additional single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), rs4973768 in SLC4A7/NEK10, rs6504950 in STXBP4/COX11, and rs10941679 at 5p12, and reanalyzed the previous associations using additional carriers in a sample of 12,525 BRCA1 and 7,409 BRCA2 carriers. Additionally, we investigated potential interactions between SNPs and assessed the implications for risk prediction. The minor alleles of rs4973768 and rs10941679 were associated with increased breast cancer risk for BRCA2 carriers (per-allele HR - 1.10, 95% CI: 1.03-1.18, P - 0.006 and HR - 1.09, 95% CI: 1.01-1.19, P = 0.03, respectively). Neither SNP was associated with breast cancer risk for BRCA1 carriers, and rs6504950 was not associated with breast cancer for either BRCA1 or BRCA2 carriers. Of the 9 polymorphisms investigated, 7 were associated with breast cancer for BRCA2 carriers (FGFR2, TOX3, MAP3K1, LSP1, 2q35, SLC4A7, 5p12, P 7 = 10 x (11) - 0.03), but only TOX3 and 2q35 were associated with the risk for BRCA1 carriers (P = 0.0049, 0.03, respectively). All risk-associated polymorphisms appear to interact multiplicatively on breast cancer risk for mutation carriers. Based on the joint genotype distribution of the 7 risk-associated SNPs in BRCA2 mutation carriers, the 5% of BRCA2 carriers at highest risk (i.e., between 95th and 100th percentiles) were predicted to have a probability between 80% and 96% of developing breast cancer by age 80, compared with 42%