Endocrine disrupting effects of ochratoxin A at the level of nuclear receptor activation and steroidogenesis

Ochratoxin A (OTA) is a mycotoxin and extrolite of fungi which has been reported in a range of foods. This study uses mammalian reporter gene assays (RGAs) with natural steroid receptors and the H295R steroidogenesis assay to assess the endocrine disrupting activity of OTA.

At the receptor level, OTA (within a concentration range of 0.25–2500 ng/ml) did not induce an agonistic response in an oestrogen, androgen, progestagen or glucocorticoid RGA. An antagonistic effect was observed in all of the RGAs at the highest concentration tested (2500 ng/ml). However, while there was no significant cytotoxic effect observed in the MTT (thiazolyl blue tetrazolium bromide) cell viability assay at this concentration, there was a corresponding change in cell morphology which may be related to the resulting antagonistic effect.

At the hormone production level, H295R cells were used as a steroidogenesis model and exposed to OTA (within a concentration range of 0.1–1000 ng/ml). Treatment of the cells with 1000 ng/ml OTA increased the production of estradiol (117 ± 14 ng/ml) over 3 times that of the solvent control (36 ± 9 pg/ml). Western blotting confirmed an increase in aromatase protein.

Overall the results indicate that OTA does not appear to interact with steroid receptors but has the potential to cause endocrine disruption by interfering with steroidogenesis. This is the first study identifying the effect OTA may have on production of the steroid hormone estradiol.

Reducing the psychological distress of family caregivers of home based palliative care patients: Longer term effects from a randomised controlled trial.

Background: Palliative care incorporates comprehensive support of family caregivers because many of them experience burden and distress. However, evidence-based support initiatives are few.

Purpose: We evaluated a one-to-one psychoeducational intervention aimed at mitigating the distress of caregivers of patients with advanced cancer receiving home-based palliative care. We hypothesised that caregivers would report decreased distress as assessed by the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ).

Method: A randomised controlled trial comparing two versions of the delivery of the intervention (one face-to-face home visit plus telephone calls versus two visits) plus standard care to a control group (standard care only) across four sites in Australia.

Results: Recruitment to the one visit condition was 57, the two visit condition 93, and the control 148. We previously reported non-significant changes in distress between times 1 (baseline) and 2 (1-week post-intervention) but significant gains in competence and preparedness. We report here changes in distress between times 1 and 3 (8-week post-death). There was significantly less worsening in distress between times 1 and 3 in the one visit intervention group than in the control group; however, no significant difference was found between the two visit intervention and the control group.

Conclusions: These results are consistent with the aim of the intervention, and they support existing evidence demonstrating that relatively short psychoeducational interventions can help family caregivers who are supporting a dying relative. The sustained benefit during the bereavement period may also have positive resource implications, which should be the subject of future inquiry. © 2014 The Authors. Psycho-Oncology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

International Coordination in Cross-Border Bank Bail-ins: Problems and Prospects

Bail-in is quickly becoming a predominant approach to banking resolution. The EU Bank Recovery Resolution Directive and the US Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’s single point of entry strategy envisage creditors’ recapitalisations
to resolve a failing financial institution. However, this legislation focuses on the domestic aspects of bail-in, leaving the question of how it is applied
to a cross-border banking group open. Cross-border banking resolution has been historically subject to coordination failures, which have resulted in disorderly resolutions with dangerous systemic effects. The goal of this article is to assess whether bail-in is subject to the same coordination problems that affect other resolution tools, and to discuss the logic of international legal cooperation in bail-in policies. We demonstrate that, in spite of the evident benefit in terms of fiscal sustainability, bail-in suffers from complex coordination problems which, if not addressed, might lead to regulatory arbitrage and lengthy court battles, and, ultimately, may disrupt resolutions. We argue that only a binding legal regime can address those problems. In doing so, we discuss the recent Financial Stability
Board’s proposal on cross-border recognition of resolution action, and the role of international law in promoting cooperation in banking resolution.