Le choix de vivre en ville-centre : interactions entre mobilité quotidienne et mobilité résidentielle

Cet article s'insère dans un double débat : celui de l'influence des formes urbaines sur les pratiques modales et celui relatif au regain d'attractivité des villes pour les classes moyennes supérieures. Il aborde les interactions entre mobilité quotidienne et mobilité résidentielle dans un nouveau quartier d'une ville de taille moyenne. Les choix résidentiels étudiés se basent en grande partie sur la valorisation de la proximité. Toutefois, plusieurs styles de mobilité coexistent au sein de ce même contexte territorial en fonction notamment des parts modales des transports publics et de l'automobile.

Expression of MYC, IgM, As Well As Non-Germinal Centre B-Cell Like Immunophenotype and Positive Immunofish Index Predict a Worse Progression Free Survival and Overall Survival in a Series of 670 De Novo Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphomas Included in Clinical Trials: A GELA Study of the 2003 Program

Introduction: Diffuse large B-cell lymphomas (DLBCL) represent a heterogeneous disease with variable clinical outcome. Identifying phenotypic biomarkers of tumor cells on paraffin sections that predict different clinical outcome remain an important goal that may also help to better understand the biology of this lymphoma. Differentiating non-germinal centre B-cell-like (non-GCB) from Germinal Centre B-cell-like (GCB) DLBCL according to Hans algorithm has been considered as an important immunohistochemical biomarker with prognostic value among patients treated with R-CHOP although not reproducibly found by all groups. Gene expression studies have also shown that IgM expression might be used as a surrogate for the GCB and ABC subtypes with a strong preferential expression of IgM in ABC DLBCL subtype. ImmunoFISH index based on the differential expression of MUM-1, FOXP1 by immunohistochemistry and on the BCL6 rearrangement by FISH has been previously reported (C Copie-Bergman, J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:5573-9) as prognostic in an homogeneous series of DLBCL treated with R-CHOP. In addition, oncogenic MYC protein overexpression by immunohistochemistry may represent an easy tool to identify the consequences of MYC deregulation in DLBCL. Our aim was to analyse by immunohistochemistry the prognostic relevance of MYC, IgM, GCB/nonGCB subtype and ImmunoFISH index in a large series of de novo DLBCL treated with Rituximab (R)-chemotherapy (anthracyclin based) included in the 2003 program of the Groupe d'Etude des Lymphomes de l'Adulte (GELA) trials. Methods: The 2003 program included patients with de novo CD20+ DLBCL enrolled in 6 different LNH-03 GELA trials (LNH-03-1B, -B, -3B, 39B, -6B, 7B) stratifying patients according to age and age-adjusted IPI. Tumor samples were analyzed by immunohistochemistry using CD10, BCL6, MUM1, FOXP1 (according to Barrans threshold), MYC, IgM antibodies on tissue microarrays and by FISH using BCL6 split signal DNA probes. Considering evaluable Hans score, 670 patients were included in the study with 237 (35.4%) receiving intensive R-ACVBP regimen and 433 (64.6%) R-CHOP/R-mini-CHOP. Results: 304 (45.4%) DLBCL were classified as GCB and 366 (54.6%) as non-GCB according to Hans algorithm. 337/567 cases (59.4%) were positive for the ImmunoFISH index (i.e. two out of the three markers positive: MUM1 protein positive, FOXP1 protein Variable or Strong, BCL6 rearrangement). Immunofish index was preferentially positive in the non-GCB subtype (81.3%) compared to the GCB subtype (31.2%), (p<0.001). IgM was recorded as positive in tumor cells in 351/637 (52.4%) DLBCL cases with a preferential expression in non-GCB 195 (53.3%) vs GCB subtype 100(32.9%), p<0.001). MYC was positive in 170/577 (29.5%) cases with a 40% cut-off and in 44/577 (14.2%) cases with a cut-off of 70%. There was no preferential expression of MYC among GCB or non-GCB subtype (p>0.4) for both cut-offs. Progression-free Survival (PFS) was significantly worse among patients with high IPI score (p<0.0001), IgM positive tumor (p<0.0001), MYC positive tumor with a 40% threshold (p<0.001), ImmunoFISH positive index (p<0.002), non-GCB DLBCL subtype (p<0.0001). Overall Survival (OS) was also significantly worse among patients with high IPI score (p<0.0001), IgM positive tumor (p=0.02), MYC positive tumor with a 40% threshold (p<0.01), ImmunoFISH positive index (p=0.02), non-GCB DLBCL subtype (p<0.0001). All significant parameters were included in a multivariate analysis using Cox Model and in addition to IPI, only the GCB/non-GCB subtype according to Hans algorithm predicted significantly a worse PFS among non-GCB subgroup (HR 1.9 [1.3-2.8] p=0.002) as well as a worse OS (HR 2.0 [1.3-3.2], p=0.003). This strong prognostic value of non-GCB subtyping was confirmed considering only patients treated with R- CHOP for PFS (HR 2.1 [1.4-3.3], p=0.001) and for OS (HR 2.3 [1.3-3.8], p=0.002). Conclusion: Our study on a large series of patients included in trials confirmed the relevance of immunohistochemistry as a useful tool to identify significant prognostic biomarkers for clinical use. We show here that IgM and MYC might be useful prognostic biomarkers. In addition, we confirmed in this series the prognostic value of the ImmunoFISH index. Above all, we fully validated the strong and independent prognostic value of the Hans algorithm, daily used by the pathologists to subtype DLBCL.

bHLH class transcription factors take centre stage in phytochrome signalling.

The phytochrome family of photoreceptors (there are five phytochromes in Arabidopsis, named phyA to phyE) maximally absorbs red and far-red light and plays important functions throughout the life cycle of plants. Several recent studies have shown that multiple related bHLH (basic helix-loop-helix) class transcription factors play key roles in phytochrome signal transduction. Somewhat surprisingly these transcription factors primarily act as negative regulators of phytochrome signalling. Moreover, in some cases, the phytochromes inhibit those negative regulators.

Expérience de dix ans de réanimation chirurgicale d'un centre hospitalier universitaire. Détermination d'un critère d'identification des patients à risque de décéder de coagulopathie irréversible [10 years experience in surgical resuscitation at a university hospital center. Determination of a criterion for identifying patients at risk for fatal irreversible coagulopathy]

The authors evaluated ten years of surgical reanimation in the University Centre of Lausanne (CHUV). Irreversible coagulopathy (IC) is the predominant cause of death for the polytraumatized patient. Acidosis, hypothermy, and coagulation troubles are crucial elements of this coagulopathy. The authors looked for a criterion allowing the identification of dying of IC. In a retrospective study, laboratory results of pH, TP, PTT, thrombocyte count and the need for blood transfusion units were checked for each major step of the primary evaluation and treatment of the polytraumatized patients. These results were considered as critical according to criteria of the literature (30). The authors conclude that the apparation of a third critical value may be useful to identify the polytraumatized patient at risk of dying of IC status. This criterion may also guide the trauma team in selecting a damage control surgical approach (DCS). This criterion was then introduced into an algorithm involving the Emergency Department, the operating room and the Intensive Care Unit. This criterion is a new tool to address the patient at the crucial moment to the appropriate hospital structure.

Early intensification and autologous stem cell transplantation in patients with systemic AL amyloidosis: a single-centre experience.

Primary systemic amyloidosis (AL amyloidosis) continues to have a very poor prognosis. Most therapeutic strategies remain unsatisfactory. Conventional chemotherapy is known to offer at best only moderate efficacy. Several studies have yielded higher complete response rates after high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in addition to improving outcomes in a subgroup of patients. However, the superiority of an intensive approach in AL amyloidosis has not been confirmed in a randomised trial. The precise role of ASCT remains unclear. We report our experience in 16 patients diagnosed with AL amyloidosis and treated in a multidisciplinary approach with high-dose melphalan and ASCT. Median age was 59 (39-71) years. The kidneys were predominantly affected in 75% of cases; two or more organs were affected in 38%. Median time from diagnosis to transplantation was 2 (1-4) months. Three patients (19%) developed acute renal failure and required transient dialysis. Transplant-related mortality was 6% after 100 days. Haematological complete response (CR) was obtained in nine (56%) and organ response in six (38%) patients. Nine out of 12 patients (75%) with kidney involvement exhibited a sustained clinical benefit at 12 months. Half of all the patients (n = 8) were alive after a median follow-up of 33 months, including two in continuous CR. This suggests that high-dose chemotherapy and ASCT are still valid treatment options in AL amyloidosis and that a significant number of patients with renal involvement might benefit from this approach.

Debating the centre : the theory of principal qualificand (mukhyavisesya) in classical Indian philosophy

The theory of language has occupied a special place in the history of Indian thought. Indian philosophers give particular attention to the analysis of the cognition obtained from language, known under the generic name of śābdabodha. This term is used to denote, among other things, the cognition episode of the hearer, the content of which is described in the form of a paraphrase of a sentence represented as a hierarchical structure. Philosophers submit the meaning of the component items of a sentence and their relationship to a thorough examination, and represent the content of the resulting cognition as a paraphrase centred on a meaning element, that is taken as principal qualificand (mukhyaviśesya) which is qualified by the other meaning elements. This analysis is the object of continuous debate over a period of more than a thousand years between the philosophers of the schools of Mimāmsā, Nyāya (mainly in its Navya form) and Vyākarana. While these philosophers are in complete agreement on the idea that the cognition of sentence meaning has a hierarchical structure and share the concept of a single principal qualificand (qualified by other meaning elements), they strongly disagree on the question which meaning element has this role and by which morphological item it is expressed. This disagreement is the central point of their debate and gives rise to competing versions of this theory. The Mïmāmsakas argue that the principal qualificand is what they call bhāvanā ̒bringing into being̒, ̒efficient force̒ or ̒productive operation̒, expressed by the verbal affix, and distinct from the specific procedures signified by the verbal root; the Naiyāyikas generally take it to be the meaning of the word with the first case ending, while the Vaiyākaranas take it to be the operation expressed by the verbal root. All the participants rely on the Pāninian grammar, insofar as the Mimāmsakas and Naiyāyikas do not compose a new grammar of Sanskrit, but use different interpretive strategies in order to justify their views, that are often in overt contradiction with the interpretation of the Pāninian rules accepted by the Vaiyākaranas. In each of the three positions, weakness in one area is compensated by strength in another, and the cumulative force of the total argumentation shows that no position can be declared as correct or overall superior to the others. This book is an attempt to understand this debate, and to show that, to make full sense of the irreconcilable positions of the three schools, one must go beyond linguistic factors and consider the very beginnings of each school's concern with the issue under scrutiny. The texts, and particularly the late texts of each school present very complex versions of the theory, yet the key to understanding why these positions remain irreconcilable seems to lie elsewhere, this in spite of extensive argumentation involving a great deal of linguistic and logical technicalities. Historically, this theory arises in Mimāmsā (with Sabara and Kumārila), then in Nyāya (with Udayana), in a doctrinal and theological context, as a byproduct of the debate over Vedic authority. The Navya-Vaiyākaranas enter this debate last (with Bhattoji Dïksita and Kaunda Bhatta), with the declared aim of refuting the arguments of the Mïmāmsakas and Naiyāyikas by bringing to light the shortcomings in their understanding of Pāninian grammar. The central argument has focused on the capacity of the initial contexts, with the network of issues to which the principal qualificand theory is connected, to render intelligible the presuppositions and aims behind the complex linguistic justification of the classical and late stages of this debate. Reading the debate in this light not only reveals the rationality and internal coherence of each position beyond the linguistic arguments, but makes it possible to understand why the thinkers of the three schools have continued to hold on to three mutually exclusive positions. They are defending not only their version of the principal qualificand theory, but (though not openly acknowledged) the entire network of arguments, linguistic and/or extra-linguistic, to which this theory is connected, as well as the presuppositions and aims underlying these arguments.