t(15;21) translocations leading to the concurrent downregulation of RUNX1 and its transcription factor partner genes SIN3A and TCF12 in myeloid disorders.

Through a combined approach integrating RNA-Seq, SNP-array, FISH and PCR techniques, we identified two novel t(15;21) translocations leading to the inactivation of RUNX1 and its partners SIN3A and TCF12. One is a complex t(15;21)(q24;q22), with both breakpoints mapped at the nucleotide level, joining RUNX1 to SIN3A and UBL7-AS1 in a patient with myelodysplasia. The other is a recurrent t(15;21)(q21;q22), juxtaposing RUNX1 and TCF12, with an opposite transcriptional orientation, in three myeloid leukemia cases. Since our transcriptome analysis indicated a significant number of differentially expressed genes associated with both translocations, we speculate an important pathogenetic role for these alterations involving RUNX1.

Harmonization of training and assessment of medical specialists in physical and rehabilitation medicine across Europe - The contribution of the UEMS Board of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine

Background.- The main goals of the European Board of Physical and Rehabili-tation Medicine (EBPRM), founded in 1991 as the third speciality board of theUnion of European Medical Specialists (UEMS), are to harmonize pre-graduate,post-graduate and continuous medical education in physical and rehabilitationmedicine (PRM) all over Europe. The harmonization of curricula of the medi-cal specialities and the assessment of medical specialists has become one of thepriorities of the UEMS and its working groups to which the EBPRM contributes.Action.- The EBPRM will continue to promote a specific minimal undergraduatecurriculum on PRM including issues like disability, participation and handicapto be taught all over Europe as a basis for general medical practice. The EBPRMwill also expand the existing EBPRM postgraduate curriculum into a detailedcatalogue of learning objectives. This catalogue will serve as a tool to boostharmonization of the national curricula across Europe as well as to structurethe content of the MCQ examination. It would be a big step forward towardsharmonization of European PRM specialist training if an important number ofcountries would use the certifying MCQ examination of the Board as a part ofthe national assessments for PRM specialists.

Educational resources offered by the European Board of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (EBPRM)

Background .- Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (PRM) is a very demanding medical speciality. To ensure high standard of research and care in PRM all across Europe, it is crucial to attract gifted trainees and offer them high quality education. At undergraduate level, many medical schools in Europe omit to offer teaching on disabled persons and on basic PRM knowledge. Thus PRM is hardly known to medical students. For postgraduate trainees access to evidence-based knowledge as well as teaching of research methodology specific to PRM, rehabilitation methodology, disability management and team building also need to be strengthened to increase the visibility of PRM. Action .- To address these issues the EBPRM proposes presently a specific undergraduate curriculum in PRM including the issues of disability, participation and handicap as a basis for general medical practice and postgraduate rehabilitation training. For PRM trainees many educational documents are now available on the EBPRM website. A growing number of educational sessions for PRM trainees take place during international and national PRM Congresses which can be accessed at low cost. Educational papers published regularly in European rehabilitation journals and European PRM Schools are offered free or at very low cost to trainees.

Current and future trens in the quality control of pharmaceuticals and biopharmaticals : impacts on Cost of Goods Sold (COGS)

[Summary] 2. Roles of quality control in the pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical industries. - 2.1. Pharmaceutical industry. - 2.2. Biopharmaceutical industry. - 2.3. Policy and regulatory. - 2.3.1. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). - 2.3.2. The European Medicine Agency (EMEA). - 2.3.3. The Japanese Ministry of Work, Labor and Welfare (MHLW). - 2.3.4. The Swiss Agency for Therapeutic Products (Swissmedic). - 2.3.5. The International Conference on Harmonization (ICH). - - 3. Types of testing. - 3.1. Microbiological purity tests. - 3.2. Physiochemical tests. - 3.3. Critical to quality steps. - 3.3.1. API starting materials and excipients. - 3.3.2. Intermediates. - 3.3.3. APIs (drug substances) and final drug product. - 3.3.4. Primary and secondary packaging materials fro drug products. - - 4. Manufacturing cost and quality control. - 4.1.1. Pharmaceutical manufacturing cost breakdown. - 4.1.2. Biopharmaceutical manufacturing cost breakdown. - 4.2. Batch failure / rejection / rework / recalls. - - 5. Future trends in the quality control of pharmaceuticals and biopharmaceuticals. - 5.1. Rapid and real time testing. - 5.1.1. Physio-chemicals testing. - 5.1.2. Rapid microbiology methods

On the relative abundance of autopolyploids and allopolyploids.

The prevalence of autopolyploids in angiosperms has long been a subject of debate. Meurountzing (1936) and Darlington (1937) conclude d that autopolyploids were common and important evolutionary entities. However, Clausen et al. (1945) and Stebbins (1947) subsequently considered them rare, in part because the criteria upon which interpretations of autopolyploidy were rendered were not rigorous. This position was reiterated by Grant (1981) decades later, although evidence was mounting that autopolyploid taxa might be important in natural populations (Lewis, 1980). As cytological and genetic data have accumulated, it has become increasingly apparent that the latter view is likely to be correct (Soltis et al., 2004b, 2007, 2010). However, it still appears that the majority of polyploids are allopolyploids (Parisod et al., 2010; Soltis et al., 2010), even though Ramsey & Schemske (1998, p. 467) conclude that 'the rate of autopolyploid formation may often be higher than the rate of allopol yploid formation.' In this letter we survey the literature to assess whether allopolyploids are indeed the prevailing cytotype in nature. Using our new estimates for the incidence of autopolyploidy and allopolyploidy, we discuss some of the evolutionary dynamics that may be driving their frequencies in nature. Finally, we suggest avenues for future research on polyploidy that build on our results and other recent progress in the field.