Use of an isothermal microcalorimetry assay to characterize microbial oxalotrophic activity

Isothermal microcalorimetry (IMC) has been used in the past to monitor metabolic activities in living systems. A few studies have used it on ecological research. In this study, IMC was used to monitor oxalotrophic activity, a widespread bacterial metabolism found in the environment, and particularly in soils. Six model strains were inoculated in solid angle media with K-oxalate as the sole carbon source. Cupriavidus oxalaticus, Cupriavidus necator, and Streptomyces violaceoruber presented the highest activity (91, 40, and 55 μW, respectively) and a maximum growth rate (μmax h(-1) ) of 0.264, 0.185, and 0.199, respectively, among the strains tested. These three strains were selected to test the incidence of different oxalate sources (Ca, Cu, and Fe-oxalate salts) in the metabolic activity. The highest activity was obtained in Ca-oxalate for C. oxalaticus. Similar experiments were carried out with a model soil to test whether this approach can be used to measure oxalotrophic activity in field samples. Although measuring oxalotrophic activity in a soil was challenging, there was a clear effect of the amendment with oxalate on the metabolic activity measured in soil. The correlation between heat flow and growth suggests that IMC analysis is a powerful method to monitor bacterial oxalotrophic activity

Effect of irrigation water on the incidence of Salmonella spp. on lettuces produced by urban agriculture and sold on the markets in Dakar, Senegal

The aim of our survey was to assess the effect of irrigation water of the microbiological quality on the production chain of lettuce in the Dakar area. Microbiological analysis showed that 35% of irrigation water was contaminated by Salmonella spp. between the two water-types used for irrigation (groundwater and wastewater), no significant difference (p>0.05) in their degree of contamination was found. The incidence of different types of irrigation water on the contamination rate of lettuces from the farm (Pikine and Patte d'Oie) was not different either (p>0.05). However, the contamination rate of lettuce from markets of Dalifort and Grand-Yoff that were supplied by the area of Patte d'Oie was greater than those of Sham and Zinc supplied by Pikine (p<0.05). Comparison of serotypes of Salmonella isolated from irrigation water and lettuce showed that irrigation water may affect the microbiological quality of lettuce. Manures, frequently used as organic amendment in cultivating lettuce are another potential source of contamination. These results showed that lettuce may constitute effective vectors for the transmission of pathogens to consumers. Extensive treatment of the used wastewater and/or composting of manure could considerably reduce these risks.

Assessment of letrozole and tamoxifen alone and in sequence for postmenopausal women with steroid hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: the BIG 1-98 randomised clinical trial at 8·1 years median follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer have persistent, long-term risk of breast-cancer recurrence and death. Therefore, trials assessing endocrine therapies for this patient population need extended follow-up. We present an update of efficacy outcomes in the Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98 study at 8·1 years median follow-up. METHODS: BIG 1-98 is a randomised, phase 3, double-blind trial of postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer that compares 5 years of tamoxifen or letrozole monotherapy, or sequential treatment with 2 years of one of these drugs followed by 3 years of the other. Randomisation was done with permuted blocks, and stratified according to the two-arm or four-arm randomisation option, participating institution, and chemotherapy use. Patients, investigators, data managers, and medical reviewers were masked. The primary efficacy endpoint was disease-free survival (events were invasive breast cancer relapse, second primaries [contralateral breast and non-breast], or death without previous cancer event). Secondary endpoints were overall survival, distant recurrence-free interval (DRFI), and breast cancer-free interval (BCFI). The monotherapy comparison included patients randomly assigned to tamoxifen or letrozole for 5 years. In 2005, after a significant disease-free survival benefit was reported for letrozole as compared with tamoxifen, a protocol amendment facilitated the crossover to letrozole of patients who were still receiving tamoxifen alone; Cox models and Kaplan-Meier estimates with inverse probability of censoring weighting (IPCW) are used to account for selective crossover to letrozole of patients (n=619) in the tamoxifen arm. Comparison of sequential treatments to letrozole monotherapy included patients enrolled and randomly assigned to letrozole for 5 years, letrozole for 2 years followed by tamoxifen for 3 years, or tamoxifen for 2 years followed by letrozole for 3 years. Treatment has ended for all patients and detailed safety results for adverse events that occurred during the 5 years of treatment have been reported elsewhere. Follow-up is continuing for those enrolled in the four-arm option. BIG 1-98 is registered at clinicaltrials.govNCT00004205. FINDINGS: 8010 patients were included in the trial, with a median follow-up of 8·1 years (range 0-12·4). 2459 were randomly assigned to monotherapy with tamoxifen for 5 years and 2463 to monotherapy with letrozole for 5 years. In the four-arm option of the trial, 1546 were randomly assigned to letrozole for 5 years, 1548 to tamoxifen for 5 years, 1540 to letrozole for 2 years followed by tamoxifen for 3 years, and 1548 to tamoxifen for 2 years followed by letrozole for 3 years. At a median follow-up of 8·7 years from randomisation (range 0-12·4), letrozole monotherapy was significantly better than tamoxifen, whether by IPCW or intention-to-treat analysis (IPCW disease-free survival HR 0·82 [95% CI 0·74-0·92], overall survival HR 0·79 [0·69-0·90], DRFI HR 0·79 [0·68-0·92], BCFI HR 0·80 [0·70-0·92]; intention-to-treat disease-free survival HR 0·86 [0·78-0·96], overall survival HR 0·87 [0·77-0·999], DRFI HR 0·86 [0·74-0·998], BCFI HR 0·86 [0·76-0·98]). At a median follow-up of 8·0 years from randomisation (range 0-11·2) for the comparison of the sequential groups with letrozole monotherapy, there were no statistically significant differences in any of the four endpoints for either sequence. 8-year intention-to-treat estimates (each with SE ≤1·1%) for letrozole monotherapy, letrozole followed by tamoxifen, and tamoxifen followed by letrozole were 78·6%, 77·8%, 77·3% for disease-free survival; 87·5%, 87·7%, 85·9% for overall survival; 89·9%, 88·7%, 88·1% for DRFI; and 86·1%, 85·3%, 84·3% for BCFI. INTERPRETATION: For postmenopausal women with endocrine-responsive early breast cancer, a reduction in breast cancer recurrence and mortality is obtained by letrozole monotherapy when compared with tamoxifen montherapy. Sequential treatments involving tamoxifen and letrozole do not improve outcome compared with letrozole monotherapy, but might be useful strategies when considering an individual patient's risk of recurrence and treatment tolerability. FUNDING: Novartis, United States National Cancer Institute, International Breast Cancer Study Group.

Direct to consumer advertising : the case for greater consumer control

A nyone traveling to the United States from countries other than New Zealand will be surprised by the prevalence of health-related advertisements on television, including ads for drugs. Typically, these TV ads follow a pattern: an ad for a burger at only 99 cents, followed by one for a proton-pump inhibitor, then an ad on healthy home-cooked food delivered directly to your home and an ad for a home-based abdominal workout DVD, followed by an ad for a lipid-lowering drug. There are, however, nuances. After 8 pm, the visitor might encounter an ad for the "little blue pill." This sequence sometimes includes an ad featuring antihistamines for allergic rhinitis in spring and one promoting antidepressants in the winter. Such direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) of prescription drugs is usual business in the United States and New Zealand but is prohibited in the rest of the world. Why? Because DTCA for prescribing drugs has pros and cons (discussed elsewhere,1-3 including in JGIM4) that are balanced differently in different countries. Constitutional factors-such as the First Amendment protections on speech, including commercial speech, in the United States5 -as well as patient and population safety considerations, which all differ across countries, modulate reactions to DTCA. Additionally, lack of robust data on the impact of DTCA on prescription drug use adds to the confusion. Evidence, though limited, suggests that DTCA increases drug sales. However, whether the increase in sales corrects existing underuse or encourages over/misuse is not clear.