Cardiomyocyte PDGFR-beta signaling is an essential component of the mouse cardiac response to load-induced stress.

PDGFR is an important target for novel anticancer therapeutics because it is overexpressed in a wide variety of malignancies. Recently, however, several anticancer drugs that inhibit PDGFR signaling have been associated with clinical heart failure. Understanding this effect of PDGFR inhibitors has been difficult because the role of PDGFR signaling in the heart remains largely unexplored. As described herein, we have found that PDGFR-beta expression and activation increase dramatically in the hearts of mice exposed to load-induced cardiac stress. In mice in which Pdgfrb was knocked out in the heart in development or in adulthood, exposure to load-induced stress resulted in cardiac dysfunction and heart failure. Mechanistically, we showed that cardiomyocyte PDGFR-beta signaling plays a vital role in stress-induced cardiac angiogenesis. Specifically, we demonstrated that cardiomyocyte PDGFR-beta was an essential upstream regulator of the stress-induced paracrine angiogenic capacity (the angiogenic potential) of cardiomyocytes. These results demonstrate that cardiomyocyte PDGFR-beta is a regulator of the compensatory cardiac response to pressure overload-induced stress. Furthermore, our findings may provide insights into the mechanism of cardiotoxicity due to anticancer PDGFR inhibitors.

The door of the tomb is open: Participatory action research to assess the impact of strengthened community capacity on maternal health care in rural Mali

This participatory action-research project addressed the hypothesis that strengthened community and women's capacity for self-development will lead to action to address maternal health problems and the prevention of maternal morbidity and mortality in Mali. Research objectives were: (1) to undertake a comparative cross-sectional study of the association of community capacity with improved maternal health in rural areas of Sanando, Mali, where capacity building interventions have taken place in some villages but not in others. (2) to describe women's maternal health status, access to and use of maternal health services given their residence in program or comparison communities.^ The participatory action research project was an integrated qualitative and quantitative study using participatory rural appraisal exercises, semi-structured group interviews and a cross-sectional survey.^ Factors related to community capacity for self-development were identified: community harmony; an understanding of the benefits of self-development; dynamic leadership; and a structure to implement collective activities.^ A distinct difference between the program and comparison villages was the commitment to train and support traditional birth attendants (TBAs). The TBAs in the program villages work in the context of the wider, integrated self-development program and, 10 years after their initial training, the TBAs continue to practice.^ Many women experience labor and childbirth alone or are attended by an untrained relative in both program and comparison villages. Nevertheless a significant change is apparent, with more women in program villages than in comparison villages being assisted by the TBAs. The delivery practices of the TBAs reveal the positive impact of their training in the "three cleans" (clean hands of the assistant, clean delivery surface and clean cord-cutting). The findings of this study indicate a significant level of unmet need for child spacing methods in all villages.^ The training and support of TBAs in the program villages yielded significant improvements in their delivery practices, and resulting outcomes for women and infants. However, potential exists for further community action. Capacities for self-development have not yet been directed toward an action plan encompassing other Safe Motherhood interventions, including access to family planning services and emergency obstetric care services. ^

Perceptions of institutional support of community -based participatory research within prevention research centers

The Institute of Medicine (IOM) report on the future of health care states that the focus on health needs to shift to the management and prevention of chronic illnesses and that academic health centers (AHCs) should play an active role in this process through community partnerships (IOM, 2002). Grant funding from the National Institutes of Health and the creation of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Prevention Research Centers (PRC) across the county represent a transition toward more proactively seeking out community partnerships to better design and disseminate health promotion programs (Green, 2001). ^ The focus of the PRCs is to conduct rigorous, community-based, prevention research, to seek outcomes applicable to public health programs and policies. The PRCs work is to create and foster partnerships among public health and community organizations, to address health promotion and disease prevention issues (CDC, 2003). ^ The W.K. Kellogg Foundation defines CBPR as "a collaborative approach to research that equitably involves all partners in the research process and recognizes the unique strengths that each brings. CBPR begins with a research topic of importance to the community with the aim of combining knowledge and action for social change to improve community health." ^ In 1995, CDC asked the IOM to review the PRC program to examine the extent to which the program is providing the public health community with strategies to address public health problems in disease prevention and health promotion (IOM, 1997). No comprehensive evaluation n of the individual PRCs had ever been done (IOM, 1997). ^ The CDC was interested in understanding how it could better support the PRC program through improved management and oversight to influence the program's success. The CDC only represents one of the entities that influence the success of a PRC. Another key entity to consider is the support of and influence of the Schools of Public Health in which the PRCs reside. Using evaluation criteria similar to those that were developed by the IOM, this study examined how aspects of structural capacity of the Schools of Public Health in which the PRCs reside are perceived to influence PRC community-based research activities. ^