Glyphosate-based herbicides at low doses affect canonical pathways in estrogen positive and negative breast cancer cell lines.

Glyphosate is a broad-spectrum herbicide that is used worldwide. It represents a potential harm to surface water, and when commercially mixed with surfactants, its uptake is greatly magnified. The most well-known glyphosate-based product is Roundup. This herbicide is potentially an endocrine disruptor and many studies have shown the cytotoxicity potential of glyphosate-based herbicides. In breast cancer (BC) cell lines it has been demonstrated that glyphosate can induce cellular proliferation via estrogen receptors. Therefore, we aimed to identify gene expression changes in ER+ and ER- BC cell lines treated with Roundup and AMPA, to address changes in canonical pathways that would be related or not with the ER pathway, which we believe could interfere with cell proliferation. Using the Human Transcriptome Arrays 2.0, we identified gene expression changes in MCF-7 and MDA-MB-468 exposed to low concentrations and short exposure time to Roundup Original and AMPA. The results showed that at low concentration (0.05% Roundup) and short exposure (48h), both cell lines suffered deregulation of 11 canonical pathways, the most important being cell cycle and DNA damage repair pathways. Enrichment analysis showed similar results, except that MDA-MB-468 altered mainly metabolic processes. In contrast, 48h 10mM AMPA showed fewer differentially expressed genes, but also mainly related with metabolic processes. Our findings suggest that Roundup affects survival due to cell cycle deregulation and metabolism changes that may alter mitochondrial oxygen consumption, increase ROS levels, induce hypoxia, damage DNA repair, cause mutation accumulation and ultimately cell death. To our knowledge, this is the first study to analyze the effects of Roundup and AMPA on gene expression in triple negative BC cells. Therefore, we conclude that both compounds can cause cellular damage at low doses in a relatively short period of time in these two models, mainly affecting cell cycle and DNA repair.

Recommendations for occupational radiation protection in interventional cardiology.

The radiation dose received by cardiologists during percutaneous coronary interventions, electrophysiology procedures and other interventional cardiology procedures can vary by more than an order of magnitude for the same type of procedure and for similar patient doses. There is particular concern regarding occupational dose to the lens of the eye. This document provides recommendations for occupational radiation protection for physicians and other staff in the interventional suite. Simple methods for reducing or minimizing occupational radiation dose include: minimizing fluoroscopy time and the number of acquired images; using available patient dose reduction technologies; using good imaging-chain geometry; collimating; avoiding high-scatter areas; using protective shielding; using imaging equipment whose performance is controlled through a quality assurance programme; and wearing personal dosimeters so that you know your dose. Effective use of these methods requires both appropriate education and training in radiation protection for all interventional cardiology personnel, and the availability of appropriate protective tools and equipment. Regular review and investigation of personnel monitoring results, accompanied as appropriate by changes in how procedures are performed and equipment used, will ensure continual improvement in the practice of radiation protection in the interventional suite. These recommendations for occupational radiation protection in interventional cardiology and electrophysiology have been endorsed by the Asian Pacific Society of Interventional Cardiology, the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions, the Latin American Society of Interventional Cardiology, and the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions.

A summary of recommendations for occupational radiation protection in interventional cardiology.

The radiation dose received by cardiologists during percutaneous coronary interventions, electrophysiology procedures, and other interventional cardiology procedures can vary by more than an order of magnitude for the same type of procedure and for similar patient doses. There is particular concern regarding occupational dose to the lens of the eye. This document provides recommendations for occupational radiation protection for physicians and other staff in the interventional suite. Simple methods for reducing or minimizing occupational radiation dose include minimizing fluoroscopy time and the number of acquired images; using available patient dose reduction technologies; using good imaging-chain geometry; collimating; avoiding high-scatter areas; using protective shielding; using imaging equipment whose performance is controlled through a quality assurance program; and wearing personal dosimeters so that you know your dose. Effective use of these methods requires both appropriate education and training in radiation protection for all interventional cardiology personnel, and the availability of appropriate protective tools and equipment. Regular review and investigation of personnel monitoring results, accompanied as appropriate by changes in how procedures are performed and equipment used, will ensure continual improvement in the practice of radiation protection in the interventional suite. These recommendations for occupational radiation protection in interventional cardiology and electrophysiology have been endorsed by the Asian Pacific Society of Interventional Cardiology, the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions, the Latin American Society of Interventional Cardiology, and the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions.

Hacia una mayor transparencia y exactitud de los reportes científicos en las revistas biomédicas / Towards enhanced transparency and accuracy of scientific reporting in biomedical journals

Me siento profundamente agradecido por la oportunidad de compartir mis observaciones personales y reflexionar sobre un tema medular en el ámbito médico científico; me refiero a la exactitud y transparencia en la presentación de informes de investigación. El presente artículo no se refiere a las violaciones intencionales de las buenas prácticas de publicación a manera de infracciones científicas o éticas que, lamentablemente se han venido observando cada vez con mayor frecuencia en los últimos años. Los temas que nos ocupan se refieren a la presentación de informes incompletos o inexactos. No se trata de problemas nuevos, sin embargo siguen estando en la palestra y son de gran importancia, ya que con demasiada frecuencia las limitaciones en la presentación de informes comprometen a muchos artículos enviados a revistas biomédicas para su publicación. Descuidos en la presentación de los informes suelen ser la razón por la cual se rechazan artículos. Reconocemos que si un estudio jamás se publica, los resultados no se diseminarán y de hecho el estudio "no existe". El registro obligatorio de estudios clínicos pudiera ser de utilidad para evitar sesgos de publicación. Sin embargo, sin publicación, se habría violado un principio ético fundamental relativo al reclutamiento y aleatorización de los pacientes para un estudio clínico. Un principio rector relacionado con las publicaciones científicas es que para lograr validez externa, los resultados de un experimento (o de un estudio controlado aleatorizado) tienen que ser reproducibles. De manera que con los métodos y los resultados de un estudio clínico descritos en suficiente detalle, un lector conocedor tenga acceso a los datos originales y así podría replicar los resultados.

Sunburn reduction through parental role modeling and sunscreen vigilance.

OBJECTIVES: To identify characteristics associated with child sunburn experience and sun protection practices, including parent and child demographics, phenotype, and sun-related knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors. STUDY DESIGN: A nationally representative telephone survey conducted in 1999 with 651 parents of children 5 to 12 years of age to collect data relating to the sun-related knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of the parent and child. RESULTS: Nearly half of parents (49%) and children (44%) were sunburnt during the previous summer. Parents who reported that they had been sunburnt were more likely to have children who had been sunburnt (OR = 2.9, 95% CI = 2.0, 4.2). Conversely, parents with a high level of sun protection behavior were less likely to report being sunburnt (OR = 0.6, 95% CI = 0.4, 0.9), and their children were more likely to have a high level of sun protection behavior (OR = 3.0, 95% CI = 2.0, 4.6) and sunscreen vigilance (OR = 2.7, 95% CI = 1.7, 4.5). High sunscreen vigilance was associated with a 60% reduction in child sunburning. CONCLUSIONS: The sunburn experience and sun protection practices of children (5-12 years of age) are closely linked to a number of modifiable attitudes and behaviors of their parents. Therefore the inclusion of parents and care givers in interventions targeting children may increase program efficacy.

Uso de estrogênio näo-anticoncepcional e risco de câncer mamário / The use of non anticonceptive estrogens and risk of breast neoplasms

A relaçäo entre o risco de câncer mamário e uso de estrogênios näo-anticoncepcionais foi investigada num estudo hospitalar em 1.610 mulheres com câncer mamário e 1.606 com outras condiçöes. A estimativa do risco relativo global para os estrogênios conjugados, tomados pela primeira vez 18 meses, pelo menos, antes da hospitalizaçäo, em comparaçäo com ausência de uso de quaisquer estrogênios näo-anticoncepcionais foi 0,9 (intervalo de confiança 95% - 0,7 a 1,1). Para outros estrogênios, tomados pelo menos 18 meses antes da hospitalizaçäo, a estimativa foi 0,8 (0,6 a 1,1). Quando levados em conta os fatores conhecidos de câncer mamário, os resultados foram semelhantes. Entre as mulheres pós-menopáusicas, os estrogênios conjugados näo pareceram aumentar o risco de câncer mamário, mesmo quando tomados por muitos anos, no passado distante. Näo houve prova de maior risco devido ao uso de estrogênios conjugados entre os subgrupos de mulheres definidos segundo os vários fatores de risco de câncer mamário. Os resultados deste estudo sugerem que os estrogênios näo anticoncepcionais näo aumentam o risco de câncer mamário