MyMedR

Displaying all 4 publications

Abstract:

Sort:

Quantification of VOCs and the development of odour wheels for rubber processing

Kamarulzaman NH, Le-Minh N, Fisher RM, Stuetz RM

Sci Total Environ, 2019 Mar 20;657:154-168.
PMID: 30543968 DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.11.451

The impacts of rubber variations (clonal, seasonal, and pre-treatment) were investigated to assess changes in the composition of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) emitted during rubber processing. VOC emissions from 14 different rubber types were evaluated by headspace micro-chamber (μ-TEC) extraction coupled with gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS). Headspace extracted at 120 °C, which is equivalent to the drying temperature during rubber processing, revealed a significant number of odorants in terms of concentrations as well as odorant type. Volatile fatty acids (VFAs) such as acetic, propanoic, butanoic, pentanoic and hexanoic acids, were frequently detected at concentrations greater than their odour detection thresholds. Other odorous compounds including trimethylamine, p-cresol, butanone, indole, and phenol, were also detected. Emissions collected at ambient conditions represent odorants released during material storage (or maturation) and were dominated by benzene derivatives followed by ketones, aldehydes, esters, and acids. Emission composition during storage appeared to be governed by specific rubber properties such as protein and rubber moisture content. Seasonal variations revealed greater impacts on the concentration of VOCs for all studied clones, compared to pre-treatment variations, suggesting that the VOCs composition was seasonally dependent and may represents the 'potential' emissions from rubber as they are processed. A combination of sensorial and analytical measurements were used to produce odour wheels which may be used as tool to identify key malodours in onsite rubber processing. The linking of odours and odorants can facilitate communication between receptors (the public) and plant operators inorder to minimise odour impact and develop effective abatement and on-site management practices.
Fulltext Breast cancer risk factors, survival and recurrence, and tumor molecular subtype: analysis of 3012 women from an indigenous Asian population

Abubakar M, Sung H, Bcr D, Guida J, Tang TS, Pfeiffer RM, et al.

Breast Cancer Res, 2018 09 18;20(1):114.
PMID: 30227867 DOI: 10.1186/s13058-018-1033-8

BACKGROUND: Limited evidence, mostly from studies in Western populations, suggests that the prognostic effects of lifestyle-related risk factors may be molecular subtype-dependent. Here, we examined whether pre-diagnostic lifestyle-related risk factors for breast cancer are associated with clinical outcomes by molecular subtype among patients from an understudied Asian population.
METHODS: In this population-based case series, we evaluated breast cancer risk factors in relation to 10-year all-cause mortality (ACM) and 5-year recurrence by molecular subtype among 3012 women with invasive breast cancer in Sarawak, Malaysia. A total of 579 deaths and 314 recurrence events occurred during a median follow-up period of ~ 24 months. Subtypes (luminal A-like, luminal B-like, HER2-enriched, triple-negative) were defined using immunohistochemical markers for hormone receptors and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) in conjunction with histologic grade. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the associations between risk factors and ACM/recurrence were estimated in subtype-specific Cox regression models.
RESULTS: We observed heterogeneity in the relationships between parity/breastfeeding, age at first full-term pregnancy (FFP), family history, body mass index (BMI), and tumor subtype (p value 30 vs
Fulltext SMART Recovery International and COVID-19: Expanding the reach of mutual support through online groups

Kelly PJ, McCreanor K, Beck AK, Ingram I, O'Brien D, King A, et al.

J Subst Abuse Treat, 2021 Dec;131:108568.
PMID: 34446323 DOI: 10.1016/j.jsat.2021.108568

BACKGROUND: Mutual support groups play an extremely important role in providing opportunities for people to engage in alcohol and other drug (AOD) treatment and support. SMART Recovery groups employ cognitive, behavioural and motivational principles and strategies to offer support for a range of addictive behaviours. COVID-19 fundamentally changed the way that these groups could be delivered.
METHODS: A series of online meetings were conducted by the lead author (PK) and the SMART Recovery International Executive Officer (KM), with representatives from the SMART Recovery National Offices in the Ireland (DO), United States (MR), Australia (RM), and Denmark (BSH, DA), and the United Kingdom (AK). The meetings focused on discussing the impacts of COVID-19 on SMART Recovery in each of the regions.
RESULTS: As a result of restrictions to prevent the transmission of COVID-19, the vast majority of SMART Recovery face-to-face meetings were required to cease globally. To ensure people still had access to AOD mutual support, SMART Recovery rapidly scaled up the provision of online groups. This upscaling has increased the number of groups in countries that had previously provided a limited number of online meetings (i.e., United States, England, Australia), and has meant that online groups are available for the first time in Denmark, Ireland, Hong Kong, Spain, Malaysia and Brazil.
DISCUSSION: Whilst the urgent and rapid expansion of online groups was required to support people during the pandemic, it has also created an opportunity for the ongoing availability of online mutual support post-pandemic. The challenge for the research community is to critically evaluate the online delivery of mutual support groups, to better understand the mechanisms through which they may work, and to help understand the experience of people accessing the groups.
Fulltext Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)1

Klionsky DJ, Abdel-Aziz AK, Abdelfatah S, Abdellatif M, Abdoli A, Abel S, et al.

Autophagy, 2021 Jan;17(1):1-382.
PMID: 33634751 DOI: 10.1080/15548627.2020.1797280

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field.