To investigate whether obesity induces a leptin‐Notch signaling axis in breast cancer (BC), leptin‐induced Notch was determined in human MCF‐7 and MDA‐MB231 and mouse E0771 cells and in E0771‐BC hosted by syngeneic lean and diet‐induced obesity (DIO) C57BL/6J female mice. Lean and DIO mice were treated for 3 weeks with leptin inhibitor (PEG‐LPrA2) 1 week after the inoculation of E0771 cells. Leptin induced Notch1, 3 and 4 in BC cells, but Notch2 expression showed opposite pattern in MCF‐7 compared to MDA‐MB231 cells. Notch loss‐of‐function (DAPT and dominant negative [R218H] RBP‐Jk [CSL/CBF1]) showed that a functional leptin‐Notch signaling axis was involved in the proliferation and migration of E0771 cells. E0771‐BC onset was affected by obesity (lean mice7/10 [70%] vs. DIO mice: 11/12 [92%]; Pearson χ²: p = 0.06]). PEG‐LPrA2 significantly reduced BC growth (untreated: 19/42; [45%] vs. treated: 8/42 [19%]; Pearson χ²: p = 0.008). PEG‐LPrA2 did not influence the caloric intake of mice but increased carcass and/or body weights of lean and DIO mice inoculated with E0771 cells, which could be related to the improvement of health conditions (less aggressive disease). Importantly, BC from obese mice had higher levels of Notch3, JAG1 and survivin than lean mice. Inhibition of leptin signaling reduced protein levels of Notch (NICD1, NICD4, Notch3, JAG1 and survivin) and significantly decreased mRNA expression of Notch receptors, ligands and targets. PEG‐LPrA's effects were more prominent in DIO mice. Present data suggest that leptin induces Notch, which could be involved in the reported higher incidence and aggressiveness and, poor prognosis of BC in obese patients.

The positive impact of diversity in increasing the effectiveness of the research workforce has been undeniably demonstrated to be an essential element for achieving health equity. Diversity is also instrumental for the research workforce to advance discovery, eliminate health disparities, improve minority health and achieve effective patient-centered outcomes in the quest for better health. One of the sustainable ways to achieve diversity in the workforce is through training, education and career development of all interested individuals including minority, underserved, underrepresented and populations with special needs. A Hispanic public, academic health center, and a historically black private medical school, have joined efforts in this article to share their experiences in addressing diversity in the clinical and translational research workforce with grant support from the National Institutes of Health. The purpose of this paper is to describe how diversity has been achieved through a concerted effort to recruit and develop underrepresented junior faculty and doctoral candidates for successful careers in clinical and translational research focused on health disparities and minority health. We describe Initiatives designed to achieve diversity in recruitment and development of research teams, together with an evaluation of outcomes to determine the success of the program and its participants.

Junior investigators often have limited access to networks of scientific experts and resources that facilitate competitive grant submissions. Since environments in which scientists are trained are critically important for long-term success, we built and tested a virtual environment for early-stage investigators (ESIs) working on grant proposals. The aim of this study was to evaluate the virtual community’s influence on grant submission patterns among participants from underrepresented groups. As part of a grant writing coaching model, junior investigators were recruited into a professional development program designed to develop competitive grantsmanship skills. Designed by the Research Resources and Outreach Core (RROC) of the National Research Mentoring Network (NRMN), the Health Equity Learning Collaboratory (EQ-Collaboratory) provided a virtual community for social support, accountability, constructive feedback, and access to peer networks to help investigators overcome barriers to grant submission. This study assessed differences in outcomes for participants who completed the training within the EQ-Collaboratory compared to those who did not. The analyzed data revealed a statistically significant difference in the average time to submission for participants enrolled in the EQ-Collaboratory. EQ-Collaboratory ESIs submitted proposals 148.6 days earlier, (p < 0.0001). The results suggest that a supportive virtual environment can help investigators more quickly overcome barriers to grant submission.

Mentoring continues to be a salient conversation in academia among junior and senior faculty and administrators. Mentors provide guidance and structure to junior faculty so that they can meet their academic and professional goals. Mentors also convey skills in balancing life and academic pursuits. Therefore, the purpose of this descriptive study was to provide additional insight from a training program called Leading Emerging and Diverse Scientists to Success (LEADS) regarding successful strategies and challenges of mentoring relating to lessons learned from the scholars and mentees’ perspective. The LEADS program provided multiple training platforms to increase skills and knowledge regarding research to promote expertise in grant writing and submission for funding opportunities among diverse scientists. These findings reinforce the knowledge about the value of a mentor in helping define the research pathway of their mentee and underscoring the importance of mentoring.

Introduction: Adding developmental networks (DN) to grant-writing coaching can significantly enhance ESIs’ research careers. Herein, we present study design, ESIs’ characteristics and encountered challenges/lessons learned and their resolutions when deploying/implementing (a) NCR algorithm(s), (b) recruitment/retention and (c) implementing DN intervention. Methods: Nested Cluster Randomization (NCR) design governs this study implementation. The sample size is 220 ESIs intending to submit an NIH K, R, U, and/or Minority Supplement application(s). Primary outcome: intensity/sustainability of grant submission(s)/funding(s), measured by time to/between application(s). Outcome(s) analyses modes: summaries, Kaplan Meir and Cox proportional hazard models as a function of randomization groups and other predictors of outcomes. Results: In the present study, we recruited two cohorts of ESIs (N = 85): 39% African Americans, 18% Latinx, 18% Whites, 20% Asians and 6% Hawaiian/Pacific Islander/other ethnicities; 65% are women; 73% are assistant professors, 4% are Associate Professors and 23% are instructors/scientists/post-doctoral. Participants’ disciplines: 32% basic/biomedical, 36% clinical/translational and 32% social/behavioral. Proposal(s) mechanisms: 61% research grants (R series), 31% career development (K series), 7% support of competitive research (SCORE) and 1% National Science Foundation applications. NCR did produce balance in the distribution of ESIs’ demographics, sex at birth, ethnicity, professional appointments, background disciplines, and mechanism of sought funding. Lessons learned/challenges: NCR implementation was methodologically challenged during implementation by added constraints (e.g., assigning coaches to the same randomization arm of their participants as well as blinding them to ESIs’ randomization group). Recruitment and retention were hampered by the COVID-19 pandemic and more progressive and innovative strategies were needed to heighten the visibility and outreach of this program. DN delivery was also affected by the pandemic and monitoring of ESIs’ engagement and facilitation of communications interventions were needed. Resolution of these challenges effectively reconfigured NCR algorithms, recruitment/retention plans, and DN intervention delivery. We intend to recruit an additional 135 ESIs focusing on underrepresented scholars from RCMIs, CTSAs, and other programs. COVID-19 rendered this program 100% virtual, with recruitment/retention challenges and substantial disruption of ESIs’ research. We may extend the grant writing period, coaching, and Mock Study Section support.

Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) seek sustainable innovation through the testing of new care delivery methods that promote shared goals among value-based health care collaborators. The Morehouse Choice Accountable Care Organization and Education System (MCACO-ES), or (M-ACO) is a physician led integrated delivery model participating in the Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) offered through the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Innovation Center. The MSSP establishes incentivized, performance-based payment models for qualifying health care organizations serving traditional Medicare beneficiaries that promote collaborative efficiency models designed to mitigate fragmented and insufficient access to health care, reduce unnecessary cost, and improve clinical outcomes. The M-ACO integration model is administered through participant organizations that include a multi-site community based academic practice, independent physician practices, and federally qualified health center systems (FQHCs). This manuscript aims to present a descriptive and exploratory assessment of health care programs and related innovation methods that validate M-ACO as a reliable simulator to implement, evaluate, and refine M-ACO’s integration model to render value-based performance outcomes over time. A part of the research approach also includes early outcomes and lessons learned advancing the framework for ongoing testing of M-ACO’s integration model across independently owned, rural, and urban health care locations that predominantly serve low-income, traditional Medicare beneficiaries, (including those who also qualify for Medicaid benefits (also referred to as “dual eligibles”). M-ACO seeks to determine how integration potentially impacts targeted performance results. As a simulator to test value-based innovation and related clinical and business practices, M-ACO uses enterprise-level data and advanced analytics to measure certain areas, including: 1) health program insight and effectiveness; 2) optimal implementation process and workflows that align primary care with specialists to expand access to care; 3) chronic care management/coordination deployment as an effective extender service to physicians and patients risk stratified based on defined clinical and social determinant criteria; 4) adoption of technology tools for patient outreach and engagement, including a mobile application for remote biometric monitoring and telemedicine; and 5) use of structured communication platforms that enable practitioner engagement and ongoing training regarding the shift from volume to value-based care delivery.