Due to progress in the industrial development of light-emitting diodes (LEDs), much work has been dedicated to understanding the reaction of plants to these light sources in recent years. In this study, the effect of different LED-based light regimes on growth and performance of passion fruit (Passiflora edulis) seedlings was investigated. Combinations of different light irradiances (50, 100, and 200 µmol m⁻² s⁻¹), quality (red, green, and blue light-emitting LEDs), and photoperiods (10 h/14 h, 12 h/12 h and 14 h/10 h light/dark cycles) were used to investigate the photosynthetic pigment contents, antioxidants and growth traits of passion fruit seedlings in comparison to the same treatment white fluorescent light. Light irradiance of 100 µmol m⁻² s⁻¹ of a 30% red/70% blue LED light combination and 12 h/12 h light/dark cycles showed the best results for plant height, stem diameter, number of leaves, internode distance, and fresh/dry shoot/root weights. 14 h/10 h light/dark cycles with the same LED light combination promoted antioxidant enzyme activities and the accumulation of phenols and flavonoids. In contrast, lower light irradiance (50 µmol m⁻² s⁻¹) had negative effects on most of the parameters. We conclude that passion fruit seedlings' optimal performance and biomass production requires long and high light irradiances with a high blue light portion.

The PTEN tumor suppressor functions as a phosphatase of phosphatidylinositol 3,4,5-trisphosphate (PIP3) and negatively regulates the PI 3-kinase signaling pathway. Our previous studies showed that PTEN expression causes accumulation of cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor p27Kip1 and G1 cell cycle arrest. Here, we show that PTEN negatively regulates expression of cyclin D1 and that cyclin D1 plays a unique role in p27 proteolysis. Co-expression of cyclin D1, but not cyclin E, is sufficient to restore p27 levels in PTEN-expressing cells. Conversely, loss of cyclin D1 by siRNA causes p27 accumulation. Silencing of the cyclin D1 gene or inhibition of the PI 3-kinase pathway prevents formation of the SCFSKP2 complex, with a simultaneous increase in CUL1 binding to CAND1. CAND1-CUL1 binding is known to block the accessibility of CUL1 to SKP1 and SKP2. We have found that CUL1 is less neddylated in cells that have lost cyclin D1 expression. Using an in vitro extract system, we found that the extracts prepared from cells lacking cyclin D1 have reduced activity to neddylate CUL1, in a manner similar to extracts from cells treated with a PI 3-kinase inhibitor or in G0 resting cells. Consistenly, the steady state levels of CUL1 neddylation were found lower under these conditions. Our studies reveal that PTEN/PI 3-kinase signaling and cyclin D1 control a novel pathway that regulates assembly of the SCFSKP2 complex by modulating cullin neddylation and CAND1 binding at the G1/S cell cycle transition.

Background: Metastatic prostate cancer is initially sensitive to androgen receptor inhibition, but eventually becomes metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Olaparib has longer progression-free survival and better measures of response and patient-reported end points than either enzalutamide or abiraterone. In the present study, 2 Markov models were established to analyze the cost utility of olaparib in treating mCRPC from the perspectives of health services in China and the United States. Methods: Markov models were established to simulate the progress of mCRPC in China and the United States. The state transition probabilities and clinical data were extracted from the PROfound trial. The cost data were estimated from local pricing, the relevant literature and expert consultancy. The health outcomes are expressed by quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). All costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) are presented in US dollars. One-way deterministic sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were performed to assess the uncertainty of the models. Results: Based on the Chinese Markov model, the base case ICER for olaparib versus the control group was ¥392,727.87, with incremental costs of ¥93,673.23 and an incremental QALY of 0.23, indicating that it was not cost effective from the aspect of the Chinese healthcare system. However, as shown by the American Markov model, olaparib was dominant versus the control group, with a cost saving of $69,675.20 and a gain of 0.23 QALYs. One-way deterministic sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed that the modeling results were not significantly affected by the model parameters. Conclusions: Olaparib treatment in patients with mCRPC is not cost effective in China, but it is cost saving in the United States.

Cancer is a global problem that lacks a global solution [1]. A study indicated that there were 19.3 million new cases of cancer and almost 10 million deaths from cancer in 2020. Cancer is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, across all regions and at all levels of human development [2]. Harnessing the […]

Objectives: The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate whether a lidocaine patch is beneficial for postoperative pain as an option for multimodal analgesia. Methods: Information was obtained from PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for clinical randomized controlled trials of lidocaine patches for postoperative pain (as of March 2022). Two researchers independently completed study screening, risk bias assessment, and data extraction. Review Manager (version 5.4, Cochrane Collaboration) was used to conduct the meta-analysis. The evaluation metrics were postoperative pain scores, opioid consumption, and patient satisfaction. Results: Sixteen randomized controlled trials were included, and data from 918 patients were available. Pain scores differed between the 2 groups at 12, 24, and 48 hours postoperatively, and the pain scores of the lidocaine patch group were significantly lower (mean difference [MD]=−1.32 [95% CI, −1.96 to −0.68], P<0.0001; I ²=92%) at 12 hours after the operation; (MD=−1.23 [95% CI, −1.72 to −0.75], P<0.00001; I ²=92%) at 24 hours after the operation; and (MD=−0.25 [95% CI,−0.29 to −0.21], P<0.00001; I ²=98%) at 48 hours after the operation. In addition, the lidocaine patch group had decreased opioid requirements (MD=−3.57 [95% CI, −5.06 to −2.09], P<0.00001; I ²=96%). The lidocaine patch group seemed to be more satisfied, but there was no statistically significant difference (risk ratio, 1.50 [95% CI, 0.74 to 3.05], P=0.26) between the groups. Discussion: Lidocaine patches are beneficial for postoperative pain and can be used in multimodal analgesia to reduce opioid use, but there is no significant increase in patient satisfaction with pain control. More data are needed to support this conclusion due to the large heterogeneity in the present study.