| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Patke, Rodhan, et al.
(författare)
-
Epitranscriptomic mechanisms of androgen signalling and prostate cancer
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Neoplasia. - : Elsevier. - 1522-8002 .- 1476-5586. ; 56
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most common cancer diagnosed in men. While radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy are often successful in treating localised disease, post-treatment recurrence is common. As the androgen receptor (AR) and androgen hormones play an essential role in prostate carcinogenesis and progression, androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is often used to deprive PCa cells of the pro-proliferative effect of androgens. ADTs act by either blocking androgen biosynthesis (e.g. abiraterone) or blocking AR function (e.g. bicalutamide, enzalutamide, apalutamide, darolutamide). ADT is often effective in initially suppressing PCa growth and progression, yet emergence of castrate-resistant PCa and progression to neuroendocrine-like PCa following ADT are major clinical challenges. For this reason, there is an urgent need to identify novel approaches to modulate androgen signalling to impede PCa progression whilst also preventing or delaying therapy resistance. The mechanistic convergence of androgen and epitranscriptomic signalling offers a potential novel approach to treat PCa. The epitranscriptome involves covalent modifications of mRNA, notably, in the context of this review, the N(6)-methyladenosine (m6A) modification. m6A is involved in the regulation of mRNA splicing, stability, and translation, and has recently been shown to play a role in PCa and androgen signalling. The m6A modification is dynamically regulated by the METTL3-containing methyltransferase complex, and the FTO and ALKBH5 RNA demethylases. Given the need for novel approaches to treat PCa, there is significant interest in new therapies that target m6A that modulate AR expression and androgen signalling. This review critically summarises the potential benefit of such epitranscriptomic therapies for PCa patients.
|
|
| 5. |
- Smith, Bradley P., et al.
(författare)
-
Taxonomic status of the Australian dingo : the case for Canis dingo Meyer, 1793
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Zootaxa. - : MAGNOLIA PRESS. - 1175-5326 .- 1175-5334. ; 4564:1, s. 173-197
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The taxonomic status and systematic nomenclature of the Australian dingo remain contentious, resulting in decades of inconsistent applications in the scientific literature and in policy. Prompted by a recent publication calling for dingoes to be considered taxonomically as domestic dogs (Jackson et al. 2017, Zootaxa 4317, 201-224), we review the issues of the taxonomy applied to canids, and summarise the main differences between dingoes and other canids. We conclude that (1) the Australian dingo is a geographically isolated (allopatric) species from all other Canis, and is genetically, phenotypically, ecologically, and behaviourally distinct; and (2) the dingo appears largely devoid of many of the signs of domestication, including surviving largely as a wild animal in Australia for millennia. The case of defining dingo taxonomy provides a quintessential example of the disagreements between species concepts (e.g., biological, phylogenetic, ecological, morphological). Applying the biological species concept sensu stricto to the dingo as suggested by Jackson et al. (2017) and consistently across the Canidae would lead to an aggregation of all Canis populations, implying for example that dogs and wolves are the same species. Such an aggregation would have substantial implications for taxonomic clarity, biological research, and wildlife conservation. Any changes to the current nomen of the dingo (currently Canis dingo Meyer, 1793), must therefore offer a strong, evidence-based argument in favour of it being recognised as a subspecies of Canis lupus Linnaeus, 1758, or as Canis familiaris Linnaeus, 1758, and a successful application to the International Commission for Zoological Nomenclature - neither of which can be adequately supported. Although there are many species concepts, the sum of the evidence presented in this paper affirms the classification of the dingo as a distinct taxon, namely Canis dingo.
|
|
