Working Group
Recently Published Documents





2021 ◽  
Vol 51 ◽  
pp. e76
John Hettema ◽  
Manuel Mattheisen ◽  
Nora I. Strom ◽  
Rosa Cheesman ◽  
Kirstin Purves ◽  

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Stephanie Lucas ◽  
Michaela Tencerova ◽  
Benoit von der Weid ◽  
Thomas Levin Andersen ◽  
Camille Attané ◽  

Over the last two decades, increased interest of scientists to study bone marrow adiposity (BMA) in relation to bone and adipose tissue physiology has expanded the number of publications using different sources of bone marrow adipose tissue (BMAT). However, each source of BMAT has its limitations in the number of downstream analyses for which it can be used. Based on this increased scientific demand, the International Bone Marrow Adiposity Society (BMAS) established a Biobanking Working Group to identify the challenges of biobanking for human BMA-related samples and to develop guidelines to advance establishment of biobanks for BMA research. BMA is a young, growing field with increased interest among many diverse scientific communities. These bring new perspectives and important biological questions on how to improve and build an international community with biobank databases that can be used and shared all over the world. However, to create internationally accessible biobanks, several practical and legislative issues must be addressed to create a general ethical protocol used in all institutes, to allow for exchange of biological material internationally. In this position paper, the BMAS Biobanking Working Group describes similarities and differences of patient information (PIF) and consent forms from different institutes and addresses a possibility to create uniform documents for BMA biobanking purposes. Further, based on discussion among Working Group members, we report an overview of the current isolation protocols for human bone marrow adipocytes (BMAds) and bone marrow stromal cells (BMSCs, formerly mesenchymal), highlighting the specific points crucial for effective isolation. Although we remain far from a unified BMAd isolation protocol and PIF, we have summarized all of these important aspects, which are needed to build a BMA biobank. In conclusion, we believe that harmonizing isolation protocols and PIF globally will help to build international collaborations and improve the quality and interpretation of BMA research outcomes.

2021 ◽  
pp. 54-93
Yu. A. Karpov ◽  
O. L. Barbarash ◽  
A. A. Boschenko ◽  
V. V. Kashtalap ◽  
V. V. Kukharchuk ◽  

Disclaimer The EAC Guidelines represent the views of the EAC, and were produced after careful consideration of the scientific and medical knowledge, and the evidence available at the time of their publication. The EAC is not responsible in the event of any contradiction, discrepancy, and/or ambiguity between the EAC Guidelines and any other official recommendations or guidelines issued by the relevant public health authorities, in particular in relation to good use of healthcare or therapeutic strategies. Health professionals are encouraged to take the EAC Guidelines fully into account when exercising their clinical judgment, as well as in the determination and the implementation of preventive, diagnostic, or therapeutic medical strategies; however, the EAC Guidelines do not override, in any way whatsoever, the individual responsibility of health professionals to make appropriate and accurate decisions in consideration of each patient’s health condition and in consultation with that patient and, where appropriate and/or necessary, the patient’s caregiver. Nor do the EAC Guidelines exempt health professionals from taking into full and careful consideration the relevant official updated recommendations or guidelines issued by the competent public health authorities, in order to manage each patient’s case in light of the scientifically accepted data pursuant to their respective ethical and professional obligations. It is also the health professional’s responsibility to verify the applicable rules and regulations relating to drugs and medical devices at the time of prescription.Members of the Working Group confirmed the lack of financial support / conflict of interest. In the event of a conflict of interest being reported, the member (s) of the Working Group was (were) excluded from the discussion of sections related to the area of conflict of interest.

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (2/3) ◽  
pp. 857-875
Anaïs Bailly ◽  
Benjamin P. Brumley ◽  
Megan A. Mraz ◽  
Benjamin S. Morgan ◽  
Gwenelle Styles O'Neal ◽  

Institutions of higher education fail to address ongoing systemic racism within their classrooms, boardrooms, and commons when university personnel and students are not prepared to discuss racism and structural inequalities that exist within the campus community. To address this at a public, Predominantly White Institution (PWI), a group of students, staff, and faculty developed an action-oriented community to increase awareness and advocacy efforts against systemic and micro-level racism. Founded by faculty in the university’s BSW and MSW programs, the Anti-Racism Working Group (ARWG) is composed of faculty, staff, and students from multiple university departments. The goals of ARWG include education and awareness, and dialogue about race, ethnicity, bias, power, and privilege; cultivating interdisciplinary faculty and student relationships, and inspiring anti-racist actions. This paper discusses and disseminates research about ARWG’s inaugural year and early assessments of the program. Data includes responses from students who attended ARWG workshops and found them useful in their conceptualization and self-awareness around race, privilege, and taking anti-racist action. ARWG members benefited around three themes including skill development, relationship building, and the increased awareness and ability to engage in productive discussions around race, power, and privilege. We share these results with other universities and organizations to encourage the creation of similar programs and to facilitate learning from our experiences.

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (19) ◽  
pp. 4762
José Rubio-Briones ◽  
Ferran Algaba ◽  
Enrique Gallardo ◽  
José Marcos-Rodríguez ◽  
Miguel Climent ◽  

On the basis of the discussion of the current state of research on relevant topics of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) among a group of experts of the Spanish Oncology Genitourinary (SOGUG) Working Group, recommendations were proposed to overcome the challenges posed by the management of NMIBC in clinical practice. A unified definition of the term ‘microhematuria’ and the profile of the patient at risk are needed. Establishing a ‘hematuria clinic’ would contribute to a centralized and more efficient evaluation of patients with this clinical sign. Second or repeated transurethral resection (re-TUR) needs to be defined, including the time window after the first procedure within which re-TUR should be performed. Complete tumor resection is mandatory when feasible, with specification of the presence or absence of muscle. Budding should be used as a classification system, and stratification of T1 tumors especially in extensive and deep tumors, is advisable. The percentage of the high-grade component should always be reported, and, in multiple tumors, grades should be reported separately. Luminal and basal subtypes can be identified because of possibly different clinical outcomes. Molecular subtypes and immunotherapy are incorporated in the management of muscle-invasive bladder cancer but data on NMIBC are still preliminary.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 204-204
Shelley Fuld Nasso ◽  
Laura Diane Porter ◽  
Kristen K. McNiff Landrum

204 Background: Patient advocates share their time and experience to improve cancer research, care, and support. Advocacy can be rewarding and empowering, and survivors and caregivers express a variety of reasons for engaging in advocacy. Yet, advocacy can also come with mental and emotional costs. Challenges include the grief of losing friends to cancer, the related “survivors’ guilt”, and the burden of repeatedly reliving their experience. The National Coalition for Cancer Survivorship (NCCS) conducted a survey to better understand the experience of patient advocates, and actions that organizations can take to recognize and support advocates. Methods: NCCS convened two focus groups with 10 advocates (the “working group”) to understand factors that contribute to advocates feeling rewarded or burned out from advocacy. We reviewed the transcripts to identify themes and reviewed the literature. We developed a survey and included a validated, non-proprietary, single-item burnout measure used for health care professionals. We built the survey online and tested with select working group members. We disseminated the survey to NCCS’ advocacy network, and working group members shared with their networks. Results: As of June 1, we received 176 responses, with the survey will open for another week. The initial data show that the vast majority of respondents find their advocacy work rewarding (97%), empowering (93%), and a positive impact on their lives (96%). At the same time, 29.5% of respondents indicated they have symptoms of burnout, including emotional and physical exhaustion. Respondents report that their advocacy work results in exhaustion (50.7%), sadness (41.1%), and anxiousness (28.7%). More than a third (36.7%) said that grief makes it hard to maintain their work as advocates. A majority manage the demands of their advocacy work by practicing self-care (66.6%) and using coping strategies (62.5%). Advocates shared the specific practices and strategies they used. Less than half (42.5%) said they set boundaries between their advocacy work and their personal life. The final analysis of the survey data will be complete by the end of June 2021. Conclusions: The phrase, “Nothing about us, without us,” has guided the inclusion of patient and caregiver voices in the design of research, care delivery, research grant review, quality measurement, and other aspects of cancer care and cancer research. Yet organizations that ask for the mental and emotional labor of advocates, including patient organizations, researchers, health care professionals, government institutions, and pharmaceutical companies, should understand the costs to advocates and how to best support them. As one respondent said, “Perhaps organizations could set the stage for this work by openly validating the toll that cancer itself takes, and acknowledge that advocacy takes energy and commitment, which may not always be possible to sustain in the face of ongoing treatment or other life complications.”

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Olivera Nikolić ◽  
Filipa Alves e Sousa ◽  
Teresa Margarida Cunha ◽  
Marijana Basta Nikolić ◽  
M. Milagros Otero-García ◽  

Abstract Objective The aim of the Female Pelvic Imaging Working Group of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) was to develop imaging staging guidelines for vulvar cancer and to propose standardised MRI protocols and reporting. Methods The guidelines recommended from the ESUR in this article resulted from a questionnaire analysis regarding imaging staging of vulvar cancer that was answered by all members of the Female Pelvic Imaging Working Group. Only the answers with an agreement equal to or more than 80% were considered. Additionally, the literature was reviewed to complement and further support our conclusions. Results The critical review of the literature and consensus obtained among experts allows for recommendations regarding imaging staging guidelines, patient preparation, MRI protocol, and a structured MRI report. Conclusions Standardising image acquisition techniques and MRI interpretation reduces ambiguity and ultimately improves the contribution of radiology to the staging and management of patients with vulvar cancer. Moreover, structured reporting assists with the communication of clinically relevant information to the referring physician.

Margaret Cox ◽  
Barry Quinn

This article builds on the work of EDUsummIT2019’s thematic working group 2 (TWG2) focus on “Learning as Learning Leaders: How does leadership for learning emerge beyond the traditional teaching models?” Using the well-established theoretical frameworks of Entwistle (1987) and Shulman (1987) the most significant influences on how learning leaders need to adjust to accommodate the dramatic increase in remote online learning are identified. The major influences include learners’ previous knowledge, self-confidence, abilities and motives, and changes between learning initiated by teachers and that by learners. COVID-19 has caused a massive upskilling of people in all facets of society from children to grandparents, from media to consumers, and from policy makers to practitioners. None of the alignments nor factors identified in this article are static and learning leaders need to perpetually reconsider the factors identified to achieve successful learning outcomes. The ongoing challenges for educators in this changing world are in a permanent state of flux with an increasing IT literate society across all formal and informal sectors of education.

William Ulate ◽  
Sunitha Katabathuni ◽  
Alan Elliott

The World Flora Online (WFO) is the collaborative, international initiative to achieve Target 1 of the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation (GSPC): "An online flora of all known plants." WFO provides an open-access, web-based compendium of the world’s plant species, which builds upon existing knowledge and published floras, checklists and revisions but will also require the collection and generation of new information on poorly known groups and unexplored regions (Borsch et al. 2020). The construction of the WFO Taxonomic Backbone is central to the entire WFO as it determines the accessibility of additional content data and at the same time, represents a taxonomic opinion on the circumscription of those taxa. The Plant List v.1.1 (TPL 2013) was the starting point for the backbone, as this was the most comprehensive resource covering all plants available. We have since curated the higher taxonomy of the backbone, based on the following published community-derived classifications: the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group (APG IV 2016), the Pteridophyte Phylogeny Group (PPG I 2016), Bryophytes (Buck et al. 2008), and Hornworts & Liverworts (Söderström et al. 2016). The WFO presents a community-supported consensus classification with the aim of being the authoritative global source of information on the world's plant diversity. The backbone is actively curated by our Taxonomic Expert Networks (TEN), consisting of specialists of taxonomic groups, ideally at the Family or Order level. There are currently 37 approved TENs, involving more than 280 specialists, working with the WFO. There are small TENs like the Begonia Resource Center and the Meconopsis Group (with five specialists), medium TENs like Ericaceae and Zingiberaceae Resource Centers or (around 15 experts), and larger TENs like and the Legume Phylogeny Working Group, with more than 80 specialists involved. When we do not have taxonomic oversight, the World Checklist of Vascular Plants (WCVP 2019) has been used to update those families from the TPL 2013 classification. Full credit and acknowledgement given to the original sources is a key requirement of this collaborative project, allowing users to refer to the primary data. For example, an association with the original content is kept through the local identifiers used by the taxonomic content providers as a link to their own resources. A key requirement for the WFO Taxonomic Backbone is that every name should have a globally unique identifier that is maintained, ideally forever. After considering several options, the WFO Technology Working Group recommended that the WFO Council establish a WFO Identifier (WFO-ID), a 10-digit number with a “wfo-” prefix, aimed at establishing a resolvable identifier for all existing plant names, which will not only be used in the context of WFO but can be universally used to reference plant names. Management of the WFO Taxonomic Backbone has been a challenge as TPL v1.1 was derived from multiple taxonomic datasets, which led to duplication of records. For that reason, names can be excluded from the public portal by the WFO Taxonomic Working Group or the TENs, but not deleted. A WFO-ID is not deleted nor reused after it has been excluded from the WFO Taxonomic Backbone. Keeping these allows for better matching when assigning WFO-IDs to data derived from content providers. Nevertheless, this implies certain considerations for new names and duplications. New names are added to the WFO Taxonomic Backbone via nomenclators like the International Plants Name Index (IPNI, The Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew et al. 2021) for Angiosperms, and Tropicos (Missouri Botanical Garden 2021) for Bryophytes, as well as harvesting endemic and infraspecific names from Flora providers when providing descriptive content. New names are passed to the TEN to make a judgement on their taxonomic status. When TENs provide a new authoritative taxonomic list for their group, we first produce a Name Matching report to ensure no names are missed. Several issues come from managing and maintaining taxonomic lists, but the process of curating an ever-growing integrated resource leads to an increase in the challenges we face with homonyms, non-standard author abbreviations, orthographic variants and duplicate names when Name Matching. The eMonocot database application, provided by Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, (Santarsiero et al. 2013) and subsequently adapted by the Missouri Botanical Garden to provide the underlying functionality for WFO's current toolset, has also proven itself to be a challenging component to update. In this presentation, we will share our hands-on experience, technical solutions and workflows creating and maintaining the WFO Taxonomic Backbone.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document