Immunocytological and Preliminary Immunohistochemical Studies of Prothymosin ��, a Human Cancer�Cassociated Polypeptide, With a Well-characterized Polyclonal Antibody

Prothymosin α (ProTα) is a nuclear polypeptide of great biological and, possibly clinical, importance, because its expression levels have been associated with early diagnosis/prognosis of human cancer. It is therefore interesting to raise easily available and cost-effective antibodies that would be applied to develop reliable ProTα immunodiagnostics. In this study, New Zealand white rabbits and laying hens were parallel immunized against intact ProTα or the synthetic fragments ProTα[1-28], ProTα[87-109], and ProTα[101-109], all conjugated to keyhole limpet hemocyanin (KLH). The corresponding antibodies G and Y were immunochemically evaluated in parallel with ELISA and Western blot systems and applied to fluorescence immunocytology experiments using various cancer cell lines and normal cells. The antibody G raised against ProTα[101-109]/KLH had excellent functional characteristics in the Western blot and immunocytology experiments, where the fluorescent signal was almost exclusively shown in the cell nucleus independently of the cells assayed. The above antibody has been applied to preliminary IHC staining of human cancer prostate tissues, leading to a high percentage of clearly and intensively stained nuclei in the adenocarcinoma tissue; this antibody can be further used in cancer tissue immunostaining and in research concerning the role of ProTα in tumorigenesis. (J Histochem Cytochem 56:1023–1031, 2008)     

Sharing the Knowledge: Sharing Aggregate Genomic Findings with Research Participants in Developing Countries

Returning research results to participants is recognised as an obligation that researchers should always try to fulfil. But can we ascribe the same obligation to researchers who conduct genomics research producing only aggregated findings? And what about genomics research conducted in developing countries? This paper considers Beskow's et al. argument that aggregated findings should also be returned to research participants. This recommendation is examined in the context of genomics research conducted in developing countries. The risks and benefits of attempting such an exercise are identified, and suggestions on ways to avoid some of the challenges are proposed. I argue that disseminating the findings of genomic research to participating communities should be seen as sharing knowledge rather than returning results. Calling the dissemination of aggregate, population level information returning results can be confusing and misleading as participants might expect to receive individual level information. Talking about sharing knowledge is a more appropriate way of expressing and communicating the outcome of population genomic research. Considering the knowledge produced by genomics research a worthwhile output that should be shared with the participants and approaching the exercise as a ‘sharing of knowledge’, could help mitigate the risks of unrealistic expectations and misunderstanding of findings, whilst promoting trusting and long lasting relationships with the participating communities.