Establishing and boosting communication in the European Reference Network for Rare Neurological Diseases (ERN-RND): the impact of offering free educational webinars.

BACKGROUND: Since it first started operating in 2017, the European Reference Network for Rare Neurological Diseases (ERN-RND) implemented a multi-channel communication strategy to effectively reach its target audience: healthcare professionals, patients, researchers, industry representatives and the general public. We first created a website containing useful and up to date information, followed by social media accounts. Here, the analytical data collected about the ERN-RND website and social media channels was compared (Twitter, Facebook, YouTube) during two periods: October 2018 to September 2019, and the year after the ERN-RND free educational webinars were launched: from October 2019 to September 2020. This allowed us to quantify the impact of offering a tangible product (webinars) on the communication strategy. RESULTS: The analytical data obtained from October 2018 to September 2019 and from October 2019 to September 2020 clearly shows a significant increase in traffic and followers since the launch of the ERN-RND webinars in November 2019. We also created a communication survey which was disseminated between February and June 2021. We collected responses from 61 people: 38 healthcare professionals, 11 scientists, 10 patients (advocates), 2 industry representatives, 1 patient association, 1 charity representative, 1 resident and 1 master student. Most respondents answered "webinars" as the number one reason when asked about which content they look for on the ERN-RND website. CONCLUSIONS: Offering a tangible product-such as the webinars presented in this report-to a specific target group (healthcare professionals) supported our communication strategy by driving traffic to ERN-RND communication channels. It has also successfully tackled ERN-RND's general aim: by enabling the flow of knowledge on rare neurological and movement disorders to the medical community in hospitals treating patients with these rare and complex conditions, patients ultimately benefit from improved and faster diagnosis, care, and treatment. We aim to set up similar strategies to effectively reach other or the same target groups. For healthcare professionals, organising eConsultations via the Clinical Patient Management System or disseminating standards of care such as diagnostic and therapeutic algorithms as well as clinical practice guidelines might offer potential. For the patient community, organising customised and multilingual webinars could also work.

Research priorities for rare neurological diseases: a representative view of patient representatives and healthcare professionals from the European Reference Network for Rare Neurological Diseases.

BACKGROUND: Patient involvement in research increases the impact of research and the likelihood of adoption in clinical practice. A first step is to know which research themes are important for patients. We distributed a survey on research priorities to ERN-RND members, both patient representatives and healthcare professionals, asking them to prioritize five research themes for rare neurological diseases on a scale ranging from 1 (most important) to 5 (least important). A follow-up e-mail interview was conducted with patient representatives and professionals to assess potential reasons for differences in opinions between these two groups. RESULTS: In total, 156 responses were analysed: 61 from professionals and 95 from patient representatives. They covered all ERN-RND disease groups and came from 20 different EU countries. Almost half of the respondents considered 'Developing therapies and preventive strategies' the most important research theme. In particular, patient representatives prioritized this theme more often than professionals, while professionals prioritized 'Disease mechanisms and models'. Patient representatives indicated that therapies and prevention were of the utmost importance to them, because their lives are often heavily impacted by the disease and their main goal is to relief the burden of disease. Professionals indicated that investigating disease mechanisms will lead to more knowledge and is indispensable for finding new treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Patients and professionals have different opinions on which research theme should have priority. A qualitative follow-up shows that they respect each others' view points. Different stakeholders involved in research should be aware of their differences in research theme priority. Explaining these differences to each other leads to more understanding, and could improve patient engagement in research.

Changes in DNA Damage Repair Gene Expression and Cell Cycle Gene Expression Do Not Explain Radioresistance in Tamoxifen-Resistant Breast Cancer.

Tamoxifen-induced radioresistance, reported in vitro, might pose a problem for patients who receive neoadjuvant tamoxifen treatment and subsequently receive radiotherapy after surgery. Previous studies suggested that DNA damage repair or cell cycle genes are involved, and could therefore be targeted to preclude the occurrence of cross-resistance. We aimed to characterize the observed cross-resistance by investigating gene expression of DNA damage repair genes and cell cycle genes in estrogen receptor-positive MCF-7 breast cancer cells that were cultured to tamoxifen resistance. RNA sequencing was performed, and expression of genes characteristic for several DNA damage repair pathways was investigated, as well as expression of genes involved in different phases of the cell cycle. The association of differentially expressed genes with outcome after radiotherapy was assessed in silico in a large breast cancer cohort. None of the DNA damage repair pathways showed differential gene expression in tamoxifen-resistant cells compared to wild-type cells. Two DNA damage repair genes were more than two times upregulated (NEIL1 and EME2), and three DNA damage repair genes were more than two times downregulated (PCNA, BRIP1, and BARD1). However, these were not associated with outcome after radiotherapy in the TCGA breast cancer cohort. Genes involved in G1, G1/S, G2, and G2/M phases were lower expressed in tamoxifen-resistant cells compared to wild-type cells. Individual genes that were more than two times upregulated (MAPK13) or downregulated (E2F2, CKS2, GINS2, PCNA, MCM5, and EIF5A2) were not associated with response to radiotherapy in the patient cohort investigated. We assessed the expression of DNA damage repair genes and cell cycle genes in tamoxifen-resistant breast cancer cells. Though several genes in both pathways were differentially expressed, these could not explain the cross-resistance for irradiation in these cells, since no association to response to radiotherapy in the TCGA breast cancer cohort was found.

Interferon-Stimulated Genes Are Involved in Cross-resistance to Radiotherapy in Tamoxifen-Resistant Breast Cancer.

Purpose: Treatment resistance is the main cause of adverse disease outcome in breast cancer patients. Here, we aimed to investigate common features in tamoxifen-resistant and radioresistant breast cancer, as tamoxifen-resistant breast cancer cells are cross-resistant to irradiation in vitroExperimental Design: RNA sequencing of tamoxifen-resistant and radioresistant breast cancer cells was performed and validated by quantitative PCR. Pathways were further investigated in vitro and in breast cancer patient cohorts to establish their relation with treatment resistance.Results: Both tamoxifen-resistant and radioresistant breast cancer cells had increased expression levels of genes involved in type I IFN signaling compared with nonresistant cells. IFN-stimulated genes (ISG) were induced in a dose-dependent and time-dependent manner after tamoxifen treatment and irradiation. Tamoxifen treatment also led to ssDNA presence in the cytoplasm, which is known to induce expression of ISGs, a phenomenon that has already been described for irradiation. Moreover, in a breast cancer patient cohort, high expression levels of ISGs were found in the primary tumor in around half of the patients. This was associated with a tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) expression signature, although the ISGs were also expressed by the tumor cells themselves. Importantly, the expression of ISGs correlated with outcome in breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant tamoxifen or radiotherapy, but not in systemically untreated patients or chemotherapy-treated patients.Conclusions: Our data indicate that expression of ISGs by tumor cells is involved in acquired, treatment-induced resistance to tamoxifen and radiotherapy, and might play a role in intrinsic resistance via interaction with TILs. Clin Cancer Res; 24(14); 3397-408. ©2018 AACR.

Hif-1α and Hif-2α synergize to suppress AML development but are dispensable for disease maintenance.

Leukemogenesis occurs under hypoxic conditions within the bone marrow (BM). Knockdown of key mediators of cellular responses to hypoxia with shRNA, namely hypoxia-inducible factor-1α (HIF-1α) or HIF-2α, in human acute myeloid leukemia (AML) samples results in their apoptosis and inability to engraft, implicating HIF-1α or HIF-2α as therapeutic targets. However, genetic deletion of Hif-1α has no effect on mouse AML maintenance and may accelerate disease development. Here, we report the impact of conditional genetic deletion of Hif-2α or both Hif-1α and Hif-2α at different stages of leukemogenesis in mice. Deletion of Hif-2α accelerates development of leukemic stem cells (LSCs) and shortens AML latency initiated by Mll-AF9 and its downstream effectors Meis1 and Hoxa9. Notably, the accelerated initiation of AML caused by Hif-2α deletion is further potentiated by Hif-1α codeletion. However, established LSCs lacking Hif-2α or both Hif-1α and Hif-2α propagate AML with the same latency as wild-type LSCs. Furthermore, pharmacological inhibition of the HIF pathway or HIF-2α knockout using the lentiviral CRISPR-Cas9 system in human established leukemic cells with MLL-AF9 translocation have no impact on their functions. We therefore conclude that although Hif-1α and Hif-2α synergize to suppress the development of AML, they are not required for LSC maintenance.