Microbial Indicator Profiling of Fresh Produce and Environmental Samples from Farms and Packing Facilities in Northern Mexico.

To compare microbiological indicator and pathogen contamination among different types of fresh produce and environmental samples along the production chain, 636 samples of produce (rinsates from cantaloupe melons, jalapeño peppers, and tomatoes) and environmental samples (rinsates from hands of workers, soil, and water) were collected at four successive steps in the production process (from the field before harvest through the packing facility) on 11 farms in northern Mexico during 2011 and 2012. Samples were assayed for enteric pathogens (Escherichia coli O157:H7, other Shiga toxigenic E. coli, Salmonella, and Listeria monocytogenes) and microbial indicators (coliforms, other E. coli strains, and Enterococcus spp.). Salmonella was the only pathogen detected; it was found in one preharvest jalapeño sample (detection limits: 0.0033 CFU/ml in produce and hand samples, 0.0013 CFU/ml in water, and 0.04 CFU/g in soil). Microbial indicator profiles for produce, worker hands, and soil from jalapeño and tomato farms were similar, but cantaloupe farm samples had higher indicator levels (P < 0.05 for all comparisons) on fruit (6.5, 2.8, and 7.2 log CFU per fruit) and hands (6.6, 3.1, and 7.1 log CFU per hand) for coliforms, E. coli, and Enterococcus, respectively, and lower E. coli levels in soil (<1 CFU/g). In water from tomato farms, E. coli indicators were significantly more prevalent (70 to 89% of samples were positive; P = 0.01 to 0.02), and geometric mean levels were higher (0.3 to 0.6 log CFU/100 ml) than those in cantaloupe farm water (32 to 38% of samples were positive, geometric mean <1 CFU/100 ml). Microbial indicators were present during all production steps, but prevalence and levels were generally highest at the final on-farm production step (the packing facility) (P < 0.03 for significant comparisons). The finding that microbial contamination on produce farms is influenced by produce type and production step can inform the design of effective approaches to mitigate microbial contamination.

Somatic Coliphage Profiles of Produce and Environmental Samples from Farms in Northern México.

Somatic coliphages were quantified in 459 produce and environmental samples from 11 farms in Northern Mexico to compare amounts of somatic coliphages among different types of fresh produce and environmental samples across the production steps on farms. Rinsates from cantaloupe melons, jalapeño peppers, tomatoes, and the hands of workers, soil, and water were collected during 2011-2012 at four successive steps on each farm, from the field before harvest through the packing facility, and assayed by FastPhage MPN Quanti-tray method. Cantaloupe farm samples contained more coliphages than jalapeño or tomato (p range <0.01-0.03). Across production steps, jalapeños had higher coliphage percentages before harvest than during packing (p = 0.03), while tomatoes had higher coliphage concentrations at packing than all preceding production steps (p range <0.01-0.02). These findings support the use of targeted produce-specific interventions at multiple points in the process of growing and packing produce to reduce the risk of enteric virus contamination and improve food safety during fruit and vegetable production.

Different Array CGH profiles within hereditary breast cancer tumors associated to BRCA1 expression and overall survival.

BACKGROUND: Array CGH analysis of breast tumors has contributed to the identification of different genomic profiles in these tumors. Loss of DNA repair by BRCA1 functional deficiency in breast cancer has been proposed as a relevant contribution to breast cancer progression for tumors with no germline mutation. Identifying the genomic alterations taking place in BRCA1 not expressing tumors will lead us to a better understanding of the cellular functions affected in this heterogeneous disease. Moreover, specific genomic alterations may contribute to the identification of potential therapeutic targets and offer a more personalized treatment to breast cancer patients. METHODS: Forty seven tumors from hereditary breast cancer cases, previously analyzed for BRCA1 expression, and screened for germline BRCA1 and 2 mutations, were analyzed by Array based Comparative Genomic Hybridization (aCGH) using Agilent 4x44K arrays. Overall survival was established for tumors in different clusters using Log-rank (Mantel-Cox) Test. Gene lists obtained from aCGH analysis were analyzed for Gene Ontology enrichment using GOrilla and DAVID tools. RESULTS: Genomic profiling of the tumors showed specific alterations associated to BRCA1 or 2 mutation status, and BRCA1 expression in the tumors, affecting relevant cellular processes. Similar cellular functions were found affected in BRCA1 not expressing and BRCA1 or 2 mutated tumors. Hierarchical clustering classified hereditary breast tumors in four major, groups according to the type and amount of genomic alterations, showing one group with a significantly poor overall survival (p = 0.0221). Within this cluster, deletion of PLEKHO1, GDF11, DARC, DAG1 and CD63 may be associated to the worse outcome of the patients. CONCLUSIONS: These results support the fact that BRCA1 lack of expression in tumors should be used as a marker for BRCAness and to select these patients for synthetic lethality approaches such as treatment with PARP inhibitors. In addition, the identification of specific alterations in breast tumors associated with poor survival, immune response or with a BRCAness phenotype will allow the use of a more personalized treatment in these patients.

Human papillomavirus and Epstein-Barr virus infections in breast cancer from chile.

BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV) and Epstein Barr virus (EBV) have been found in breast carcinomas (BCs) around the world. In this study, fifty-five BCs from Chile were analyzed for HPV and EBV presence. In addition, HPV-16 viral load/physical status and E6/E7 expressions were determined. RESULTS: The amplification of a housekeeping gene showed that 46/55 samples (84%) had amplifiable DNA. HPV-16 was detected in 4/46 BCs (8.7%) and EBV was detected in 3/46 (6.5%) BCs. The analysis of HPV-16 physical status showed that this virus was integrated in all of the tumors with a relatively low viral load (range: 0.14 to 33.8 copies/cell). E6 and E7 transcripts, however, were not detected in any HPV-16 positive specimens. Using a Cox-regression model, we found a statistically significant association between EBV presence and poor survival (p = 0.013). CONCLUSIONS: The findings in this study suggest that it is unlikely that HPV and/or EBV play a direct role in the etiology of BC.

Promoter hypermethylation of BRCA1 correlates with absence of expression in hereditary breast cancer tumors.

Germline mutations in BRCA1 account for a low proportion of hereditary cases in diverse populations. Several efforts have been made to find new genes involved in the inheritance of breast cancer with no success until today. The participation of BRCA1 in the development of breast cancer has been proposed in several studies where hypermethylation of its promoter and a decrease in expression has been reported for sporadic cases and one study on familial cases. To explore the participation of BRCA1 in hereditary carcinogenesis through a different mechanism than the inheritance of germline mutations, we studied the methylation status of its promoter in breast tumors, from patients previously screened for BRCA1/BRCA2 germline mutations. We also determined the presence of the BRCA1 protein in these tumors and correlated both events with tumor grade, hormone receptors and ERBB2 presence. Promoter hypermethylation of the BRCA1 gene was detected in 51% of our biopsies, among which 67% did not express the respective protein. This result leads us to suggest that hypermethylation could be considered as an inactivating mechanism for BRCA1 expression, either as a first or second hit. Moreover, a number of biopsies with absence of expression on BRCA1 showed negative detection of estrogen and progesterone receptors, a similar phenotype to BRCA1 mutated breast tumors.