Category Archives: Biochemistry

Despite presenting with high-risk disease, Black patients with prostate cancer who enrolled on radiation therapy clinical trials were reported to have better rates of biochemical recurrence, distant metastases, and prostate cancerspecific mortality than White patients.

Although Black patients with prostate cancer who enrolled on radiation therapy clinical trials had more aggressive disease, they had better rates of biochemical recurrence, distant metastases, and prostate cancerspecific mortality vs White patients, suggesting that other factors such as access to care may be important in achieving equity, according to findings from a meta-analysis published in JAMA Network Open.1

Findings from the trial, which had a median follow up of 10.6 months, indicated that Black patients, although more likely to have high-risk disease features, were less likely to experience biochemical recurrence (sHR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.58-0.91), distant metastases (sHR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.58-0.91), or prostate cancerspecific mortality (sHR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.54-0.97). Moreover, no significant differences in all-cause mortality were observed (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.92-1.07). Even after adjusting, investigators reported that Black race continued to be significantly associated with improvements in biochemical recurrence (adjusted sHR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.72-0.88; P <.001), distant metastases (adjust sHR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.55-0.87; P = .002), and prostate cancerspecific mortality (adjusted sHR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.50-0.93; P = .01).

These results do not suggest that there are no biological differences that might be associated with differences in prostate cancer incidence between racial groups, the study authors wrote. It is possible that the association with differential treatment response might be, at least in part, explained by differences in underlying biologic factors. Studies have reported distinct characteristics of prostate cancer in Black and White men at the genetic, epigenetic, and immunological level. These differences may have contributed to improved efficacy of multiple lines of systemic therapy in Black men compared with non-Black men with locally advanced or metastatic disease.

Investigators conducted a literature search in order to identify relevant, randomized studies that were conducted via NRG Oncology or Radiation Therapy Oncology Group from January 1, 1990, to December 31, 2010; this was significant as both groups have historically included a significant population of Black patients within its clinical research. The trial's primary end points were biochemical recurrence, distant metastases, and prostate cancerspecific mortality, with the key secondary end point being all-cause mortality.

Investigators included a total of 8814 patients, 18.5% of whom were Black and 81.5% of whom were White. The mean patient age was 69.1 years in the overall study cohort and most patients were considered to be low- (19.8%) and intermediate-risk (48.4%) with a smaller group of high-risk patients (31.8%).

Investigators observed that Black patients presented at a significantly lower median age compared with White patients (68 years vs 71 years). Additionally, the population was more likely to present with high-risk prostate cancer (38.2% vs 30.4%; P <.001), higher prostate-specific antigen levels (10.3 vs 8.4; P <.001), and Gleason scores ranging between 8 and 10 (16.3% vs 14.1%; P = .03) vs White patients.

The 10-year cumulative incidences of biochemical recurrence, distant metastases, and prostatecancer specific mortality in White and Black patients, respectively were 40.5% and 44.6% (P = .006), 8.4% and 11.6% (P = .005), and 4.5% and 6.4% (P = .03). The 10-year rate of all-cause mortality was comparable between White and Black patients (37.2% vs 36.6%; P = .50). Investigators clarified that prostate cancerspecific mortality rather than other cause mortality was responsible for the low rate of mortality events overall (6.5% vs 10.2%), in patients who were under 65 years of age (7.6% vs 14.9%), and older than 65 years (6.0% vs 9.2%). The same could be applied to patients with high-risk disease (6.4% vs 12.7%).

These results provide high-level evidence challenging the common belief that Black men who are diagnosed with prostate cancer will necessarily have a worse prognosis than White men, co-senior author Amar Kishan, MD, an associate professor and vice chair of clinical and translational research in the Department of Radiation Oncology at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and a researcher at the UCLA Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, said in a press release.2 This is especially important because an unfounded belief can inadvertently contribute to cancer injustice, leading to the use of more aggressive treatments than might be necessarypotentially reducing quality of lifeand diverting attention away from other important factors that can influence outcome, including access to more comprehensive healthcare.

Read more:
Meta-Analysis Indicates Black Individuals With Prostate Cancer May Have Better Outcomes in Radiation Therapy Clinical Trials vs White Patients -...

Haematology and biochemistry results in equines: Interpretation and significance will cover the standard haematology and biochemistry tests performed at most laboratories.

The latest free webinar hosted by the Webinar Vet will take a look at equine blood tests and what the results mean.

Haematology and biochemistry results in equines: Interpretation and significancewill look at the standard haematology and biochemistry tests performed at most UK laboratories and discuss interpretation with regards to organ systems and significance. Factors affecting certain parameters will be indicated as appropriate.

Haematology and biochemistry results in equines: Interpretation and significance is being presented by veterinary clinical pathologist Dr Stacey A Newton, an internal medicine and equine neurology expert. It is sponsored by Nationwide Labs.

Register for the webinar, on Wednesday, February 9, at 12.30pm (GMT).

Dr Stacey Newton, BVSc Cert EM (Int Med) PhD FRCPath MRCVS, qualified from the University of Bristol 1993. She obtained her certificate in equine medicine (internal medicine) at the University of Liverpool, and went on to do a PhD in equine neurology. This was mainly based on headshaking in horses and working with Dr Derek Knottenbelt. Part of the work was with Paul Eldridge, a Neurosurgeon at The Walton Hospital, Liverpool, and a specialist in trigeminal neuralgia. Newton obtained her Diplomat of the Royal College of pathologists in 2008 and then went on to do become a Fellow of the Royal College of pathologists in 2010. Newton is currently working at Nationwide as a senior veterinary clinical pathologist.

Read this article:
Webinar to explore equine blood tests and what the results mean - Horsetalk.co.nz - Horsetalk

From Doe v. Regents, decided Tuesday by the Ninth Circuit, in an opinion by Judge Consuelo Callahan, joined by Judge Danielle J. Forrest and District Judge and Carol Bagley Amon:

Based on a former student's bare allegations of misconduct, and before beginning a formal Title IX investigation, the University of California, Los Angeles (the "University" or "UCLA") issued an immediate interim suspension of John Doe, a Chinese national graduate student just months away from completing his Ph.D. in chemistry/biochemistry. Over five months later, the University suspended Doe for two years after finding he violated the University's dating violence policy by placing Jane Roe "in fear of bodily injury," just one of the thirteen charges the University brought against him. As a result, Doe lost his housing, his job as a teaching assistant on campus, his ability to complete his Ph.D., and his student visa.

As we clarified in Schwake v. Arizona Board of Regents (9th Cir. 2020), the relevant inquiry on a motion to dismiss a Title IX claim in this context is whether the alleged facts, if true, raise a plausible inference that the university discriminated against the plaintiff on the basis of sex. Doe's First Amended Complaint ("FAC") meets this standard.

At all relevant times herein, Doe was a Chinese national graduate student at UCLA on a student visa pursuing his Ph.D. in chemistry/biochemistry. He first met then-UCLA student Jane Roe in a chemistry class during the spring quarter of 2014, and the two began dating that summer. Their long-term romantic relationship continued, and the couple became engaged in December 2016. They planned to marry after Doe was scheduled to graduate with his doctorate in June 2017.

However, the relationship ended abruptly in February 2017, after Doe learned that Roe had been unfaithful to him throughout their relationship. On February 12, Doe sought to break off his engagement with Roe and the two met briefly outside Roe's home. The next morning, by text message, the pair agreed to meet on campus after Doe completed teaching his course and after Roe got off work on February 13, to exchange property that each had in their possession. Sometime thereafter, Doe learned that Roe had withdrawn the entire balance of approximately $8,000 from their joint bank account.

At about 9:45 a.m. on February 13, Roe showed up unannounced to Doe's teaching assistant office on campus, before he was scheduled to teach, to confront him. Roe was not an active student enrolled at UCLA at the time. Roe pounded on the door repeatedly, without announcing herself, until Doe answered. Doe, who was meeting with another graduate student at the time, refused to let Roe into his office. Roe demanded that Doe return her Social Security card which she claimed Doe had in his possession. When Doe asked for his engagement ring back, Roe said she had thrown it into the ocean.

Doe explained that he needed to leave to teach his class and asked Roe to wait until he was finished, but Roe refused to let him leave his office. Roe attempted to block Doe's doorway with her arms stretched out and threatened to call the police to have Doe arrested. Eventually, Doe was able to get around Roe to get to his class. Roe followed him and unsuccessfully tried to prevent him from entering his classroom.

While Doe taught his class, Roe called the University police to report that Doe had pushed her in the upper torso area and grabbed her wrist and forearm. Based on this report, University police arrested Doe for misdemeanor domestic battery after he completed teaching his class.

Two months after the incident, on April 13, Roe lodged a Title IX complaint with the University against Doe, alleging thirteen instances of misconduct, some dating back to the Fall of 2014. Although she was no longer a student at UCLA at the time of the February incident (or at the time she filed her Title IX complaint), she represented to the University that she was. UCLA did not verify Roe's status as a student. Roe also reported as part of her Title IX complaint that she had suffered a rib fracture from her encounter with Doe on February 13. The University ultimately found this to be untrue.

On May 10, 2017, the University's Title IX Office and the Office of Student Conduct issued a joint Notice of Charges to Doe, charging him with violations of policies relating to dating violence, conduct that threatens health or safety, stalking, sexual harassment, terrorizing conduct, and sexual assault. Pending resolution of the investigation of these charges, and without a hearing, the Office of the Dean of Students immediately suspended Doe on an interim basis, banned him from UCLA property, and evicted him from student housing. {Doe appealed the interim suspension, and following a special hearing held on May 22, 2017, the University modified the interim suspension to allow Doe to participate in certain activities on campus.}

On February 13, 2018, Doe filed a petition for writ of mandamus against the Regents in Los Angeles Superior Court, in which he challenged the disciplinary proceedings and decision rendered by the University. On April 3, 2018, Judge Chalfant granted Doe's motion to stay the decision and sanction, finding in relevant part that the evidence did not support the University's findings. Not long thereafter, on May 22, 2018, the Regents filed a Confession of Judgment stating that the Regents believed that Doe's petition should be granted. The court therefore entered judgment in Doe's favor, the Regents' decision and sanction were vacated and set aside, and the matter was remanded for the Regents to reconsider its action.

But this relief came too late, and Doe lost his student visa status.

The court allowed Doe's sex discrimination against UCLA to go forward:

Doe's [Complaint] divides his relevant allegations into three categories: (1) allegations of external pressures, (2) allegations of an internal pattern and practice of bias, and (3) allegations of specific instances of bias in his case. We consider each of these categories of allegations in turn. We conclude that these allegations, when combined, raise a plausible inference of discrimination on the basis of sex sufficient to withstand dismissal at this stage.

In the interests of space, I'll skip items 1 and 2 (though you can read them in the opinion), and focus on item 3:

The above allegations taken together sufficiently allege background indicia of sex discrimination. However, to survive a motion to dismiss, Doe "must combine [those allegations] with facts particular to his case." We hold that Doe has sufficiently done so.

First, the [Complaint] alleges that Jason Zeck, UCLA's Respondent Coordinator, advised Doe in July 2017, during the pending Title IX investigation, that "no female has ever fabricated allegations against an ex-boyfriend in a Title IX setting." The Regents' position that Mr. Zeck's alleged statement cannot possibly be true because Doe was only found responsible for one of the thirteen alleged incidents of misconduct brought against him by Roe is simply untenable. {An alternative explanation might be that, when confronted by a claim that lacked merit, the University rushed to judgment in issuing the two-year interim suspension and then sought out a way to find the accused responsible for something in order to justify its earlier actions.}

Instead, as we must accept this well-pleaded allegation as true, Mr. Zeck's statement suggests that UCLA's Title IX officials held biased assumptions against male respondents during the course of Doe's disciplinary proceeding. Particularly given the ultimate findings of Roe's numerous fabrications, Mr. Zeck's statement plausibly supports an inference that the Regents prejudged Roe's allegations (and Doe's defenses thereto) during its investigation on the basis of their respective genders.

Contrary to the Regents' argument, "statements by 'pertinent university officials,' not just decisionmakers, can support an inference of gender bias." Mr. Zeck's comments are relevant because he served as the "Respondent Coordinator" throughout the Title IX investigation. So while not a decisionmaker, Mr. Zeck was familiar with UCLA's Title IX process and the facts underlying Doe's case. It is therefore reasonable to infer that Mr. Zeck's statement reflects the broader gender assumptions within UCLA's Title IX office during its investigation of Doe.

Second, the [Complaint] alleges that Associate Dean Rush, the ultimate decisionmaker here, advised Doe that if she were in his shoes, she would have invited Roe into her office during the February 2017 incident. Associate Dean Rush's comment suggests that she did not view Roe as an aggressor, and at the very least raises the question of whether, if the gender roles were reversed, Associate Dean Rush would have made the same recommendation to a female approached by her angry, male ex-fianc when he showed up unannounced to confront her at her place of employment.

The [Complaint] further alleges several additional facts which, if assumed to be true, demonstrate irregularities in Doe's proceedings that, while not dispositive on their own, support an inference of gender bias.

For example, the [Complaint] alleges that the University demonstrated its disparate treatment of Doe as a male during its investigation by failing to investigate his claim that Roe was not a student at the time of the incident and not discrediting Roe when it became apparent that Roe had misrepresented her status as a student and falsely stated that she fractured a rib on February 13. {Roe's status as a non-student at the time of the incident would not preclude the University from proceeding with investigating her complaint under Title IX because her complaint also included allegations of misconduct dating back to 2014, when she was a student at UCLA.} The [Complaint] also alleges other irregularities in the investigation including the fact that Ms. Shakoori made findings of violations of policy not included in the Joint Notice or Amended Joint Notice of Charges.

The [Complaint] enumerates several other allegations of irregular proceedings during the appeal hearing itself, including that (1) the burden was placed on Doe, not the University; (2) Doe was not permitted to speak at the appeal hearing; (3) fact witness testimony supporting Doe's account of the events was discounted, while witness testimony supporting Roe's account was accepted without the need for an independent interview by the appeal panel; (4) Associate Dean Rush evidenced gender bias when she falsely stated that the two-year suspension was required by SVSH Policy for any type of dating violence; and (5) the appeal panel only found that Roe was in fear of "bodily injury," not "serious bodily injury" as required by the policy. Additionally, the [Complaint] referenced the state court's ruling on the motion for stay in the writ proceeding, wherein the court found that the evidence did not support the Regents' findings.

Although the Regents contends that these allegations of procedural irregularities do not suggest that gender was the reason for the supposed errors, this Circuit, as well as the Seventh and Sixth Circuits, have found similar irregularities support an inference of gender bias, particularly when considered in combination with allegations of other specific instances of bias and background indicia of sex discrimination.

The fact that the Regents ultimately found Doe not responsible for twelve of the thirteen allegations made against him does not make the allegations of irregularities in the proceedings any less relevant to our inquiry. Rather, at some point an accumulation of procedural irregularities all disfavoring a male respondent begins to look like a biased proceeding despite the Regents' protests otherwise.

Taken together, Doe's allegations of external pressures and an internal pattern and practice of bias, along with allegations concerning his particular disciplinary case, give rise to a plausible inference that the University discriminated against Doe on the basis of sex. The fact that sex discrimination is "a plausible explanation" for the University's handling of the disciplinary case against Doe is sufficient for his Title IX claim to survive a motion to dismiss. While Doe "may face problems of proof, and the factfinder might not buy the inferences that he's selling," his Title IX claim makes it past the pleading stage.

Here is the original post:
Sex Discrimination Lawsuit Over Alleged Wrongful Title IX Suspension Against UCLA Can Go Forward - Reason

UK College of Medicineresearchers will enroll more than 80 adult participants from Kentucky: some who have had COVID-19 and others who have not. Participants will be followed for up to four years to identify risk factors and occurrences of long COVID, medically known as post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC).

This study is part of the National Institutes of HealthResearching COVID to Enhance Recovery (RECOVER) Initiative. The NIH awarded the $470 million RECOVER parent award to more than 100 researchers at more than 30 institutions, creating a large-scale, national study population of diverse research volunteers, that is being coordinated by the RECOVER Clinical Science Core located at New York University Langone Health.

Together, these studies are expected to provide insights over the coming months into many important questions including the incidence and prevalence of long-term effects from SARS-CoV-2 infection, the range of symptoms, underlying causes, risk factors, outcomes, and potential strategies for treatment and prevention.

UK has partnered with West Virginia University and nine other institutions to form the IDeA States Consortium for Clinical Research (ISCORE) network, which ensures that the unique needs of the rural and medically underserved communities of Kentucky will be represented in the RECOVER study.

We get to help tell the story of the impact of COVID-19 on our state and better understand how to help our citizens recover from it, said Zach Porterfield, M.D., Ph.D., assistant professor in the UK Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Molecular Genetics, who is co-leading the study.

Of the 45 million COVID-19 cases in the U.S., it is estimated that 10-30%are long haulers. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, people commonly report prolonged symptoms including difficulty breathing or shortness of breath, tiredness or fatigue, cough, difficulty thinking or concentrating (brain-fog), chest or stomach pain, headache and cardiovascular complications including thrombosis.

This project draws multidisciplinary expertise from across the UK College of Medicine including the Departments of Microbiology, Immunology and Genetics; Molecular and Cellular Biochemistry; and Internal Medicine (Cardiology and Infectious Disease Divisions). The project is made possible by the support from UKs Center for Clinical and Translational Science (CCTS) and the Virus Induced Thrombosis Alliance (VITAL). The VITAL team, funded through the College of Medicines Research Alliance Initiative, investigates why viral infections cause an increased risk of cardiovascular disease. VITAL research early in the COVID-19 pandemic suggested the risk of thrombosis could persist after the SARS-CoV-2 infection clears.

This important study is a wonderful example of how teams of clinicians, basic scientists, and support staff at UK work together to address health care problems in the Commonwealth and the nation, said the studys co-principal investigatorSidney Whiteheart, Ph.D., professor in the Department of Molecular and Cellular Biochemistry.

For those interested in learning more about this study or participating, please emailKITE@uky.edu.

Original post:
UK part of national collaboration to study long COVID-19 - ABC 36 News - WTVQ

In the quest for new treatments for COVID-19, a team led by researchers at UC San Francisco has identified a new potential drug target that may block infection by SARS-CoV-2. The protein, called BRD2, regulates the ACE2 receptor, which the novel coronavirus relies on to gain entry to its hosts cells.

In their new study,published January 13 inNature Cell Biology, the researchers found that blocking production of BRD2 prevents the virus from infecting a variety of human cell types.

Weve known that BRD2 regulates expression of other genes, including those that help promote tumor growth in some cancers, saidMartin Kampmann, PhD, an associate professor of Biochemistry and Biophysics and senior author on the study. Having discovered how the protein regulates ACE2 means that pathway could potentially be manipulated to make it harder for SARS-CoV-2 to infect cells.

Unlike many of the proteins being studied as potential targets against COVID-19, BRD2 isnt produced by the virus, but by the cells of its human host. The protein and others related to it are currently being investigated in clinical trials as targets for cancer drugs.

Focusing on ACE2s Gatekeeper

The researchers discovered that BRD2 regulates ACE2 while searching for human host proteins that affect the ability of SARS-CoV-2 to attach to various cell types grown in lab cultures, including cells from lungs, heart, and nasal cavitytissues especially susceptible to infection and long-lasting damage due to COVID-19

The scientists screened 2,325 cellular proteins that they thought might affect COVID-19 infection by influencing the viruss interaction with human cells. They determined that existing drugs targeting BRD2 can thwart COVID-19 infection in susceptible cell types, as well as in hamsters.

We were amazed to see that knocking down BRD2 has almost the same effect on inhibiting ACE2 production and COVID-19 infectivity as directly knocking down ACE2 itself, Kampmann said.

The research team also includedAvi Samelson, PhD, a postdoctoral fellow in Kampmanns lab, and Ruilin Tian, PhD, a former graduate student in the lab who is now an assistant professor at the Southern University of Science and Technology in Shenzhen, China. They, along with other members of the Kampmann lab, which is usually focused on neuroscience, proposed the study out of a desire to contribute to a better understanding of COVID-19. Working with members of theCoronavirus Research Groupof UCSFs Quantitative Biosciences Institute (QBI) and collaborators recruited from around the world, the team identified several other cellular proteins that are potent enhancers and inhibitors of ACE2 production.

However, the researchers caution that this new study is only a first step, and many more studies will be required to prove the safety and efficacy of any drug directed at BRD2 or other newly identified targets.

For example, the team found that inhibiting BRD2 also inhibited the production of interferon, a key protein in the bodys inflammation response.

Its important to learn more about these potential side effects, said Samelson. We dont know whether this impact on the immune system would be harmful or beneficial for an infected patient, and under what circumstances.

CRISPR Aids the Search for Drug Targets

Kampmann is known for inventing innovative new lab techniques based on the powerful gene-editing technology, CRISPR, which was engineered from unique biochemical machinery used by bacteria to fight viruses that infect them.

Scientists first used CRISPR less than a decade ago, to direct the cutting of DNA at specific sites along the genome and now employ the technique to edit DNA in a wide range of organisms.

Kampmann and his colleagues have modified the original bacterial enzyme used in CRISPR so that rather than cutting DNA, it ferries regulatory molecules to specific sites within the genome. Once there, these regulatory molecules can activate or repress genes, overriding normal gene expression.

This ability to fine-tune the gene expression up or down is a useful approach for identifying drug targets, Kampmann said. Repressing genes and their products with CRISPR can mimic their inhibition by drugs and uncover which drug targets may be therapeutically beneficial.

Another benefit is that these CRISPR screenings are unbiased, meaning that the researchers arent looking for a particular outcome, but methodically testing each protein to see which ones have the desired effect, said Tian, who aims to continue studying COVID-19 in China.

Using this powerful approach helps us to find many potential targets that we might otherwise not see, he said. In doing so, this screening helps facilitate new strategies to fend off infection by SARS-CoV-2 and its variants.

This research was supported by NIH grant F32AG063487 and fellowships.

Authors:For additional authors, please see the study.

About UCSF:The University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) is exclusively focused on the health sciences and is dedicated to promoting health worldwide through advanced biomedical research, graduate-level education in the life sciences and health professions, and excellence in patient care.UCSF Health, which serves as UCSF's primary academic medical center,includestop-ranked specialty hospitalsand other clinical programs, and has affiliations throughout the Bay Area. Learn more athttps://www.ucsf.edu, or see ourFact Sheet.

###

Follow UCSFucsf.edu|Facebook.com/ucsf|YouTube.com/ucsf

Nature Cell Biology

Disclaimer: AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert system.

Read the original post:
Human proteins behind COVID-19 infection reve - EurekAlert

The American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics (ASPET) has named Margarita L. Dubocovich, SUNY Distinguished Professor of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences at UB, the recipient of the 2022 Julius Axelrod Award in Pharmacology.

Dubocovich is receiving the award in recognition of her seminal work in understanding the physiological role of melatonin and its receptors on neuroendocrine function and circadian rhythms, and for her extraordinary contributions to the training of future pharmacologists, according to ASPET.

The Axelrod award was established in 1991 to honor the eminent American pharmacologist who shaped the fields of neuroscience, drug metabolism and biochemistry, and who served as a mentor for numerous world-renowned pharmacologists.

It is quite fitting that Dr. Dubocovich receives this honor, as her groundbreaking research on melatonin neuropharmacology builds upon the earlier work of Julius Axelrod, says Allison Brashear, vice president for health sciences and dean of the Jacobs School. I am pleased this award also recognizes her exceptional dedication to mentoring the next generation of pharmacologists.

Dubocovich is an international scholar on the brain hormone melatonin and its receptors. Her pioneering work has revealed melatonins impact on circadian rhythms, sleep disorders, depression, reproduction, body weight and torpor, an energy-conserving state similar to short-term hibernation.

It is a distinct privilege to receive an award honoring the memory of such an eminent Nobel laureate, pharmacologist, neuroscientist and mentor, whose scientific contributions still impact the discovery of medicines to treat psychiatric disorders today, Dubocovich says.

She first met Axelrod while she was completing her doctoral degree at the University of Buenos Aires in Argentina.

He visited a few years after hewon a share of the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1970, along with eminent pharmacologists Sir Bernard Katz and Ulf von Euler, for their discoverieson the release and reuptake of catecholamine neurotransmitters.

Our team, working on the modulation of catecholamine release by presynaptic receptors at the time, gathered for a conversation with Dr. Axelrod where we all had the opportunity to discuss our experiments and ask questions, Dubocovich recalls. This meeting shaped the course of my career and influences me to this day.

Dubocovich takes great pride in how her own work has contributed to the field of melatonin receptor pharmacology and physiology initiated by Axelrod.

Dr. Axelrods forthrightness and ability to define concise hypotheses were the foundation upon which he developed novel experimental methodologies and discoveries, she says. His philosophy of science was something which has remained with me throughout my career, and one that I hope to continue to impart onto future scientists in the legacy of Dr. Axelrod.

He emphasized the paramount importance of observation of biological effects over any complex analysis, Dubocovich adds. He used to say:If the effect is strong, then you do not need sophisticated analysisto recognize the experiment was successful to move forward with the project.

Building upon the early work of Axelrod, Dubocovich is credited with discovering and revolutionizing the field of functional melatonin receptors and pioneering the pharmacology of melatonin receptors agonists and antagonists.

Her seminal paper in the journal Nature in 1983 described the presynaptic regulation of dopamine release in the retina, and began her career-defining quest to understand melatonins role in physiological function and receptor pharmacology.

Dubocovich discovered luzindole, the first melatonin receptor antagonist, successfully demonstrating its antidepressant-like activity by blocking melatonin receptor types in mouse models.

She has continued to push the frontiers of neuropharmacology with studies of melatonin receptor-mediated effects on brain neurogenesis and drug design. Most recently, she broke new ground discovering that environmental agents impact the activity of melatonin receptors.

Dubocovich, who serves as senior associate dean for diversity and inclusion in the Jacobs School, is a passionate educator who has built culturally and intellectually diverse and academically inclusive communities of trainees, and instituted inaugural programs for trainee development at all levels.

After instituting the Collaborative Learning and Integrated Mentoring in the Biosciences (CLIMB) program at Northwestern University, she launched CLIMB programs at UB that now include professional development and mentoring programs for undergraduates, masters and doctoral students, postdoctoral fellows and junior faculty.

A National Institutes of Health (NIH) R25 grant has continuously funded her initiative for maximizing student development and has increased the number of underrepresented students in biomedical and behavioral research since 2012.

A dedicated mentor for research trainees, she has trained and provided research mentoring to 48 graduate and postdoctoral scholars. Her reputation as an outstanding research adviser is reflected in the fellowships that her trainees have received from NIH, the Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association and others.

Her trainees currently hold academic positions and jobs in industry as pharmacologists, neuroscientists and toxicologists. Local and national mentoring awards have honored both her teaching and mentoring.

Dubocovich has been an ASPET member since 1983 and was named a fellow of the society in 2020.She was named a fellow of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology in 2013.

Dubocovich says that over the years she had many opportunities to meet Axelrod at scientific conferences to listen to his talks and discuss their common interest in the pharmacology of melatonin receptors.

It is truly an honor to have had met him and to do what I can to carry his legacy forward, she says.

The award will be formally presented at the ASPET Business Meeting and Awards Presentation during the ASPET Annual Meeting at Experimental Biology 2022 on April 2 in Philadelphia.

The award includes invitations to deliver the Julius Axelrod Lecture and organize the Axelrod Symposium in 2023, and to deliver a less formal presentation at the 2022 annual dinner meeting of The Catecholamine Society, an international organization consisting of scientists interested in all aspects of catecholamine research, which was co-founded by Axelrod in 1969.

Go here to read the rest:
Dubocovich to receive ASPET's Julius Axelrod Award in Pharmacology - UB Now: News and views for UB faculty and staff - University at Buffalo Reporter