In cells lacking telomerase, telomeres shorten progressively during each cell division due to incomplete end-replication. When the telomeres become very short, cells enter a state that blocks cell division, termed senescence. A subset of these cells can overcome senescence and maintain their telomeres using telomerase-independent mechanisms. In Saccharomyces cerevisiae, these cells are called ‘survivors’ and are dependent on Rad52-dependent homologous recombination and Pol32-dependent break-induced replication. There are two main types of survivors: type I and type II. The type I survivors require Rad51 and maintain telomeres by amplification of subtelomeric elements, while the type II survivors are Rad51-independent, but require the MRX complex and Sgs1 to amplify the C1–3A/TG1–3 telomeric sequences. Rad52, Pol32, Rad51, and Sgs1 are also important to prevent accelerated senescence, indicating that recombination processes are important at telomeres even before the formation of survivors. The Shu complex, which consists of Shu1, Shu2, Psy3, and Csm2, promotes Rad51-dependent homologous recombination and has been suggested to be important for break-induced replication. It also promotes the formation of recombination intermediates that are processed by the Sgs1-Top3-Rmi1 complex, as mutations in the SHU genes can suppress various sgs1, top3, and rmi1 mutant phenotypes. Given the importance of recombination processes during senescence and survivor formation, and the involvement of the Shu complex in many of the same processes during DNA repair, we hypothesized that the Shu complex may also have functions at telomeres. Surprisingly, we find that this is not the case: the Shu complex does not affect the rate of senescence, does not influence survivor formation, and deletion of SHU1 does not suppress the rapid senescence and type II survivor formation defect of a telomerase-negative sgs1 mutant. Altogether, our data suggest that the Shu complex is not important for recombination processes at telomeres.
The wide application of patient engagement and its associated benefits has increased across government, academic and pharmaceutical research. However, neither an identified standard practice for the process of engagement, nor utilization of common metrics to assess associated outcomes, exists. Parkinson's Foundation developed a patient engagement framework and metrics to assess engagement within the academic research and drug development sectors. This approach was developed over the course of several years through assessing the literature, acquiring feedback from researchers and people with Parkinson's disease and adapting practices to be relevant and generalizable across patient engagement projects. This framework includes the: 1) creation of a scope of work, 2) establishment of guiding principles, 3) selection and training of participants, 4) co‐determination of project metrics, 5) execution of the project and 6) dissemination of project findings. Parkinson's Foundation has also worked with academic, government and pharmaceutical stakeholders to identify metrics that assess both the quality of patient engagement and outcomes associated with patient engagement on projects. By improving patient engagement project methodologies and metrics, global clinical trials can have access to evidence‐based patient engagement practices to more efficiently capture the needs of, and potentially benefit, the patient community.
| 975 LETTER TO THE EDITOR patient engagement projects. The patient advocates involved successfully changed study protocol, resulting in a complete restart of the study months after it originally launched. This project was so successful that we had many other patient engagement partnerships with the same company, including one that I engaged in. I took this example, along with others, and shared it with a couple hundred people in another division of the company to educate them about how best to collaborate with people in their disease communities. I have worked with multiple patient-focused organizations and with dozens of advocates of all backgrounds and perspectives. Most of these advocates and organizations welcome collegial fact-based dialogue as we try to solve the same problems. We do too. We encourage all readers to read our paper. Ask questions. Give feedback. And we encourage you to consider: just as people living with a condition are first and foremost people (never 'just patients'), with all the richness of life experiences and knowledge that we all have, similarly, 'academics' and 'charity officers' are more than just people doing a job. Many of them are driven to this field by firsthand experience with health conditions and motivated to stay in these fields and advocate alongside the community out of deep emotional connections. This work is important to all of us. We all have too much on the line.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.