Introduction: Breast cancer is one of the most common malignancy in women and is the leading cause of cancer related death worldwide. Reactive oxygen species (ROS) play an important role in the development of tumours. Several mechanisms leading to oxidative stress have been proposed in cancer patients. In this study we aimed to measure and compare the levels of zinc, superoxide dismutase, catalase, vitamin C, vitamin E, and malondialdehyde in breast cancer patients and age matched healthy controls. Methods: In this comparative cross sectional study, 30 confirmed breast cancer cases and 30 age and sex matched controls were enrolled after taking their consent. Blood sample was collected in EDTA vial, and the parameters of oxidative stress were evaluated by spectrophotometric and atomic absorption spectrophotometric methods. Results: Zinc and MDA level were significantly higher (p<0.001) in cases (106.4 µg/dl and 7.12 nmol/ml) compared to controls (89.8µg/ dl and 3.99nmol/ml). In contrast, there were lower catalase, vitamin C and E levels in cases (28.7±14.56, 0.92±0.35 and 0.68±0.13 mg/dl) compared to controls (37.1±14.7,1.62±0.59 and 1.02±0.22 mg/dl) and were statistically significant (p<0.05 and p<0.001). Whereas, superoxide dismutase was lower in cases compared to controls, but was not statistically significant. Conclusion: Zinc was found to be higher in our study as it is a pivotal element in all rapidly growing tissues. Enhanced lipid peroxidation observed in the circulation of breast cancer patients in our study can be attributed to over production of ROS and deficiency of antioxidant defences. Oxidative stress in cancer cells may trigger excessive consumption of antioxidants as a compensatory mechanism which lead to its lower concentration.
The status and liability of non-governmental entities for commercial use of outer space activities on behalf of space launching states are not very clear under the existing space law regimes. Non-governmental entities are those who carry private space activities such as commercial launching, supplying different equipment or parts to space agencies and manufacturing spacecraft and satellite. The possible litigation relating to the commercial activities are mainly the financial consequence of damage caused and also the technical complications that private entities face in case of supply of defaulted parts to the space agencies. According to Article VI of the Outer Space Treaty 1967 and Articles II and III of Liability Convention 1972, launching country is liable for any activities in outer space. Even in the case of non-governmental activities, the launching state is liable. Therefore, in the event of any commercial activity from any sovereign states, the state is liable for any accidents and consequential damages. This article focusses on specific issues such as liability for commercial outer space activities of nongovernmental entities in the existing international space law regimes. It explores the applicable principle of space law and international law in outer space activities. The work also focusses on the impact on space liability regime as well as on the legal efficiency of the links between private entities and state liability. This exercise is important in the background of the increasing number of private spacecrafts scheduled for launching in the future.
It is generally viewed that Intellectual property protection and competition law are odds with each other. Is there really any tussle between intellectual property protection and competition law? Intellectual property law creates and protects monopoly power and the other seeks to exclude it. IP exclusion provisions are included in the Indian Competition Act, 2002 in Section 3(5). This is to provide enforcement to intellectual property rights. But protection of intellectual property rights are not per se violates any competition provisions. The objective of competition law is to prohibit anti-competitive practices and the objective of both the stream is wealth maximization in any economy. Intellectual property protection is necessary to foster innovation and choices of products in the market. It infuses efficiency in the market and increases consumer welfare. India is in the nascent state of its administration of competition laws. There are sizable number of cases came before the Indian competition authorities (CCI) and Indian courts. Cases against Microsoft India and abuse of dominant case against Ericsson filed by an Indian company named Micromax is only the beginning of the interface cases on intellectual property and competition law. There is no sufficient case laws and jurisprudence is available in India in guiding the Indian authorities and courts on the interface between intellectual property and competition. It is necessary to make an analysis of the jurisprudence in the US and EU. First part of this paper deals with the US Antitrust Act, 1890 and analysis of a number of cases dealt by the US courts. The EU Regulations and cases are clearer on issues of intellectual property and competition law. Indian jurisprudence is not clear so far and few cases are dealt by the CCI and Indian courts. The study concludes that Indian authorities should learn from other jurisdictions and the jurisprudence will act as guideline for Indian authorities.
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.