Epigenetic inactivation of IRX4 is responsible for acceleration of cell growth in human pancreatic cancer

Epigenetic gene silencing by aberrant DNA methylation is one of the important mechanisms leading to loss of key cellular pathways in tumorigenesis. Methyl-CpG-targeted transcriptional activation (MeTA) reactivates hypermethylation-mediated silenced genes in a different way from DNA-demethylating agents. Microarray coupled with MeTA (MeTA-array) identified seven commonly hypermethylation-mediated silenced genes in 12 pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) cell lines. Among these, we focused on IRX4 (Iroquois homeobox 4) because IRX4 is located at chromosome 5p15.33 where PDAC susceptibility loci have been identified through genome-wide association study. IRX4 was greatly downregulated in all of the analyzed 12 PDAC cell lines by promoter hypermethylation. In addition, the IRX4 promoter region was found to be frequently and specifically hypermethylated in primary resected PDACs (18/28: 64%). Reexpression of IRX4 inhibited colony formation and proliferation in two PDAC cell lines, PK-1 and PK-9. In contrast, knockdown of IRX4 accelerated cell proliferation in an IRX4-expressing normal pancreatic ductal epithelial cell line, HPDE-1. Because IRX4 is a sequence-specific transcription factor, downstream molecules of IRX4 were pursued by microarray analyses utilizing tetracycline-mediated IRX4 inducible PK-1 and PK-9 cells; CRYAB, CD69, and IL32 were identified as IRX4 downstream candidate genes. Forced expression of these genes suppressed colony formation abilities for both PK-1 and PK-9. These results suggest that DNA methylation-mediated silencing of IRX4 contributes to pancreatic tumorigenesis through aberrant transcriptional regulation of several cancer-related genes.

Promoting transparency, accountability, and access through a multi-stakeholder initiative: lessons from the medicines transparency alliance

Background

Barriers to expanding access to medicines include weak pharmaceutical sector governance, lack of transparency and accountability, inadequate attention to social services on the political agenda, and financing challenges. Multi-stakeholder initiatives such as the Medicines Transparency Alliance (MeTA) may help overcome these barriers. Between 2008 and 2015, MeTA engaged stakeholders in the pharmaceutical sectors of seven countries (Ghana, Jordan, Kyrgyzstan, Peru, Philippines, Uganda, and Zambia) to promote access goals through greater transparency.

Methods

We reviewed archival data to document MeTA activities and results related to transparency and accountability in the seven countries where it was implemented. We identified common themes and content areas, noting specific activities used to make information transparent and accessible, how data were used to inform discussions, and the purpose and timing of meetings and advocacy activities to help set priorities and influence governance decisions. The cross-case analysis looked for pathways which might link the MeTA strategies to results such as better policies or program improvements.

Results

Countries used evidence gathering, open meetings, and proactive information dissemination to increase transparency. MeTA fostered policy dialogue to bring together the many government, civil society and private company stakeholders concerned with access issues, and provided them with information to understand barriers to access at policy, organizational, and community levels. We found strong evidence that transparency was enhanced. Some evidence suggests that MeTA efforts contributed to new policies and civil society capacity strengthening although the impact on government accountability is not clear.

Conclusion

MeTA appears to have achieved its goal of creating a multi-stakeholder shared policy space in which government, civil society, and private sector players can come together and have a voice in the national pharmaceutical policy making process. Assuming that transparency is in place to leverage accountability, the success of MeTA’s efforts to promote accountability by the government as well as other stakeholders in the pharmaceutical sector will depend on how well efforts are sustained over time.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s40545-017-0106-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Civil society engagement in multi-stakeholder dialogue: a qualitative study exploring the opinions and perceptions of MeTA members

BACKGROUND

The Medicines Transparency Alliance (MeTA) is an initiative that brings together all stakeholders in the medicines market to create a multi-stakeholder dialogue and improve access, availability and affordability of medicines. Key to this multi-stakeholder dialogue is the participation of Civil Society Organisations. A recent MeTA annual review, identified uneven engagement of civil society organisations in the multi-stakeholder process. This study was designed to explore the engagement of Civil Society Organisations in the MeTA multi-stakeholder process and the factors influencing their participation.

METHODS

Participants were drawn from a convenience sample of key MeTA informants attending a MeTA global meeting in Geneva in 2014. Study participants consisted of members of MeTA, which included representatives from government, the private sector and civil society. In-depth semi-structured face-to-face interviews were conducted to identify perceptions around the barriers to civil society engagement in the multi-stakeholder process. Interviews were guided by a conceptual framework exploring the three main themes of the political environment, relative stakeholder strength and agenda setting/gatekeepers. Interviews were structured to enable additional themes to emerge and be explored. Fifteen interviews were conducted. The interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using a general inductive approach. All interviewees provided written informed consent.

RESULTS

Findings were captured within three main overarching themes: the political environment, relative stakeholder strength and agenda setting/gatekeepers, with the opportunity for additional themes to emerge in the interviewing process. The study conformed these three themes were important in the engagement process. Participants reported that civil society engagement is particularly limited by those who set the agenda. It was largely seen that the political environment was the significant factor that enabled or disabled all others. The findings counter the argument that CSO barriers to engagement are predominantly due to capacity issues.

CONCLUSIONS

This study enriches previous findings by providing insights into civil society participation in multi-stakeholder dialogue, specifically the MeTA initiative. The development of more rigorous and systematic accountability mechanisms in order to maintain the legitimacy of decision-making processes and establish more equal power relations would significantly benefit the engagement of civil society organisations. The results inform practical recommendations for MeTA and future multi-stakeholder programmes tasked with improving policy on the access, availability and affordability of medicines.