Search

Figure 4, Tables 4-8, supplementary text

Supplementary Table S5A from Cancers as Wounds that Do Not Heal: Differences and Similarities between Renal Regeneration/Repair and Renal Cell Carcinoma

Supplementary Figure S4 from Cancers as Wounds that Do Not Heal: Differences and Similarities between Renal Regeneration/Repair and Renal Cell Carcinoma

Cancers have been described as wounds that do not heal, suggesting that the two share common features. By comparing microarray data from a model of renal regeneration and repair (RRR) with reported gene expression in renal cell carcinoma (RCC), we asked whether those two processes do, in fact, share molecular features and regulatory mechanisms. The majority (77%) of the genes expressed in RRR and RCC were concordantly regulated, whereas only 23% were discordant (i.e., changed in opposite directions). The orchestrated processes of regeneration, involving cell proliferation and immune response, were reflected in the concordant genes. The discordant gene signature revealed processes (e.g., morphogenesis and glycolysis) and pathways (e.g., hypoxia-inducible factor and insulin-like growth factor-I) that reflect the intrinsic pathologic nature of RCC. This is the first study that compares gene expression patterns in RCC and RRR. It does so, in particular, with relation to the hypothesis that RCC resembles the wound healing processes seen in RRR. However, careful attention to the genes that are regulated in the discordant direction provides new insights into the critical differences between renal carcinogenesis and wound healing. The observations reported here provide a conceptual framework for further efforts to understand the biology and to develop more effective diagnostic biomarkers and therapeutic strategies for renal tumors and renal ischemia. (Cancer Res 2006; 66(14): 7216-24)

The WGBU (2011) calls the sustainability transition towards a net-zero Europe the biggest challenge that mankind has ever faced. Naturally, all parts of society need to take their toll. In its statement paper ‘The Great Transformation’ (2011), the WGBU highlights the innovative and trans-formative potential of civic engagement within the sustainability trans-formation, a recurring claim made within the field of transformative re-search (WGBU 2011, 2020, Göpel 2016). Yet, there are not enough of- fers for citizens to acquire the necessary skills, Futures and Transforma-tive Literacy. While more and more research and political institutions are incorporating the theories of sustainability transformation as a frame-work, the question of who will take on the task of building transforma-tive competencies among citizens remains open (EEA, 2019).