This post-fieldwork report summarizes a series of findings and preliminary analyses from fieldwork conducted in the kingdom/village cluster of Mayong, Assam (Northeast India) from June 1, 2013 until May 30, 2014. The goal of this research project, which in part informs my (the co-PI’s) PhD dissertation, was to investigate ethnographically how an impoverished1 section of Assam’s multiethnic populace reckon, document, and symbolically manage the actions, agents, objects, and ends of their economic lives. In a word, this project is about how a people account—not only for finances, but also to each other in secretive and publicly shared modes. The overall framing of this study is that reckoning economic life is a cosmological practice in Mayong—it creates images of the whole world and its parts; and in attuning part and whole, it modifies the picture of what the whole is. The vitality of accounting is an index of the dynamisim of Mayongian society and the visions Mayongians have of their history and the universe they live in. Effectively, there is a tendency in Mayongian accounting: whatever is kept intentionally secret is often pushed into the open, toward becoming a publicly shared account.The findings and analyses included here are by no means exhuastive. This report is meant to provide a glimpse into how I am currently thinking through the research data. In what follows, I will lay out the project and provide some exemplifications that respond to the general research question: how and to what ends do Mayongians actually account?

While the population of Mayong is “banked” (most families have bank accounts at the local branch of the State Bank of India), very few villagers actually use the bank: long lines, a perpetually broken ATM, and paperwork in English are irritating inconveniences. Mobile money would seem to offer a convenient service. But, mobile phones are not “private property,” so to speak; they are shared and passed around freely. Data is shared and it is common for someone to pick up another’s mobile phone without asking and look through the pictures, music files, or whatever data can be found therein. Hence, there is a potential risk of revealing too much if one can access one’s secret accounts in another’s mobile phone. Furthermore, none of my friends in Mayong were interested in the technology as a means of payment. They were more interested in how they could share money with friends and family—how to make gifts and how to recharge a negative prepaid mobile balance from someone else’s positive balance. In so many words, when I showed them my mobile money account, they were interested in how it could be used as a shared account, the features of which I will turn to in my next blog post.

The “shared account” is my translation of the kind of “public accounting” (raijor hisap) that goeson in Mayong. These accounts are publicly debated in the first instance: ledgers are filled withnames, dates, formal resolutions, descriptions of events, and eulogistic or baptismal forms ofnarration. They also very often coincide with and adopt the form of liturgical rites. Indeed, theycreate a kind of detailed historical record (almost a chronicle) of the history of kinship, social life,and ritual eventology in hamlets, villages, and in the supralocal kingdom.

The analytical distinction I am making between “shared” and “secret” accounts (more onthese to follow in my forthcoming blog posts) is an ethnographically driven one.Mayongians make distinctions between particular kinds of accounts on a token-by-tokenbasis, and sometimes as a typological distinction between accounts of discretion andaccounts of public audit.In my next blog post I will turn to the qualities and implicationsof this distinctionbetween secret and shared accounts, a distinction that can also benullifiedwhen we consider these accounts as modes of historiography.

Background

It is unclear whether the transcriptional subtypes of high grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC) apply to high grade clear cell (HGCCOC) or high grade endometrioid ovarian cancer (HGEOC). We aim to delineate transcriptional profiles of HGCCOCs and HGEOCs.

Methods

We used Agilent microarrays to determine gene expression profiles of 276 well annotated ovarian cancers (OCs) including 37 HGCCOCs and 66 HGEOCs. We excluded low grade OCs as these are known to be distinct molecular entities. We applied the prespecified TCGA and CLOVAR gene signatures using consensus non-negative matrix factorization (NMF).

Results

We confirm the presence of four TCGA transcriptional subtypes and their significant prognostic relevance (p<0.001) across all three histological subtypes (HGSOC, HGCCOC and HGEOCs). However, we also demonstrate that 22/37 (59%) HGCCOCs and 30/67 (45%) HGEOCs form 2 additional separate clusters with distinct gene signatures. Importantly, of the HGCCOC and HGEOCs that clustered separately 62% and 65% were early stage (FIGO I/II), respectively. These finding were confirmed using the reduced CLOVAR gene set for classification where most early stage HGCCOCs and HGEOCs formed a distinct cluster of their own. When restricting the analysis to the four TCGA signatures (ssGSEA or NMF with CLOVAR genes) most early stage HGCCOCs and HGEOC were assigned to the differentiated subtype.

Conclusions

Using transcriptional profiling the current study suggests that HGCCOCs and HGEOCs of advanced stage group together with HGSOCs. However, HGCCOCs and HGEOCs of early disease stages may have distinct transcriptional signatures similar to those seen in their low grade counterparts.

A recent ASCO workforce study projects a significant shortage of oncologists in the U.S. by 2020, especially in rural/underserved (R/US) areas. The current study aim was to determine the patterns of distribution of U.S. gynecologic oncologists (GO) and to identify provider-based attitudes and barriers that may prevent GOs from practicing in R/US regions. U.S. GOs (n = 743) were electronically solicited to participate in an on-line survey regarding geographic distribution and participation in outreach care. A total of 320 GOs (43%) responded; median age range was 35-45 years and 57% were male. Most practiced in an urban setting (72%) at a university hospital (43%). Only 13% of GOs practiced in an area with a population < 50,000. A desire to remain in academics and exposure to senior-level mentorship were the factors most influencing initial practice location. Approximately 50% believed geographic disparities exist in GO workforce distribution that pose access barriers to care; however, 39% "strongly agreed" that cancer patients who live in R/US regions should travel to urban cancer centers to receive care within a center of excellence model. GOs who practice within 50 miles of only 0-5 other GOs were more likely to provide R/US care compared to those practicing within 50 miles of ≥ 10 GOs (p < 0.0001). Most (39%) believed the major barriers to providing cancer care in R/US areas were volume and systems-based. Most also believed the best solution was a hybrid approach, with coordination of local and centralized cancer care services. Among GOs, a self-reported rural-urban disparity exists in the density of gynecologic oncologists. These study findings may help address barriers to providing cancer care in R/US practice environments.

Molecular classification of high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC) using transcriptional profiling has proven to be complex and difficult to validate across studies. We determined gene expression profiles of 174 well-annotated HGSOCs and demonstrate prognostic significance of the prespecified TCGA Network gene signatures. Furthermore, we confirm the presence of four HGSOC transcriptional subtypes using a de novo classification. Survival differed statistically significantly between de novo subtypes (log rank, P = .006) and was the best for the immunoreactive-like subtype, but statistically significantly worse for the proliferative- or mesenchymal-like subtypes (adjusted hazard ratio = 1.89, 95% confidence interval = 1.18 to 3.02, P = .008, and adjusted hazard ratio = 2.45, 95% confidence interval = 1.43 to 4.18, P = .001, respectively). More prognostic information was provided by the de novo than the TCGA classification (Likelihood Ratio tests, P = .003 and P = .04, respectively). All statistical tests were two-sided. These findings were replicated in an external data set of 185 HGSOCs and confirm the presence of four prognostically relevant molecular subtypes that have the potential to guide therapy decisions.

BACKGROUNDSurgical site infections (SSIs) following colorectal surgery (CRS) are among the most common healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). Reduction in colorectal SSI rates is an important goal for surgical quality improvement.OBJECTIVETo examine rates of SSI in patients with and without cancer and to identify potential predictors of SSI risk following CRSDESIGNAmerican College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) data files for 2011-2013 from a sample of 12 National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) member institutions were combined. Pooled SSI rates for colorectal procedures were calculated and risk was evaluated. The independent importance of potential risk factors was assessed using logistic regression.SETTINGMulticenter studyPARTICIPANTSOf 22 invited NCCN centers, 11 participated (50%). Colorectal procedures were selected by principal procedure current procedural technology (CPT) code. Cancer was defined by International Classification of Disease, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes.MAIN OUTCOMEThe primary outcome of interest was 30-day SSI rate.RESULTSA total of 652 SSIs (11.06%) were reported among 5,893 CRSs. Risk of SSI was similar for patients with and without cancer. Among CRS patients with underlying cancer, disseminated cancer (SSI rate, 17.5%; odds ratio [OR], 1.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.23-2.26; P=.001), ASA score ≥3 (OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.09-1.83; P=.001), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD; OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.06-2.53; P=.02), and longer duration of procedure were associated with development of SSI.CONCLUSIONSPatients with disseminated cancer are at a higher risk for developing SSI. ASA score >3, COPD, and longer duration of surgery predict SSI risk. Disseminated cancer should be further evaluated by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in generating risk-adjusted outcomes.Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2018;39:555-562.

Purpose: Recent progress in understanding the molecular biology of epithelial ovarian cancer has not yet translated into individualized treatment for these women or improvements in their disease outcome. Gene expression has been utilized to identify distinct molecular subtypes, but there have been no reports investigating whether or not molecular subtyping is predictive of response to bevacizumab in ovarian cancer.Experimental Design: DASL gene expression arrays were performed on FFPE tissue from patients enrolled on the ICON7 trial. Patients were stratified into four TCGA molecular subtypes. Associations between molecular subtype and the efficacy of randomly assigned therapy with bevacizumab were assessed.Results: Molecular subtypes were assigned as follows: 122 immunoreactive (34%), 96 proliferative (27%), 73 differentiated (20%), and 68 mesenchymal (19%). In univariate analysis patients with tumors of proliferative subtype obtained the greatest benefit from bevacizumab with a median PFS improvement of 10.1 months [HR, 0.55 (95% CI, 0.34-0.90), P = 0.016]. For the mesenchymal subtype, bevacizumab conferred a nonsignificant improvement in PFS of 8.2 months [HR 0.78 (95% CI, 0.44-1.40), P = 0.41]. Bevacizumab conferred modest improvements in PFS for patients with immunoreactive subtype (3.8 months; P = 0.08) or differentiated subtype (3.7 months; P = 0.61). Multivariate analysis demonstrated significant PFS improvement in proliferative subtype patients only [HR, 0.45 (95% CI, 0.27-0.74), P = 0.0015].Conclusions: Ovarian carcinoma molecular subtypes with the poorest survival (proliferative and mesenchymal) derive a comparably greater benefit from treatment that includes bevacizumab. Validation of our findings in an independent cohort could enable the use of bevacizumab for those patients most likely to benefit, thereby reducing side effects and healthcare cost. Clin Cancer Res; 23(14); 3794-801. ©2017 AACR.