In this task, you are given a passage which has a question and the context. You have to generate an answer to the question based on the information present in the context.

[Q]: Context: The proteasome is the proteolytically active core of the ubiquitin-proteasome system, which regulates vital processes and which can cause various diseases when it malfunctions. Therefore, the proteasome has become an attractive target for pharmaceutical interventions. Inhibition of the cardiac proteasome by specific proteasome inhibitors has been shown to attenuate cardiac hypertrophy and ischaemia reperfusion injury of the heart. We have resolved the cardiac proteasome into its subtypes and have addressed the key question of how proteasome inhibitors affect single cardiac proteasomal subtypes.', 'The 20S proteasome from rat heart was dissected into three different subpopulations (groups I-III), each comprising 4-7 different subtypes. The major group (group II) comprises standard proteasome subtypes; the two minor subpopulations (groups I and III) contain intermediate proteasome subtypes. All subtypes exhibit chymotrypsin-, trypsin-, and caspase-like activity but to different degrees. We have tested the effect of two common proteasome inhibitors on the chymotrypsin-like activity of all subtypes: 20-30 nmol/L MG132 caused 50% inhibition of all subtypes from groups I and II, whereas 100 nmol/L was necessary to affect group III subtypes to the same extent. However, another inhibitor, bortezomib (VELCADE), already used clinically, inhibited 50% of the activity of group III proteasome subtypes even below 20 nmol/L, a concentration showing almost no effect on group I and II proteasome subtypes. The caspase-like activity of group II proteasome subtypes was not affected by MG132 and was inhibited by bortezomib only at concentrations above 100 nmol/L.\Question: Do multiple cardiac proteasome subtypes differ in their susceptibility to proteasome inhibitors?
[A]: These data show that different inhibitors have differential inhibitory effects on the various cardiac proteasome subtypes. Different cardiac subtypes are inhibited by the same dose of proteasome inhibitor to a different extent.


[Q]: Context: To examine whether trichostatin A (TSA), a histone deacetylase inhibitor (HDACI), can induce up-regulation of peroxisome proliferator-activating receptor gamma (PPAR gamma) and to see whether LG100268, a retinoid X receptor (RXR) ligand, can inhibit proliferation of endometriotic cells alone or in synergy with ciglitazone, a PPAR gamma agonist.', 'One endometrial stromal cell line and two endometriotic cell lines used as a model system: Western blot analysis to determine whether TSA can up-regulate PPAR gamma expression, and MTT (3-[4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl]-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide) proliferation assay to see whether ciglitazone and LG100268 have any antiproliferative effects individually or jointly.', 'Academic.', 'None.', 'Culture of immortalized endometrial and endometriotic cell lines with TSA, or ciglitazone or LG100268.', 'PPAR gamma protein expression levels in cells treated with or without TSA, and number of viable cells treated with or without ciglitazone, LG100268, or both.', 'The TSA treatment resulted in up-regulation of PPAR gamma expression in all cell lines in a dose-dependent fashion. Both ciglitazone and LG100268 inhibited proliferation in a dose-dependent manner, and the antiproliferative effects appeared to be synergistic. In addition, endometriotic cells were more sensitive than endometrial stromal cells to LG100268 treatment.\Question: Do peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma and retinoid X receptor agonists synergistically suppress proliferation of immortalized endometrial stromal cells?
[A]: The up-regulation of PPAR gamma induced by TSA indicates that the action of HDACIs also includes the PPAR gamma signaling pathway, suggesting that the activation of PPAR gamma is a desirable way to contain endometriosis phenotypes. The higher sensitivity of endometriotic cells than their endometrial counterpart to LG100268 treatment suggests that the sensitivity differential could be exploited effectively to eradicate unwanted ectopic endometrial tissues while minimizing the collateral damage to the normal endometrial tissues.


[Q]: Context: For many decades, the debate on children's competence to give informed consent in medical settings concentrated on ethical and legal aspects, with little empirical underpinnings. Recently, data from empirical research became available to advance the discussion. It was shown that children's competence to consent to clinical research could be accurately assessed by the modified MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Clinical Research. Age limits for children to be deemed competent to decide on research participation have been studied: generally children of 11.2 years and above were decision-making competent, while children of 9.6 years and younger were not. Age was pointed out to be the key determining factor in children's competence. In this article we reflect on policy implications of these findings, considering legal, ethical, developmental and clinical perspectives.\Question: Is informed consent instead of assent appropriate in children from the age of twelve : Policy implications of new findings on children 's competence to consent to clinical research?
[A]:
Although assessment of children's competence has a normative character, ethics, law and clinical practice can benefit from research data. The findings may help to do justice to the capacities children possess and challenges they may face when deciding about treatment and research options. We discuss advantages and drawbacks of standardized competence assessment in children on a case-by-case basis compared to application of a fixed age limit, and conclude that a selective implementation of case-by-case competence assessment in specific populations is preferable. We recommend the implementation of age limits based on empirical evidence. Furthermore, we elaborate on a suitable model for informed consent involving children and parents that would do justice to developmental aspects of children and the specific characteristics of the parent-child dyad. Previous research outcomes showed that children's medical decision-making capacities could be operationalized into a standardized assessment instrument. Recommendations for policies include a dual consent procedure, including both child as well as parents, for children from the age of 12 until they reach majority. For children between 10 and 12 years of age, and in case of children older than 12 years in special research populations of mentally compromised patients, we suggest a case-by-case assessment of children's competence to consent. Since such a dual consent procedure is fundamentally different from a procedure of parental permission and child assent, and would imply a considerable shift regarding some current legislations, practical implications are elaborated.