instruction:
Given a passage, construct a question on the basis of the information present in the passage. Construct the question in such a way that (i) it is unambiguous, (ii) it is answerable from the passage, (iii) its answer is unique (iv) it answer uses text phrases from the passage. Avoid creating questions that (i) can't be answered correctly without actually understanding the passage and (ii) uses the same words or phrases given in the passage.
question:
Reduction-oxidation (redox) signaling, the translation of an oxidative intracellular environment into a cellular response, is mediated by the reversible oxidation of specific cysteine thiols. The latter can result in disulfide formation between protein hetero- or homodimers that alter protein function until the local cellular redox environment has returned to the basal state. We have previously shown that this mechanism promotes the nuclear localization and activity of the Forkhead Box O4 (FOXO4) transcription factor.', 'In this study, we sought to investigate whether redox signaling differentially controls the human FOXO3 and FOXO4 paralogs.', 'We present evidence that FOXO3 and FOXO4 have acquired paralog-specific cysteines throughout vertebrate evolution. Using a proteome-wide screen, we identified previously unknown redox-dependent FOXO3 interaction partners. The nuclear import receptors Importin-7 (IPO7) and Importin-8 (IPO8) form a disulfide-dependent heterodimer with FOXO3, which is required for its reactive oxygen species-induced nuclear translocation. FOXO4 does not interact with IPO7 or IPO8.
answer:
Does evolutionary acquisition of cysteines determine FOXO paralog-specific redox signaling?

question:
Genetic variability in hepatic uptake was recently shown to influence the disposition and cholesterol-lowering effects of statins. Ezetimibe, an inhibitor of the intestinal cholesterol uptake protein Niemann-Pick C 1 like 1, is another drug for which genetic polymorphisms of hepatic organic anion transporting polypeptides (OATPs) are expected to be of clinical relevance because ezetimibe undergoes intensive enterohepatic circulation for which hepatic uptake transporters may be rate-limiting determinants.', 'Using OATP1B3-, OATP2B1-, and OATP1B1-transfected HEK cells, including the OATP1B1 variants OATP1B1*1b and OATP1B1*5, we measured the uptake of ezetimibe and its glucuronide and we analyzed the competition with the common OATP-substrate bromosulfophthalein. Disposition and sterol-lowering effects of 20-mg ezetimibe were measured in 35 healthy participants genotyped for OATP1B1, ABCB1, ABCC2, and UGT1A1.', 'Ezetimibe glucuronide inhibited bromosulfophthalein uptake in all OATP-transfected cells (50% inhibitory concentration (IC50): 0.14-0.26 mumol/l) whereas ezetimibe was 30-100 times less potent. Only the glucuronide was accumulated significantly in cells expressing OATP1B1 and OATP2B1. Its uptake in cells expressing OATP1B1*1b and *5 was reduced. In-vivo studies showed there was a gene-dose-dependent decrease in the area under the curve of ezetimibe in participants with the OATP1B1*1b protein (*1a/*1a, N=12, 112+/-66 ngxh/ml vs. *1a/*1b, N=8, 88+/-39 ngxh/ml vs. *1b/*1b, N=5, 55+/-18 ngxh/ml; Jonkheere-Terpstra, P=0.041) and a tendency for increased glucuronide exposure (704+/-296 vs. 878+/-369 vs. 1059+/-363 ngxh/ml; P=0.092). Fecal ezetimibe excretion was significantly decreased whereas renal glucuronide excretion was increased in carriers of *1b/*1b. Fecal excretion was also diminished in carriers of OATP1B1*5 and *15. The sterol-lowering effect of ezetimibe was not influenced by OATP1B1 polymorphisms.
answer:
Is disposition of ezetimibe influenced by polymorphisms of the hepatic uptake carrier OATP1B1?

question:
We investigated whether aprepitant, a neurokinin-1 antagonist, could decrease chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) following cisplatin, when a conventional anti-emetic regimen had failed.', 'This was a prospective study (April 2011-April 2012) of patients with lung cancer, treated with cisplatin at the Beijing Cancer Hospital, and initially receiving granisetron, dexamethasone, and metoclopramide as anti-emetics. If patients experienced vomiting of grade 2 and required rescue anti-emetic medications during the first cycle, oral aprepitant was added in subsequent cycles (day 1: 125 mg; days 2-3: 80 mg once daily). Acute (day 1) and delayed (days 2-5) nausea and vomiting, use of rescue medications, and occurrence of adverse reactions were monitored after the start of chemotherapy.', 'Twenty-five of 132 patients (18.9 %) were administered aprepitant for secondary prophylaxis against emesis during the second cycle of chemotherapy. The incidences of acute and delayed nausea were 52 and 100 % in the first cycle, but 8 and 72 % in the second cycle. The incidences of acute and delayed vomiting were 20 and 100 % in the first cycle, but 0 and 36 % in the second cycle. No patients required rescue medications or intravenous rehydration during the second cycle. Aprepitant was not associated with additional adverse events.
answer:
Does addition of aprepitant improve protection against cisplatin-induced emesis when a conventional anti-emetic regimen fails?