instruction:
Given a passage with a context and an answer, 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:
Context: Is a perioperative metastatic screening programme indicated in patients presenting with primary operable breast cancer and no signs of distant metastases?', 'The impact of staging results (chest X-ray, bone scanning, liver ultrasound) for prognosis, treatment, quality of life and costs was retrospectively analysed in 1 076 patients with an operable breast cancer and no clinical signs of metastases.', 'Staging examinations revealed 30 (2.8 %) distant metastases, 130 (12.1 %) suspect findings and excluded metastases in 916 (85.1 %) patients. Further diagnostic procedures confirmed distant metastases in 7 (5.4 %) and excluded them in 123 (94.6 %) out of 130 patients with suspect findings. Distant metastases were detected more frequently with increasing tumor size (pT < or = 2.0 cm: 1.6 %, pT 2.1-5.0 cm: 3.0 %, respectively pT > 5.0 cm: 15.1 %; p < 0.001) and increasing number of involved axillary lymph nodes (pN0: 1.4 %, pN1-3 +: 1.8 %, pN4-9 +: 4.0 %, pN > 10 +: 12.5 %; p < 0.001). Due to false positive findings 123 (11.4 %) patients had to live for a significant period of time with the psychological distress of suspected metastatic disease. The abandonment of a perioperative screening in 1 076 patients saves costs of at least euro 259,366.68.
Answer: In breast cancer patients without clinical signs of tumor spread perioperative screening for metastases is not warranted because of low frequency of metastases, false positive findings, missing therapeutic consequences and high costs.
answer:
Is [ A perioperative screening for metastatic disease indicated in patients with primary breast cancer and no clinical signs of tumor spread ]?

question:
Context: Bacteria often form multicellular, organized communities known as biofilms, which protect cells from a variety of environmental stresses. During biofilm formation, bacteria secrete a species-specific matrix; in Bacillus subtilis biofilms, the matrix consists of protein polymers and exopolysaccharide. Many domesticated strains of B. subtilis have a reduced ability to form biofilms, and we conducted a two-month evolution experiment to test whether laboratory culturing provides selective pressure against biofilm formation in B. subtilis.', 'Bacteria grown in two-month-long batch culture rapidly diversified their biofilm-forming characteristics, exhibiting highly diverse colony morphologies on LB plates in the initial ten days of culture. Generally, this diversity decreased over time; however, multiple types of colony morphology remained in our final two-month-old populations, both under shaking and static conditions. Notably, while our final populations featured cells that produce less biofilm matrix than did the ancestor, cells overproducing biofilm matrix were present as well. We took a candidate-gene approach to identify mutations in the strains that overproduced matrix and found point mutations in the biofilm-regulatory gene sinR. Introducing these mutations into the ancestral strain phenocopied or partially phenocopied the evolved biofilm phenotypes.
Answer: Our data suggest that standard laboratory culturing conditions do not rapidly select against biofilm formation. Although biofilm matrix production is often reduced in domesticated bacterial strains, we found that matrix production may still have a fitness benefit in the laboratory. We suggest that adaptive specialization of biofilm-forming species can occur through mutations that modulate biofilm formation as in B. subtilis.
answer:
Is sinR a mutational target for fine-tuning biofilm formation in laboratory-evolved strains of Bacillus subtilis?

question:
Context: Chronic inflammatory conditions, such as granulomas, are associated with angiogenesis. Mast cells represent the main cell type orchestrating angiogenesis, through the release of their granule content. Therefore, compounds able to modulate mast cell behaviour may be considered as a new pharmacological approach to treat angiogenesis-dependent events. Here, we tested the effect of selective cannabinoid (CB) receptor agonists in a model of angiogenesis-dependent granuloma formation induced by lambda-carrageenin in rats.', 'Granulomas were induced by lambda-carrageenin-soaked sponges implanted subcutaneously on the back of male Wistar rats. After 96 h, implants were removed and granuloma formation was measured (wet weight); angiogenesis was evaluated by histological analysis and by the measurement of haemoglobin content. Mast cells in the granulomas were evaluated histologically and by RT-PCR and immunoblotting analysis for mast cell-derived proteins (rat mast cell protease-5 (rMCP-5) and nerve growth factor). Selective CB1 and CB2 receptor agonists(,) ACEA and JWH-015 (0.001-0.1 mg mL(-1)), were given locally only once, at the time of implantation.', 'The CB1 and CB2 receptor agonists decreased the weight and vascularization of granulomas after 96 h. This treatment also reduced mast cell number and activation in granulomatous tissue. Specifically, these compounds prevented the transcription and expression of rMCP-5, a protein involved in sprouting and advance of new blood vessels.
Answer: Modulation of mast cell function by cannabinoids reduced granuloma formation and associated angiogenesis. Therefore cannabinoid-related drugs may be useful in the management of granulomatous diseases accompanied by angiogenesis.
answer:
Do cannabinoids reduce granuloma-associated angiogenesis in rats by controlling transcription and expression of mast cell protease-5?