Griffith Research Online

N-Myc downstream regulated gene-1 (NDRG1) and the other three members of this family (NDRG2, 3, and 4) play various functional roles in the cellular stress response, differentiation, migration, and development. These proteins are involved in regulating key signaling proteins and pathways that are often dysregulated in cancer, such as EGFR, PI3K/AKT, c-Met, and the Wnt pathway. NDRG1 is the primary, well-examined member of the NDRG family, and is generally characterized as a metastasis suppressor that inhibits the first step in metastasis, the epithelial-mesenchymal transition. While NDRG1 is well-studied, emerging evidence suggests NDRG2, NDRG3, and NDRG4 also play significant roles in modulating oncogenic signaling and cellular homeostasis. NDRG family members are regulated by multiple mechanisms, including transcriptional control by hypoxia-inducible factors, p53, and Myc, as well as post-translational modifications such as phosphorylation, ubiquitination, and acetylation. Pharmacological targeting of the NDRG family is a therapeutic strategy against cancer. For instance, di-2-pyridylketone 4,4-dimethyl-3-thiosemicarbazone (Dp44mT) and di-2-pyridylketone-4-cyclohexyl-4-methyl-3-thiosemicarbazone (DpC) have been extensively shown to up-regulate NDRG1 expression, leading to metastasis suppression and inhibition of tumor growth in multiple cancer models. Similarly, targeting NDRG2 demonstrates its pro-apoptotic and anti-proliferative effects, particularly in glioblastoma and colorectal cancer. This review provides a comprehensive analysis of the structural features, regulatory mechanisms, and biological functions of the NDRG family and their roles in cancer and neurodegenerative diseases. Additionally, NDRG1-4 are explored as therapeutic targets in oncology, focusing on recent advances in anti-cancer agents that induce the expression of these proteins. Implications for future research and clinical applications are also discussed.

Objectives Suicide research and prevention are complex. Many practical, methodological and ethical challenges must be overcome to implement effective suicide prevention interventions. Implementation science can offer insights into what works, why and in what context. Yet, there are limited real-world examples of the application of implementation science in suicide prevention. This study aimed to identify approaches to employ principles of implementation science to tackle important challenges in suicide prevention.

Methods A questionnaire about promoting implementation science for suicide prevention was developed through thematic analysis of stakeholder narratives. Statements were categorised into six domains: research priorities, practical considerations, approach to intervention design and delivery, lived experience engagement, dissemination and the way forward. The questionnaire (n=52 statements—round 1; n=44 statements—round 2; n=9 statements—round 3) was administered electronically to a panel (n=62—round 1, n=48—round 2; n=45—round 3) of international experts (suicide researchers, leaders, project team members, lived experience advocates). Statements were rated on a Likert scale based on an understanding of importance and priority of each item. Statements endorsed by at least 85% of the panel would be included in the final guidelines.

Results Eighty-two of the 90 statements were endorsed. Recommendations included broadening research inquiries to understand overall programme impact; accounting for resources in the translation of evidence into practice; embedding implementation science in intervention delivery and design; meaningfully engaging lived experience; considering channels for dissemination of implementation-related findings and focusing on next steps needed to routinely harness the strengths of implementation science in suicide prevention research, practice and training.

Conclusion An interdisciplinary panel of suicide prevention experts reached a consensus on optimal strategies for using implementation science to enhance the effectiveness of policies and programmes aimed at reducing suicide.

Production growth of electrical and electronic equipment (EEE) has led to a significant increase in waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE), with small EEE having the highest generation rate but the lowest formal collection rate globally. In Australia, many consumers tend to stockpile old small EEE, which limits collection rates and reduces the potential for resource recovery. This study aimed to assess consumer behaviour related to the collection of small EEE in Australia through a multivocal literature review and an online survey of 403 respondents. The analysis revealed that consumers are disposing of small WEEE along with general household waste, and most are uncertain of the correct disposal method. Almost half of the respondents are willing to pay to manage small WEEE and prefer to drop them at a designated location. Hence, to increase the collection rates, this study recommends setting realistic collection targets based on products on the market rather than waste generation estimates based on average lifespan. In addition, correct disposal can be encouraged by integrating small WEEE in kerbside collection and providing incentives. In order to strengthen this, awareness campaigns should target all age and income groups to increase collection rates and product circularity.

Background: Suicide is estimated to be the fourth leading cause of death globally, with those working in male-dominated industries such as mining and construction at higher risk than the general population. Research suggests this is due (in part) to stigma towards mental health. No research exists that has sought to understand the attitudes underpinning this stigma in the fly-in/fly-out (FIFO) industry. The current study, set in Australia, is the first of its kind to examine what specific stigmatised attitudes of FIFO workers exist towards suicide, help-seeking, and help-offering. Methods: Using convenience sampling, FIFO workers (n = 138) completed an online self-report survey. General thematic analysis identified four major themes. Most salient was that fear of negative consequences for employment was a primary barrier to help-seeking and help-offering. Participants also expressed lack of trust in leadership and workplace mental health culture, lack of knowledge and confidence in responding to suicidality disclosure, and fear of negative reactions as barriers to help-seeking and help-offering behaviours. Conclusions: These findings present new and valuable insights into why FIFO workers are reluctant to seek or offer help for suicidality and have important implications for addressing systematic inadequacies within the sector that hinder disclosure of suicidal ideation and access to vital services.