Suchergebnisse

Die neue GATT-Runde muß sich im Rahmen der Liberalisierung des Welthandels auch mit den handelbaren Dienstleistungen befassen, die in der Kommunikations- und Informationstechnologie ihren Niederschlag finden. Die europäischen Postmonopole zeigen, daß es auf der Ebene der Industrieländer noch ein großes Potential für Deregulierung gibt; dabei soll nicht übersehen werden, daß im Rahmen der nationalen Sicherheit "reasonable regulations" ("vernünftige Regulierungen") notwendig sein können. Gleichzeitig müssen die Entwicklungsländer gleichberechtigt in die neue Ordnung integriert werden, um einen insgesamt positiven Beitrag zur internationalen Wirtschaftsordnung zu erreichen. - Grewlich, K. W.: Auswärtiges Amt. (SWP-Tth)

Im Zusammenhang mit dem Antrag der Türkei auf Vollmitgliedschaft in der EG wird die Grundfrage untersucht, ob die Türkei den Zielsetzungen und Anforderungen der westeuropäischen Integrationsgemeinschaft entsprechen kann. Dies sind: die volle Eingliederung in die westeuropäische Zollunion; die Einführung der freien Mobilität des Kapitals; die freie Mobilität der Arbeitskräfte; die Harmonisierung der Währungs-, Rechts-, Finanz- und Agrarpolitik; die Liberalisierung des Wirtschaftssystems. (DÜI-Hns)

Der Europäische Binnenmarkt ist der größte der Welt. Das Wissen um die Europäische Integration ist deswegen für Studierende sehr wichtig. Das Lehrbuch führt zu Beginn in die Geschichte des europäischen Einigungsprozesses ein und stellt die institutionelle Struktur der EU vor. Europäische Politikfelder werden in Theorie und Praxis dargestellt und die Herausforderungen der Zukunft diskutiert. Die 3. Auflage wurde vollständig überarbeitet und erweitert: Sie berücksichtigt die aktuellen politischen Debatten über die Zukunft der Europäischen Union und über die Weiterentwicklung der zentralen Politikfelder. Jedes Kapitel zeichnet sich durch Lernziele, Zusammenfassungen und Literaturtipps aus. Ein Glossar rundet das Buch ab. Das Lehrbuch richtet sich an Bachelorstudierende der Volks- und Betriebswirtschaftslehre.

A locus at 19p13 is associated with breast cancer (BC) and ovarian cancer (OC) risk. Here we analyse 438 SNPs in this region in 46,451 BC and 15,438 OC cases, 15,252 BRCA1 mutation carriers and 73,444 controls and identify 13 candidate causal SNPs associated with serous OC (P=9.2 × 10(-20)), ER-negative BC (P=1.1 × 10(-13)), BRCA1-associated BC (P=7.7 × 10(-16)) and triple negative BC (P-diff=2 × 10(-5)). Genotype-gene expression associations are identified for candidate target genes ANKLE1 (P=2 × 10(-3)) and ABHD8 (P<2 × 10(-3)). Chromosome conformation capture identifies interactions between four candidate SNPs and ABHD8, and luciferase assays indicate six risk alleles increased transactivation of the ADHD8 promoter. Targeted deletion of a region containing risk SNP rs56069439 in a putative enhancer induces ANKLE1 downregulation; and mRNA stability assays indicate functional effects for an ANKLE1 3'-UTR SNP. Altogether, these data suggest that multiple SNPs at 19p13 regulate ABHD8 and perhaps ANKLE1 expression, and indicate common mechanisms underlying breast and ovarian cancer risk. ; We thank all the individuals who took part in these studies and all the researchers, clin- icians, technicians and administrative staff who have enabled this work to be carried out, in particular those involved in the COGS project: Rosalind A. Eeles, Ali Amin Al Olama, Zsofia Kote-Jarai, Sara Benlloch (PRACTICAL), Andrew Lee, and Ed Dicks, Craig Luccarini and the staff of the Centre for Genetic Epidemiology Laboratory, the staff of the CNIO genotyping unit, Daniel C. Tessier, Francois Bacot, Daniel Vincent, Sylvie LaBoissie ` re and Frederic Robidoux and the staff of the McGill University and Ge ́ nome Que ́ bec Innovation Centre, Sune F. Nielsen, Borge G. Nordestgaard, and the staff of the Copenhagen DNA laboratory, and Julie M. Cunningham, Sharon A. Windebank, Christopher A. Hilker, Jeffrey Meyer and the staff of Mayo Clinic Genotyping Core Facility. BCAC (acknowledgements by study) (ABCFS) : Maggie Angelakos, Judi Maskiell, Gillian Dite. (ABCS) C Ellen van der Schoot, Sanquin Amsterdam. (ACP) The ACP study wishes to thank the participants in the Thai Breast Cancer study. Special Thanks also go to the Thai Ministry of Public Health (MOPH), doctors and nurses who helped with the data collection process. Finally, the study would like to thank Dr Prat Boonyawongviroj, the former Permanent Secretary of MOPH and Dr Pornthep Siriwanarungsan, the Department Director-Generalof Disease Control who have supported the study throughout. (BBCS) Eileen Williams, Elaine Ryder-Mills, Kara Sargus (BIGGS) Niall McInerney, Gabrielle Colleran, Andrew Rowan, Angela Jones. (BSUCH) Peter Bugert, Medical Faculty Mannheim (CGPS) Staff and participants of the Copenhagen General Population Study. For the excellent technical assistance: Dorthe Uldall Andersen, Maria Birna Arnadottir, Anne Bank, Dorthe Kjeldgård Hansen (CNIO-BCS) Guillermo Pita, Charo Alonso, Daniel Herrero, Nuria A ́ lvarez, Pilar Zamora, Primitiva Menendez, the Human Genotyping-CEGEN Unit (CNIO)(CTS). The CTS Steering Committee includes Leslie Bernstein, Susan Neuhausen, James Lacey, Sophia Wang, Huiyan Ma, Yani Lu, and Jessica Clague DeHart at the Beckman Research Institute of City of Hope, Dennis Deapen, Rich Pinder, Eunjung Lee, and Fred Schumacher at the University of Southern California, Pam Horn-Ross, Peggy Reynolds, Christina Clarke Dur and David Nelson at the Cancer Prevention Institute of California, and Hoda Anton-Culver, Argyrios Ziogas, and Hannah Park at the University of California Irvine. (ESTHER) Hartwig Ziegler, Sonja Wolf, Volker Hermann. (GC-HBOC) Heide Hellebrand, Stefanie Engert and GC-HBOC (Supported by Deutsche Krebshilfe). (GENICA) The GENICA Network: Dr Margarete Fischer-Bosch-Institute of Clinical Pharmacology, Stuttgart, and University of Tu ̈bingen, Germany [HB, Wing-Yee Lo, Christina Justenhoven], German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) [HB], Department of Internal Medicine, Evangelische Kliniken Bonn gGmbH, Johanniter Krankenhaus, Bonn, Germany [Yon-Dschun Ko, Christian Baisch], Institute of Pathology, University of Bonn, Germany [Hans-Peter Fischer], Molecular Genetics of Breast Cancer, Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany [UH], Institute for Prevention and Occupational Medicine of the German Social Accident Insurance, Institute of the Ruhr University Bochum (IPA), Bochum, Germany [Thomas Bru ̈ning, Beate Pesch, Sylvia Rabstein, Anne Lotz]; and Institute of Occupational Medicine and Maritime Medicine, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany [Volker Harth] (HEBCS) Kirsimari Aaltonen, Karl von Smitten, Sofia Khan, Tuomas Heikkinen, Irja Erkkila ̈ . (HMBCS) Natalia Antonenkova, Peter Hillemanns, Hans Christiansen and Johann H. Karstens (KBCP) Eija Myo ̈ ha ̈ nen, Helena Kemila ̈ inen. (kConFab/AOCS) We wish to thank Heather Thorne, Eveline Niedermayr, all the kConFab research nurses and staff, the heads and staff of the Family Cancer Clinics, and the Clinical Follow Up Study (which has received funding from the NHMRC, the National Breast Cancer Foundation, Cancer Australia, and the National Institute of Health (USA)) for their contributions to this resource, and the many families who contribute to kConFab. (LAABC) We thank all the study participants and the entire data collection team, especially Annie Fung and June Yashiki. (LMBC) Gilian Peuteman, Dominiek Smeets, Thomas Van Brussel and Kathleen Corthouts. (MARIE) Petra Seibold, Judith Heinz, Nadia Obi, Alina Vrieling, Sabine Behrens, Ursula Eilber, Muhabbet Celik, Til Olchers and Stefan Nickels. (MCCS) MCCS cohort recruitment was funded by VicHealth and Cancer Council Victoria. The MCCS was further supported by Australian NHMRC grants 209057, 251553 and 504711 and by infrastructure provided by Cancer Council Victoria. Cases and their vital status were ascertained through the Victorian Cancer Registry (VCR) and the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW), including the National Death Index. (MBCSG) Bernard Peissel and Daniela Zaffaroni and Giulietta Scuvera of the Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori (INT), Milan, Italy; Monica Barile and Irene Feroce of the Istituto Europeo di Oncologia (IEO), Milan, Italy; and the personnel of the Cogentech Cancer Genetic Test Laboratory. (MTLGEBCS) We would like to thank Martine Tranchant (CHU de Que ́ bec Research Center), Marie-France Valois, Annie Turgeon and Lea Heguy (McGill University Health Center, Royal Victoria Hospital; McGill Uni- versity) for DNA extraction, sample management and skilful technical assistance. J.S. is Chairholder of the Canada Research Chair in Oncogenetics. (MYBRCA) Phuah Sze Yee, Peter Kang, Kang In Nee, Kavitta Sivanandan, Shivaani Mariapun, Yoon Sook-Yee, Daphne Lee, Teh Yew Ching and Nur Aishah Mohd Taib for DNA Extraction and patient recruitment. (NBHS) We thank study partcipants and research staff for their contributions and commitment to this study. (OBCS) Meeri Otsukka, Kari Mono- nen(OFBCR) Teresa Selander, Nayana Weerasooriya(ORIGO) We thank E. Krol-War- merdam, and J. Blom for patient accrual, administering questionnaires, and managing clinical information. The LUMC survival data were retrieved from the Leiden hospital- based cancer registry system (ONCDOC) with the help of Dr J. Molenaar. (PBCS) Louise Brinton, Mark Sherman, Neonila Szeszenia-Dabrowska, Beata Peplonska, Witold Zatonski, Pei Chao, Michael Stagner(pKARMA) The Swedish Medical Research Counsel. (RBCS) Petra Bos, Jannet Blom, Ellen Crepin, Elisabeth Huijskens, Annette Heemskerk, the Erasmus MC Family Cancer Clinic. (SASBAC) The Swedish Medical Research Counsel. (SBCGS) We thank study partcipants and research staff for their contributions and commitment to this study. (SBCS) Sue Higham, Helen Cramp, Ian Brock, Malcolm W. R. Reed, Sabapathy Balasubramanian and Dan Connley. (SEARCH) The SEARCH and EPIC teams. (SGBCC) We thank the participants and research coordinator Kimberley Chua. (SKKDKFZS) We thank all study participants, clinicians, family doctors, researchers and technicians for their contributions and commitment to this study. (TNBCC) Robert Pilarski and Charles Shapiro were instrumental in the formation of the OSU Breast Cancer Tissue Bank. We thank the Human Genetics Sample Bank for processing of samples and providing OSU Columbus area control samples. (UKBGS) We thank Breakthrough Breast Cancer and the Institute of Cancer Research for support and funding of the Breakthrough Generations Study, and the study participants, study staff, and the doctors, nurses and other health care providers and health information sources who have contributed to the study. We acknowledge NHS funding to the Royal Marsden/ ICR NIHR Biomedical Research Centre. OCAC (acknowledgements by study) : This study would not have been possible without the contributions of the following: J Dennis, P. Hall (COGS); D. C. Tessier, F. Bacot, D. Vincent, S. LaBoissie ` re and F. Robidoux and the staff of the genotyping unit, (Genome Quebec); D. C. Whiteman, P. M. Webb, A. C. Green, N. K. Hayward, P. G. Parsons, D. M. Purdie, B. M. Smithers, D. Gotley, A. Clouston, I. Brown, S. Moore. K. Harrap, T. Sadkowski, S. O'Brien, E. Minehan, D. Roffe, S. O'Keefe, S. Lipshut, G. Connor . Berry, F. Walker, T. Barnes, J. Thomas, L. Terry, M. Connard, L. Bowes, M-R. Malt, J. White, C. Mosse, N. Tait, C. Bambach, A. Biankan, R. Brancatisano, M. Coleman, M. Cox, S. Deane, G. L. Falk, J. Gallagher, M. Hollands, T. Hugh, D. Hunt, J. Jorgensen, C. Martin, M. Richardson, G. Smith, R. Smith, D. Storey, J. Avramovic, J. Croese, J. D'Arcy, S. Fairley, J. Hansen, J. Masson, L. Nathanson, B. O'Loughlin, L. Rutherford, R. Turner, M. Windsor, J. Bessell, P. Devitt, G. Jamieson, D. Watson, S. Blamey, A. Boussioutas, R. Cade, G. Crosthwaite, I. Faragher, J. Gribbin, G. Hebbard, G. Kiroff, B. Mann, R. Millar, P. O'Brien, R. Thomas, S. Wood, S. Archer, K. Faulkner, J. Hamdorf (ACS); R. Stuart-Harris, F. Kirsten, J. Rutovitz, P. Clingan, A.Glasgow, A. Proietto, S. Braye, G. Otton, J. Shannon, T. Bonaventura, J. Stewart, S. Begbie, M. Friedlander, D. Bell, S. Baron-Hay, G. Gard, D. Nevell, N. Pavlakis, S. Valmadre, B. Young, C Camaris, R. Crouch, L. Edwards, N. Hacker, D. Marsden, G. Robertson, P. Beale, J. Beith, J. Carter, C. Dalrymple, R. Houghton, P. Russell, L. Anderson, M. Links, J. Grygiel, J. Hill, A. Brand, K. Byth, R. Jaworski, P. Harnett, R. Sharma,.G Wain, D. Purdie, D. Whiteman, B. Ward, D. Papadimos, A. Crandon, M. Cummings, K. Horwood. A. Obermair, L. Perrin, D. Wyld, J. Nicklin, M. Davy, M. K. Oehler, C. Hall, T. Dodd, T. Healy, K. Pittman, D. Henderson, J. Miller, J. Pierdes, A. Achan, P. Blomfield, D. Challis, R. McIntosh, A. Parker, B. Brown, R. Rome, D. Allen, P. Grant, S. Hyde, R. Laurie, M. Robbie, D. Healy, T. Jobling, T. Manolitsas, J. McNealage, P Rogers, B. Susil, E. Sumithran, I. Simpson, I. Haviv, K. Phillips, D. Rischin, S. Fox, D. Johnson, S. Lade, P. Waring, M. Loughrey, N.O'Callaghan, B. Murray, L. Mileshkin, P. Allan; V. Billson, J. Pyman, D. Neesham, M. Quinn, A. Hamilton, C. Underhill, R. Bell, L. F Ng, R. Blum, V.Ganju, I. Hammond, C. Stewart, Y. Leung, M. Buck, N. Zeps (ACS); G. Peuteman, T. Van Brussel and D. Smeets (BEL); U. Eilber and T. Koehler (GER); L. Gacucova (HMO); P. Schu ̈rmann, F. Kramer, W. Zheng, T.-W. Park-Simon, K. Beer-Grondke and D. Schmidt (HJO); G.S. Keeney, S. Windebank, C. Hilker and J. Vollenweider (MAY); the state cancer registries of AL, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, NE, NH, NJ, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, TN, TX, VA, WA, and WYL (NHS); L. Paddock, M. King, U. Chandran, A. Samoila, and Y. Bensman (NJO); L. Brinton, M. Sherman, A. Hutchinson, N. Szeszenia- Dabrowska, B. Peplonska, W. Zatonski, A. Soni, P. Chao and M. Stagner (POL); ); C. Luccarini, P. Harrington the SEARCH team and ECRIC (SEA); the Scottish Gynaecological Clinical Trails group and SCOTROC1 investigators (SRO); W-H. Chow, Y-T. Gao (SWH); Information about TCGA and the investigators and institutions who constitute the TCGA research network can be found at http://cancergenome.nih.gov/ (TCGA); I. Jacobs, M. Widschwendter, E. Wozniak, N. Balogun, A. Ryan and J. Ford (UKO); Carole Pye (UKR); a full list of the investigators who contributed to the generation of the WTCCC data is available from http://www.wtccc.org.uk/ (WTCCC). CIMBA (acknowledgements by study) : (BCFR-AU) Maggie Angelakos, Judi Maskiell, Gillian Dite, Helen Tsimiklis. (BCFR-NY) We wish to thank members and participants in the New York site of the Breast Cancer Family Registry for their contributions to the study. (BCFR-ON) We wish to thank members and participants in the Ontario Familial Breast Cancer Registry for their contributions to the study. (BFBOCC-LT) We acknowledge Vilius Rudaitis, Laimonas Gris ˇ kevic ˇ ius, Ramu ̄ nas Janavic ˇ ius (if not in the authorship). BFBOCC-LV acknowledge Drs Janis Eglitis, Anna Krilova and Aivars Stengrevics. (BMBSA) We wish to thank the families who contribute to the BMBSA study. (BRICOH) We wish to thank Yuan Chun Ding and Linda Steele for their work in participant enrolment and biospecimen and data management.(CNIO) We thank Alicia Barroso, Rosario Alonso and Guillermo Pita for their assistance. (CONSIT TEAM) Alessandra Viel and Riccardo Dolcetti of the CRO Aviano National Cancer Institute, Aviano (PN), Italy; Laura Ottini of the 'Sapienza' University, Rome, Italy; Liliana Varesco of the IRCCS AOU San Martino - IST Istituto Nazionale per la Ricerca sul Cancro, Genoa, Italy; Laura Papi and Gabriele Capone of the University of Florence, Florence, Italy; Antonella Savarese and Aline Martayan of the Istituto Nazionale Tumori Regina Elena, Rome, Italy; Stefania Tommasi and Brunella Pilato of the Istituto Nazionale Tumori 'Giovanni Paolo II', Bari, Italy. (CORE) The CIMBA data management and analysis is funded through Cancer Research- UK grant C12292/A11174. ACA is a Senior Cancer Research - UK Research Fellow. (EMBRACE) RE is supported by NIHR support to the Biomedical Research Centre at The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust. (FCCC) We thank Ms. JoEllen Weaver and Dr Betsy Bove for their technical support. (GEMO) Genetic Modifiers of Cancer Risk in BRCA1/2 Mutation Carriers (GEMO) study: National Cancer Genetics Network ) UNICANCER Genetic Group * , France. We wish to thank all the GEMO collaborating groups for their contribution to this study. GEMO Collaborating Centres are: Coordinating Centres, Unite ́ Mixte de Ge ́ ne ́ tique Constitutionnelle des Cancers Fre ́ quents, Hospices Civils de Lyon - Centre Le ́ on Be ́ rard, and Equipe ) Ge ́ ne ́ tique du cancer du sein * , Centre de Recherche en Cance ́ rologie de Lyon: Olga Sinilnikova w , Sylvie Mazoyer, Francesca Damiola, Laure Barjhoux, Carole Verny-Pierre, Me ́ lanie Le ́ one, Nadia Boutry-Kryza, Alain Calender, Sophie Giraud; and Service de Ge ́ ne ́ tique Oncologique, Institut Curie, Paris: Dominique Stoppa-Lyonnet, Marion Gauthier-Villars, Bruno Buecher, Claude Houdayer, Etienne Rouleau, Lisa Golmard, Agne ` s Collet, Virginie Moncoutier, Ce ́ drick Lefol, Muriel Belotti, Antoine de Pauw, Camille Elan, Catherine Nogues, Emmanuelle Fourme, Anne-Marie Birot. Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif: Brigitte Bressac-de-Pail- lerets, Olivier Caron, Marine Guillaud-Bataille. Centre Jean Perrin, Clermont–Ferrand: Yves-Jean Bignon, Nancy Uhrhammer. Centre Le ́ on Be ́ rard, Lyon: Christine Lasset, Vale ́ rie Bonadona, Sandrine Handallou. Centre Franc ̧ ois Baclesse, Caen: Agne ` s Hardouin, Pascaline Berthet, Dominique Vaur, Laurent Castera. Institut Paoli Calmettes, Marseille: Hagay Sobol, Violaine Bourdon, Tetsuro Noguchi, Audrey Remenieras, Franc ̧ ois Eisinger. CHU Arnaud-de-Villeneuve, Montpellier: Isabelle Coupier, Pascal Pujol. Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille: Jean-Philippe Peyrat, Joe ̈ lle Fournier, Franc ̧ oise Re ́ villion, Philippe Vennin w , Claude Adenis. Centre Paul Strauss, Strasbourg: Danie ` le Muller, Jean-Pierre Fricker. Institut Bergonie ́ , Bordeaux: Emmanuelle Barouk-Simonet, Franc ̧ oise Bonnet, Virginie Bubien, Nicolas Sevenet, Michel Longy. Institut Claudius Regaud, Toulouse: Christine Toulas, Rosine Guimbaud, Laurence Gladieff, Viviane Feillel. CHU Grenoble: Dominique Leroux, He ́ le ` ne Dreyfus, Christine Rebischung, Magalie Peysselon. CHU Dijon: Fanny Coron, Laurence Faivre. CHU St-Etienne: Fabienne Prieur, Marine Lebrun, Caroline Kientz. Ho ˆ tel Dieu Centre Hospitalier, Chambe ́ ry: Sandra Fert Ferrer. Centre Antoine Lacassagne, Nice: Marc Fre ́ nay. CHU Limoges: Laurence Ve ́ nat-Bouvet. CHU Nantes: Capucine Delnatte. CHU Bretonneau, Tours: Isabelle Mortemousque. Groupe Hospitalier Pitie ́ -Salpe ́ trie ` re, Paris: Florence Coulet, Chrystelle Colas, Florent Soubrier, Mathilde Warcoin. CHU Vandoeuvre-les- Nancy: Johanna Sokolowska, Myriam Bronner. CHU Besanc ̧ on: Marie-Agne ` s Collonge- Rame, Alexandre Damette. Creighton University, Omaha, USA: Henry T. Lynch, Carrie L. Snyder. (G-FAST) We wish to thank the technical support of Ilse Coene en Brecht Crombez. (HCSC) We acknowledge Alicia Tosar for her technical assistance(HEBCS) HEBCS would like to thank Dr Kristiina Aittoma ̈ ki, Taru A. Muranen, Drs Carl Blomqvist and Kirsimari Aaltonen and RNs Irja Erkkila ̈ and Virpi Palola for their help with the HEBCS data and samples. (HEBON) The Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Research Group Netherlands (HEBON) consists of the following Collaborating Centres: Coordinating center: Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, NL: M.A. Rookus, F.B.L. Hogervorst, F.E. van Leeuwen, S. Verhoef, M.K. Schmidt, N.S. Russell, J.L. de Lange, R. Wijnands; Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, NL: J.M. Colle ́ e, A.M.W. van den Ouweland, M.J. Hooning, C. Seynaeve, C.H.M. van Deurzen, I.M. Obdeijn; Leiden University Medical Center, NL: C.J. van Asperen, J.T. Wijnen, R.A.E.M. Tollenaar, P. Devilee, T.C.T.E.F. van Cronenburg; Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, NL: C.M. Kets, A.R. Mensenkamp; University Medical Center Utrecht, NL: M.G.E.M. Ausems, R.B. van der Luijt, C.C. van der Pol; Amsterdam Medical Center, NL: C.M. Aalfs, T.A.M. van Os; VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, NL: J.J.P. Gille, Q. Waisfisz, H.E.J. Meijers-Heijboer; University Hospital Maastricht, NL: E.B. Go ́ mez- Garcia, M.J. Blok; University Medical Center Groningen, NL: J.C. Oosterwijk, A.H. van der Hout, M.J. Mourits, G.H. de Bock; The Netherlands Foundation for the detection of hereditary tumours, Leiden, NL: H.F. Vasen; The Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization (IKNL): S. Siesling, J.Verloop; The Dutch Pathology Registry (PALGA): L.I.H. Overbeek. The HEBON study is supported by the Dutch Cancer Society grants NKI1998-1854, NKI2004-3088, NKI2007-3756, the Netherlands Organization of Scien- tific Research grant NWO 91109024, the Pink Ribbon grants 110005 and 2014- 187.WO76, the BBMRI grant NWO 184.021.007/CP46 and the Transcan grant JTC 2012 Cancer 12-054. HEBON thanks the registration teams of IKNL and PALGA for part of the data collection. (HRBCP) We wish to thank Hong Kong Sanatoriuma and Hospital for their continual support. (HUNBOCS) We wish to thank the Hungarian Breast and Ovarian Cancer Study Group members (Janos Papp, Tibor Vaszko, Aniko Bozsik, Timea Pocza, Judit Franko, Maria Balogh, Gabriella Domokos, Judit Ferenczi, Department of Molecular Genetics, National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary) and the clin- icians and patients for their contributions to this study.(HVH) We wish to thank the Oncogenetics Group (VHIO), and the High Risk and Cancer Prevention Unit of the University Hospital Vall d'Hebron.(ICO) We wish to thank the ICO Hereditary Cancer Program team led by Dr Gabriel Capella. (INHERIT) We would like to thank Dr Martine Dumont, Martine Tranchant for sample management and skilful technical assistance. J.S. is Chairholder of the Canada Research Chair in Oncogenetics. J.S. and P.S. were part of the QC and Genotyping coordinating group of iCOGS (BCAC and CIMBA). (IPOBCS) We wish to thank Drs Ana Peixoto, Catarina Santos, Patrı ́ cia Rocha and Pedro Pinto for their skilful contribution to the study. (KCONFAB) We wish to thank Heather Thorne, Eveline Niedermayr, all the kConFab research nurses and staff, the heads and staff of the Family Cancer Clinics, and the Clinical Follow Up Study (which has received funding from the NHMRC, the National Breast Cancer Foundation, Cancer Australia, and the National Institute of Health (USA)) for their contributions to this resource, and the many families who contribute to kConFab. (MODSQUAD) Modifier Study of Quantitative Effects on Disease (MODSQUAD): we acknowledge ModSQuaD members Csilla Szabo (National Human Genome Research Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA); Lenka Foretova and Eva Machackova (Department of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Masaryk Memorial Cancer Institute and MF MU, Brno, Czech Republic); and Michal Zikan, Petr Pohlreich and Zdenek Kleibl (Oncogynecologic Center and Department of Biochemistry and Experimental Oncology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic). (MSKCC) Anne Lincoln, Lauren Jacobs. (NICCC) We wish to thank the NICCC National Familial Cancer Consultation Service team led by Sara Dishon, the lab team led by Dr Flavio Lejbkowicz, and the research field operations team led by Dr Mila Pinchev. (NRG Oncology) We thank the investigators of the Australia New Zealand NRG Oncology group. (OCGN) We wish to thank members and participants in the Ontario Cancer Genetics Network for their contributions to the study. (OSU CCG) Leigha Senter, Kevin Sweet, Caroline Craven, and Michelle O'Conor were instrumental in accrual of study participants, ascertainment of medical records and database management. Samples were processed by the OSU Human Genetics Sample Bank. (SEABASS) We would like to thank Yip Cheng Har, Nur Aishah Mohd Taib, Phuah Sze Yee, Norhashimah Hassan and all the research nurses, research assistants and doctors involved in the MyBrCa Study for assistance in patient recruitment, data collection and sample preparation. In addition, we thank Philip Iau, Sng Jen-Hwei and Sharifah Nor Akmal for contributing samples from the Singapore Breast Cancer Study nd the HUKM-HKL Study respectively. The Malaysian Breast Cancer Genetic Study is funded by research grants from the Malaysian Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, Ministry of Higher Education (UM.C/HIR/MOHE/06) and charitable funding from Cancer Research Initiatives Foundation. (SMC) SMC team wishes to acknowledge the assistance of the Meirav Comprehensice breast cancer center team at the Sheba Medical Center for assistance in this study. (SWE-BRCA) Swedish scientists participating as SWE-BRCA collaborators are: from Lund University and University Hospital: Åke Borg, Håkan Olsson, Helena Jernstro ̈ m, Karin Henriksson, Katja Harbst, Maria Soller, Ulf Kristoffersson; from Gothenburg Sahlgrenska University Hospital: Anna O ̈ fverholm, Margareta Nordling, Per Karlsson, Zakaria Einbeigi; from Stockholm and Karolinska University Hospital: Anna von Wachenfeldt, Annelie Liljegren, Annika Lindblom, Brita Arver, Gisela Barbany Bustinza, Johanna Rantala; from Umeå University Hospital: Beatrice Melin, Christina Edwinsdotter Ardnor, Monica Emanuelsson; from Uppsala University: Hans Ehrencrona, Maritta Hellstro ̈ m Pigg, Richard Rosenquist; from Linko ̈ ping University Hospital: Marie Stenmark-Askmalm, Sigrun Lied- gren(UCHICAGO) We wish to thank Cecilia Zvocec, Qun Niu, physicians, genetic counsellors, research nurses and staff of the Cancer Risk Clinic for their contributions to this resource, and the many families who contribute to our programme. (UCLA) We thank Joyce Seldon MSGC and Lorna Kwan, MPH for assembling the data for this study. (UCSF) We would like to thank Dr Robert Nussbaum and the following genetic coun- sellors for participant recruitment: Beth Crawford, Kate Loranger, Julie Mak, Nicola Stewart, Robin Lee, Amie Blanco and Peggy Conrad. And thanks to Ms. Salina Chan for her data management. (UKFOCR) We thank Carole Pye, Patricia Harrington and Eva Wozniak for their contributions towards the UKFOCR. (VFCTG) Geoffrey Lindeman, Marion Harris, Martin Delatycki of the Victorian Familial Cancer Trials Group. We thank Sarah Sawyer and Rebecca Driessen for assembling this data and Ella Thompson for performing all DNA amplification. Grant Support : The COGS project is funded through a European Commission's Seventh Framework Programme grant (agreement number 223175—HEALTH-F2-2009- 223175). BCAC is funded by Cancer Research UK [C1287/A10118, C1287/A12014] and by the European Community ́ s Seventh Framework Programme under grant agreement number 223175 (grant number HEALTH-F2-2009-223175) (COGS). The CIMBA data management and analytical work is funded by Cancer Research UK (C12292/A11174, C12292/A20861). Funding for the iCOGS infrastructure came from: the European Community's Seventh Framework Programme under grant agreement n ° 223175 (HEALTH-F2-2009-223175) (COGS), Cancer Research UK (C1287/A10118, C1287/A 10710, C12292/A11174, C1281/A12014, C5047/A8384, C5047/A15007, C5047/A10692, C8197/A16565), the National Institutes of Health (CA128978) and Post-Cancer GWAS initiative (1U19 CA148537, 1U19 CA148065 and 1U19 CA148112 - the GAME-ON initiative), the Department of Defence (W81XWH-10-1-0341), the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) for the CIHR Team in Familial Risks of Breast Cancer, Komen Foundation for the Cure, the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, and the Ovarian Cancer Research Fund. The Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium is supported by a grant from the Ovarian Cancer Research Fund thanks to donations by the family and friends of Kathryn Sladek Smith (PPD/RPCI.07). The scientific development and funding for this project were in part supported by the US National Cancer Institute GAME-ON Post-GWAS Initiative (U19-CA148112). This study made use of data generated by the Wellcome Trust Case Control consortium. Funding for the project was provided by the Wellcome Trust under award 076113. The results published here are in part based on data generated by The Cancer Genome Atlas Project established by the National Cancer Institute and National Human Genome Research Institute. Personal support: K.L. is supported by a K99/R00 grant from the National Cancer Institute (Grant number 1K99CA184415-01). This project was supported in part by a Program Project Development Grant from the Ovarian Cancer Research Fund (S.A.G and A.M). The in vitro aspects of this project were performed within the Norris Cancer Centre at USC, which is supported in part by award number P30CA014089 from the National Cancer Institute. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Cancer Institute or the National Institutes of Health. D.F.E. is a Principal Research Fellow of Cancer Research UK. A.C.A. is a Cancer Research—UK Senior Cancer Research Fellow. G.C.-T. and P.M.W. are supported by the National Health and Medical Research Council. (WCP) B.Y.K is funded by the American Cancer Society Early Detection Professorship (SIOP- 06-258-01-COUN) and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), Grant UL1TR000124. L.E.K. is supported by a Canadian Institutes of Health Research Investigator award (MSH-87734). S.P.K. is supported by a Gates Cambridge Scholarship. J.S. is Chairholder of the Canada Research Chair in Oncogenetics. RB was a Cancer Institute NSW Clinical Research Fellow. M.C.S. is a NHMRC Senior Research Fellow. A.K.G. was funded by 5U01CA113916, R01CA140323, and by the Chancellors Distinguished Chair in Biomedical Sciences Professorship. J.L.H. is a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Senior Principal Research Fellow. S.L.E. and J.D.F. are supported by Fellowships from the National Breast Cancer Foundation (NBCF) Australia and NHMRC project grant (1058415). Funding : BCAC: The Australian Breast Cancer Family Study (ABCFS) was supported by grant UM1 CA164920 from the National Cancer Institute (USA). The content of this manuscript does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the National Cancer Institute or any of the collaborating centres in the Breast Cancer Family Registry (BCFR), nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the USA Government or the BCFR. The ABCFS was also supported by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, the New South Wales Cancer Council, the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation (Australia) and the Victorian Breast Cancer Research Consortium. The ABCS study was supported by the Dutch Cancer Society [grants NKI 2007-3839; 2009 4363]. The ACP study is funded by the Breast Cancer Research Trust, UK. The BBCS is funded by Cancer Research UK and Breakthrough Breast Cancer and acknowledges NHS funding to the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, and the National Cancer Research Network (NCRN).ES is supported by NIHR Comprehensive Biomedical Research Centre, Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust in partnership with King's College London, United Kingdom. IT is supported by the Oxford Biomedical Research Centre.The BSUCH study was supported by the Dietmar-Hopp Foundation, the Helmholtz Society and the German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ). The CGPS was supported by the Chief Physician Johan Boserup and Lise Boserup Fund, the Danish Medical Research Council and Herlev HospitalThe CNIO-BCS was supported by the Instituto de Salud Carlos III, the Red Tema ́ tica de Investigacio ́ n Cooperativa en Ca ́ ncer and grants from the Asociacio ́ n Espan ̃ ola Contra el Ca ́ ncer and the Fondo de Investigacio ́ n Sanitario (PI11/00923 and PI12/00070). The CTS was initially supported by the California Breast Cancer Act of 1993 and the California Breast Cancer Research Fund (contract 97-10500) and is cur- rently funded through the National Institutes of Health (R01 CA77398). Collection of cancer incidence data was supported by the California Department of Public Health as part of the statewide cancer reporting program mandated by California Health and Safety Code Section 103885. HAC receives support from the Lon V Smith Foundation (LVS39420). The ESTHER study was supported by a grant from the Baden Wu ̈rttemberg Ministry of Science, Research and Arts. Additional cases were recruited in the context of the VERDI study, which was supported by a grant from the German Cancer Aid (Deutsche Krebshilfe). The GC-HBOC was supported by Deutsche Krebshilfe (107 352). The GENICA was funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) Germany grants 01KW9975/5, 01KW9976/8, 01KW9977/0 and 01KW0114, the Robert Bosch Foundation, Stuttgart, Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum (DKFZ), Heidelberg, the Institute for Prevention and Occupational Medicine of the German Social Accident Insurance, Institute of the Ruhr University Bochum (IPA), Bochum, as well as the Department of Internal Medicine, Evangelische Kliniken Bonn gGmbH, Johanniter Krankenhaus, Bonn, Germany. The HEBCS was financially supported by the Helsinki University Central Hospital Research Fund, Academy of Finland (266528), the Finnish Cancer Society, The Nordic Cancer Union and the Sigrid Juselius Foundation. The HMBCS was supported by a grant from the Friends of Hannover Medical School and by the Rudolf Bartling Foundation. The KBCP was financially supported by the special Government Funding (EVO) of Kuopio University Hospital grants, Cancer Fund of North Savo, the Finnish Cancer Organizations, and by the strategic funding of the University of Eastern Finland. kConFab is supported by a grant from the National Breast Cancer Foundation, and previously by the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), the Queensland Cancer Fund, the Cancer Councils of New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania and South Australia, and the Cancer Foundation of Western Australia. Financial support for the AOCS was provided by the United States Army Medical Research and Materiel Command [DAMD17-01-1-0729], Cancer Council Victoria, Queensland Cancer Fund, Cancer Council New South Wales, Cancer Council South Australia, The Cancer Foundation of Western Australia, Cancer Council Tasmania and the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (NHMRC; 400413, 400281, 199600). LAABC is supported by grants (1RB-0287, 3PB-0102, 5PB-0018, 10PB-0098) from the California Breast Cancer Research Program. Incident breast cancer cases were collected by the USC Cancer Surveillance Program (CSP), which is supported under subcontract by the California Department of Health. The CSP is also part of the National Cancer Institute's Division of Cancer Prevention and Control Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program, under contract number N01CN25403. LMBC is supported by the 'Stichting tegen Kanker' (232-2008 and 196-2010). Diether Lambrechts is supported by the FWO and the KULPFV/10/016-SymBioSysII.The MARIE study was supported by the Deutsche Krebshilfe e.V. [70-2892-BR I, 106332, 108253, 108419], the Hamburg Cancer Society, the German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) and the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) Germany [01KH0402]. (MBCSG) is supported by grants from the Italian Association for Cancer Research (AIRC) and by funds from the Italian citizens who allocated the 5/1000 share of their tax payment in support of the Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale Tumori, according to Italian laws (INT-Institutional strategic projects '5x1000'). The work of MTLGEBCS was supported by the Quebec Breast Cancer Foundation, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research for the 'CIHR Team in Familial Risks of Breast Cancer' program – grant # CRN-87521 and the Ministry of Economic Development, Innovation and Export Trade – grant # PSR-SIIRI-701.MYBRCA is funded by research grants from the Malaysian Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (MOSTI), Malaysian Ministry of Higher Education (UM.C/HlR/MOHE/06) and Cancer Research Initiatives Foundation (CARIF). Additional controls were recruited by the Singapore Eye Research Institute, which was supported by a grant from the Biomedical Research Council (BMRC08/1/35/19/550), Singapore and the National medical Research Council, Singa- pore (NMRC/CG/SERI/2010). The NBHS was supported by NIH grant R01CA100374. Biological sample preparation was conducted the Survey and Biospecimen Shared Resource, which is supported by P30 CA68485. The OBCS was supported by research grants from the Finnish Cancer Foundation, the Academy of Finland (grant number 250083, 122715 and Center of Excellence grant number 251314), the Finnish Cancer Foundation, the Sigrid Juselius Foundation, the University of Oulu, the University of Oulu Support Foundation and the special Governmental EVO funds for Oulu University Hospital-based research activities. The Ontario Familial Breast Cancer Registry (OFBCR) was supported by grant UM1 CA164920 from the National Cancer Institute (USA). The content of this manuscript does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the National Cancer Institute or any of the collaborating centres in the Breast Cancer Family Registry (BCFR), nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the USA Government or the BCFR. The ORIGO study was supported by the Dutch Cancer Society (RUL 1997-1505) and the Biobanking and Biomolecular Resources Research Infrastructure (BBMRI-NL CP16). The PBCS was funded by Intramural Research Funds of the National Cancer Institute, Department of Health and Human Services, USA. The pKARMA study was supported by Ma ̈ rit and Hans Rausings Initiative Against Breast CancerThe RBCS was funded by the Dutch Cancer Society (DDHK 2004-3124, DDHK 2009-4318). The SASBAC study was sup- ported by funding from the Agency for Science, Technology and Research of Singapore (A*STAR), the US National Institute of Health (NIH) and the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation. The SBCGS was supported primarily by NIH grants R01CA64277, R01CA148667, and R37CA70867. Biological sample preparation was conducted the Survey and Biospecimen Shared Resource, which is supported by P30 CA68485. The scientific development and funding of this project were, in part, supported by the Genetic Associations and Mechanisms in Oncology (GAME-ON) Network U19 CA148065.The SBCS was supported by Yorkshire Cancer Research S295, S299, S305PA and Sheffield Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre.SEARCH is funded by a programme grant from Cancer Research UK [C490/A10124] and supported by the UK National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre at the University of Cambridge.SGBCC is funded by the NUS start-up Grant, National University Cancer Institute Singapore (NCIS) Centre Grant and the NMRC Clinician Scientist Award. Additional controls were recruited by the Singapore Consortium of Cohort Studies-Multi-ethnic cohort (SCCS-MEC), which was funded by the Biomedical Research Council, grant number: 05/ 1/21/19/425.SKKDKFZS is supported by the DKFZ. The TNBCC was supported by: a Specialized Program of Research Excellence (SPORE) in Breast Cancer (CA116201), a grant from the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, a generous gift from the David F. and Margaret T. Grohne Family Foundation, the Hellenic Cooperative Oncology Group research grant (HR R_BG/04) and the Greek General Secretary for Research and Technology (GSRT) Program, Research Excellence II, the European Union (European Social Fund – ESF), and Greek national funds through the Operational Program 'Education and Lifelong Learning' of the National Strategic Reference Framework (NSRF) - ARISTEIA. The UKBGS is funded by Breakthrough Breast Cancer and the Institute of Cancer Research (ICR), London. ICR acknowledges NHS funding to the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre. Funding : OCAC : Funding of the constituent studies was provided by the American Cancer Society (CRTG-00-196-01-CCE); the California Cancer Research Program (00-01389 V-20170, N01-CN25403, 2II0200); the Canadian Institutes for Health Research (MOP-86727); Cancer Council Victoria; Cancer Council Queensland; Cancer Council New South Wales; Cancer Council South Australia; Cancer Council Tasmania; Cancer Foundation of Western Australia; the Cancer Institute of New Jersey; Cancer Research UK (C490/A6187, C490/A10119, C490/A10124, C536/A13086, C536/A6689); the Celma Mastry Ovarian Cancer Foundation; the Danish Cancer Society (94-222-52); the ELAN Program of the University of Erlangen-Nuremberg; the Eve Appeal; the Helsinki University Central Hospital Research Fund; Helse Vest; Imperial Experimental Cancer Research Centre (C1312/A15589); the Norwegian Cancer Society; the Norwegian Research Council; the Ovarian Cancer Research Fund; Nationaal Kankerplan of Belgium; Grant-in-Aid for the Third Term Comprehensive 10-Year Strategy for Cancer Control from the Ministry of Health Labour and Welfare of Japan; the L and S Milken Foun- dation; the Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education (4 PO5C 028 14, 2 PO5A 068 27); Malaysian Ministry of Higher Education (UM.C/HlR/MOHE/06) and Cancer Research Initiatives Foundation; the Roswell Park Cancer Institute Alliance Foundation; the US National Cancer Institute (K07-CA095666, K07-CA143047, K22-CA138563, N01-CN55424, N01-PC067010, N01-PC035137, P01-CA017054, P01-CA087696, P30-CA15083, P50-CA105009, P50- CA136393, R01-CA014089, R01-CA016056, R01-CA017054, R01-CA049449, R01-CA050385, R01-CA054419, R01- CA058598, R01-CA058860, R01-CA061107, R01-CA061132, R01-CA063682, R01-CA064277, R01-CA067262, R01- CA071766, R01-CA074850, R01-CA076016, R01-CA080742, R01-CA080978, R01-CA083918, R01-CA087538, R01- CA092044, R01-095023, R01-CA106414, R01-CA122443, R01-CA112523, R01-CA114343, R01-CA126841, R01- CA136924, R01-CA149429, R03-CA113148, R03-CA115195, R37-CA070867, R37-CA70867, U01-CA069417, U01- CA071966, R01-CA063678 and Intramural research funds); the US Army Medical Research and Material Command (DAMD17-98-1- 8659, DAMD17-01-1-0729, DAMD17-02-1-0666, DAMD17-02-1- 0669, W81XWH-10-1-0280); the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (199600 and 400281); the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research of Germany Programme of Clinical Biomedical Research (01 GB 9401); the state of Baden-Wu ̈rttemberg through Medical Faculty of the University of Ulm (P.685); the Minnesota Ovarian Cancer Alliance; the Mayo Foundation; the Fred C. and Katherine B. Andersen Foundation; the Lon V. Smith Foundation (LVS-39420); the Oak Foundation; the OHSU Foundation; the Mermaid I project; the Rudolf-Bartling Foundation; the UK National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centres at the University of Cambridge, Imperial College London, University College Hospital 'Womens Health Theme' and the Royal Marsden Hospital; WorkSafeBC. Funding : CIMBA (BCFR—all) : This work was supported by grant UM1 CA164920 from the National Cancer Institute. The content of this manuscript does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the National Cancer Institute or any of the collaborating centres in the Breast Cancer Family Registry (BCFR), nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the US Government or the BCFR. (BFBOCC-LT) BFBOCC is partly supported by: Lithuania (BFBOCC-LT): Research Council of Lithuania grant LIG-07/2012; (BIDMC) BIDMC is supported by the Breast Cancer Research Foundation. (BMBSA) BRCA-gene mutations and breast cancer in South African women (BMBSA) was supported by grants from the Cancer Association of South Africa (CANSA) to Elizabeth J. van Rensburg. (BRICOH) SLN was partially supported by the Morris and Horowitz Familes Endowed Professorship. (CBCS) This work was supported by the NEYE Foundation. (CNIO) This work was partially supported by Spanish Association against Cancer (AECC08), RTICC 06/0020/1060, FISPI08/1120, Mutua Madrilen ̃ a Foundation (FMMA) and SAF2010-20493 (COH-CCGCRN) City of Hope Clinical Cancer Genetics Community Network and the Hereditary Cancer Research Registry, supported in part by Award Number RC4CA153828 (PI: J. Weitzel) from the National Cancer Institute and the Office of the Director, National Institutes of Health. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. (CONSIT TEAM) Funds from Italian citizens who allocated the 5x1000 share of their tax payment in support of the Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale Tumori, according to Italian laws (INT-Institutional strategic projects '5x1000') to Siranoush Manoukian. (CORE) The CIMBA data management and data analysis were supported by Cancer Research – UK grants C12292/A11174 and C1287/A10118.SH is supported by an NHMRC Program Grant to GCT. ACA is a Cancer Research -UK Senior Cancer Research Fellow. (DEMOKRITOS) This research has been co-financed by the European Union (European Social Fund – ESF) and Greek national funds through the Operational Program 'Education and Lifelong Learning' of the National Strategic Reference Frame- work (NSRF) - Research Funding Program of the General Secretariat for Research and Technology: ARISTEIA. Investing in knowledge society through the European Social Fund.(DKFZ) The DKFZ study was supported by the DKFZ. (EMBRACE) EMBRACE is supported by Cancer Research UK Grants C1287/A10118 and C1287/A11990. D. Gareth Evans and Fiona Lalloo are supported by an NIHR grant to the Biomedical Research Centre, Manchester. The Investigators at The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust are supported by an NIHR grant to the Biomedical Research Centre at The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust. (FCCC) The authors acknowledge support from The University of Kansas Cancer Center (P30 CA168524) and the Kansas Bioscience Authority Eminent Scholar Program. (GC-HBOC) The German Consortium of Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (GC-HBOC) is supported by the German Cancer Aid (grant no 109076, Rita K. Schmutzler) and by the Center for Molecular Medicine Cologne (CMMC). (GEMO) The study was supported by the Ligue Nationale Contre le Cancer; the Association 'Le cancer du sein, parlons-en!' Award; the Canadian Institutes of Health Research for the 'CIHR Team in Familial Risks of Breast Cancer' program and the French National Institute of Cancer (INCa). (GEORGETOWN) CI received support from the Non-Therapeutic Subject Registry Shared Resource at Georgetown University (NIH/NCI grant P30-CA051008), the Fisher Center for Familial Cancer Research, and Swing Fore the Cure. (G-FAST) Kim De Leeneer is supported by GOA grant BOF10/ GOA/019 (Ghent University) and spearhead financing of Ghent University Hospital. (HCSC) HCSC supported by a grant RD12/0036/0006 and 12/00539 from ISCIII (Spain), partially supported by European Regional Development FEDER funds. (HEBCS) The HEBCS was financially supported by the Helsinki University Hospital Research Fund, Academy of Finland (266528), the Finnish Cancer Society and the Sigrid Juselius Foundation. (HEBON) The HEBON study is supported by the Dutch Cancer Society grants NKI1998-1854, NKI2004-3088, NKI2007-3756, the Netherlands Organization of Scientific Research grant NWO 91109024, the Pink Ribbon grant 110005 and the BBMRI grant NWO 184.021.007/CP46. HEBON thanks the registration teams of the Comprehensive Cancer Centre Netherlands and Comprehensive Centre South (together the Netherlands Cancer Registry) and PALGA (Dutch Pathology Registry) for part of the data collection. (HRBCP) HRBCP is supported by The Hong Kong Hereditary Breast Cancer Family Registry and the Dr Ellen Li Charitable Foundation, Hong Kong (HUNBOCS) Hungarian Breast and Ovarian Cancer Study was supported by Hungarian Research Grants KTIA-OTKA CK-80745, OTKA K-112228 and the Norwegian EEA Financial Mechanism Hu0115/NA/2008-3/OP-9. (ICO) Contract grant sponsor: Asociacio ́ n Espan ̃ ola Contra el Ca ́ ncer, Spanish Health Research Fund; Carlos III Health Institute; Catalan Health Institute and Autonomous Government of Catalonia. Contract grant numbers: ISCIIIRETIC RD06/0020/1051, RD12/0036/008, PI10/01422, PI10/ 00748, PI13/00285, PIE13/00022, 2009SGR290 and 2014SGR364. (IHCC) The IHCC was supported by Grant PBZ_KBN_122/P05/2004(ILUH) The ILUH group was supported by the Icelandic Association 'Walking for Breast Cancer Research' and by the Landspitali University Hospital Research Fund. (INHERIT) This work was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research for the 'CIHR Team in Familial Risks of Breast Cancer' program, the Canadian Breast Cancer Research Alliance-grant #019511 and the Ministry of Economic Development, Innovation and Export Trade – grant # PSR-SIIRI- 701. (IOVHBOCS) IOVHBOCS is supported by Ministero della Salute and '5 1,000' Istituto Oncologico Veneto grant. (IPOBCS) This study was in part supported by Liga Portuguesa Contra o Cancro.(KCONFAB) kConFab is supported by a grant from the National Breast Cancer Foundation, and previously by the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), the Queensland Cancer Fund, the Cancer Councils of New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania and South Australia, and the Cancer Foundation of Western Australia; (KOHBRA) KOHBRA is supported by a grant from the National R&D Program for Cancer Control, Ministry for Health, Welfare and Family Affairs,Republic of Korea (1020350). (MAYO) MAYO is supported by NIH grants CA116167, CA128978 and CA176785, an NCI Specialized Program of Research Excellence (SPORE) in Breast Cancer (CA116201), a U.S. Department of Defence Ovarian Cancer Idea award (W81XWH-10-1-0341), a grant from the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, a generous gift from the David F. and Margaret T. Grohne Family Foundation and the Ting Tsung and Wei Fong Chao Foundation. (MCGILL) Jewish General Hospital Weekend to End Breast Cancer, Quebec Ministry of Economic Development, Innovation and Export Trade (MODSQUAD) MODSQUAD was supported by MH CZ - DRO (MMCI, 00209805) and by the European Regional Development Fund and the State Budget of the Czech Republic (RECAMO, CZ.1.05/2.1.00/03.0101) to LF, and by Charles University in Prague project UNCE204024 (MZ). (MSKCC) MSKCC is supported by grants from the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, the Robert and Kate Niehaus Clinical Cancer Genetics Initiative, and the Andrew Sabin Research Fund. (NAROD) 1R01 CA149429- 01. (NCI) The research of Drs MH Greene, JT Loud and PL Mai was supported by the Intramural Research Program of the US National Cancer Institute, NIH, and by support services contracts NO2-CP-11019-50 and N02-CP-65504 with Westat, Inc, Rockville, MD. (NICCC) NICCC is supported by Clalit Health Services in Israel. Some of it's activities are supported by the Israel Cancer Association and the Breast Cancer Research Foundation (BCRF), NY. (NNPIO) This work has been supported by the Russian Federation for Basic Research (grants 13-04-92613, 14-04-93959 and 15-04-01744). (NRG Oncology) This study was supported by National Cancer Institute grants to the NRG Oncology Administrative Office and Tissue Bank (CA 27469), the NRG Oncology Statistical and Data Center (CA 37517), and NRG Oncology's Cancer Prevention and Control Committee (CA 101165). (OSU CCG) OSUCCG is supported by the Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center. (PBCS) This work was supported by the ITT (Istituto Toscano Tumori) grants 2011-2013. (SEABASS) Ministry of Science, Technol- ogy and Innovation, Ministry of Higher Education (UM.C/HlR/MOHE/06) and Cancer Research Initiatives Foundation. (SMC) This project was partially funded through a grant by the Isreal cancer association and the funding for the Israeli Inherited breast cancer consortium (SWE-BRCA) SWE-BRCA collaborators are supported by the Swedish Cancer Society. (UCHICAGO) UCHICAGO is supported by NCI Specialized Program of Research Excellence (SPORE) in Breast Cancer (CA125183), R01 CA142996, 1U01CA161032 and by the Ralph and Marion Falk Medical Research Trust, the Entertainment Industry Fund National Women's Cancer Research Alliance and the Breast Cancer research Foundation. OIO is an ACS Clinical Research Professor.(UCLA) Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center Foundation; Breast Cancer Research Foundation. (UCSF) UCSF Cancer Risk Program and Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center. (UKFOCR) UKFOCR was supported by a project grant from CRUK to Paul Pharoah. (UPENN) National Institutes of Health (NIH) (R01-CA102776 and R01- CA083855; Breast Cancer Research Foundation; Susan G. Komen Foundation for the cure, Basser Research Center for BRCA. (UPITT/MWH) Frieda G. and Saul F. Shapira BRCA-Associated Cancer Research Program;Hackers for Hope Pittsburgh. (VFCTG) Victorian Cancer Agency, Cancer Australia, National Breast Cancer Foundation unding for the iCOGS infrastructure came from: the European Community's Seventh Framework Programme under grant agreement n ° 223175 (HEALTH-F2-2009-223175) (COGS), Cancer Research UK (C1287/A10118, C1287/A 10710, C12292/A11174, C1281/ A12014, C5047/A8384, C5047/A15007, C5047/A10692, C8197/A16565), the National Institutes of Health (CA128978) and Post-Cancer GWAS initiative (1U19 CA148537, 1U19 CA148065 and 1U19 CA148112 - the GAME-ON initiative), the Department of Defence (W81XWH-10-1-0341), the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) for the CIHR Team in Familial Risks of Breast Cancer, Komen Foundation for the Cure, the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, and the Ovarian Cancer Research Fund and grants R01-CA122443 and P50-CA136393. ; Sí

Problem setting. The state of the national labor market is characterized by an extremely acute crisis. Its essence is that there is no balance in the field of public administration of the population employment system. In particular, as always, national governments and international structures draw the attention to the imbalance of labor markets, as an important determinant of socio-economic development and a multidimensional problem of public administration policy. Due to globalization, digitalization, demographic change, migration, etc., the problem of public administration in the field of population employment became significantly relevant in recent years, which has a strong impact on the state of the world and national labor markets. The importance of labor market institutions is critical for overcoming imbalances in the employment sector – this is clear from global and, including European experience. Now it is necessary for domestic state policy to comprehend and adapt such experience, as in recent years there have been significant conceptual and practical differences between the institutional approaches used by Ukraine and the European Union concerning how to develop labor and social relations.The effectiveness of the population employment system which is conducted by public administration at the current stage of development of the country – a qualitative indicator of the effectiveness of public policy in the socio-economic sphere, its level directly determines the current state of the domestic economy. The structure of employment and the level of its efficiency, which had a direct connection with various sectors of the economy, the phenomena of illegal labor migration and shadow employment, still remain problems of the labor market. The inefficiency of the structure of public administration of the population employment system is a reflection of the model of economic development, which is based on cheap workforce. Thus, in connection with the current state of the Ukrainian economy, public administration bodies must develop a very prudent employment policy, because only positive changes in public administration of the employment system, including the possibility of free movement of labor, which stimulates structural change, can assist the country to emerge from the crisis and revive economic growth.Recent research and publications analysis. Many researches by both domestic and foreign authors are dedicated to the analysis of the institutional environment of the employment system and the labor market. Analysis of employment legislation and its impact on the labor market, the activities of employment services in the world is presented in researches of such foreign authors as J. Keynes, A. Marshall, O. Williamson, Fan Tui, E. Hansent and D. Price others.Among the domestic authors who resaerched this issue can be identified scientific achievements of M. Butka, S. Goncharova, Yu. Marshavina, E. Libanova, L. Novak-Kalyaeva, V. Petyukha, L. Shchetinina, L. Fokas, T. Vonberg, T. Kitsak, S. Kalinina and others.Highlighting previously unsettled parts of the general problem. The diversity of modern institutional research, however, leaves unanswered a number of important issues for modern state policy of Ukraine - the institutional foundations of public administration of the population employment system of Ukraine. Paying tribute to the conducted researchws, many important problems of institutional restructuring of the domestic labor market in the context of the social crisis and the destruction of the regional economic space remain unresolved.Paper main body. The interaction of individuals in society is regulated by numerous social organizations and regulations. In other words, the activity of each person is institutionalized. Institutionalization is mainly understood as the formalization of social relations, the transition from informal relations and unorganized work to the formation of organizational structures, which were characterized by a clear hierarchy of power. The process of institutionalization also means that the activities of people and their relationships will be regulated, legally legalized organizational structures, if it is necessary and possible.The process of institutionalization is associated with a complex systemic transformation, differently implemented in the normative, organizational and communicative forms of social institutions.At the present stage, the institutional basis (formal component) of the state employment service is determined:1) The Law of Ukraine "On Population Employment" № 5067-VI of 05.07.2012, in its section III it is determined that the state policy in the field of population employment and labor migration is carried out by the Central Executive Body, which implements the state policy in the field of population employment and labor migration, which has its own territorial bodies that are legal entities under public law. Financing of activity is carried out at the expense of means of Fund of the Obligatory State Social Insurance of Ukraine in Case of Unemployment;2) The Law of Ukraine "On Compulsory State Social Insurance in Case of Unemployment" stipulates that the functions of the executive directorate of the Fund are performed by the central executive body implementing state policy in the field of population employment and labor migration, and its territorial bodies;3) In accordance with the Fundamentals of the legislation of Ukraine concerning compulsory state social insurance, the management of funds of compulsory state social insurance is carried out by the boards and executive directorates of insurance funds, which ensure defined by laws specific types of social insurance, the implementation of board decisions;4) The Decree of the President of Ukraine "On the State Employment Service of Ukraine" № 19/2013 of January 16, 2013 approved the Regulations on the State Employment Service of Ukraine, determined that the new service is the successor of the relevant bodies of the state employment service. The same Decree amended Section II and Clause 12 of Section IV of the Scheme of Organization and Interaction of Central Executive Bodies of the Decree of the President of Ukraine "On Optimization of the System of Central Executive Bodies" № 1085/2010 of December 9, 2010, supplemented by the following paragraph: "State Employment Service of Ukraine". We would like to draw special attention to the fact that the Decree of the President of Ukraine is currently in force. However, the new "State Employment Service of Ukraine" did not last long after its creation. On July 11, 2013, the Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine "Issues of the State Employment Service" №565 was adopted, according to it territorial bodies of the State Employment Service were established as legal entities under public law, and the State Employment Center of the Ministry of Labor and Social Policy was merged with the State Employment Service. According to the appendix to the Resolution, departments of the State Employment Service was established in regional and district centers. However, in fact this did not happen. The Resolution expired on the basis of the Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine "Some Issues of Public Administration in the Field of Employment" № 90 of March 5, 2014, which states that "in order to improve public administration in the field of population employment and optimize the system of central executive bodies "the state employment service" was liquidated. It was also determined that the state employment service as a centralized system of state institutions, its activities are directed and coordinated by the Ministry of Economic Development, Trade and Agriculture, is the successor of the State Employment Service. Along with the liquidation of the State Employment Service of Ukraine, employees of the State Employment Service also lost the status of civil servants. It is interesting that the Presidential Decree established the State Employment Service of Ukraine, and the Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine abolished the State Employment Service;5) Presidential Decree "On Optimization of the System of Central Executive Bodies" № 1085/2010 of 09.12.2010, where in the section "Central authorities" there is such a body as the "State Employment Service", and in section IV the central executive bodies, which activities are directed and coordinated by the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine through the relevant members of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, determine that the activities of "the State Employment Service of Ukraine" are directed through the Minister of Social Policy of Ukraine.We would like to draw your attention to the fact that "the State Employment Service of Ukraine" was liquidated, but this Decree is valid and was not amended since 2014;6) There was also an attempt to change the organizational and legal form and transform the SESU into the National Employment Agency. The concept of such reform was presented by the Minister of Social Policy of Ukraine on June 25, 2015 at the International Scientific and Practical Conference "Labor Market of Ukraine: European Dimension". The work of the National Employment Agency on the basis of the SESU was scheduled to start on January 1, 2016. However, due to the lack of substantiation of the planned reforms, no reforms were carried out. Even while discussing the idea of reorganization, experts had doubts about its relevance, but noted the necessity for change in the work of the employment service;7) The next step in "reforming" the state employment service was the issuance of the Order of the Ministry of Social Policy of Ukraine № 1543 of 15.12.2016, which approved the "Regulations on the State Employment Service", but not taking into account that the title mentions "state", according to item 1 of the Regulation such institution as "State employment service" which is the centralized system of the state institutions which activity is directed and coordinated by the Ministry of Social Policy of Ukraine again appears. The Service consisted of the Central Office of the Service, Regional and Basic Employment Centers, the Ukrainian State Employment Service Training Institute, vocational schools of the State Employment Service, which are defined as legal entities under public law. However, this Order expired on the basis of the Order of the Ministry of Social Policy of Ukraine "On approval of the Regulations on the State Employment Service" № 945 of June 14, 2019. In our opinion, the only significant change in this order was that instead of the Central Office in the service, the State Employment Center reappeared. This provision is valid;8) On December 5, 2019, the Law of Ukraine "On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of Ukraine Concerning the Formation of State Policy in the Sphere of Labor, Labor Relations, Employment and Labor Migration" № 341-IX was adopted, pursuant to it the Resolution was adopted Of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine № 206 of March 3, 2020 "On Amendments to Certain Resolutions of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine Concerning the Transfer of Certain Powers from the Ministry of Social Policy to the Ministry of Economic Development, Trade and Agriculture in the Field of Employment population", which entered into force on March 12, 2020. In accordance with the provisions of this Resolution, taking into account the new priorities of public policy, the issue of public administration of the employment system is a component of economic rather than social policy. Also, this resolution, by amending the existing regulations, destroys the concept of "public employment service". Only the State Employment Center remains. At the same time, no changes were made to the Order of the Ministry of Social Policy of Ukraine "On approval of the Regulations on the State Employment Service" № 945 of June 14, 2019, according to it the activities of the State Employment Service are directed and coordinated by the Ministry of Social Policy of Ukraine. is the main institution of the service. The new provision has not yet been approved. In connection with these conflicts in the law there is a question of legitimacy of the institution.Conclusions of the research and prospects for further researches. Institutional principles of public administration of the population employment system of Ukraine are a process that consists in defining and consolidating social norms, rules, statuses and roles, bringing them into a system capable of acting to reduce the negative impact of unemployment by identifying, eliminating and neutralizing the causes and conditions of unemployment. The result of this process is the creation of an institute of state employment service.The analysis makes it possible to identify in our country an imperfect institutional environment for employment and the labor market. First of all, it is related to the existing contradictions in the legislative system, the shortcomings of the current regulations on the state employment service in Ukraine, and the lack of a clearly defined development strategy.A clearly defined goal, a detailed presentation of the tasks and functions of the state employment service were not formed, in particular those that take into account new trends and realities of employment and the labor market, provide employment legislation with formalities that do not ensure effective activity of service, does not encourage new forms of cooperation of neither potential employees nor employers. ; Розглянуто співвідношення понять "інституціоналізація" та "інституалізація".Зроблено висновок, що ці поняття є тотожними. Доведено, що у контексті глобалізації, цифровізації, демографічних змін, міграції тощо проблема державного управління у сфері зайнятості населення упродовж останніх років суттєво актуалізується, що сильно впливає на стан світового і національного ринків праці. Наголошено, що значення інститутів ринку праці є критичним для подолання розбалансованості у секторі зайнятості. Досліджено інституціональні основи діяльності Державної служби зайнятості. Визначено, що інституціональне середовище зайнятості та ринку праці є недосконалим: існує велика кількість колізій у нормативно-правовому забезпеченні, відсутня чітко окреслена стратегія розвитку

The importance of direct patient reporting has been highlighted by recent European legislation on pharmacovigilance, and in addition, there is also an increasing attention worldwide for this subject. In Europe, the legislation directs member states to take all appropriate measures to encourage patients to report suspected adverse drug reactions (ADR) to the relevant national authorities. The introduction of patient reporting in pharmacovigilance indicates a change in attitude in which patient reporting is valued due to their potential to contribute useful information on drug safety. The aim of this project is to give a better understanding of the role of patients in pharmacovigilance systems. The chosen approach during this project intended to lead to a better understanding of the awareness and perception of the risk involved with medicine use and how patients and healthcare professionals can contribute to optimize the current pharmacovigilance system. For the purpose of this study, the project was divided in several parts, for which specific objectives were designed and described below, together with main results of the thesis. The first study described in Chapter 2 discusses the experiences of patient reporting to pharmacovigilance in Portugal and quantifies consumers motivation for reporting ADRs, investigating patient opinions about reporting with a quantitative analysis in a large group of consumers. The objective was to describe the attitudes and knowledge of the general public regarding spontaneous reporting and the reasons and opinions that can influence consumers adverse drug reaction underreporting. The study reveals that consumers are more likely to do spontaneous report about severe reactions or if they are worried about the symptoms. Also, more altruistic motives as the contribution to research and knowledge, the contribution to improvement of drugs and prevent harm to other people are seen as motives to report ADRs by patients. These motives can be classified in reporting for oneself (severity, worried, problems), reporting for others (share experiences, preventing harm, feeling responsible) or reporting for improvement (research and knowledge, patient information leaflet). It appeared that multiple patient characteristics (gender, age and level of education) had an effect on the motives of patients to report their ADR. In Chapter 3 were described the attitudes toward patient reporting systems, and progress toward implementing such systems among national competent authorities participating in the World Health Organization Programme for International Drug Monitoring. The study shows that most countries accept ADR reports from patients by an official reporting system designed for patients or through the existing system for Healthcare Professionals (HCPs). The main reasons for not having a Patient Reporting System (PRS) are financial restraints and a lack of information/education of patients. Attitudes toward a PRS are positive, but some countries fear 181 that they will not be able to handle an increase in reports. Most countries accept ADR reports from the general public. The lack of resources/budget and the lack of information/education for patients are highlighted as the major obstacles to the implementation of PRS. Chapter 4 focused on patient organizations role to promote patient reporting. In Chapter 4.1, it was studied the role of European patient organizations with the objective of understand the role of European patient organizations as stakeholders to optimize patient involvement in pharmacovigilance. There is a wide range of interest in drug safety issues among patient organizations, which appear to have an important role in encouraging patients to talk with their doctors/pharmacists about ADRs experienced, or to help him/her report the ADRs to the pharmacovigilance systems. A lack of resources, budget, and support from National Competent Authorities (NCAs) are seen as the main barriers to being involved in pharmacovigilance. On the other hand, an important part of the organizations appears to not have any activities or involvement related to pharmacovigilance. Bringing pharmacovigilance stakeholders and patient organizations together could create a more optimal patient reporting culture. Members of a patient organization showed more positive opinions related to pharmacovigilance. They would like to have more information about ADRs related to their medication and a higher intention to have information on how to report when compared to other patients. The other study in Chapter 4 described medicines and attitudes and opinions regarding pharmacovigilance in people with diabetes. The study explored the impact of the patient reports being followed by a patient diabetes association. The objective was to assess risk perception of developing adverse drug reactions and knowledge, attitudes and opinions regarding pharmacovigilance in patients with diabetes and to investigate whether being a member of a patient organization for diabetes had an effect on these factors. Patients followed in a diabetes patient association presented a higher score of risk perception, experiences using the medicines, but also by the information received from the patient organization. Being a member of a patient organization seems to have an important role in increasing risk perception since they presented the highest risk perception scores for medicines related to their disease. Those patients affirmed that their doctor explained the possible ADRs of their medication and they have higher intention to report ADRs in the future if they are serious or unexpected. Patient organizations are well positioned to be a source where patients can obtain reliable information, changing their attitudes and perceptions about the disease and drug treatments. An additional chapter was provided, related with HCPs role as active agents to improve the involvement of patients in pharmacovigilance. Chapter 5.1 objective was to describe the attitudes and knowledge of different community pharmacy professional groups regarding the spontaneous reporting of adverse drug reactions to identify the factors that can influence adverse drug reaction under-reporting. Despite HCPs knowledge of the pharmacovigilance system, only a small 182 percentage of Community pharmacy professionals had reported ADRs, and approximately half did not usually encourage consumers to report possible ADRs. In Chapter 5.2, the objective was to evaluate community pharmacy professionals as role players . Reporting of ADRs is fundamental to pharmacovigilance, and consumer reporting is a significant contribution to creating useful information on drug safety. Community pharmacy professionals can play a major role in pharmacovigilance by reporting ADRs directly or encouraging consumers to report them. Measures to overcome under-reporting as encouraging HCPs and consumers to play an active role in pharmacovigilance, namely continuous education and training should be incorporated to increase the level of risk perception and encourage a better attitude about reporting for both HCPs and consumers. Chapter 6 presents a general discussion about the role of general public in pharmacovigilance, providing recommendations that arose from the results with different points of view of patient participation in pharmacovigilance (national competent authorities, HCPs, patient organizations and patients themselves). In conclusion, this thesis has focused on an overview of the participation of different stakeholders in pharmacovigilance, including HCPs, NCAs, Patient Organizations and patients themselves. Further research and developments for pharmacovigilance systems and for patients themselves arose from the results provided. ; Recientemente, la legislación europea sobre farmacovigilancia ha resaltado la importancia de la participación de los ciudadanos en la notificación espontánea de sospechas de reacciones adversas (RAMs), siendo este asunto objeto de atención creciente en todo el mundo. En Europa, la legislación establece que los Estados miembros deben tomar las medidas apropiadas para alentar a los pacientes a notificar las de sospechas de RAMs a las autoridades nacionales competentes. La introducción de esta posibildad, indica un cambio de actitud en el que se valora el informe del paciente debido a su potencial para aportar información útil sobre la seguridad de los medicamentos. El objetivo de esta tesis es comprender mejor el papel de los pacientes en los sistemas de farmacovigilancia. El enfoque elegido pretende describir la conciencia y la percepción del riesgo por parte de los pacientes en relación con el uso de medicamentos y cómo tanto ellos, como los profesionales de la salud (PS) pueden contribuir a optimizar el sistema actual de farmacovigilancia. Con este propósito, la tesis se dividió en varias partes, cuyos objetivos específicos y principales resultados, se describen a continuación. En el primer estudio descrito en el Capítulo 2, se discuten las experiencias de la notificacion ciudadana al sistema de farmacovigilancia en Portugal y cuantifica la motivación de los consumidores, investigando sus opiniones a través de un análisis cuantitativo llevado a cabo en un gran grupo de usuarios. El objetivo de este estudio es describir las actitudes y el conocimiento de los ciudadanos en general con respecto a las notificaciones espontáneas y las razones y opiniones que pueden influir en la escasa notificación de RAMs por su parte. El estudio revela que es más probable la notificación espontánea por parte de los ciudadanos, cuando se trate de reacciones graves o si existiera preocupación por los síntomas generados por la RAM. Además, otros motivos más altruistas como la contribución a la investigación y al conocimiento, la contribución a la mejora de los fármacos y la prevención del daño en otras personas, también fueron considerados por los pacientes como motivos para notificar RAM. Estas motivaciones pueden clasificarse en: notificar para uno mismo (gravedad, preocupación, problemas), para otros (compartir experiencias, prevenir daños, sentirse responsable) o para la mejora (investigación y conocimiento, hoja de información para el paciente). Asimismo, diferentes características del paciente como género, edad y nivel de educación, tenían influencia en sus motivos para notificar sus RAMs. El Capítulo 3 describe las actitudes de las autoridades nacionales de los participantes en el Programa de la Organización Mundial de la Salud de Vigilancia Farmacéutica Internacional acerca de la notificación ciudadana de sospechas de RAM y del progreso en su implementación. 187 El estudio muestra que la mayoría de los países aceptan notificaciones de sospechas de RAMs de los ciudadanos mediante un sistema oficial diseñado especialmente para ellos, o bien mediante el sistema existente para PS. Las principales razones para no disponer de un Sistema de Notificación de sospechas de RAM para Ciudadanos (SNRC) son las restricciones económicas y la falta de información / educación de los pacientes. Las actitudes acerca de los SNRC son positivas, aunque algunos países temen no poder manejar un aumento de las notificaciones de sospechas. La falta de recursos y la falta de información/educación de los pacientes se destacan como los principales obstáculos para la implementación del SNRC. El Capítulo 4 se centró en el papel de las organizaciones de pacientes para promover la notificación. En el Capítulo 4.1 se estudió el papel de las organizaciones europeas de pacientes como partes interesadas en optimizar la participación del paciente en la farmacovigilancia. Existe un amplio interés en los problemas de seguridad de los medicamentos entre las organizaciones de pacientes. Estas organizaciones parecen tener un papel importante alentando a los pacientes a hablar con sus médicos / farmacéuticos sobre las RAM experimentadas, o ayudándolo a informar las sospechas de RAM a los sistemas de farmacovigilancia. La falta de recursos y apoyo de las Autoridades Nacionales Competentes se consideran las principales barreras para participar en la farmacovigilancia. Por otro lado, una parte importante de las organizaciones parece no tener ninguna actividad relacionada con la farmacovigilancia. Reunir a las partes interesadas en farmacovigilancia con las organizaciones de pacientes podría crear una cultura de notificaciones de sospechas por los pacientes optimizada. De un estudio realizado en una organización de pacientes de pacientes diabéticos (Capítulo 4.2) sabemos que sus miembros mostraron opiniones positivas relacionadas con la farmacovigilancia. En general, a los pacientes asociados les gustaría tener más información sobre las RAMs de sus medicación y tenían mayor interés en disponer de información sobre cómo notificar que los pacientes diabéticos que no formaban parte de la asociación. El capítulo 5.1 se centró en el papel de los PS como agentes activos para mejorar la participación de los pacientes en la farmacovigilancia. El objetivo del Capítulo 5.1 era describir las actitudes y el conocimiento de los diferentes grupos profesionales de Farmacias Comunitarias con respecto a la notificación espontánea de RAM para identificar los factores que puedan influir en la falta de notificación. A pesar de que los PS conocen el sistema de farmacovigilancia, solo un pequeño porcentaje de los profesionales de Farmacia Comunitaria ha informado de RAMs, y aproximadamente la mitad no suele alentar a los ciudadanos a informar sospechas de RAMs. En el Capítulo 5.2, el objetivo fue evaluar a los profesionales de Farmacia Comunitaria como actores en la mejora de la participación de los ciudadanos en la farmacovigilancia y describir sus actitudes en relación con el sistema de farmacovigilancia y la notificación ciudadana de sospechas de RAMs. Las notificaciones de RAMs son fundamentales para la farmacovigilancia, y los informes de los ciudadanos son una contribución significativa a la creación de información útil sobre la seguridad de los medicamentos. Los profesionales de la Farmacia Comunitaria pueden desempeñar un papel importante en la farmacovigilancia notificando directamente o 188 alentando a los ciudadanos. Se deben implementar medidas como estrategias de educación y capacitación continua para superar la falta de información de los ciudadanos y alentar a los profesionales sanitarios a desempeñar un papel activo en la farmacovigilancia, mejorando su nivel de percepción de riesgo y promoviendo una mejor actitud. El Capítulo 6 presenta una discusión general sobre el papel del ciudadano en la farmacovigilancia, brindando recomendaciones surgidas de los resultados de los estudios sobre los diferentes puntos de vista (autoridades nacionales competentes, profesionales sanitarios, organizaciones de pacientes y los propios pacientes) acerca de la participación del paciente en la farmacovigilancia. En conclusión, esta tesis se ha centrado en una visión general de la participación de diferentes partes interesadas en la farmacovigilancia, incluidos los PS, las autoridades nacionales competentes, las organizaciones de pacientes y los propios pacientes. De los resultados proporcionados, surge la necesidad de un desarrollo adicional de medidas dirigidas a los PS, pacientes y a los propios sistemas de farmacovigilancia para mejorar la participación de los ciudadanos en los sistemas de farmacovigilancia.

Problem setting. The state of the national labor market is characterized by an extremely acute crisis. Its essence is that there is no balance in the field of public administration of the population employment system. In particular, as always, national governments and international structures draw the attention to the imbalance of labor markets, as an important determinant of socio-economic development and a multidimensional problem of public administration policy. Due to globalization, digitalization, demographic change, migration, etc., the problem of public administration in the field of population employment became significantly relevant in recent years, which has a strong impact on the state of the world and national labor markets. The importance of labor market institutions is critical for overcoming imbalances in the employment sector – this is clear from global and, including European experience. Now it is necessary for domestic state policy to comprehend and adapt such experience, as in recent years there have been significant conceptual and practical differences between the institutional approaches used by Ukraine and the European Union concerning how to develop labor and social relations.The effectiveness of the population employment system which is conducted by public administration at the current stage of development of the country – a qualitative indicator of the effectiveness of public policy in the socio-economic sphere, its level directly determines the current state of the domestic economy. The structure of employment and the level of its efficiency, which had a direct connection with various sectors of the economy, the phenomena of illegal labor migration and shadow employment, still remain problems of the labor market. The inefficiency of the structure of public administration of the population employment system is a reflection of the model of economic development, which is based on cheap workforce. Thus, in connection with the current state of the Ukrainian economy, public administration bodies must develop a very prudent employment policy, because only positive changes in public administration of the employment system, including the possibility of free movement of labor, which stimulates structural change, can assist the country to emerge from the crisis and revive economic growth.Recent research and publications analysis. Many researches by both domestic and foreign authors are dedicated to the analysis of the institutional environment of the employment system and the labor market. Analysis of employment legislation and its impact on the labor market, the activities of employment services in the world is presented in researches of such foreign authors as J. Keynes, A. Marshall, O. Williamson, Fan Tui, E. Hansent and D. Price others.Among the domestic authors who resaerched this issue can be identified scientific achievements of M. Butka, S. Goncharova, Yu. Marshavina, E. Libanova, L. Novak-Kalyaeva, V. Petyukha, L. Shchetinina, L. Fokas, T. Vonberg, T. Kitsak, S. Kalinina and others.Highlighting previously unsettled parts of the general problem. The diversity of modern institutional research, however, leaves unanswered a number of important issues for modern state policy of Ukraine - the institutional foundations of public administration of the population employment system of Ukraine. Paying tribute to the conducted researchws, many important problems of institutional restructuring of the domestic labor market in the context of the social crisis and the destruction of the regional economic space remain unresolved.Paper main body. The interaction of individuals in society is regulated by numerous social organizations and regulations. In other words, the activity of each person is institutionalized. Institutionalization is mainly understood as the formalization of social relations, the transition from informal relations and unorganized work to the formation of organizational structures, which were characterized by a clear hierarchy of power. The process of institutionalization also means that the activities of people and their relationships will be regulated, legally legalized organizational structures, if it is necessary and possible.The process of institutionalization is associated with a complex systemic transformation, differently implemented in the normative, organizational and communicative forms of social institutions.At the present stage, the institutional basis (formal component) of the state employment service is determined:1) The Law of Ukraine "On Population Employment" № 5067-VI of 05.07.2012, in its section III it is determined that the state policy in the field of population employment and labor migration is carried out by the Central Executive Body, which implements the state policy in the field of population employment and labor migration, which has its own territorial bodies that are legal entities under public law. Financing of activity is carried out at the expense of means of Fund of the Obligatory State Social Insurance of Ukraine in Case of Unemployment;2) The Law of Ukraine "On Compulsory State Social Insurance in Case of Unemployment" stipulates that the functions of the executive directorate of the Fund are performed by the central executive body implementing state policy in the field of population employment and labor migration, and its territorial bodies;3) In accordance with the Fundamentals of the legislation of Ukraine concerning compulsory state social insurance, the management of funds of compulsory state social insurance is carried out by the boards and executive directorates of insurance funds, which ensure defined by laws specific types of social insurance, the implementation of board decisions;4) The Decree of the President of Ukraine "On the State Employment Service of Ukraine" № 19/2013 of January 16, 2013 approved the Regulations on the State Employment Service of Ukraine, determined that the new service is the successor of the relevant bodies of the state employment service. The same Decree amended Section II and Clause 12 of Section IV of the Scheme of Organization and Interaction of Central Executive Bodies of the Decree of the President of Ukraine "On Optimization of the System of Central Executive Bodies" № 1085/2010 of December 9, 2010, supplemented by the following paragraph: "State Employment Service of Ukraine". We would like to draw special attention to the fact that the Decree of the President of Ukraine is currently in force. However, the new "State Employment Service of Ukraine" did not last long after its creation. On July 11, 2013, the Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine "Issues of the State Employment Service" №565 was adopted, according to it territorial bodies of the State Employment Service were established as legal entities under public law, and the State Employment Center of the Ministry of Labor and Social Policy was merged with the State Employment Service. According to the appendix to the Resolution, departments of the State Employment Service was established in regional and district centers. However, in fact this did not happen. The Resolution expired on the basis of the Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine "Some Issues of Public Administration in the Field of Employment" № 90 of March 5, 2014, which states that "in order to improve public administration in the field of population employment and optimize the system of central executive bodies "the state employment service" was liquidated. It was also determined that the state employment service as a centralized system of state institutions, its activities are directed and coordinated by the Ministry of Economic Development, Trade and Agriculture, is the successor of the State Employment Service. Along with the liquidation of the State Employment Service of Ukraine, employees of the State Employment Service also lost the status of civil servants. It is interesting that the Presidential Decree established the State Employment Service of Ukraine, and the Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine abolished the State Employment Service;5) Presidential Decree "On Optimization of the System of Central Executive Bodies" № 1085/2010 of 09.12.2010, where in the section "Central authorities" there is such a body as the "State Employment Service", and in section IV the central executive bodies, which activities are directed and coordinated by the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine through the relevant members of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, determine that the activities of "the State Employment Service of Ukraine" are directed through the Minister of Social Policy of Ukraine.We would like to draw your attention to the fact that "the State Employment Service of Ukraine" was liquidated, but this Decree is valid and was not amended since 2014;6) There was also an attempt to change the organizational and legal form and transform the SESU into the National Employment Agency. The concept of such reform was presented by the Minister of Social Policy of Ukraine on June 25, 2015 at the International Scientific and Practical Conference "Labor Market of Ukraine: European Dimension". The work of the National Employment Agency on the basis of the SESU was scheduled to start on January 1, 2016. However, due to the lack of substantiation of the planned reforms, no reforms were carried out. Even while discussing the idea of reorganization, experts had doubts about its relevance, but noted the necessity for change in the work of the employment service;7) The next step in "reforming" the state employment service was the issuance of the Order of the Ministry of Social Policy of Ukraine № 1543 of 15.12.2016, which approved the "Regulations on the State Employment Service", but not taking into account that the title mentions "state", according to item 1 of the Regulation such institution as "State employment service" which is the centralized system of the state institutions which activity is directed and coordinated by the Ministry of Social Policy of Ukraine again appears. The Service consisted of the Central Office of the Service, Regional and Basic Employment Centers, the Ukrainian State Employment Service Training Institute, vocational schools of the State Employment Service, which are defined as legal entities under public law. However, this Order expired on the basis of the Order of the Ministry of Social Policy of Ukraine "On approval of the Regulations on the State Employment Service" № 945 of June 14, 2019. In our opinion, the only significant change in this order was that instead of the Central Office in the service, the State Employment Center reappeared. This provision is valid;8) On December 5, 2019, the Law of Ukraine "On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of Ukraine Concerning the Formation of State Policy in the Sphere of Labor, Labor Relations, Employment and Labor Migration" № 341-IX was adopted, pursuant to it the Resolution was adopted Of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine № 206 of March 3, 2020 "On Amendments to Certain Resolutions of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine Concerning the Transfer of Certain Powers from the Ministry of Social Policy to the Ministry of Economic Development, Trade and Agriculture in the Field of Employment population", which entered into force on March 12, 2020. In accordance with the provisions of this Resolution, taking into account the new priorities of public policy, the issue of public administration of the employment system is a component of economic rather than social policy. Also, this resolution, by amending the existing regulations, destroys the concept of "public employment service". Only the State Employment Center remains. At the same time, no changes were made to the Order of the Ministry of Social Policy of Ukraine "On approval of the Regulations on the State Employment Service" № 945 of June 14, 2019, according to it the activities of the State Employment Service are directed and coordinated by the Ministry of Social Policy of Ukraine. is the main institution of the service. The new provision has not yet been approved. In connection with these conflicts in the law there is a question of legitimacy of the institution.Conclusions of the research and prospects for further researches. Institutional principles of public administration of the population employment system of Ukraine are a process that consists in defining and consolidating social norms, rules, statuses and roles, bringing them into a system capable of acting to reduce the negative impact of unemployment by identifying, eliminating and neutralizing the causes and conditions of unemployment. The result of this process is the creation of an institute of state employment service.The analysis makes it possible to identify in our country an imperfect institutional environment for employment and the labor market. First of all, it is related to the existing contradictions in the legislative system, the shortcomings of the current regulations on the state employment service in Ukraine, and the lack of a clearly defined development strategy.A clearly defined goal, a detailed presentation of the tasks and functions of the state employment service were not formed, in particular those that take into account new trends and realities of employment and the labor market, provide employment legislation with formalities that do not ensure effective activity of service, does not encourage new forms of cooperation of neither potential employees nor employers. ; Розглянуто співвідношення понять "інституціоналізація" та "інституалізація".Зроблено висновок, що ці поняття є тотожними. Доведено, що у контексті глобалізації, цифровізації, демографічних змін, міграції тощо проблема державного управління у сфері зайнятості населення упродовж останніх років суттєво актуалізується, що сильно впливає на стан світового і національного ринків праці. Наголошено, що значення інститутів ринку праці є критичним для подолання розбалансованості у секторі зайнятості. Досліджено інституціональні основи діяльності Державної служби зайнятості. Визначено, що інституціональне середовище зайнятості та ринку праці є недосконалим: існує велика кількість колізій у нормативно-правовому забезпеченні, відсутня чітко окреслена стратегія розвитку

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License.-- CIMBA et al. ; BRCA1-associated breast and ovarian cancer risks can be modified by common genetic variants. To identify further cancer risk-modifying loci, we performed a multi-stage GWAS of 11,705 BRCA1 carriers (of whom 5,920 were diagnosed with breast and 1,839 were diagnosed with ovarian cancer), with a further replication in an additional sample of 2,646 BRCA1 carriers. We identified a novel breast cancer risk modifier locus at 1q32 for BRCA1 carriers (rs2290854, P = 2.7 × 10(-8), HR = 1.14, 95% CI: 1.09-1.20). In addition, we identified two novel ovarian cancer risk modifier loci: 17q21.31 (rs17631303, P = 1.4 × 10(-8), HR = 1.27, 95% CI: 1.17-1.38) and 4q32.3 (rs4691139, P = 3.4 × 10(-8), HR = 1.20, 95% CI: 1.17-1.38). The 4q32.3 locus was not associated with ovarian cancer risk in the general population or BRCA2 carriers, suggesting a BRCA1-specific association. The 17q21.31 locus was also associated with ovarian cancer risk in 8,211 BRCA2 carriers (P = 2×10(-4)). These loci may lead to an improved understanding of the etiology of breast and ovarian tumors in BRCA1 carriers. Based on the joint distribution of the known BRCA1 breast cancer risk-modifying loci, we estimated that the breast cancer lifetime risks for the 5% of BRCA1 carriers at lowest risk are 28%-50% compared to 81%-100% for the 5% at highest risk. Similarly, based on the known ovarian cancer risk-modifying loci, the 5% of BRCA1 carriers at lowest risk have an estimated lifetime risk of developing ovarian cancer of 28% or lower, whereas the 5% at highest risk will have a risk of 63% or higher. Such differences in risk may have important implications for risk prediction and clinical management for BRCA1 carriers. ; The study was supported by NIH grant CA128978, an NCI Specialized Program of Research Excellence (SPORE) in Breast Cancer (CA116201), a U.S. Department of Defense Ovarian Cancer Idea award (W81XWH-10-1-0341), grants from the Breast Cancer Research Foundation and the Komen Foundation for the Cure; Cancer Research UK grants C12292/A11174 and C1287/A10118; the European Commission's Seventh Framework Programme grant agreement 223175 (HEALTH-F2-2009-223175). Breast Cancer Family Registry Studies (BCFR): supported by the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health under RFA # CA-06-503 and through cooperative agreements with members of the Breast Cancer Family Registry (BCFR) and Principal Investigators, including Cancer Care Ontario (U01 CA69467), Cancer Prevention Institute of California (U01 CA69417), Columbia University (U01 CA69398), Fox Chase Cancer Center (U01 CA69631), Huntsman Cancer Institute (U01 CA69446), and University of Melbourne (U01 CA69638). The Australian BCFR was also supported by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, the New South Wales Cancer Council, the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation (Australia), and the Victorian Breast Cancer Research Consortium. Melissa C. Southey is a NHMRC Senior Research Fellow and a Victorian Breast Cancer Research Consortium Group Leader. Carriers at FCCC were also identified with support from National Institutes of Health grants P01 CA16094 and R01 CA22435. The New York BCFR was also supported by National Institutes of Health grants P30 CA13696 and P30 ES009089. The Utah BCFR was also supported by the National Center for Research Resources and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, NIH grant UL1 RR025764, and by Award Number P30 CA042014 from the National Cancer Institute. Baltic Familial Breast Ovarian Cancer Consortium (BFBOCC): BFBOCC is partly supported by Lithuania (BFBOCC-LT), Research Council of Lithuania grant LIG-19/2010, and Hereditary Cancer Association (Paveldimo vėžio asociacija). ; Latvia (BFBOCC-LV) is partly supported by LSC grant 10.0010.08 and in part by a grant from the ESF Nr.2009/0220/1DP/1.1.1.2.0/09/APIA/VIAA/016.BRCA-gene mutations and breast cancer in South African women (BMBSA): BMBSA was supported by grants from the Cancer Association of South Africa (CANSA) to Elizabeth J. van Rensburg. Beckman Research Institute of the City of Hope (BRICOH): Susan L. Neuhausen was partially supported by the Morris and Horowitz Families Endowed Professorship. BRICOH was supported by NIH R01CA74415 and NIH P30 CA033752. Copenhagen Breast Cancer Study (CBCS): The CBCS study was supported by the NEYE Foundation. Spanish National Cancer Centre (CNIO): This work was partially supported by Spanish Association against Cancer (AECC08), RTICC 06/0020/1060, FISPI08/1120, Mutua Madrileña Foundation (FMMA) and SAF2010-20493. City of Hope Cancer Center (COH): The City of Hope Clinical Cancer Genetics Community Research Network is supported by Award Number RC4A153828 (PI: Jeffrey N. Weitzel) from the National Cancer Institute and the Office of the Director, National Institutes of Health. CONsorzio Studi ITaliani sui Tumori Ereditari Alla Mammella (CONSIT TEAM): CONSIT TEAM was funded by grants from Fondazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro (Special Project "Hereditary tumors"), Italian Association for Cancer Research (AIRC, IG 8713), Italian Minitry of Health (Extraordinary National Cancer Program 2006, "Alleanza contro il Cancro" and "Progetto Tumori Femminili), Italian Ministry of Education, University and Research (Prin 2008) Centro di Ascolto Donne Operate al Seno (CAOS) association and by funds from Italian citizens who allocated the 5×1000 share of their tax payment in support of the Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale Tumori, according to Italian laws (INT-Institutional strategic projects '5×1000'). German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ): The DKFZ study was supported by the DKFZ. The Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Research Group Netherlands (HEBON): HEBON is supported by the Dutch Cancer Society grants NKI1998-1854, NKI2004-3088, NKI2007-3756, the NWO grant 91109024, the Pink Ribbon grant 110005, and the BBMRI grant CP46/NWO. ; Epidemiological study of BRCA1 & BRCA2 mutation carriers (EMBRACE): EMBRACE is supported by Cancer Research UK Grants C1287/A10118 and C1287/A11990. D. Gareth Evans and Fiona Lalloo are supported by an NIHR grant to the Biomedical Research Centre, Manchester. The Investigators at The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust are supported by an NIHR grant to the Biomedical Research Centre at The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust. Rosalind A. Eeles and Elizabeth Bancroft are supported by Cancer Research UK Grant C5047/A8385. Fox Chase Cancer Canter (FCCC): The authors acknowledge support from The University of Kansas Cancer Center and the Kansas Bioscience Authority Eminent Scholar Program. Andrew K. Godwin was funded by 5U01CA113916, R01CA140323, and by the Chancellors Distinguished Chair in Biomedical Sciences Professorship. German Consortium of Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (GC-HBOC): The German Consortium of Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (GC-HBOC) is supported by the German Cancer Aid (grant no 109076, Rita K. Schmutzler) and by the Center for Molecular Medicine Cologne (CMMC). Genetic Modifiers of cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers (GEMO): The GEMO study was supported by the Ligue National Contre le Cancer; the Association "Le cancer du sein, parlons-en!" Award and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research for the "CIHR Team in Familial Risks of Breast Cancer" program. Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG): This study was supported by National Cancer Institute grants to the Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) Administrative Office and Tissue Bank (CA 27469), Statistical and Data Center (CA 37517), and GOG's Cancer Prevention and Control Committtee (CA 101165). Drs. Mark H. Greene and Phuong L. Mai were supported by funding from the Intramural Research Program, NCI, NIH. Hospital Clinico San Carlos (HCSC): HCSC was supported by RETICC 06/0020/0021, FIS research grant 09/00859, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitivity, and the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF). ; Helsinki Breast Cancer Study (HEBCS): The HEBCS was financially supported by the Helsinki University Central Hospital Research Fund, Academy of Finland (132473), the Finnish Cancer Society, the Nordic Cancer Union, and the Sigrid Juselius Foundation. Study of Genetic Mutations in Breast and Ovarian Cancer patients in Hong Kong and Asia (HRBCP): HRBCP is supported by The Hong Kong Hereditary Breast Cancer Family Registry and the Dr. Ellen Li Charitable Foundation, Hong Kong. Molecular Genetic Studies of Breast and Ovarian Cancer in Hungary (HUNBOCS): HUNBOCS was supported by Hungarian Research Grant KTIA-OTKA CK-80745 and the Norwegian EEA Financial Mechanism HU0115/NA/2008-3/ÖP-9. Institut Català d'Oncologia (ICO): The ICO study was supported by the Asociación Española Contra el Cáncer, Spanish Health Research Foundation, Ramón Areces Foundation, Carlos III Health Institute, Catalan Health Institute, and Autonomous Government of Catalonia and contract grant numbers: ISCIIIRETIC RD06/0020/1051, PI09/02483, PI10/01422, PI10/00748, 2009SGR290, and 2009SGR283. International Hereditary Cancer Centre (IHCC): Supported by the Polish Foundation of Science. Katarzyna Jaworska is a fellow of International PhD program, Postgraduate School of Molecular Medicine, Warsaw Medical University. Iceland Landspitali–University Hospital (ILUH): The ILUH group was supported by the Icelandic Association "Walking for Breast Cancer Research" and by the Landspitali University Hospital Research Fund. INterdisciplinary HEalth Research Internal Team BReast CAncer susceptibility (INHERIT): INHERIT work was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research for the "CIHR Team in Familial Risks of Breast Cancer" program, the Canadian Breast Cancer Research Alliance grant 019511 and the Ministry of Economic Development, Innovation and Export Trade grant PSR-SIIRI-701. Jacques Simard is Chairholder of the Canada Research Chair in Oncogenetics. ; Istituto Oncologico Veneto (IOVHBOCS): The IOVHBOCS study was supported by Ministero dell'Istruzione, dell'Università e della Ricerca and Ministero della Salute ("Progetto Tumori Femminili" and RFPS 2006-5-341353,ACC2/R6.9"). Kathleen Cuningham Consortium for Research into Familial Breast Cancer (kConFab): kConFab is supported by grants from the National Breast Cancer Foundation and the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) and by the Queensland Cancer Fund; the Cancer Councils of New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania, and South Australia; and the Cancer Foundation of Western Australia. Amanda B. Spurdle is an NHMRC Senior Research Fellow. The Clinical Follow Up Study was funded from 2001–2009 by NHMRC and currently by the National Breast Cancer Foundation and Cancer Australia #628333. Mayo Clinic (MAYO): MAYO is supported by NIH grant CA128978, an NCI Specialized Program of Research Excellence (SPORE) in Breast Cancer (CA116201), a U.S. Department of Defence Ovarian Cancer Idea award (W81XWH-10-1-0341) and grants from the Breast Cancer Research Foundation and the Komen Foundation for the Cure. McGill University (MCGILL): The McGill Study was supported by Jewish General Hospital Weekend to End Breast Cancer, Quebec Ministry of Economic Development, Innovation, and Export Trade. Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC): The MSKCC study was supported by Breast Cancer Research Foundation, Niehaus Clinical Cancer Genetics Initiative, Andrew Sabin Family Foundation, and Lymphoma Foundation. Modifier Study of Quantitative Effects on Disease (MODSQUAD): MODSQUAD was supported by the European Regional Development Fund and the State Budget of the Czech Republic (RECAMO, CZ.1.05/2.1.00/03.0101). Women's College Research Institute, Toronto (NAROD): NAROD was supported by NIH grant: 1R01 CA149429-01. National Cancer Institute (NCI): Drs. Mark H. Greene and Phuong L. Mai were supported by the Intramural Research Program of the US National Cancer Institute, NIH, and by support services contracts NO2-CP-11019-50 and N02-CP-65504 with Westat, Rockville, MD. National Israeli Cancer Control Center (NICCC): NICCC is supported by Clalit Health Services in Israel. Some of its activities are supported by the Israel Cancer Association and the Breast Cancer Research Foundation (BCRF), NY. N. N. Petrov Institute of Oncology (NNPIO): The NNPIO study has been supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (grants 11-04-00227, 12-04-00928, and 12-04-01490), the Federal Agency for Science and Innovations, Russia (contract 02.740.11.0780), and through a Royal Society International Joint grant (JP090615). The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center (OSU-CCG): OSUCCG is supported by the Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center. ; South East Asian Breast Cancer Association Study (SEABASS): SEABASS is supported by the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, Ministry of Higher Education (UM.C/HlR/MOHE/06) and Cancer Research Initiatives Foundation. Sheba Medical Centre (SMC): The SMC study was partially funded through a grant by the Israel Cancer Association and the funding for the Israeli Inherited Breast Cancer Consortium. Swedish Breast Cancer Study (SWE-BRCA): SWE-BRCA collaborators are supported by the Swedish Cancer Society. The University of Chicago Center for Clinical Cancer Genetics and Global Health (UCHICAGO): UCHICAGO is supported by grants from the US National Cancer Institute (NIH/NCI) and by the Ralph and Marion Falk Medical Research Trust, the Entertainment Industry Fund National Women's Cancer Research Alliance, and the Breast Cancer Research Foundation. University of California Los Angeles (UCLA): The UCLA study was supported by the Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center Foundation and the Breast Cancer Research Foundation. University of California San Francisco (UCSF): The UCSF study was supported by the UCSF Cancer Risk Program and the Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center. United Kingdom Familial Ovarian Cancer Registries (UKFOCR): UKFOCR was supported by a project grant from CRUK to Paul Pharoah. University of Pennsylvania (UPENN): The UPENN study was supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) (R01-CA102776 and R01-CA083855), Breast Cancer Research Foundation, Rooney Family Foundation, Susan G. Komen Foundation for the Cure, and the Macdonald Family Foundation. Victorian Familial Cancer Trials Group (VFCTG): The VFCTG study was supported by the Victorian Cancer Agency, Cancer Australia, and National Breast Cancer Foundation. Women's Cancer Research Initiative (WCRI): The WCRI at the Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Cedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, is funded by the American Cancer Society Early Detection Professorship (SIOP-06-258-01-COUN). ; Peer Reviewed

The papers in the present SUERF Study is a selection of the papers presented at a SUERF Workshop and Special OeNB East Jour Fixe held at Oesterreichische Nationalbank in Vienna on 23 January 2009. In his opening remarks (chapter 2), Ewald Nowotny, Governor of the Oesterreichische Nationalbank referred to Austrian banks? engagement with neighbouring Central and Eastern European Countries. The current crisis should not make people forget the fact that Austrian banks? deep engagement with the neighbouring countries is one of the success stories in Austrian economic history. Since the fall of the Berlin Wall, Austrian banks have become one of the driving forces of the process of structural adjustment, modernization of business practices, and deepening of financial intermediation in the region. At end 2007, in Central Europe, the share of Austrian banks surpassed a fifth of aggregate sector assets, in Southeastern Europe even a third of the respective total. A considerable share of the earnings of Austrian banks comes from banking activities in Central and Eastern Europe. Austrian bankers can claim to be among the pioneer foreign investors in Russia, Ukraine, Kazakstan and Belarus. The international financial crisis has from September 2008 demonstrated Russia?s structural vulnerability. The comprehensive countermeasures by the Russian authorities to assist the banking sector and the economy are characterized by the Governor as worthy endeavours. Chapter 3 is based on the keynote speech by Pekka Sutela, BOFIT, Bank of Finland ?Russian Finance: Drag or Booster for Future Growth?? The author praises the Russian authorities for having made prudent decisions in recent years. The Putin-Kudrin regime chose a stability-oriented macro policy. The very strong increase in the global oil price up to 2008 implied a strong growth in the value of Russian exports and lead to an impressive GDP growth. The author uses the term ?windfall?. The Russian Government decided to pay back practically all foreign debt, much of it ahead of schedule. The regime wanted to bring back what they see as Russian sovereignty and in particular to avoid being dependent on IMF or other foreign financiers. Their policy contributed strongly to an improvement of Russia?s general credit-worthiness and to a growth in foreign reserves. During the 1990s, lack of trust in the rouble had as consequence that the US dollar was applied to a considerable extent in payments between Russians. The stability oriented policy after 2001 contributed to a de-dollarization of the economy up to 2008. It follows from the stability-oriented policy that Russia was relatively well prepared when it was hit by the global financial crisis in 2007?2008. In the autumn of 2008, however, the general public started to withdraw bank deposits and the relative share of foreign exchange deposits increased again. The public shifted towards foreign currency cash assets. The author explains that Russia has a dual economy. The natural resource based sectors are clearly globally competitive but the sectors outside the resource sectors are not. The big resource based companies have relied on foreign markets for their financial needs. The home market is primarily serviced by domestic banks. At the end of September 2008, government-controlled banks had 47.8% of all bank assets. The state maintains banking sector stability primarily through state banks. The author?s answer to the question in the headline is: ?The Russian financial system is rather a drag than a booster for future growth?. In addition, it is unlikely that Russia will become a regional financial centre or an inventionbased society in the foreseeable future. Chapter 4 by Stephan Barisitz, Oesterreichische Nationalbank, is ?Russian Banking in Recent Years: Gaining Depth in a Fragile Environment.? The author shows tables with macroeconomic, monetary and financial indicators for Russia for the years 2002?2008. Key observations are: Strong economic growth, strong dependence on oil prices, inflation problems, recent volatility of private capital in- and outflows. Banking development initially featured rather slow recovery from the financial crisis of 1998, coupled with sluggish reforms. This was followed by a stepped-up pace of institutional and structural adjustments in 2003?2005, which brought about major improvements of banking activities and of the regulatory framework. The return on equity (ROE) of banks was in 2006?2007 above 20%. The solvency ratio of banks declined steadily up to 2008 due to strong growth in bank assets. The oil price driven improvements in Russia?s terms of trade over the period 1998 to 2008 combined with political stability, prudent macroeconomic policies and some successful institutional and structural reforms have supported Russian economic expansion. Not only exports, but also consumption, have driven strong GDP growth. Financial intermediation continued to deepen swiftly in Russia up to the fall of 2008, despite important repercussions of the US subprime crisis. As the interbank market tightened during 2008 and capital outflows increased, Central Bank of Russia reacted quickly with repeated liquidity interventions. Following the continuous oil price decline and pressures on the rouble, Central Bank of Russia intervened extensively in the foreign exchange market and draw down foreign exchange reserves. The controlled depreciation strategy initiated in November 20078 has not stopped the decline in foreign exchange reserves. Due to the still sizable foreign reserves, the relatively high profitability of banking activity and the satisfactory capital adequacy level as shock absorbing factors, Russia seems to be in a better position to handle the financial crisis than many other countries. Chapter 5 by Alexander Lehmann, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development has the headline ?Banks and Financial Reform: Their Role in Sustaining Russia?s Growth.? The paper focuses on the strength of the link between economic growth and financial development. Even in East European transition countries where a positive correlation between finance and growth developed in the 1990s, there was little microeconomic evidence that the financial sector actively supported growth. Investments were overwhelmingly financed through retained earnings, and what little external finance was raised came from foreign direct investment. Around year 2000, this changed. Regulatory improvements, better enforcement and rapid development of individual institutions meant that the financial sector undoubtedly has supported economic growth since year 2000. The disruption to credit growth since 2008 and the simultaneous downturn of the Russian real economy has made the link abundantly clear. EBRD evaluates the progress in structural reforms in transition countries by means of ?transition scores?. The author shows an exhibit which illustrates the development of the EBRD transition score for Russia from 1989 to 2006. It shows that the fastest progress took place from 1995 to 2003. The improvements in the regulatory framework for banking activity supported financial intermediation and Russian banks expanded their balance sheets and diversified into lending to retail customers and SMEs. For corporate investment as a whole, however, the share of new investment financed through bank credit remained relatively small. The sectors that saw sharp increases in investment and accounted for the bulk of capital spending, predominantly benefited from internal cash flows, or benefited from public support or ownership. Chapter 6 by Cyril Pineau-Valencienne, CEO, CPV Conseil, is ?Russian financial institutions and the oil and gas sector: funding and recycling.? The paper first outlines the importance of the oil and gas sector for the Russian economy. Capital expenditures in the sector grew strongly from 1999 to 2007. The huge investments were to a large extent financed by internal operating cash flows and by borrowing in international financial markets. The big oil and gas companies are important customers for foreign banks. The companies also have their own so-called raw material banks but these banks have not played a major role as related parties in the financing of the investments of these groups. The willingness of the oil and gas companies to incur debt denominated in foreign currency must be understood in the light of their revenue structure. Contracts in the global energy markets are primarily denominated in US-dollars and the companies are therefore to a considerable extent able to match currency revenues from exports with currency payments of principal and interest. Recycling of funds related to the oil and gas sector has partly been carried out by the state and by the sovereign funds controlled by the state. Revenue from export duties has been accumulated in the funds and applied in accordance with the funds? investment strategies. Chapter 7 is based on the presentation by Zuzana Fungácová, BOFIT, Bank of Finland ?Risk-taking by Russian banks: do location, ownership and size matter?? The paper is co-authored by Laura Solanko. The rapid growth of the assets of Russian banks has in the last 6?7 years contributed to a decrease in the capital adequacy ratio, thus influencing the ability of banks to cope with risk. In the paper, the authors investigate the relationship between bank characteristics and risk-taking. The banks are divided into different subgroups by size, ownership and location. The authors distinguish between state-controlled, foreign-controlled and domestic private banks. Risk is measured in two different ways: By group-wise comparisons of financial risk ratios i.e. accounting data, and by regression analysis of bank insolvency risk as measured by a Z-score indicator. The average level of financial ratios are all well above the regulatory minima set by Central Bank of Russia. Large banks in Russia have higher insolvency risk than small ones. Foreign-owned banks exhibit higher insolvency risk than domestic banks. State-controlled banks are on average more stable than the private domestic banks. Similar to the case of foreign banks, large state-controlled banks are more stable than the others. Regional banks are significantly more prone to risk-taking than their counterparts in Moscow. Chapter 8 is based on the keynote speech ?Russia?s Financial Crisis: Causes, Consequences, and Prospects? by Zeljko Bogetic, World Bank, Moscow. Until mid-2008, Russia was viewed as a ?safe haven? during turbulent times in global financial markets. Record high oil prices, strong macroeconomic fundamentals, lack of exposure of Russian banks to the US sub-prime mortgage markets, strong ratings and a strong appreciating currency explained the confidence in Russia. After mid-2008 Russia was hit. There was an oil price shock, a sudden stop in capital flows, and a sharp tightening of external borrowing conditions. The paper contains a diagram that documents an almost perfect correlation of the Russian stock index RTS with the price of oil. From the peaks in May-June 2008 to the end of the year, the RTS moved from 2400 to 440 and the oil price from USD 144 per barrel to USD 45 per barrel. The non-oil external current account deficit continued to deteriorate very fast in 2008 as import volumes grew faster than non-oil exports. Incoming FDIs declined and worsened the composition of capital flows towards borrowing. While public external debt remained moderate, private (corporate and bank) debt grew rapidly. In the balance sheets of Russian banks, the loan-deposit ratio increased from approximately 107% in 2005 to 127% in the autumn of 2008, making the banking sector more exposed to the interbank market and to rollover risk. As response to the crisis, the Russian authorities have loosened their monetary stance and provided fiscal support to ease the liquidity crisis. The exchange rate has continuously been managed with progressive widening of the bi-currency corridor. After a gradual depreciation since November 2008, the rouble was devalued in mid January 2009. The speaker described the 2009 outlook for the Russian economy as very uncertain. It is likely that the twin surpluses on the Government budget and the balance of payments current account will disappear, but thanks to the prudent macroeconomic policies in recent years, these deficits can be financed for some time. The speaker reflected on the social impact of the crisis. If the recession in 2009 becomes deeper, it might require an introduction of a fiscal stimulus package focusing on domestic demand and the poorer segments of the population, including strengthening of the unemployment, training and social assistance and possibly well designed public works. Chapter 9 is based on the presentation by Peter Havlik, The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies (WIIW) ?Russian Economy and the Global Turmoil.? The paper contains very illustrative exhibits that show the development of Russian GDP, exports, imports, inflation, money supply, stock prices and nominal and real exchange rates. Among the Putin administration?s key achievements, he lists improved living standards, rising employment, more FDI inflows, repayment of external debt, ballooning foreign exchange reserves, restoring stability, stronger role of the state but also deteriorating external relations. Despite strong economic fundamentals, Russia has been seriously hit by the global crisis. The Medvedev administration faces serious challenges. It plans to use industrial policy instruments in order to reduce the dependence on energy proceeds. The Government offers targeted support to various public-private partnership projects in the automotive, aviation, shipbuilding and selected high-tech industries. According to the speaker, some of the envisaged industrial policy tools could well be in conflict with WTO rules and make Russia?s WTO accession more difficult. Chapter 10 is based on the workshop contribution by Debora Revoltella, UniCredit Group ?The Russian Banking Sector: What to Expect? The paper is co-authored by Vladimir V.Osakovsky and Valery Invushin. It is divided in three sections: 1) The past: Russian economic renaissance, 2) The crisis: Politics and Economics join forces, and 3) Longer term prospects are brighter. Up to 2008, Russia enjoyed strong growth in domestic investment, consumption and GDP. Prudent fiscal policy and massive capital inflows helped to amass the world?s third largest international reserves. The country was, however, exposed to global commodities prices, a demographic crisis, a rigid labour market and an increasing dependence on foreign sources of funding. The crisis in 2008 was triggered by collapse of global commodities prices, massive capital flight, failures of some large market participants and general loss of confidence abroad and at home. As reaction to the challenges posed by the crisis, the Government and Central bank of Russia initiated corporate debt refinancing assistance, liquidity infusion into the banking system and fiscal stimuli. The authors expect a major restructuring of the Russian banking sector including a considerable reduction of the number of financial institutions.