Between AZM susceptibility and 3xGly cleavage by P. aeruginosa isolates cultured from the sputum of CF patients, with growth inhibition zones in the 3xGly cleavage-positive isolates being significant AbMole Miglitol Larger compared to zones of 3xGly cleavage-negative isolates. Until recently it was stated that AZM is unable to eradicate P. aeruginosa by bacterial killing. A recent publication by Buyck et al. however, revealed that growth inhibition of P. aeruginosa by AZM depends on the medium used. P. aeruginosa strains grown in Mueller Hinton medium have a lower outer membrane permeability compared to strains cultured in for example RPMI. This results in an increase in susceptibility towards AZM and thus might explain the AbMole Simetryn presence of AZM induced growth inhibition zones we observed on TSA agar plates. The results of our systematic review suggest that there is a lack of real evidence showing that soy increases risk of breast cancer or breast cancer recurrence. This is an important finding given the generally perceived controversial status of 
soy in relation to breast cancer. Our review suggests that on the contrary, soy consumption may protect against the development of breast cancer, and less so, breast cancer recurrence and mortality, although this is based on observational data only. Larger, long-term trials are needed to better define these effects. In particular, research is needed to more clearly identify possible subgroups of women that may differentially benefit from soy or not, based on receptor status and/ or use of anti-estrogen therapy. In the meantime, since the overall effect of soy, if any, appears to be protective for both breast cancer incidence and recurrence, moderate soy consumption appears to be safe and possibly beneficial for most women. Among studies included in our review, case control studies showed a stronger association between soy and reduced risk of breast cancer. As shown in Figures 2 and 3, case control studies were much more likely to report significant protective associations between soy intake and risk of breast cancer, while prospective studies were less likely to do so. The reasons for this are unclear. Although not shown here, we conducted subgroup analysis according to the method of exposure assessment to assess for the possibility of recall bias. Our analysis showed no clear separation however, between studies utilizing food frequency questionnaires, structured interviews, or objective assessments of blood or urinary isoflavone concentrations. It is possible that cohort studies were not long enough in duration to prospectively capture the true effect of long term soy exposure. The effect of soy on hot flashes in breast cancer patients is not clear. RCTs noted some improvements over time, but not in comparison to placebo.