MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2020416066 · doi:10.1158/0008-5472.can-12-0699

Ricardo Renzo Brentani: In Memoriam (1937–2011)

2012· article· en· W2020416066 sur OpenAlexaff
Luisa L. Villa, Eduardo L. Franco

Notice bibliographique

RevueCancer Research · 2012
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueBiotechnology and Related Fields
Établissements canadiensMcGill University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésLatin AmericansMedicineLibrary sciencePolitical scienceGerontologyFamily medicineHistoryLaw

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Ricardo Renzo Brentani, one of the most prominent Latin American cancer researchers who ever lived, passed away suddenly on November 29, 2011. He was born in Trieste, Italy, in July 1937 and moved to Brazil as an infant. He studied medicine at the University of São Paulo Medical School, which served as the academic home for most of his career. He established, in that largest and most prominent of all Latin American universities, the Department of Oncology, which he led for decades. Through his leadership, oncology became a full-fledged discipline in the medical curriculum. Shortly after being promoted to full professor in 1981, he was approached to become the founding Director of the São Paulo Branch of the Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, a post he held until 2005. He was also for many years the President of the Antonio Prudente Foundation that maintained the Hospital do Câncer, one of the largest comprehensive cancer centers in Latin America, where the Ludwig Branch was located. After his retirement, he created and directed the International Center for Research and Teaching of the Hospital do Câncer. In 2004, Ricardo became the president of the board of Trustees of FAPESP, one of the major research funding agencies in Brazil, and was extremely active until his heart stopped, no longer able to sustain the power plant of intellectual energy that Ricardo exuded in his 74 years.He was a Member of the Brazilian Academy of Science and a recipient of the Grand Cross of the Brazilian Order of Scientific Merit and received several distinctions, including the D.K. Ludwig Award for his services to the Ludwig Institute, the FAPESP Scopus Prize in 2007 and 2009, the State Governor's Award for Scientific Discoveries, and many other prominent accolades. He became an AACR member in 1973 and served on several AACR committees as well as the Editorial Board of Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention. He was also an Editorial Board member of UICC's International Journal of Cancer.His research themes reflected his strong background in biochemistry and cell biology, areas that he delved into while still a medical student. Throughout his prolific career as scientist, he tackled the complexities of collagen structure and synthesis, nucleolar RNA production, hydropathic complementarity in peptide chains, and the importance of the intercellular environment in carcinogenesis. His passion for the physicochemical nature of protein folding and binding led him also to study prions and how these lowly infectious forms cause disease.It was not only through his own research that he influenced cancer research in Latin America. In typical altruistic vision, he used the prerogative of his office to launch several genome-sequencing projects in Brazil and to support large-scale research on human papillomavirus from the initial molecular epidemiologic investigations to the development of prophylactic vaccines. In 2007, he initiated the process for the Hospital do Câncer and the MD Anderson Cancer Center to become sister institutions. The same day of his death, he was actively engaged in formalizing collaborations between researchers from these two institutions.Never at a loss for words, he was a strong and determined person who never failed to provide a sound bite, a piece of his erudite mind, or just plain technical advice. He dispensed these pearls of wisdom to anyone, irrespective of whether the interlocutor was a colleague, a subordinate, a student, or even a laboratory janitor. He loved to elicit intellectually provocative discussions, which he started with scientific or literary quotes (many from Machiavelli's Il Principe), a joke, or a question about a result generated in the laboratory. He tackled journal editors who rejected his papers with a determination that became legendary. Some of his battles could serve as a case study on how to reverse the effects of biased peer review.To his subordinates, Ricardo was “The Master” or “The Boss,” qualifiers that were used as terms of endearment and respect. Foremost, the human side of the scientist was ever present. He was tireless in supporting and protecting his trainees and junior researchers. He knew exactly how to stimulate self-confidence in people, an essential trait to excel in science. One of his most important legacies is the endless list of researchers and clinician-scientists trained under or supported by him and who have gone on to positions of leadership in Brazil and internationally. He had a good eye for talent and he knew that. He understood that creativity takes time to bear fruit and he was never afraid to take on high-risk, high pay-off research ideas, and to stimulate those under him to devote themselves to such endeavors.With his brilliant mind he influenced so many people, particularly those that for more than 2 decades had the opportunity to work at an ideal environment for independent research in different cancer-related areas with the necessary support and infrastructure that Ricardo built up at the Ludwig Institute's São Paulo Branch. The latter institution attained international acclaim because of his monumental vision for multidisciplinary research on cancer. We are among the privileged people who were blessed with his guidance and friendship. Both of us started research programs at the Ludwig Institute under his provocative and ahead-of-his-time vision and leadership.Ricardo created a stimulating and respectful environment for both women and men, with promotions based on merit and productivity. He used to highlight the value of women in the laboratory, often mentioning that Mitzi Brentani, his wife of almost 50 years and his medical school days' sweetheart, was his role model. Mitzi is a world-class scientist in her own merit and a woman of exceptional character, brilliance, and strength. He and Mitzi formed an exemplary couple in cancer research. Together they raised 4 children and had 9 grandchildren who were a true joy in their lives.Ricardo was a giant in so many ways. From the heft of his imposing 6-foot-7 stature he dispensed wisdom with unparalleled charisma. However, his powers of persuasion did not always have the intended effect. He faced many battles and he fought them well until the last minute. Always placing merit first, he soldiered on against mediocrity and the petty politics of academia. His mind was as uncluttered as was his desk. Sitting on it was not the busy scientist's stack of scientific articles or books, but only a statue of Cervantes' Don Quixote de la Mancha. For those of us who knew him well, it symbolized Ricardo's chivalry in fighting the enemies of scientific integrity and scholarly conduct.Like Marie Curie, his larger-than-life persona had a youthful enthusiasm for research and he passed his love for studying the inner workings of cells to his countless trainees over a most illustrious career. The cancer research communities in Brazil and Latin America lost one of their most prominent leaders. His indelible legacy as scientist and educator will have an impact that will last decades through the scientific productivity and mentorship of countless cancer researchers at home and abroad.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesIntégrité de la recherche, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesIntégrité de la recherche
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,243
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,004
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,104
Tête enseignante GPT0,449
Écart entre enseignants0,345 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2012
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCancer ResearchMême sujetBiotechnology and Related FieldsTravaux en français237 207