Top Investigators Explore the Complexities of Angiogenesis Cancer Research The targeting of tumor angiogenesis has evolved into one of the most widely pursued therapeutic strategies. However, as of yet, no antiangiogenic agent used as a monotherapy has demonstrated a survival benefit in a randomized Phase III trial. The combination of bevacizumab, the first FDA approved angiogenesis inhibitor, with cytotoxic regimens has led to survival benefits in cancer patients. This has raised important questions about the complexities inherent in the clinical application of angiogenesis inhibitors. Compiles the results of four decades of progress Integrating fundamental concepts with therapeutic strategies, Anti-Angiogenic Cancer Therapy promotes the idea that an understanding of the molecular and cellular regulation of angiogenesis leads to optimal therapeutic strategies and positive clinical results. It brings together contributions from leading researchers to provide the most authoritative and encyclopedic volume available on this subject. Examines the role of angiogenesis in cancer, including strategies to prolong the nonangiogenic dormant state of human tumors, molecular mechanisms and cellular regulation of angiogenesis in solid tumors and hematologic malignancies, and the regulation of angiogenesis by the tumor microenvironment. Covers specific molecular targets for inhibiting angiogenesis in cancer therapy. Discusses clinical trial design and translational research approaches essential for identifying and developing effective angiogenesis inhibitors. Outlines current understanding of the molecular biology of each cancer type followed by discussions that examine strategies for targeting angiogenesis in specific cancers. This volume celebrates progress made in four decades, and more importantly, it provi

Top Investigators Explore the Complexities of Angiogenesis Cancer Research The targeting of tumor angiogenesis has evolved into one of the most widely pursued therapeutic strategies. However, as of yet, no antiangiogenic agent used as a monotherapy has demonstrated a survival benefit in a randomized Phase III trial. The combination of bevacizumab, the first FDA approved angiogenesis inhibitor, with cytotoxic regimens has led to survival benefits in cancer patients. This has raised important questions about the complexities inherent in the clinical application of angiogenesis inhibitors. Compiles the results of four decades of progress Integrating fundamental concepts with therapeutic strategies, Anti-Angiogenic Cancer Therapy promotes the idea that an understanding of the molecular and cellular regulation of angiogenesis leads to optimal therapeutic strategies and positive clinical results. It brings together contributions from leading researchers to provide the most authoritative and encyclopedic volume available on this subject. Examines the role of angiogenesis in cancer, including strategies to prolong the nonangiogenic dormant state of human tumors, molecular mechanisms and cellular regulation of angiogenesis in solid tumors and hematologic malignancies, and the regulation of angiogenesis by the tumor microenvironment. Covers specific molecular targets for inhibiting angiogenesis in cancer therapy. Discusses clinical trial design and translational research approaches essential for identifying and developing effective angiogenesis inhibitors. Outlines current understanding of the molecular biology of each cancer type followed by discussions that examine strategies for targeting angiogenesis in specific cancers. This volume celebrates progress made in four decades, and more importantly, it provi

A thought-provoking look at how racial resentment, rather than racial prejudice alone, motivate a growing resistance among whites to improve the circumstances faced by racial minorities. In Racial Resentment in the Political Mind, Darren W. Davis and David C. Wilson challenge the commonly held notion that all racial negativity, disagreements, and objections to policies that seek to help racial minorities stem from racial prejudice. They argue that racial resentment arises from just-world beliefs and appraisals of deservingness that help explain the persistence of racial inequality in America in ways more consequential than racism or racial prejudice alone. The culprits, as many White people see it, are undeserving people of color, who are perceived to benefit unfairly from, and take advantage of, resources that come at Whites' expense-a worldview in which any attempt at modest change is seen as a challenge to the status quo and privilege. Yet, as Davis and Wilson reveal, many Whites have become racially resentful due to their perceptions that African Americans skirt the "rules of the game" and violate traditional values by taking advantage of unearned resources. Resulting attempts at racial progress lead Whites to respond in ways that retain their social advantage-opposing ameliorative policies, minority candidates, and other advancement on racial progress. Because racial resentment is rooted in beliefs about justice, fairness, and deservingness, ordinary citizens, who may not harbor racist motivations, may wind up in the same political position as racists, but for different reasons.

A thought-provoking look at how racial resentment, rather than racial prejudice alone, motivate a growing resistance among whites to improve the circumstances faced by racial minorities. In Racial Resentment in the Political Mind, Darren W. Davis and David C. Wilson challenge the commonly held notion that all racial negativity, disagreements, and objections to policies that seek to help racial minorities stem from racial prejudice. They argue that racial resentment arises from just-world beliefs and appraisals of deservingness that help explain the persistence of racial inequality in America in ways more consequential than racism or racial prejudice alone. The culprits, as many White people see it, are undeserving people of color, who are perceived to benefit unfairly from, and take advantage of, resources that come at Whites' expense-a worldview in which any attempt at modest change is seen as a challenge to the status quo and privilege. Yet, as Davis and Wilson reveal, many Whites have become racially resentful due to their perceptions that African Americans skirt the "rules of the game" and violate traditional values by taking advantage of unearned resources. Resulting attempts at racial progress lead Whites to respond in ways that retain their social advantage-opposing ameliorative policies, minority candidates, and other advancement on racial progress. Because racial resentment is rooted in beliefs about justice, fairness, and deservingness, ordinary citizens, who may not harbor racist motivations, may wind up in the same political position as racists, but for different reasons.

Did America s democratic convictions change forever after the terrorist attacks of September 11? In the wake of 9/11, many pundits predicted that Americans new and profound anxiety would usher in an era of political acquiescence. Fear, it was claimed, would drive the public to rally around the president and tolerate diminished civil liberties in exchange for security. Political scientist Darren Davis challenges this conventional wisdom in Negative Liberty, revealing a surprising story of how September 11 affected Americans views on civil liberties and security. Drawing on a unique series of original public opinion surveys conducted in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 and over the subsequent three years, Negative Liberty documents the rapid shifts in Americans opinions regarding the tradeoff between liberty and security, at a time when the threat of terrorism made the conflict between these values particularly stark. Theories on the psychology of threat predicted that people would cope with threats by focusing on survival and reaffirming their loyalty to their communities, and indeed, Davis found that Americans were initially supportive of government efforts to prevent terrorist attacks by rolling back certain civil liberties. Democrats and independents under a heightened sense of threat became more conservative after 9/11, and trust in government reached its highest level since the Kennedy administration. But while ideological divisions were initially muted, this silence did not represent capitulation on the part of civil libertarians. Subsequent surveys in the years after the attacks revealed that, while citizens perceptions of threat remained acute, trust in the government declined dramatically in response to the perceived failures of the administration s foreign and domestic security policies. Indeed, those Americans who reported the greatest anxiety about terrorism were the most likely to lose confidence in the government in the years after 2001. As a result, ideological unity proved short lived, and support for civil liberties revived among the public. Negative Liberty demonstrates that, in the absence of faith in government, even extreme threats to national security are not enough to persuade Americans to concede their civil liberties permanently. The September 11 attacks created an unprecedented conflict between liberty and security, testing Americans devotion to democratic norms. Through lucid analysis of concrete survey data, Negative Liberty sheds light on how citizens of a democracy balance these competing values in a time of crisis."