• Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases
• /
• v.46 no.2
• /
• pp.215-228
• /
• 1999

Background: Sarcoidosis is a chronic granulomatous inflammatory disease of unknown etiology often involving the lungs and intrathoracic lymph nodes. The natural course of sarcoidosis is variable from spontaneous remission to significant morbidity or death. But, the mechanisms causing the variable clinical outcomes or any single parameter to predict the prognosis was not known. In sarcoidosis, the number and the activity of CD4 + lymphocytes are significantly increased at the loci of disease and their oligoclonality suggests that the CD4 + lymphocytes hyperreactivity may be caused by persistent antigenic stimulus. Recently, it has been known that CD4+ lymphocytes can be subdivided into 2 distinct population(Th1 and Th2) defined by the spectrum of cytokines produced by these cells. Th1 cells promote cellular immunity associated with delayed type hypersensitivity reactions by generating IL-2 and IFN-$\gamma$. Th2 cells playa role in allergic responses and immediate hypersensitivity reactions by secreting IL-4, IL-5, and IL-10. CD4+ lymphocytes in pulmonary sarcoidosis were reported to be mainly Th1 cells. IL-12 has been known to play an important role in differentiation of undifferentiated naive T cells to Th1 cells. And, Moller et al. observed increased IL-12 in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid(BALF) in patients with sarcoidosis. So it is possible that the elevated level of IL-12 is necessary for the continuous progression of the disease in active sarcoidosis. This study was performed to test the assumption that IL-12 can be a marker of active pulmonary sarcoidosis. Methods: We measured the concentration of IL-12 in BALF and in conditioned medium of alveolar macrophage(AM) using ELISA(enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay) method in 26 patients with pulmonary sarcoidosis(10 males, 16 females, mean age: $39.8{\pm}2.1$ years) and 11 normal control. Clinically, 14 patients had active sarcoidosis and 12 patients had inactive. Results: Total cells counts, percentage and number of lymhocytes, number of AM and CD4/CD8 lymphocyte ratio in BALF were significantly higher in patients with sarcoidosis than in control group. But none of these parameters could differentiate active sarcoidosis from inactive disease. The concentration of IL-12 in BALF was significantly increased in sarcoidosis patients ($49.3{\pm}9.2$ pg/ml) than in normal control ($2.5{\pm}0.4$ pg/ml) (p<0.001). Moreover it was significantly higher in patients with active sarcoidosis ($70.3{\pm}14.8$ pg/ml) than in inactive disease ($24.8{\pm}3.l$ pg/ml) (p=0.001). Also, the concentration of IL-12 in BALF showed significant correlation with the percentage of AM(p<0.001), percentage(p<0.001) and number of lymphocyte(p<0.001) in BALF, suggesting the close relationship between the level of IL-12 in BALF and the inflammatory cell infiltration in the lungs. Furthermore, we found a significant correlation between the level of IL-12 and the concentration of soluble ICAM-1 : in serum(p<0.001) and BALF (p=0.001), and also between IL-12 level and ICAM-1 expression of AM(p<0.001). The AM from patients with pulmonary sarcoidosis secreted significantly larger amount of IL-12 ($206.2{\pm}61.9$ pg/ml) than those of control ($68.3{\pm}43.7$ pg/ml) (p<0.008), but, there was no difference between inactive and active disease group. Conclusion : Our data suggest that the BALF IL-12 level can be used as a marker of the activity of pulmonary sarcoidosis.

• Korean small business review
• /
• v.32 no.1
• /
• pp.65-87
• /
• 2010

With the advent of knowledge-based society, the revitalization of technological innovation type SMEs, termed "inno-biz" hereafter, has been globally recognized as a government policymakers' primary concern in strengthening national competitiveness, and much effort is being put into establishing polices of boosting the start-ups and innovation capability of SMEs. Especially, in that the inno-biz enables national economy to get vitalized by widening world markets with its superior technology, and thus, taking the initiative of extremely competitive world markets, its growth and development has greater significance. In the case of Korea, the government has been maintaining the policies since the late 1990s of stimulating the growth of SMEs as well as building various infrastructures to foster the start-ups of the SMEs such as venture businesses with high technology. In addition, since the enactment of "Innovation Promotion Law for SMEs" in 2001, the government has been accelerating the policies of prioritizing the growth and development of inno-biz. So, for the sound growth and development of Korean inno-biz, this paper intends to offer effective management strategies for SMEs and suggest proper policies for the government, by researching into the effect of technological innovation capability and technology commercialization capability as the primary business resources on business performance in Korean SMEs in the light of market information orientation. The research is carried out on Korean companies characterized as inno-biz. On the basis of OSLO manual and prior studies, the research categorizes their status. R&D capability, technology accumulation capability and technological innovation system are categorized into technological innovation capability; product development capability, manufacturing capability and marketing capability into technology commercialization capability; and increase in product competitiveness and merits for new technology and/or product development into business performance. Then the effect of each component on business performance is substantially analyzed. In addition, the mediation effect of technological innovation and technology commercialization capability on business performance is observed by the use of the market information orientation as a parameter. The following hypotheses are proposed. H1 : Technology innovation capability will positively influence business performance. H1-1 : R&D capability will positively influence product competitiveness. H1-2 : R&D capability will positively influence merits for new technology and/or product development into business performance. H1-3 : Technology accumulation capability will positively influence product competitiveness. H1-4 : Technology accumulation capability will positively influence merits for new technology and/or product development into business performance. H1-5 : Technological innovation system will positively influence product competitiveness. H1-6 : Technological innovation system will positively influence merits for new technology and/or product development into business performance. H2 : Technology commercializing capability will positively influence business performance. H2-1 : Product development capability will positively influence product competitiveness. H2-2 : Product development capability will positively influence merits for new technology and/or product development into business performance. H2-3 : Manufacturing capability will positively influence product competitiveness. H2-4 : Manufacturing capability will positively influence merits for new technology and/or product development into business performance. H2-5 : Marketing capability will positively influence product competitiveness. H2-6 : Marketing capability will positively influence merits for new technology and/or product development into business performance. H3 : Technology innovation capability will positively influence market information orientation. H3-1 : R&D capability will positively influence information generation. H3-2 : R&D capability will positively influence information diffusion. H3-3 : R&D capability will positively influence information response. H3-4 : Technology accumulation capability will positively influence information generation. H3-5 : Technology accumulation capability will positively influence information diffusion. H3-6 : Technology accumulation capability will positively influence information response. H3-7 : Technological innovation system will positively influence information generation. H3-8 : Technological innovation system will positively influence information diffusion. H3-9 : Technological innovation system will positively influence information response. H4 : Technology commercialization capability will positively influence market information orientation. H4-1 : Product development capability will positively influence information generation. H4-2 : Product development capability will positively influence information diffusion. H4-3 : Product development capability will positively influence information response. H4-4 : Manufacturing capability will positively influence information generation. H4-5 : Manufacturing capability will positively influence information diffusion. H4-6 : Manufacturing capability will positively influence information response. H4-7 : Marketing capability will positively influence information generation. H4-8 : Marketing capability will positively influence information diffusion. H4-9 : Marketing capability will positively influence information response. H5 : Market information orientation will positively influence business performance. H5-1 : Information generation will positively influence product competitiveness. H5-2 : Information generation will positively influence merits for new technology and/or product development into business performance. H5-3 : Information diffusion will positively influence product competitiveness. H5-4 : Information diffusion will positively influence merits for new technology and/or product development into business performance. H5-5 : Information response will positively influence product competitiveness. H5-6 : Information response will positively influence merits for new technology and/or product development into business performance. H6 : Market information orientation will mediate the relationship between technology innovation capability and business performance. H7 : Market information orientation will mediate the relationship between technology commercializing capability and business performance. The followings are the research results : First, as for the effect of technological innovation on business performance, the technology accumulation capability and technological innovating system have a positive effect on increase in product competitiveness and merits for new technology and/or product development, while R&D capability has little effect on business performance. Second, as for the effect of technology commercialization capability on business performance, the effect of manufacturing capability is relatively greater than that of merits for new technology and/or product development. Third, the mediation effect of market information orientation is identified to exist partially in information generation, information diffusion and information response. Judging from these results, the following analysis can be made : On Increase in product competitiveness, directly related to successful technology commercialization of technology, management capability including technological innovation system, manufacturing capability and marketing capability has a relatively strong effect. On merits for new technology and/or product development, on the other hand, capability in technological aspect including R&D capability, technology accumulation capability and product development capability has relatively strong effect. Besides, in the cast of market information orientation, the level of information diffusion within an organization plays and important role in new technology and/or product development. Also, for commercial success like increase in product competitiveness, the level of information response is primarily required. Accordingly, the following policies are suggested : First, as the effect of technological innovation capability and technology commercialization capability on business performance differs among SMEs; in order for SMEs to secure competitiveness, the government has to establish microscopic policies for SMEs which meet their needs and characteristics. Especially, the SMEs lacking in capital and labor are required to map out management strategies of focusing their resources primarily on their strengths. And the government needs to set up policies for SMEs, not from its macro-scaled standpoint, but from the selective and concentrative one that meets the needs and characteristics of respective SMEs. Second, systematic infrastructures are urgently required which lead technological success to commercial success. Namely, as technological merits at respective SME levels do not always guarantee commercial success, the government should make and effort to build systematic infrastructures including encouragement of M&A or technology trade, systematic support for protecting intellectual property, furtherance of business incubating and industrial clusters for strengthening academic-industrial network, and revitalization of technology financing, in order to make successful commercialization from technological success. Finally, the effort to innovate technology, R&D, for example, is essential to future national competitiveness, but its result is often prolonged. So the government needs continuous concern and funding for basic science, in order to maximize technological innovation capability. Indeed the government needs to examine continuously whether technological innovation capability or technological success leads satisfactorily to commercial success in market economic system. It is because, when the transition fails, it should be left to the government.