Österreichischer Sachstandsbericht Klimawandel 2014

The AAR14 is the first Assessment Report on climate Change in Austria assessing the Impact of climate change and the Needs and possibilities of mitigation and Adaptation. This three-volume Report, developed through a multiple peer-Review process including stakeholder participation, presents a coherent assessment of scientific knowledge about climate and makes it accessible for both decision-makers and the General public. Approximately 240 scientists from 50 institutions have participated in this national Assessment ReportDer AAR14 ist der erste Sachstandsbericht zum Klimawandel in Österreich, zu dessen Auswirkungen, und den Erfordernissen und Möglichkeiten der Minderung und Anpassung. Der drei-bändige Bericht, der einen mehrstufigen Peer-Review-Prozess inklusive Stakeholder-Partizipation durchlaufen hat, legt den wissenschaftlich gesicherten Kenntnisstand für Österreich kohärent dar und macht ihn Entscheidungstragenden und der interessierten Öffentlichkeit zugänglich. An dem nationalen Sachstandbericht haben rund 240 WissenschafterInnen aus 50 Institutionen mitgewirkt.Der Österreichische Sachstandsbericht Klimawandel 2014 (AAR14) stellt einen Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)-ähnlichen Bericht dar. Er besteht aus drei Bänden, in denen das bestehende Wissen zum Klimawandel in Österreich, zu dessen Auswirkungen, und den Erfordernissen und Möglichkeiten der Minderung und Anpassung zusammengefasst wird. Der Bericht verfolgt das Ziel, den wissenschaftlichen Kenntnisstand für Österreich kohärent und vollständig darzulegen und diesen auch in Form von politikrelevanten Analysen an die Österreichische Bundesregierung und politische Entscheidungsgremien auf allen Ebenen zu übermitteln, bzw. um dadurch Entscheidungsgrundlagen auch für den privaten Sektor und einen Wissensfundus für akademische Institutionen bereitzustellen. Ähnlich den IPCC-Sachstandsberichten liegt dem AAR14 das Prinzip zugrunde, entscheidungsrelevant zu sein, aber keinen empfehlenden Charakter zu haben

Österreichischer Sachstandsbericht Klimawandel 2014

The AAR14 is the first Assessment Report on climate Change in Austria assessing the Impact of climate change and the Needs and possibilities of mitigation and Adaptation. This three-volume Report, developed through a multiple peer-Review process including stakeholder participation, presents a coherent assessment of scientific knowledge about climate and makes it accessible for both decision-makers and the General public. Approximately 240 scientists from 50 institutions have participated in this national Assessment Repor

PIConGPU setup: Gas-foil target for ion acceleration

This data set contains the PIConGPU source code used for the simulations presented in "Gas-foil target for ion acceleration" and the setup files

Dendritic cells facilitate accumulation of il-17t cells in the kidney following acute renal obstruction

Acute urinary obstruction causes interstitial inflammation with leukocyte accumulation and the secretion of soluble mediators. Here we show that unilateral ureteral ligation caused a progressive increase in renal F4/80(+) and F4/80(-) dendritic cells, monocytes, neutrophils and T-cells 24-72 h following obstruction. Depletion of dendritic cells by clodronate pretreatment showed these cells to be the most potent source of tumor necrosis factor and other pro-inflammatory mediators in the obstructed kidney. F4/80(+) dendritic cells and T-cells co-localized in the cortico-medullary junction and cortex of the obstructed kidney. Cytokine secretion patterns and surface phenotypes of T-cells from obstructed kidneys were found to include interferon-gamma-secreting CD4(+) and CD8(+) memory T-cells as well as interleukin 17 (IL-17)-secreting CD4(+) memory T-cells. Depletion of the intra-renal dendritic cells prior to ligation did not numerically reduce T-cells in obstructed kidneys but attenuated interferon-gamma and IL-17-competent T-cells. Our study shows that intra-renal dendritic cells are a previously unidentified early source of proinflammatory mediators after acute urinary obstruction and play a specific role in recruitment and activation of effector-memory T-cells including IL-17-secreting CD4(+) T-cells

Positron Emission Tomography (PET) Guided Therapy of Aggressive Lymphomas - Interim PET-Based Outcome Prediction and Treatment Changes in Patients with B Cell Lymphomas Participating in the PETAL Trial

Abstract Introduction: The PETAL trial is a multicenter randomized controlled study for patients with aggressive lymphomas of diverse histologies (EudraCT 2006-001641-33, NCT00554164). In the study population as a whole interim PET (iPET) reliably predicted time to treatment failure (TTTF) and overall survival (OS). Interim PET-based treatment changes, however, had no impact on outcome (ASH 2014, abstract 391). Here we report the exploratory analysis for aggressive B cell lymphomas. Methods: Pts. aged 18 to 80 yrs. with newly diagnosed aggressive lymphomas and a positive baseline PET received 2 cycles of rituximab (R), cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone (CHOP) followed by iPET. The conditions of iPET were strictly defined: 3-week interval between the 2nd R-CHOP cycle and iPET to avoid inflammatory reactions (Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 30:682, 2003), no G-CSF after the 2nd cycle to avoid altered glucose biodistribution (J Nucl Med 47:950, 2006), standardized uptake value (SUV)-based PET interpretation to improve reproducibility (favorable iPET response: reduction of maximum SUV by &gt; 66 % compared to baseline; J Nucl Med 48:1626, 2007). Pts. with CD20+ lymphomas and a favorable iPET were randomized to receive 4 more cycles of R-CHOP or the same treatment plus 2 extra doses of R (part A of the trial). Pts. with an unfavorable iPET were randomized to continue R-CHOP for 6 additional cycles or receive 6 blocks of a more complex methotrexate-, cytarabine- and etoposide-based regimen originally designed for Burkitt lymphoma (Blood 124: 3870, 2014; part B). R was omitted in pts. with CD20- lymphomas. Sample size of the entire study population was based on the empirically derived assumption that treatment failure after 2 yrs. (TF: progression, relapse, treatment discontinuation due to toxicity, start of alternative therapy, death of any cause) could be improved from 80 % to 90 % in part A and from 30 % to 45 % in part B (alpha=0.05, power=0.8). Secondary endpoints included OS and toxicity. Results: Fifty-seven oncological centers and 23 nuclear medicine institutions participated in the trial. Between 2007 and 2012 1072 pts. were registered, and 862 (80.4 %) had a positive baseline PET, received 2 cycles R-CHOP, underwent iPET and were allocated to one of the post-iPET treatment arms detailed above. Reference pathology was available in 98 %, and median follow-up is 52 months. All in all, there were 779 patients with CD20+ aggressive B-cell lymphomas (90.4 % of all treated pts.) of whom 606 had diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), 42 primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL) and 42 follicular lymphoma grade 3 (FL3). Interim PET was favorable in 691 pts. (88.7 %) and unfavorable in 88 pts. with CD20+ lymphomas (11.3 %). It was highly predictive of TTTF for CD20+ lymphomas in general and for each of the DLBCL, PMBCL and FL3 subgroups (Table). In CD20+ lymphomas and DLBCL, the iPET response predicted TF independently of the International Prognostic Index, and it was also predictive of OS. The groups of PMBCL and FL3 were too small for multivariate analyses. In part A, adding 2 extra doses of R failed to improve TTTF and OS in all histological entities. Separate analyses for subgroups defined by sex, age (&lt; vs. &gt; 60 yrs.) or a combination of the two showed no statistically significant benefit of extra doses of R in any of the subgroups. In pts. with an unfavorable iPET response, a switch from R-CHOP to the Burkitt regimen failed to improve TTTF or OS in CD20+ lymphomas in general (Figure) and in the DLBCL, PMBCL and FL3 subgroups. In part B, the Burkitt protocol was associated with more grade 3/4 leukopenia (82 % vs. 57 %, p=0.02), thrombocytopenia (59 % vs. 18 %, p=0.0001), infection (41 % vs. 16 %, p=0.017) and mucositis (39 % vs. 7 %, p=0.0007) than R-CHOP, but treatment-related mortality was similar in both arms (1 death each). Conclusion: In this large multicenter trial iPET proved highly predictive of outcome in pts. with CD20+ aggressive B-cell lymphomas, DLBCL, PMBCL or FL3 treated with R-CHOP. In pts. with a favorable iPET response, addition of 2 extra doses of R to 6 cycles R-CHOP failed to improve outcome in CD20+ lymphomas in general and in subgroups defined by histology, sex or age. In pts. with an unfavorable iPET response, switching to a more aggressive protocol also failed to improve outcome in any of the entities. Novel strategies are required for aggressive B-cell lymphomas failing to respond to the first 2 cycles of R-CHOP. Table Table. Figure Figure. Disclosures Duehrsen: Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Alexion Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Research Funding. Giagounidis:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy. Grube:BMS, Sanofi: Consultancy. Klapper:Roche, Novartis, Amgen, Takeda: Research Funding. Hüttmann:Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, Celgene, Roche: Honoraria; Gilead, Amgen: Other: Travel cost. </jats:sec