The legal framework for financial advertising:curbing behavioural exploitation

Policy makers and behavioural finance scholars express growing concern that marketing practices by financial institutions exploit retail investors’ behavioural biases. Investor protection regulation should thus address these marketing practices and include mechanisms curbing behavioural exploitation. That raises the question whether the marketing communications regime of the new Markets in Financial Instruments Directive can live up to this demand. This article develops a regulatory model that integrates behavioural finance insights into the new marketing communications regime. It then determines how regulatory authorities can apply this model when they interpret and apply specific regulatory requirements. It demonstrates how a regulatory authority or a court can translate empirical behavioural finance research findings into legal arguments when assessing whether marketing practices can significantly distort a model investor’s decision-making process. The article further establishes that the detailed requirements imposed on investment firms by the new Markets in Financial Instruments Directive are necessary in order to protect investors from behavioural exploitation. Finally, the article submits policy proposals that aim to protect investors more effectively from behavioural exploitation

Kontrastmittelanwendung auf Hochfeld-(3 T-)MRT

The basic diagnostic efficacy of MR contrast medium in the evaluation of primary brain tumors and its clinical usefulness in the detection of brain metastases with single and cumulative triple-dose was compared using a high-field 3T MR unit and a 1.5 T MR unit. Additionally, the effect of contrast agent on high-resolution MR venography based on the BOLD effect was evaluated at both field strengths. Tumor-brain contrast after gadodiamide administration, as assessed by means of statistical evaluation of MP-RAGE scans and T1-SE images, was significantly higher at 3 T than at 1.5 T. The subjective assessment of cumulative triple-dose 3 T images obtained the best results in the detection of brain metastases, followed by 1.5 T cumulative triple-dose enhanced images. Due to higher spatial resolution, contrast-enhanced MR venography at 3 T showed more details in and around tumors than at 1.5 T, additionally enhanced by stronger susceptibility weighting and higher signal-to-noise ratio at 3 T. In summary, administration of gadolinium-based contrast agent produces higher contrast between tumor and normal brain at 3 T than at 1.5 T, helps to detect more cerebral metastases at 3 T than at 1.5 T in single and cumulative triple dose, and improves MR venography at 3 T with increase in spatial resolution within the same measurement time, thus providing more detailed information

Contrast-enhanced, high-resolution, susceptibility-weighted magnetic resonance imaging of the brain: dose-dependent optimization at 3 Tesla and 1.5 Tesla in healthy volunteers

OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine the optimal dose of a contrast agent with known high relaxivity on 1.5 and 3 Tesla scanners that would achieve the best compromise between image quality and scan time for the clinical application of contrast-enhanced susceptibility-weighted imaging (CE-SWI). METHODS: Pre- and postcontrast SWI was performed with different contrast agent doses (0.05, 0.1, and 0.2 mmol/kg gadobenate dimeglumine) at both 1.5 and 3 T in 6 healthy volunteers, resulting in 72 examinations. Venograms were created from minimum intensity projection reconstructions over specified deep white matter volumes to enhance the visual appearance of connected venous structures. Three independent radiologists blindly rated the visibility of the veins on a continuous scale of 1 to 10. A general linear model was used for statistical evaluation, with fixed effects of the contrast agent dose, the field strength, the rater and the patients as a random effect. RESULTS: With CE-SWI, we found significant differences in the visibility of the deep veins dependent on the contrast media dose (P = 0.02). At 3 T, the visibility of deep venous vessels, with regard to susceptibility effect, image quality, and scan time reduction after a standard contrast agent dose 0.1 mmol/kg was significantly better than that achieved with 0.05 mmol/kg. The visibility was considered equal with 0.1 mmol/kg of the contrast agent to the precontrast images and a dose of 0.2 mmol/kg. At 1.5 T, no significant difference was found between the 4 contrast agent doses. We found no difference in the visibility of the veins with the shorter sequences at 3 T compared with the sequences at 1.5 T. CONCLUSIONS: Only a standard dose (0.1 mmol/kg) of gadobenate dimeglumine is required to achieve the optimum susceptibility effect and image quality at 3 T, together with a reduced scan time. This result can be attributed to the higher relaxivity of gadobenate dimeglumine, compared with conventional gadolinium chelates

Multicenter, double-blind, randomized, intra-individual crossover comparison of gadobenate dimeglumine and gadopentetate dimeglumine in MRI of brain tumors at 3 tesla

PURPOSE: To prospectively compare 0.1 mmol/kg doses of gadobenate dimeglumine and gadopentetate dimeglumine for contrast-enhanced MRI of brain lesions at 3 Tesla (T). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-six randomized patients underwent a first examination with gadobenate dimeglumine (n = 23) or gadopentetate dimeglumine (n = 23) and then, after 2–7 days, a second examination with the other agent. Contrast administration (volume, rate), sequence parameters (T1wSE; T1wGRE), and interval between injection and image acquisition were identical for examinations in each patient. Three blinded neuroradiologists evaluated images qualitatively (lesion delineation, lesion enhancement, global preference) and quantitatively (lesion-to-brain ratio [LBR], contrast-to-noise ratio [CNR],%lesion enhancement). Differences were assessed using Wilcoxon’s signed-rank test. Reader agreement was determined using kappa (κ) statistics. RESULTS: There were no demographic differences between groups. The three readers preferred gadobenate dimeglumine globally in 22 (53.7%), 21 (51.2%), and 27 (65.9%) patients, respectively, compared with 0, 1, and 0 patients for gadopentetate dimeglumine. Similar significant (P < 0.001) preference was expressed for lesion border delineation and enhancement. Reader agreement was consistently good (κ = 0.48–0.64). Significantly (P < 0.05) higher LBR (+43.5–61.2%), CNR (+51.3–147.6%), and % lesion enhancement (+45.9–49.5%) was noted with gadobenate dimeglumine. CONCLUSION: Brain lesion depiction at 3T is significantly improved with 0.1 mmol/kg gadobenate dimeglumine