Annealing tests of in-pile irradiated oxide coated U–Mo/Al–Si dispersed nuclear fuel

Authors do acknowledge the MERARG team for their experimental work (CEA) and F. Charollais, J. Noirot and finally B. Kapusta for their advices and comments. This study was supported by a combined Grant (FRM0911) of the Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (BMBF) and the Bayerisches Staatsministerium für Wissenschaft, Forschung und Kunst (StMWFK).U–Mo/Al based nuclear fuels have been worldwide considered as a promising high density fuel for the conversion of high flux research reactors from highly enriched uranium to lower enrichment. In this paper, we present the annealing test up to 1800°C of in-pile irradiated U–Mo/Al–Si fuel plate samples. More than 70% of the fission gases (FGs) are released during two major FG release peaks around 500°C and 670°C. Additional characterisations of the samples by XRD, EPMA and SEM suggest that up to 500°C FGs are released from IDL/matrix interfaces. The second peak at 670°C representing the main release of FGs originates from the interaction between U–Mo and matrix in the vicinity of the cladding

Phase III study of nilotinib versus best supportive care with or without a TKI in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors resistant to or intolerant of imatinib and sunitinib

Background This phase III open-label trial investigated the efficacy of nilotinib in patients with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumors following prior imatinib and sunitinib failure. Patients and methods Patients were randomized 2:1 to nilotinib 400 mg b.i.d. or best supportive care (BSC; BSC without tyrosine kinase inhibitor, BSC+imatinib, or BSC+sunitinib). Primary efficacy end point was progression-free survival (PFS) based on blinded central radiology review (CRR). Patients progressing on BSC could cross over to nilotinib. Results Two hundred and forty-eight patients enrolled. Median PFS was similar between arms (nilotinib 109 days, BSC 111 days; P=0.56). Local investigator-based intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis showed a significantly longer median PFS with nilotinib (119 versus 70 days; P=0.0007). A trend in longer median overall survival (OS) was noted with nilotinib (332 versus 280 days; P=0.29). Post hoc subset analyses in patients with progression and only one prior regimen each of imatinib and sunitinib revealed a significant difference in median OS of >4 months in favor of nilotinib (405 versus 280 days; P=0.02). Nilotinib was well tolerated. Conclusion In the ITT analysis, no significant difference in PFS was observed between treatment arms based on CRR. In the post hoc subset analyses, nilotinib provided significantly longer median O