Correspondence to General William Robertson Boggs, date unknown or unclear

Boggs Family Papers Correspondence to General William Robertson Boggs, date unknown or unclear.https://digitalcommons.wofford.edu/littlejohnboggs/1007/thumbnail.jp

Correspondence to William Barrett Taylor, May 4, 1878 - April 18, 1880

Correspondence to William Barrett Taylor, May 4, 1878 - April 18, 1880. Box 3, Folder 4.https://digitalcommons.wofford.edu/littlejohnboggs/1020/thumbnail.jp

Correspondence to Elizabeth ( Bessie ) McCaw Boggs Taylor, December 11, 1901 - February 5, 1904

Correspondence to Elizabeth ( Bessie ) McCaw Boggs Taylor, December 11, 1901 - February 5, 1904. Box 2, folder 6.https://digitalcommons.wofford.edu/littlejohnboggs/1016/thumbnail.jp

Correspondence to Elizabeth ( Bessie ) McCaw Boggs Taylor, dates unknown

Boggs Family Paper, Box 2, Folder 1. Correspondence to Elizabeth ( Bessie ) McCaw Boggs Taylor, dates unknownhttps://digitalcommons.wofford.edu/littlejohnboggs/1011/thumbnail.jp

Correspondence to General William Robertson Boggs, 1890s: March 7, 1892 - October 1, 1899.

Boggs Family Papers, Box 1, Folder 5. Correspondence to General William Robertson Boggs, 1890s: March 7, 1892 - October 1, 1899.https://digitalcommons.wofford.edu/littlejohnboggs/1004/thumbnail.jp

How does colonoscopy compare with fecal occult blood testing as a screening tool for colon cancer?

No studies have directly compared colonoscopy with fecal occult blood testing (FOBT). Multiple screening trials have demonstrated that a primary strategy of 3-card home FOBT with follow-up colonoscopy for positive results is associated with a significant reduction in mortality from colorectalcancer (strength of recommendation [SOR]: A, based on systematic reviews of randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials). A single negative office-based digital FOBT does not decrease the likelihood of advanced neoplasia (SOR: B, based on a single prospective cohort study). There are no publications of screening trials with colonoscopy, but the odds of dying from colorectal cancer are lower for patients undergoing colonoscopy compared with patients not having a colonoscopy (SOR: B, based on extrapolation from a case-control study). Both strategies are cost-effective (SOR: A, based on a systematic review of high-quality cost-effective analyses)

Correspondence to William Barrett Taylor, date unknown or unclear

Correspondence to William Barrett Taylor, date unknown or unclear. Box 3, folder 7.https://digitalcommons.wofford.edu/littlejohnboggs/1022/thumbnail.jp

Simultaneous Detection of FISH Signals and Bromo-Deoxyuridine Incorporation in Fixed Tissue Cultured Cells

FISH (Fluorescence in situ hybridization) is a powerful technique that detects and localises specific DNA sequences on metaphase chromosomes, interphase nuclei or chromatin fibres. When coupled to BrdU (5-Bromo 2-deoxy-uridine) labeling of newly replicated DNA, the replication properties of different DNA sequences can be analysed. However, the technique for the detection of BrdU incorporation is time consuming, and relies on acidic pH buffer treatments, that prevent use of pH sensitive fluorochromes such as FITC (Fluoro-isothiocianate) during FISH. In this work, we describe a simplified protocol that allows the simultaneous detection of FISH signals and BrdU incorporation. Since the technique does not involve paraformaldehyde for cell fixation, or formamide for denaturation of the target DNA and in post-hybridisation washes, it represents a safer alternative to classical FISH techniques