Modelling and simulation of a lava flow affecting a shore platform: a case study of Montaña de Aguarijo eruption, El Hierro (Canary Islands, Spain)

Recent subaerial volcanism at El Hierro Island (Canary Islands, Spain) consists of monogenetic volcanic fields. This volcanism generated cinder cones, tephra air-fall deposits, and lava flows. The lava flows reach several kilometres in length extending through shore platforms and, sometimes, penetrating under the sea level. The volcanic landforms of El Hierro convert it into a natural laboratory for topographic and morphometric modelling and lava flow simulations. We perform the modelling and simulation of the Montaña de Aguarijo eruption, a cinder cone at the NE rift. The associated lava flow channelled through a V-shaped ravine until reaching a cliff, where formed cascades. The flow spread at the cliff base over a platform before reaching the sea modifying the coastline. Different maps were designed to show the results, including the geomorphologic reconstruction of the area affected by this eruption and the lava flow simulations obtained with the Q-LavHA plugin. © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group on behalf of Journal of Maps

Izaña Atmospheric Research Center. Activity Report 2015-2016

This report is a summary of the many activities at the Izaña Atmospheric Research Center to the broader community. The combination of operational activities, research and development in state-of-the-art measurement techniques, calibration and validation and international cooperation encompass the vision of WMO to provide world leadership in expertise and international cooperation in weather, climate, hydrology and related environmental issues

Izaña Atmospheric Research Center. Activity Report 2019-2020

Editors: Emilio Cuevas, Celia Milford and Oksana Tarasova.[EN]The Izaña Atmospheric Research Center (IARC), which is part of the State Meteorological Agency of Spain (AEMET), is a site of excellence in atmospheric science. It manages four observatories in Tenerife including the high altitude Izaña Atmospheric Observatory. The Izaña Atmospheric Observatory was inaugurated in 1916 and since that date has carried out uninterrupted meteorological and climatological observations, contributing towards a unique 100-year record in 2016. This reports are a summary of the many activities at the Izaña Atmospheric Research Center to the broader community. The combination of operational activities, research and development in state-of-the-art measurement techniques, calibration and validation and international cooperation encompass the vision of WMO to provide world leadership in expertise and international cooperation in weather, climate, hydrology and related environmental issues.[ES]El Centro de Investigación Atmosférica de Izaña (CIAI), que forma parte de la Agencia Estatal de Meteorología de España (AEMET), representa un centro de excelencia en ciencias atmosféricas. Gestiona cuatro observatorios en Tenerife, incluido el Observatorio de Izaña de gran altitud, inaugurado en 1916 y que desde entonces ha realizado observaciones meteorológicas y climatológicas ininterrumpidas y se ha convertido en una estación centenaria de la OMM. Estos informes resumen las múltiples actividades llevadas a cabo por el Centro de Investigación Atmosférica de Izaña. El liderazgo del Centro en materia de investigación y desarrollo con respecto a las técnicas de medición, calibración y validación de última generación, así como la cooperación internacional, le han otorgado una reputación sobresaliente en lo que se refiere al tiempo, el clima, la hidrología y otros temas ambientales afines

Izaña Atmospheric Research Center. Activity Report 2021-2022

Editors: Emilio Cuevas, Celia Milford and Oksana Tarasova.[EN]The Izaña Atmospheric Research Center (IARC), which is part of the State Meteorological Agency of Spain (AEMET), is a site of excellence in atmospheric science. It manages four observatories in Tenerife including the high altitude Izaña Atmospheric Observatory. The Izaña Atmospheric Observatory was inaugurated in 1916 and since that date has carried out uninterrupted meteorological and climatological observations, contributing towards a unique 100-year record in 2016. This reports are a summary of the many activities at the Izaña Atmospheric Research Center to the broader community. The combination of operational activities, research and development in state-of-the-art measurement techniques, calibration and validation and international cooperation encompass the vision of WMO to provide world leadership in expertise and international cooperation in weather, climate, hydrology and related environmental issues.[ES]El Centro de Investigación Atmosférica de Izaña (CIAI), que forma parte de la Agencia Estatal de Meteorología de España (AEMET), representa un centro de excelencia en ciencias atmosféricas. Gestiona cuatro observatorios en Tenerife, incluido el Observatorio de Izaña de gran altitud, inaugurado en 1916 y que desde entonces ha realizado observaciones meteorológicas y climatológicas ininterrumpidas y se ha convertido en una estación centenaria de la OMM. Estos informes resumen las múltiples actividades llevadas a cabo por el Centro de Investigación Atmosférica de Izaña. El liderazgo del Centro en materia de investigación y desarrollo con respecto a las técnicas de medición, calibración y validación de última generación, así como la cooperación internacional, le han otorgado una reputación sobresaliente en lo que se refiere al tiempo, el clima, la hidrología y otros temas ambientales afines

Comparative effectiveness and safety of non-vitamin K antagonists for atrial fibrillation in clinical practice: GLORIA-AF Registry

Background and purpose: Prospectively collected data comparing the safety and effectiveness of individual non-vitamin K antagonists (NOACs) are lacking. Our objective was to directly compare the effectiveness and safety of NOACs in patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods: In GLORIA-AF, a large, prospective, global registry program, consecutive patients with newly diagnosed AF were followed for 3 years. The comparative analyses for (1) dabigatran vs rivaroxaban or apixaban and (2) rivaroxaban vs apixaban were performed on propensity score (PS)-matched patient sets. Proportional hazards regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for outcomes of interest. Results: The GLORIA-AF Phase III registry enrolled 21,300 patients between January 2014 and December 2016. Of these, 3839 were prescribed dabigatran, 4015 rivaroxaban and 4505 apixaban, with median ages of 71.0, 71.0, and 73.0 years, respectively. In the PS-matched set, the adjusted HRs and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for dabigatran vs rivaroxaban were, for stroke: 1.27 (0.79–2.03), major bleeding 0.59 (0.40–0.88), myocardial infarction 0.68 (0.40–1.16), and all-cause death 0.86 (0.67–1.10). For the comparison of dabigatran vs apixaban, in the PS-matched set, the adjusted HRs were, for stroke 1.16 (0.76–1.78), myocardial infarction 0.84 (0.48–1.46), major bleeding 0.98 (0.63–1.52) and all-cause death 1.01 (0.79–1.29). For the comparison of rivaroxaban vs apixaban, in the PS-matched set, the adjusted HRs were, for stroke 0.78 (0.52–1.19), myocardial infarction 0.96 (0.63–1.45), major bleeding 1.54 (1.14–2.08), and all-cause death 0.97 (0.80–1.19). Conclusions: Patients treated with dabigatran had a 41% lower risk of major bleeding compared with rivaroxaban, but similar risks of stroke, MI, and death. Relative to apixaban, patients treated with dabigatran had similar risks of stroke, major bleeding, MI, and death. Rivaroxaban relative to apixaban had increased risk for major bleeding, but similar risks for stroke, MI, and death. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifiers: NCT01468701, NCT01671007. Date of registration: September 2013

Why Are Outcomes Different for Registry Patients Enrolled Prospectively and Retrospectively? Insights from the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF).

Background: Retrospective and prospective observational studies are designed to reflect real-world evidence on clinical practice, but can yield conflicting results. The GARFIELD-AF Registry includes both methods of enrolment and allows analysis of differences in patient characteristics and outcomes that may result. Methods and Results: Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and ≥1 risk factor for stroke at diagnosis of AF were recruited either retrospectively (n = 5069) or prospectively (n = 5501) from 19 countries and then followed prospectively. The retrospectively enrolled cohort comprised patients with established AF (for a least 6, and up to 24 months before enrolment), who were identified retrospectively (and baseline and partial follow-up data were collected from the emedical records) and then followed prospectively between 0-18 months (such that the total time of follow-up was 24 months; data collection Dec-2009 and Oct-2010). In the prospectively enrolled cohort, patients with newly diagnosed AF (≤6 weeks after diagnosis) were recruited between Mar-2010 and Oct-2011 and were followed for 24 months after enrolment. Differences between the cohorts were observed in clinical characteristics, including type of AF, stroke prevention strategies, and event rates. More patients in the retrospectively identified cohort received vitamin K antagonists (62.1% vs. 53.2%) and fewer received non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (1.8% vs . 4.2%). All-cause mortality rates per 100 person-years during the prospective follow-up (starting the first study visit up to 1 year) were significantly lower in the retrospective than prospectively identified cohort (3.04 [95% CI 2.51 to 3.67] vs . 4.05 [95% CI 3.53 to 4.63]; p = 0.016). Conclusions: Interpretations of data from registries that aim to evaluate the characteristics and outcomes of patients with AF must take account of differences in registry design and the impact of recall bias and survivorship bias that is incurred with retrospective enrolment. Clinical Trial Registration: - URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier for GARFIELD-AF (NCT01090362)

Improved risk stratification of patients with atrial fibrillation: an integrated GARFIELD-AF tool for the prediction of mortality, stroke and bleed in patients with and without anticoagulation.

OBJECTIVES: To provide an accurate, web-based tool for stratifying patients with atrial fibrillation to facilitate decisions on the potential benefits/risks of anticoagulation, based on mortality, stroke and bleeding risks. DESIGN: The new tool was developed, using stepwise regression, for all and then applied to lower risk patients. C-statistics were compared with CHA2DS2-VASc using 30-fold cross-validation to control for overfitting. External validation was undertaken in an independent dataset, Outcome Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF). PARTICIPANTS: Data from 39 898 patients enrolled in the prospective GARFIELD-AF registry provided the basis for deriving and validating an integrated risk tool to predict stroke risk, mortality and bleeding risk. RESULTS: The discriminatory value of the GARFIELD-AF risk model was superior to CHA2DS2-VASc for patients with or without anticoagulation. C-statistics (95% CI) for all-cause mortality, ischaemic stroke/systemic embolism and haemorrhagic stroke/major bleeding (treated patients) were: 0.77 (0.76 to 0.78), 0.69 (0.67 to 0.71) and 0.66 (0.62 to 0.69), respectively, for the GARFIELD-AF risk models, and 0.66 (0.64-0.67), 0.64 (0.61-0.66) and 0.64 (0.61-0.68), respectively, for CHA2DS2-VASc (or HAS-BLED for bleeding). In very low to low risk patients (CHA2DS2-VASc 0 or 1 (men) and 1 or 2 (women)), the CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED (for bleeding) scores offered weak discriminatory value for mortality, stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding. C-statistics for the GARFIELD-AF risk tool were 0.69 (0.64 to 0.75), 0.65 (0.56 to 0.73) and 0.60 (0.47 to 0.73) for each end point, respectively, versus 0.50 (0.45 to 0.55), 0.59 (0.50 to 0.67) and 0.55 (0.53 to 0.56) for CHA2DS2-VASc (or HAS-BLED for bleeding). Upon validation in the ORBIT-AF population, C-statistics showed that the GARFIELD-AF risk tool was effective for predicting 1-year all-cause mortality using the full and simplified model for all-cause mortality: C-statistics 0.75 (0.73 to 0.77) and 0.75 (0.73 to 0.77), respectively, and for predicting for any stroke or systemic embolism over 1 year, C-statistics 0.68 (0.62 to 0.74). CONCLUSIONS: Performance of the GARFIELD-AF risk tool was superior to CHA2DS2-VASc in predicting stroke and mortality and superior to HAS-BLED for bleeding, overall and in lower risk patients. The GARFIELD-AF tool has the potential for incorporation in routine electronic systems, and for the first time, permits simultaneous evaluation of ischaemic stroke, mortality and bleeding risks. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier for GARFIELD-AF (NCT01090362) and for ORBIT-AF (NCT01165710)

Anticoagulant selection in relation to the SAMe-TT2R2 score in patients with atrial fibrillation. the GLORIA-AF registry

Aim: The SAMe-TT2R2 score helps identify patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) likely to have poor anticoagulation control during anticoagulation with vitamin K antagonists (VKA) and those with scores >2 might be better managed with a target-specific oral anticoagulant (NOAC). We hypothesized that in clinical practice, VKAs may be prescribed less frequently to patients with AF and SAMe-TT2R2 scores >2 than to patients with lower scores. Methods and results: We analyzed the Phase III dataset of the Global Registry on Long-Term Oral Antithrombotic Treatment in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation (GLORIA-AF), a large, global, prospective global registry of patients with newly diagnosed AF and ≥1 stroke risk factor. We compared baseline clinical characteristics and antithrombotic prescriptions to determine the probability of the VKA prescription among anticoagulated patients with the baseline SAMe-TT2R2 score >2 and ≤ 2. Among 17,465 anticoagulated patients with AF, 4,828 (27.6%) patients were prescribed VKA and 12,637 (72.4%) patients an NOAC: 11,884 (68.0%) patients had SAMe-TT2R2 scores 0-2 and 5,581 (32.0%) patients had scores >2. The proportion of patients prescribed VKA was 28.0% among patients with SAMe-TT2R2 scores >2 and 27.5% in those with scores ≤2. Conclusions: The lack of a clear association between the SAMe-TT2R2 score and anticoagulant selection may be attributed to the relative efficacy and safety profiles between NOACs and VKAs as well as to the absence of trial evidence that an SAMe-TT2R2-guided strategy for the selection of the type of anticoagulation in NVAF patients has an impact on clinical outcomes of efficacy and safety. The latter hypothesis is currently being tested in a randomized controlled trial. Clinical trial registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov//Unique identifier: NCT01937377, NCT01468701, and NCT01671007