Is American Public Administration Detached From Historical Context?: On the Nature of Time and the Need to Understand It in Government and Its Study

The study of public administration pays little attention to history. Most publications are focused on current problems (the present) and desired solutions (the future) and are concerned mainly with organizational structure (a substantive issue) and output targets (an aggregative issue that involves measures of both individual performance and organizational productivity/services). There is much less consideration of how public administration (i.e., organization, policy, the study, etc.) unfolds over time. History, and so administrative history, is regarded as a “past” that can be recorded for its own sake but has little relevance to contemporary challenges. This view of history is the product of a diminished and anemic sense of time, resulting from organizing the past as a series of events that inexorably lead up to the present in a linear fashion. To improve the understanding of government’s role and position in society, public administration scholarship needs to reacquaint itself with the nature of time.Yeshttps://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/manuscript-submission-guideline

The Public Repository of Xenografts enables discovery and randomized phase II-like trials in mice

More than 90% of drugs with preclinical activity fail in human trials, largely due to insufficient efficacy. We hypothesized that adequately powered trials of patient-derived xenografts (PDX) in mice could efficiently define therapeutic activity across heterogeneous tumors. To address this hypothesis, we established a large, publicly available repository of well-characterized leukemia and lymphoma PDXs that undergo orthotopic engraftment, called the Public Repository of Xenografts (PRoXe). PRoXe includes all de-identified information relevant to the primary specimens and the PDXs derived from them. Using this repository, we demonstrate that large studies of acute leukemia PDXs that mimic human randomized clinical trials can characterize drug efficacy and generate transcriptional, functional, and proteomic biomarkers in both treatment-naive and relapsed/refractory disease

Crown, Clergy and revolution in Bourbon Peru The diocese of Cuzco 1780-1814

SIGLELD:D50153/84 / BLDSC - British Library Document Supply CentreGBUnited Kingdo

A combined molecular clinical predictor of survival validated with the rtog-0525 cohort

For glioblastoma (GBM), survival classification has primarily relied on clinical criteria, exemplified by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) recursive partitioning analysis (RPA). We sought to improve tumor classification by combining tumor biomarkers with the clinical RPA data. To accomplish this, we first developed 4 molecular biomarkers derived from gene expression profiling, a glioma CpG island methylator phenotype, a novel MGMT promoter methylation assay, and IDH1 mutations. A molecular predictor (MP) model was created with these 4 biomarkers on a training set of 220 retrospectively collected archival GBMtumors. ThisMPwas further combined with RPA classification to develop a molecular-clinical predictor (MCP). The median survivals for the combined, 4-class MCP were 65 months, 31 months, 13 months, and 9 months, which was significantly improved when compared with the RPA alone. The MCP was then applied to 725 samples from the RTOG-0525 cohort, showing median survival for each risk group of NR, 26 months, 16 months, and 11 months. The MCP was significantly improved over the RPA at outcome prediction in the RTOG 0525 cohort with a 33%increase in explained variation with respect to survival, validating the result obtained in the training set. To illustrate the benefit of the MCP for patient stratification, we examined progression-free survival (PFS) for patients receiving standard-dose temozolomide (SD-TMZ) vs. dose-dense TMZ (DD-TMZ) in RPA and MCP risk groups. A significant difference between DD-TMZ and SD-TMZ was observed in the poorest surviving MCP risk group with a median PFS of 6 months vs. 3 months (p ¼ 0.048, log-rank test). This difference was not seen using the RPA classification alone. In summary, we have developed a combined molecular-clinical predictor that appears to improve outcome prediction when compared with clinical variables alone. This MCP may serve to better identify patients requiring intensive treatments beyond the standard of care