PET probe-guided surgery: applications and clinical protocol

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licens

Reproducibility of quantitative F-18-3'-deoxy-3'-fluorothymidine measurements using positron emission tomography

Positron emission tomography (PET) using F-18-3'-deoxy-3'-fluorothymidine ([F-18]FLT) allows noninvasive monitoring of tumour proliferation. For serial imaging in individual patients, good reproducibility is essential. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the reproducibility of quantitative [F-18]FLT measurements. Nine patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and six with head-and-neck cancer (HNC) underwent [F-18]FLT PET twice within 7 days prior to therapy. The maximum pixel value (SUVmax) and a threshold defined volume (SUV41%) were defined for all delineated lesions. The plasma to tumour transfer constant (K-i) was estimated using both Patlak graphical analysis and nonlinear regression (NLR). NLR was also used to estimate k(3), which, at least in theory, selectively reflects thymidine kinase 1 activity. The level of agreement between test and retest values was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland-Altman analysis. All primary tumours and > 90% of clinically suspected locoregional metastases could be delineated. In total, 24 lesions were defined. NLR-derived K-i, Patlak-derived K-i, SUV41% and SUVmax showed excellent reproducibility with ICCs of 0.92, 0.95, 0.98 and 0.93, and SDs of 16%, 12%, 7% and 11%, respectively. Reproducibility was poor for k(3) with an ICC of 0.43 and SD of 38%. Quantitative [F-18]FLT measurements are reproducible in both NSCLC and HNC patients. When monitoring response in individual patients, changes of more than 15% in SUV41%, 20-25% in SUVmax and Patlak-derived K-i, and 32% in NLR3k-derived K-i are likely to represent treatment effect

The Water Bugs (Heteroptera: Nepomorpha) of the Guyana Region

NEPOMORPHA OF THE GUYANA REGION The Nepomorpha of the Guyana Region are keyed out and described. In addition distributional, faunistical and comparative notes on the species are given. New species and subspecies: Ochterus aeneifrons surinamensis, O. tenebrosus; Limnocoris fittkaui surinamensis; Ranatra adelomorpha; Neoplea globoidea; Buenoa amnigenopsis; Tenagobia pseudoromani from Suriname and Ranatra ornitheia from Guyana. New synonyms (junior ones between parenthesis): Gelaslocorus flavus flavus Guér. (G. nebulosus nebulosus Guér.); Pelocoris impicticollis Stål (P. horváthi Mont.), P. poeyi (Guér.) not identical with P. femoratus (P.-B.) (P. convexus Nieser), P. procurrens White (P. minutus Mont.); Belostoma bicavum Lauck ( B. parvoculum Lauck); Ranatra doesburgi De Carlo (R. usingeri De C.), R. macrophthalma H.-S. (R. surinamensis De C.), R. mediana Mont. (R. williamsi Kuitert), R. obscura Mont. (R. annulipes White 1879 not Stål), R. sarmentoi De C. (R. ameghinoi De C.); Buenoa amnigenopsis n. sp. ( B. amnigenus Nieser 1968, 1970 not White), B. amnigenus (White) (B. amnigenoidea Nieser 1970), B. nitida Truxal (B. doesburgi Nieser); Heterocorixa surinamensis Nieser ( H. boliviensis Nieser 1970 not Hungerford); Tenagobia incerta Lundbl. ( T. signata and T. serrata in part, Nieser 1970 not White and Deay respectively), T. socialis (White) (T. serrata in part, Nieser 1970 not Deay)

Non-affirmative Theory of Education as a Foundation for Curriculum Studies, Didaktik and Educational Leadership

This chapter presents non-affirmative theory of education as the foundation for a new research program in education, allowing us to bridge educational leadership, curriculum studies and Didaktik. We demonstrate the strengths of this framework by analyzing literature from educational leadership and curriculum theory/didaktik. In contrast to both socialization-oriented explanations locating curriculum and leadership within existing society, and transformation-oriented models viewing education as revolutionary or super-ordinate to society, non-affirmative theory explains the relation between education and politics, economy and culture, respectively, as non-hierarchical. Here critical deliberation and discursive practices mediate between politics, culture, economy and education, driven by individual agency in historically developed cultural and societal institutions. While transformative and socialization models typically result in instrumental notions of leadership and teaching, non-affirmative education theory, previously developed within German and Nordic education, instead views leadership and teaching as relational and hermeneutic, drawing on ontological core concepts of modern education: recognition; summoning to self-activity and Bildsamkeit. Understanding educational leadership, school development and teaching then requires a comparative multi-level approach informed by discursive institutionalism and organization theory, in addition to theorizing leadership and teaching as cultural-historical and critical-hermeneutic activity. Globalisation and contemporary challenges to deliberative democracy also call for rethinking modern nation-state based theorizing of education in a cosmopolitan light. Non-affirmative education theory allows us to understand and promote recognition based democratic citizenship (political, economical and cultural) that respects cultural, ethical and epistemological variations in a globopolitan era. We hope an American-European-Asian comparative dialogue is enhanced by theorizing education with a non-affirmative approach