Voluntary carbon offsets a solution for reducing tourism emissions? assessment of communication aspects and mitigation potential

Contrary to most sectors, to date the tourism and aviation industries have not managed to level off greenhouse gas emissions. Moreover, effective mitigation through technological innovation or structural and behavioural change cannot be expected shortly. Airlines and tourism companies appear to use carbon offsetting as a last resort. However, offsetting is generally acknowledged as a second-best solution for mitigating emissions, after reducing energy use. This paper seeks to determine the mitigation potential of voluntary carbon offsetting by comparing public and industry awareness of climate change and aviation emissions, and attitudes to various mitigation measures with relevant online communication by 64 offset providers. Methods were a literature review and online content analyses. Overall, the gaps that were identified between awareness, attitude and actual behaviour are not bridged by provider communication. From this perspective, the mitigation potential of voluntary carbon offsetting for achieving reductions of tourism transport emissions is estimated as low. The same conclusion is reached by comparing carbon dioxide volumes of flight offsets with actual air travel emissions. Current sales of flight offsets compensate less than 1% of all aviation emissions

Timing of glioblastoma surgery and patient outcomes: a multicenter cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The impact of time-to-surgery on clinical outcome for patients with glioblastoma has not been determined. Any delay in treatment is perceived as detrimental, but guidelines do not specify acceptable timings. In this study, we relate the time to glioblastoma surgery with the extent of resection and residual tumor volume, performance change, and survival, and we explore the identification of patients for urgent surgery. METHODS: Adults with first-time surgery in 2012–2013 treated by 12 neuro-oncological teams were included in this study. We defined time-to-surgery as the number of days between the diagnostic MR scan and surgery. The relation between time-to-surgery and patient and tumor characteristics was explored in time-to-event analysis and proportional hazard models. Outcome according to time-to-surgery was analyzed by volumetric measurements, changes in performance status, and survival analysis with patient and tumor characteristics as modifiers. RESULTS: Included were 1033 patients of whom 729 had a resection and 304 a biopsy. The overall median time-to-surgery was 13 days. Surgery was within 3 days for 235 (23%) patients, and within a month for 889 (86%). The median volumetric doubling time was 22 days. Lower performance status (hazard ratio [HR] 0.942, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.893–0.994) and larger tumor volume (HR 1.012, 95% CI 1.010–1.014) were independently associated with a shorter time-to-surgery. Extent of resection, residual tumor volume, postoperative performance change, and overall survival were not associated with time-to-surgery. CONCLUSIONS: With current decision-making for urgent surgery in selected patients with glioblastoma and surgery typically within 1 month, we found equal extent of resection, residual tumor volume, performance status, and survival after longer times-to-surgery

Glioblastoma surgery imaging—reporting and data system: Standardized reporting of tumor volume, location, and resectability based on automated segmentations

Treatment decisions for patients with presumed glioblastoma are based on tumor characteristics available from a preoperative MR scan. Tumor characteristics, including volume, location, and resectability, are often estimated or manually delineated. This process is time consuming and subjective. Hence, comparison across cohorts, trials, or registries are subject to assessment bias. In this study, we propose a standardized Glioblastoma Surgery Imaging Reporting and Data System (GSI-RADS) based on an automated method of tumor segmentation that provides standard reports on tumor features that are potentially relevant for glioblastoma surgery. As clinical validation, we determine the agreement in extracted tumor features between the automated method and the current standard of manual segmentations from routine clinical MR scans before treatment. In an observational consecutive cohort of 1596 adult patients with a first time surgery of a glioblastoma from 13 institutions, we segmented gadolinium-enhanced tumor parts both by a human rater and by an automated algorithm. Tumor features were extracted from segmentations of both methods and compared to assess differences, concordance, and equivalence. The laterality, contralateral infiltration, and the laterality indices were in excellent agreement. The native and normalized tumor volumes had excellent agreement, consistency, and equivalence. Multifocality, but not the number of foci, had good agreement and equivalence. The location profiles of cortical and subcortical structures were in excellent agreement. The expected residual tumor volumes and resectability indices had excellent agreement, consistency, and equivalence. Tumor probability maps were in good agreement. In conclusion, automated segmentations are in excellent agreement with manual segmentations and practically equivalent regarding tumor features that are potentially relevant for neurosurgical purposes. Standard GSI-RADS reports can be generated by open access software

Glioblastoma Surgery Imaging-Reporting and Data System: Validation and Performance of the Automated Segmentation Task

For patients with presumed glioblastoma, essential tumor characteristics are determined from preoperative MR images to optimize the treatment strategy. This procedure is time-consuming and subjective, if performed by crude eyeballing or manually. The standardized GSI-RADS aims to provide neurosurgeons with automatic tumor segmentations to extract tumor features rapidly and objectively. In this study, we improved automatic tumor segmentation and compared the agreement with manual raters, describe the technical details of the different components of GSI-RADS, and determined their speed. Two recent neural network architectures were considered for the segmentation task: nnU-Net and AGU-Net. Two preprocessing schemes were introduced to investigate the tradeoff between performance and processing speed. A summarized description of the tumor feature extraction and standardized reporting process is included. The trained architectures for automatic segmentation and the code for computing the standardized report are distributed as open-source and as open-access software. Validation studies were performed on a dataset of 1594 gadolinium-enhanced T1-weighted MRI volumes from 13 hospitals and 293 T1-weighted MRI volumes from the BraTS challenge. The glioblastoma tumor core segmentation reached a Dice score slightly below 90%, a patientwise F1-score close to 99%, and a 95th percentile Hausdorff distance slightly below 4.0 mm on average with either architecture and the heavy preprocessing scheme. A patient MRI volume can be segmented in less than one minute, and a standardized report can be generated in up to five minutes. The proposed GSI-RADS software showed robust performance on a large collection of MRI volumes from various hospitals and generated results within a reasonable runtime