Wilms tumors: genotypes and phenotypes

Wilms tumor, or nephroblastoma, represents about 90% of all pediatric renal tumors and about 7% of all pediatric malignancies. Most Wilms tumors are unilateral, although in 5-10 % of the patients both kidneys are infected. Wilms tumor typically occurs between the age of 2 and 4 years, and 90% of the patients are diagnosed before the age of 7 years. Above the age of 18 years, Wilms tumor is rare, representing less than 1% of all adult renal tumors. Most pediatric Wilms tumor patients present with an asymptomatic abdominal mass, although abdominal pain, anorexia, vomiting, hematuria, fever and hypertension have frequently been described. Unusual presentations of Wils tumor in children are acquired von Willebrand disease, sudden death due to pulmanory embolism, and Cushing syndrome

Directionality in translator training. Contrastive evaluation of L1 and L2 translations using the PIE method (Preselected Items Evaluation) and the ATA Framework for Standardized Error Marking

This paper illustrates the results of an experiment conducted in translator training in which thirty students translated a text from their L1 (Dutch) into their L2 (English). The students completed a questionnaire on their acquisition of the L1, the perceived difficulty of each translation direction and the main difficulties encountered. The translations were analysed and scored by means of PIE (Preselected Items Evaluation), and the errors identified were categorised using the error categories of the ATA Framework for Standardized Error Marking. While the students scored slightly higher into their L2, the scores and main error categories were similar in the two translation directions. The students whose L1 is not Dutch obtained similar scores to those whose L1 is Dutch. The students’ perceived main difficulties were confirmed in the error categorisation. Finally, the perceived overall difficulty was higher than the item difficulty measured by means of PIE

Refining the PIE method (Preselected Items Evaluation) in translator training

This paper explains how to use the PIE method, a criterionand norm-referenced analytical translation evaluation method, with particular emphasis on translator training. In addition, it sheds light on the test construct and the preparation phase that precedes the PIE evaluation. The source text and item selection, as well as the dichotomous categorisation of translation solutions are discussed in detail. This paper also clarifies and refines two contentious issues in the psychometric component of the PIE method. Firstly, the p-value range, which the authors have revised. Secondly, the calculation of the d-index by means of the extreme groups method. The authors propose two additional methods to calculate the d-index, viz., the adjusted and unadjusted item-total correlation, which, unlike the extreme groups method, take into account all test takers rather than just a set percentage of test takers.peer-reviewe

Item-based translation evaluation : the evolution from RPM to CDI to PIE

Translation evaluation is a key aspect of translator training and professional translation which poses quite a few challenges, particularly in terms of subjectivity. In the past two decades there has been a marked shift from subjective, evaluator-dependent translation evaluation methods to more objective, (partly) evaluator-independent methods with automation potential. One such method is Preselected Items Evaluation (PIE), a criterion- and norm-referenced item-based analytical translation evaluation method developed in 2014 (Kockaert & Segers, 2014). It can be used as a criterion-referenced method only or as a criterion- and normreferenced method, which includes a psychometric and a statistical component. The entire method is strongly rooted in docimology, which guarantees greater transparency and objectivity, as well as inter- and intra-rater reliability. The proposed poster illustrates the evolution of PIE, which was inspired by the Reference Points Method (RPM)1 and the latter’s successor, Calibration of Dichotomous Items (CDI), and is currently being refined. Tracing the development of PIE provides an insight into the advantages and disadvantages of item-based analytical methods. It also gives us a glimpse of the (r)evolutions that lie ahead.peer-reviewe

PIE & ATA : an innovative approach to translation evaluation

Evaluation in professional translation and certification poses multiple challenges in terms of objectivity and transparency. The authors propose an innovative method that aims for greater transparency and objectivity, and can be automated. This method combines PIE (Preselected Items Evaluation) with the ATA Framework for Standardized Error Marking.peer-reviewe

Randomized controlled trial on the effect of 1-hour infusion of vincristine versus push injection on neuropathy in children with cancer (final analysis)

Introduction: Vincristine is an integral component of treatment for children with cancer. Its main dose-limiting side effect is vincristine-induced peripheral neuropathy (VIPN). The VINCA trial was a randomized controlled trial that explored the effect of 1-hour infusion compared with push injection of vincristine on the development of VIPN in children with cancer. The short-term outcomes (median follow-up 9 months) showed that there was no difference in VIPN between the randomization groups. However, 1-hour infusion was less toxic in children who also received azoles. We now report the results of the final analyses (median follow-up 20 months), which includes treatment outcome as a secondary objective (follow-up 3 years). Methods: VIPN was measured 1–7 times per participant using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) and the pediatric-modified total neuropathy score. Poisson mixed model and logistic generalized estimating equation analysis for repeated measures were performed.Results: Forty-five participants per randomization group were included. There was no significant effect of 1-hour infusion compared with push injection on VIPN. In participants receiving concurrent azoles, the total CTCAE score was significantly lower in the one-hour group (rate ratio 0.52, 95% confidence interval 0.33–0.80, p = 0.003). Four patients in the one-hour group and one patient in the push group relapsed. Two patients in the one-hour group died. Conclusion:1-hour infusion of vincristine is not protective against VIPN. However, in patients receiving concurrent azoles, 1-hour infusion may be less toxic. The difference in treatment outcome is most likely the result of differences in risk profile.</p