Thermal conductivity via magnetic excitations in spin-chain materials

We discuss the recent progress and the current status of experimental investigations of spin-mediated energy transport in spin-chain and spin-ladder materials with antiferromagnetic coupling. We briefly outline the central results of theoretical studies on the subject but focus mainly on recent experimental results that were obtained on materials which may be regarded as adequate physical realizations of the idealized theoretical model systems. Some open questions and unsettled issues are also addressed.Comment: 17 pages, 4 figure

Diffusive energy transport in the S=1 Haldane chain compound AgVP2S6

We present the results of measurements of the thermal conductivity $\kappa$ of the spin S=1 chain compound AgVP_2S_6 in the temperature range between 2 and 300 K and with the heat flow directed either along or perpendicular to the chain direction. The analysis of the anisotropy of the heat transport allowed for the identification of a small but non-negligible magnon contribution $\kappa_m$ along the chains, superimposed on the dominant phonon contribution $\kappa_ph$. At temperatures above about 100 K the energy diffusion constant D_E(T), calculated from the $\kappa_m(T)$ data, exhibits similar features as the spin diffusion constant D_S(T), previously measured by NMR. In this regime, the behaviour of both transport parameters is consistent with a diffusion process that is caused by interactions inherent to one-dimensional S=1 spin systems.Comment: 6 pages, 4 figure

To wet or not to wet: that is the question

Wetting transitions have been predicted and observed to occur for various combinations of fluids and surfaces. This paper describes the origin of such transitions, for liquid films on solid surfaces, in terms of the gas-surface interaction potentials V(r), which depend on the specific adsorption system. The transitions of light inert gases and H2 molecules on alkali metal surfaces have been explored extensively and are relatively well understood in terms of the least attractive adsorption interactions in nature. Much less thoroughly investigated are wetting transitions of Hg, water, heavy inert gases and other molecular films. The basic idea is that nonwetting occurs, for energetic reasons, if the adsorption potential's well-depth D is smaller than, or comparable to, the well-depth of the adsorbate-adsorbate mutual interaction. At the wetting temperature, Tw, the transition to wetting occurs, for entropic reasons, when the liquid's surface tension is sufficiently small that the free energy cost in forming a thick film is sufficiently compensated by the fluid- surface interaction energy. Guidelines useful for exploring wetting transitions of other systems are analyzed, in terms of generic criteria involving the "simple model", which yields results in terms of gas-surface interaction parameters and thermodynamic properties of the bulk adsorbate.Comment: Article accepted for publication in J. Low Temp. Phy

Observation of the baryonic decay B \uaf 0 \u2192 \u39bc+ p \uaf K-K+

We report the observation of the baryonic decay B\uaf0\u2192\u39bc+p\uafK-K+ using a data sample of 471 7106 BB\uaf pairs produced in e+e- annihilations at s=10.58GeV. This data sample was recorded with the BABAR detector at the PEP-II storage ring at SLAC. We find B(B\uaf0\u2192\u39bc+p\uafK-K+)=(2.5\ub10.4(stat)\ub10.2(syst)\ub10.6B(\u39bc+)) 710-5, where the uncertainties are statistical, systematic, and due to the uncertainty of the \u39bc+\u2192pK-\u3c0+ branching fraction, respectively. The result has a significance corresponding to 5.0 standard deviations, including all uncertainties. For the resonant decay B\uaf0\u2192\u39bc+p\uaf\u3c6, we determine the upper limit B(B\uaf0\u2192\u39bc+p\uaf\u3c6)<1.2 710-5 at 90% confidence level

Scalable Open Science Approach for Mutation Calling of Tumor Exomes Using Multiple Genomic Pipelines

The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) cancer genomics dataset includes over 10,000 tumor-normal exome pairs across 33 different cancer types, in total >400 TB of raw data files requiring analysis. Here we describe the Multi-Center Mutation Calling in Multiple Cancers project, our effort to generate a comprehensive encyclopedia of somatic mutation calls for the TCGA data to enable robust cross-tumor-type analyses. Our approach accounts for variance and batch effects introduced by the rapid advancement of DNA extraction, hybridization-capture, sequencing, and analysis methods over time. We present best practices for applying an ensemble of seven mutation-calling algorithms with scoring and artifact filtering. The dataset created by this analysis includes 3.5 million somatic variants and forms the basis for PanCan Atlas papers. The results have been made available to the research community along with the methods used to generate them. This project is the result of collaboration from a number of institutes and demonstrates how team science drives extremely large genomics projects

Spatial Organization and Molecular Correlation of Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes Using Deep Learning on Pathology Images

Beyond sample curation and basic pathologic characterization, the digitized H&E-stained images of TCGA samples remain underutilized. To highlight this resource, we present mappings of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) based on H&E images from 13 TCGA tumor types. These TIL maps are derived through computational staining using a convolutional neural network trained to classify patches of images. Affinity propagation revealed local spatial structure in TIL patterns and correlation with overall survival. TIL map structural patterns were grouped using standard histopathological parameters. These patterns are enriched in particular T cell subpopulations derived from molecular measures. TIL densities and spatial structure were differentially enriched among tumor types, immune subtypes, and tumor molecular subtypes, implying that spatial infiltrate state could reflect particular tumor cell aberration states. Obtaining spatial lymphocytic patterns linked to the rich genomic characterization of TCGA samples demonstrates one use for the TCGA image archives with insights into the tumor-immune microenvironment. Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) were identified from standard pathology cancer images by a deep-learning-derived \u201ccomputational stain\u201d developed by Saltz et al. They processed 5,202 digital images from 13 cancer types. Resulting TIL maps were correlated with TCGA molecular data, relating TIL content to survival, tumor subtypes, and immune profiles

Predictive Value Of Phase I Trials For Safety In Later Trials And Final Approved Dose: Analysis Of 61 Approved Cancer Drugs

Phase I trials use a small number of patients to define amaximumtolerated dose (MTD) and the safety of new agents. We compared data from phase I and registration trials to determine whether early trials predicted later safety and final dose. We searched the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) website for drugs approved in nonpediatric cancers (January 1990-October 2012). The recommended phase II dose (R2PD) and toxicities from phase I were compared with doses and safety in later trials. In 62 of 85 (73%) matched trials, the dose from the later trial was within 20% of the RP2D. In a multivariable analysis, phase I trials of targeted agents were less predictive of the final approved dose (OR, 0.2 for adopting ± 20% of the RP2D for targeted vs. other classes; P = 0.025). Of the 530 clinically relevant toxicities in later trials, 70% (n = 374) were described in phase I. A significant relationship (P = 0.0032) between increasing the number of patients in phase I (up to 60) and the ability to describe future clinically relevant toxicities was observed. Among 28,505 patients in later trials, the death rate that was related to drug was 1.41%. In conclusion, dosing based on phase I trials was associated with a lowtoxicity-related death rate in later trials. The ability to predict relevant toxicities correlates with thenumber of patients on the initial phase I trial. The final dose approved was within 20%of the RP2D in 73% of assessed trials. Clin Cancer Res; 20(2); 281-8. © 2013 AACR.202281288Critical role of phase 1 clinical trials in cancer treatment (1997) J Clin Oncol., 15, pp. 853-859. , American Society of Clinical OncologyPostel-Vinay, S., Gomez-Roca, C., Molife, L.R., Anghan, B., Levy, A., Judson, I., Phase 1 trials of molecularly targeted agents: Should we pay more attention to late toxicities? (2011) J Clin Oncol, 29, pp. 1728-1735Soria, J.C., Phase 1 trials of molecular targeted therapies: Are we evaluating toxicities properly? (2011) Eur J Cancer., 47, pp. 1443-1445Penel, N., Adenis, A., Clisant, S., Bonneterre, J., Nature and subjectivity of dose-limiting toxicities in contemporary phase 1 trials: Comparison of cytotoxic versus non-cytotoxic drugs (2011) Invest New Drugs, 29, pp. 1414-1419Iasonos, A., Gounder, M., Spriggs, D.R., Gerecitano, J.F., Hyman, D.M., Zohar, S., The impact of nondrug-related toxicities on the estimation of the maximum tolerated dose in phase 1 trials (2012) Clin Cancer Res., 18, pp. 5179-5187Le Tourneau, C., Razak, A.R., Gan, H.K., Pop, S., Dieras, V., Tresca, P., Heterogeneity in the definition of dose-limiting toxicity in phase 1 cancer clinical trials of molecularly targeted agents: A review of the literature (2011) Eur J Cancer., 47, pp. 1468-1475FDA Approved Drug Products, , http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/drugsatfda/, Administration UFaD, Available from:Postel-Vinay, S., Arkenau, H.T., Olmos, D., Ang, J., Barriuso, J., Ashley, S., Clinical benefit in phase I trials of novel molecularly targeted agents: Does dose matter? (2009) Br J Cancer., 100, pp. 1373-1378Adjei, A.A., What is the right dose? The elusive optimal biologic dose in phase 1 clinical trials (2006) J Clin Oncol., 24, pp. 4054-4055Sleijfer, S., Wiemer, E., Dose selection in phase 1 studies: Why we should always go for the top (2008) J Clin Oncol., 26, pp. 1576-1578Jain, R.K., Lee, J.J., Hong, D., Markman, M., Gong, J., Naing, A., Phase 1 oncology studies: Evidence that in the era of targeted therapies patients on lower doses do not fare worse (2010) Clin Cancer Res., 16, pp. 1289-1297Le Tourneau, C., Lee, J.J., Siu, L.L., Dose escalation methods in phase 1 cancer clinical trials (2009) J Natl Cancer Inst., 101, pp. 708-720Parulekar, W.R., Eisenhauer, E.A., Phase 1 trial design for solid tumor studies of targeted, non-cytotoxic agents: Theory and practice (2004) J Natl Cancer Inst., 96, pp. 990-997Niraula, S., Seruga, B., Ocana, A., Shao, T., Goldstein, R., Tannock, I.F., The price we pay for progress: A meta-analysis of harms of newly approved anticancer drugs (2012) J Clin Oncol., 30, pp. 3012-3019Horstmann, E., McCabe, M.S., Grochow, L., Yamamoto, S., Rubinstein, L., Budd, T., Risks and benefits of phase 1 oncology trials 1991 through 2002 (2005) N Engl J Med., 352, pp. 895-904Roberts, Jr.T.G., Goulart, B.H., Squitieri, L., Stallings, S.C., Halpern, E.F., Chabner, B.A., Trends in the risks and benefits to patients with cancer participating in phase 1 clinical trials (2004) JAMA, 292, pp. 2130-2140Olmos, D., A'Hern, R.P., Marsoni, S., Morales, R., Gomez-Roca, C., Verweij, J., Patient selection for oncology phase I trials: A multiinstitutional study of prognostic factors (2012) J Clin Oncol., 30, pp. 996-1004Mukherjee, S.D., Coombes, M.E., Levine, M., Cosby, J., Kowaleski, B., Arnold, A., A qualitative study evaluating causality attribution for serious adverse events during early-phase oncology clinical trials (2011) Invest New Drugs., 29, pp. 1013-1020Le Tourneau, C., Stathis, A., Vidal, L., Moore, M.J., Siu, L.L., Choice of starting dose for molecularly targeted agents evaluated in first-in-human phase I cancer clinical trials (2010) J Clin Oncol., 28, pp. 1401-1407Tolcher, A.W., Takimoto, C.H., Rowinsky, E.K., The multifunctional multiinstitutional and sometimes even global phase 1 study: A better life for phase 1 evaluations or just "living large"? (2002) J Clin Oncol., 20, pp. 4276-4278Booth, C.M., Calvert, A.H., Giaccone, G., Lobbezoo, M.W., Seymour, L.K., Eisenhauer, E.A., Endpoints and other considerations in phase 1 studies of targeted anticancer therapy: Recommendations from the task force on Methodology for the Development of Innovative Cancer Therapies (MDICT) (2008) Eur J Cancer., 44, pp. 19-2