Appendix : 1820 Treaty Negotiation between the Penobscot Indian Nation and Maine from Wabanaki Homeland and the New State of Maine: The 1820 Journal and Plans of Survey of Joseph Treat

In late September 1820, hoping to lay claim to territory then under dispute between Great Britain and the United States, Governor William King of the newly founded state of Maine dispatched Major Joseph Treat to survey public lands on the Penobscot and Saint John Rivers. Traveling well beyond the limits of colonial settlement, Treat relied heavily on the cultural knowledge and expertise of John Neptune, lieutenant governor of the Penobscot tribe, to guide him across the Wabanaki homeland... The groundwork for cooperation between Treat and Neptune [was] laid during the 1820 treaty negotiations in which both men participated and which were successfully concluded just over a month before their expedition departed from Bangor, Maine. -- Description adapted from University of Massachusetts Press Edited with an introduction by Micah A. Pawling, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of History and Native American Studies, University of Maine. Appendix : 1820 Treaty Negotiation between the Penobscot Indian Nation and Maine posted in DigitalCommons@UMaine with permission of the author and of University of Massachusetts Press, Amherst.https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/mainebicentennial/1078/thumbnail.jp

Phase i study of \u27dose-dense\u27 pemetrexed plus carboplatin/radiotherapy for locally advanced non-small cell lung carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: This phase I study investigates the feasibility of carboplatin plus dose-dense (q2-week) pemetrexed given concurrently with radiotherapy (XRT) for locally advanced and oligometastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Eligible patients had Stage III or IV (oligometastatic) NSCLC. Patients received XRT to 63 Gy in standard fractionation. Patients received concurrent carboplatin (AUC = 6) during weeks 1 and 5 of XRT, and pemetrexed during weeks 1, 3, 5, and 7 of XRT. The starting dose level (level 1) of pemetrexed was 300 mg/m2. Following the finding of dose limiting toxicity (DLT) in dose level 1, an amended dose level (level 1A) continued pemetrexed at 300 mg/m2, but with involved field radiation instead of extended nodal irradiation. Consolidation consisted of carboplatin (AUC = 6) and pemetrexed (500 mg/m2) q3 weeks × 2 -3 cycles. RESULTS: Eighteen patients were enrolled. Fourteen patients are evaluable for toxicity analysis. Of the initial 6 patients treated on dose level 1, two experienced DLTs (one grade 4 sepsis, one prolonged grade 3 esophagitis). There was one DLT (grade 5 pneumonitis) in the 8 patients treated on dose level 1A. In 16 patients evaluable for response (4 with oligometastatic stage IV disease and 12 with stage III disease), the median follow-up time is 17.8 months. Thirteen of 16 patients had in field local regional response. The actuarial median survival time was 28.6 months in all patients and 34.7 months (estimated) in stage III patients. CONCLUSIONS: Concurrent carboplatin with dose-dense (q2week) pemetrexed at 300 mg/m2 with involved field XRT is feasible and encouraging in patients with locally advanced and oligometastatic NSCLC

Phase i study of 'dose-dense' pemetrexed plus carboplatin/radiotherapy for locally advanced non-small cell lung carcinoma

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>This phase I study investigates the feasibility of carboplatin plus dose-dense (q2-week) pemetrexed given concurrently with radiotherapy (XRT) for locally advanced and oligometastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Eligible patients had Stage III or IV (oligometastatic) NSCLC. Patients received XRT to 63 Gy in standard fractionation. Patients received concurrent carboplatin (AUC = 6) during weeks 1 and 5 of XRT, and pemetrexed during weeks 1, 3, 5, and 7 of XRT. The starting dose level (level 1) of pemetrexed was 300 mg/m². Following the finding of dose limiting toxicity (DLT) in dose level 1, an amended dose level (level 1A) continued pemetrexed at 300 mg/m², but with involved field radiation instead of extended nodal irradiation. Consolidation consisted of carboplatin (AUC = 6) and pemetrexed (500 mg/m²) q3 weeks × 2 -3 cycles.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Eighteen patients were enrolled. Fourteen patients are evaluable for toxicity analysis. Of the initial 6 patients treated on dose level 1, two experienced DLTs (one grade 4 sepsis, one prolonged grade 3 esophagitis). There was one DLT (grade 5 pneumonitis) in the 8 patients treated on dose level 1A. In 16 patients evaluable for response (4 with oligometastatic stage IV disease and 12 with stage III disease), the median follow-up time is 17.8 months. Thirteen of 16 patients had in field local regional response. The actuarial median survival time was 28.6 months in all patients and 34.7 months (estimated) in stage III patients.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Concurrent carboplatin with dose-dense (q2week) pemetrexed at 300 mg/m²with involved field XRT is feasible and encouraging in patients with locally advanced and oligometastatic NSCLC.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov <a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00330044">NCT00330044</a></p

Phase II Study of Paclitaxel, Carboplatin, and Cetuximab as First Line Treatment, for Patients with Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC): Results of OPN-017

BackgroundCetuximab has demonstrated synergy with taxanes in preclinical models; as well as single agent activity. We assessed the activity of cetuximab with carboplatin and paclitaxel given on a 4-week schedule, in advanced, chemo-naive non-small cell lung cancer.Patients and MethodsThis phase II, single arm, multi-institution study featured standard dosage of cetuximab 400 mg/m2 day 1, then 250 mg/m2 with paclitaxel (100 mg/m2/wk, for 3 weeks), and carboplatin (area under curve = 6) day 1 of each 28 day cycle. After 4 to 6 cycles, in the absence of disease progression or excess toxicity, cetuximab was continued weekly. Primary end point was response rate.ResultsFifty-three patients (median age 63, 51% male) participated. Response rate was 57% (3 complete response and 27 partial response). At a median follow-up of 12.5 months, the estimated overall survival is 13.8 months (95% CI: 9.08–16.02) with an event-free survival rate of 5.53 months (95% CI: 4.77–7.99), 18.9% remain free from progression at 1 year. Improved survival was associated with female gender, absence of prior radiation, PS 0 and epidermal growth factor receptor expression. Toxicities included rash (28% grade 3), nail changes (3.7% grade 3), hypomagnesemia (7.5% grade 3 and 3.7% grade 4), and neutropenia (25% grade 3 and 13% grade 4) in addition to other typical side effects anticipated with paclitaxel/carboplatin. There were no grade 5 toxicities.ConclusionCombination of cetuximab/paclitaxel/carboplatin in non-small cell lung cancer was well tolerated and clinically active with manageable toxicities. This unique schedule, integrating weekly paclitaxel and cetuximab has not yet been tested in a randomized trial

Phase 2 Study of Pemetrexed Plus Carboplatin, or Pemetrexed Plus Cisplatin with Concurrent Radiation Therapy Followed by Pemetrexed Consolidation in Patients with Favorable-Prognosis Inoperable Stage IIIA/B Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

IntroductionThere is no consensus chemotherapy regimen with concurrent radiotherapy (RT) for inoperable stage IIIA/B non–small-cell lung cancer. This trial evaluated pemetrexed with carboplatin (PCb) or cisplatin (PC) with concurrent RT followed by consolidation pemetrexed.MethodsIn this open-label, noncomparative phase II trial, patients with inoperable stage IIIA/B non–small-cell lung cancer (initially all histologies, later restricted to nonsquamous) were randomized (1:1) to PCb or PC with concurrent RT (64–68 Gy over days 1–45). Consolidation pemetrexed monotherapy was administered every 21 days for three cycles. Primary endpoint was 2-year overall survival (OS) rate.ResultsFrom June 2007 to November 2009, 98 patients were enrolled (PCb: 46; PC: 52). The 2-year OS rate was PCb: 45.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 29.5–60.0%); PC: 58.4% (95% CI, 42.6–71.3%), and in nonsquamous patients was PCb: 48.0% (95% CI, 29.0–64.8%); PC: 55.8% (95% CI, 38.0–70.3%). Median time to disease progression was PCb: 8.8 months (95% CI, 6.0–12.6 months); PC: 13.1 months (95% CI, 8.3–not evaluable [NE]). Median OS (months) was PCb: 18.7 (95% CI, 12.9–NE); PC: 27.0 (95% CI, 23.2–NE). The objective response rates (ORRs) were PCb: 52.2%; PC: 46.2%. Grade 4 treatment-related toxicities (% PCb/% PC) were: anemia, 0/1.9; neutropenia, 6.5/3.8; thrombocytopenia, 4.3/1.9; and esophagitis, 0/1.9. Most patients completed scheduled chemotherapy and RT during induction and consolidation phases. No drug-related deaths were reported during chemoradiotherapy.ConclusionsBecause of study design, efficacy comparisons cannot be made. However, both combinations with concurrent RT were active and well tolerated

What do the Universal Test and Treat Trials tell us about the path to HIV epidemic control?

Introduction Achieving HIV epidemic control globally will require new strategies to accelerate reductions in HIV incidence and mortality. Universal test and treat (UTT) was evaluated in four randomized population‐based trials (BCPP/Ya Tsie, HPTN 071/PopART, SEARCH, ANRS 12249/TasP) conducted in sub‐Saharan Africa (SSA) during expanded antiretroviral treatment (ART) eligibility by World Health Organization guidelines and the UNAIDS 90‐90‐90 campaign. Discussion These three‐year studies were conducted in Botswana, Zambia, Uganda, Kenya and South Africa in settings with baseline HIV prevalence from 4% to 30%. Key observations across studies were: (1) Universal testing (implemented via a variety of home and community‐based testing approaches) achieved >90% coverage in all studies. (2) When coupled with robust linkage to HIV care, rapid ART start and patient‐centred care, UTT achieved among the highest reported population levels of viral suppression in SSA. Significant gains in population‐level viral suppression were made in regions with both low and high baseline population viral load; however, viral suppression gains were not uniform across all sub‐populations and were lower among youth. (3) UTT resulted in marked reductions in community HIV incidence when universal testing and robust linkage were present. However, HIV elimination targets were not reached. In BCPP and HPTN 071, annualized HIV incidence was approximately 20% to 30% lower in the intervention (which included universal testing) compared to control arms (no universal testing). In SEARCH (where both arms had universal testing), incidence declined 32% over three years. (4) UTT reduced HIV associated mortality by 23% in the intervention versus control communities in SEARCH, a study in which mortality was comprehensively measured. Conclusions These trials provide strong evidence that UTT inclusive of universal testing increases population‐level viral suppression and decreases HIV incidence and mortality faster than the status quo in SSA and should be adapted at a sub‐country level as a public health strategy. However, more is needed, including integration of new prevention interventions into UTT, in order to reach UNAIDS HIV elimination targets

Outcomes Associated with Brain Metastases in a Three-Arm Phase III Trial of Gemcitabine-Containing Regimens Versus Paclitaxel Plus Carboplatin for Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer

BACKGROUND: Brain metastases (BMs) are a common complication of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Because of historical data indicating a poor prognosis for patients with BM, few randomized phase III studies of advanced NSCLC have included patients with BM at presentation. Because the potential benefits of systemic therapy in patients with BM are uncertain, we analyzed data from a recent phase III study. METHODS: One thousand one hundred thirty-five chemonaïve patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC were randomized to receive gemcitabine/carboplatin, gemcitabine/paclitaxel, or paclitaxel/carboplatin. Stratification was based on presence or absence of BM, stage, and baseline weight loss. Patients with BM were required to be clinically stable after treatment with radiotherapy or surgery before entry. Results were retrospectively analyzed by presence or absence of BM at study entry. RESULTS: Rate of BM was 17.1% overall. The response rate was 28.9% for patients with BM (n = 194) versus 29.1% without BM (n = 941). Time to progression was 4.3 months with BM and 4.6 months without BM (p = 0.03). Median survival was 7.7 months (95% confidence interval: 6.7-9.3) among patients with BM (n = 194) and 8.6 months (95% confidence interval: 7.9-9.5) for patients without BM (n = 941), p = 0.09. Rates of hematologic adverse events were not different among patients with and without BM. CONCLUSIONS: There were no significant differences in response, survival, or hematologic toxicity for patients with or without BM; however, patients with BM had a small but significantly shorter time to progression. Nonprogressing patients with treated BM are appropriate candidates for systemic therapy and entry into clinical trials

A Comparison of White and African American Outcomes from a Three-Arm, Randomized, Phase III Multicenter Trial of Advanced or Metastatic Non-small Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of race on the efficacy and safety of standard chemotherapy doublet regimens in African American patients, we conducted a subgroup analysis of a phase III randomized trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Chemonaïve patients with a performance status of 0 or 1 and stage IIIB or IV non-small cell lung cancer were randomized to arm A: gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 plus carboplatin area under the curve 5.5 on day 1; arm B: the same schedule of gemcitabine plus paclitaxel 200 mg/m2 on day 1; or arm C: paclitaxel 225 mg/m2 on day 1 plus carboplatin area under the curve 6.0 on day 1. Cycles were repeated every 21 days up to 6. A site selection tool identified institutions with potential to recruit a minority population. Outcome and toxicity data of white and African American patients were compared. RESULTS: Of 1135 total patients, 972 were white (85.6%) and 138 were African American (12.2%). Median survival was 8.3 months for white patients (95% confidence interval [CI]: 7.7-9.3) and 9.1 months for African American patients (95% CI: 8.2-11.1). Response rates were 29.1 and 29.0%, respectively. Rates of grade 3 or 4 toxicities were comparable. Among African Americans, median survival was 7.2 months (95% CI: 5.1-10.1) for gemcitabine-carboplatin (n = 47), 10.5 months (95% CI: 7.1-15.4) for gemcitabine-paclitaxel (n = 42), and 10.2 months (95% CI: 8.5-13.2) for paclitaxel-carboplatin (n = 49). CONCLUSION: Whites and African Americans had similar outcomes, although there was some variability in survival among African Americans across the three treatment groups

1957: Abilene Christian College Bible Lectures - Full Text

Featuring the Theme CHRIST IN YOU -THE HOPE OF GLORY PRICE: $3.00 FIRM FOUNDATION PUBLISHING HOUSE BOX 77 AUSTIN, TEXA

An open-source database for the synthesis of soil radiocarbon data: International Soil Radiocarbon Database (ISRaD) version 1.0

Radiocarbon is a critical constraint on our estimates of the timescales of soil carbon cycling that can aid in identifying mechanisms of carbon stabilization and destabilization and improve the forecast of soil carbon response to management or environmental change. Despite the wealth of soil radiocarbon data that have been reported over the past 75 years, the ability to apply these data to global-scale questions is limited by our capacity to synthesize and compare measurements generated using a variety of methods. Here, we present the International Soil Radiocarbon Database (ISRaD; http://soilradiocarbon.org, last access: 16 December 2019), an open-source archive of soil data that include reported measurements from bulk soils, distinct soil carbon pools isolated in the laboratory by a variety of soil fractionation methods, samples of soil gas or water collected interstitially from within an intact soil profile, CO2 gas isolated from laboratory soil incubations, and fluxes collected in situ from a soil profile. The core of ISRaD is a relational database structured around individual datasets (entries) and organized hierarchically to report soil radiocarbon data, measured at different physical and temporal scales as well as other soil or environmental properties that may also be measured and may assist with interpretation and context. Anyone may contribute their own data to the database by entering it into the ISRaD template and subjecting it to quality assurance protocols. ISRaD can be accessed through (1) a web-based interface, (2) an R package (ISRaD), or (3) direct access to code and data through the GitHub repository, which hosts both code and data. The design of ISRaD allows for participants to become directly involved in the management, design, and application of ISRaD data. The synthesized dataset is available in two forms: the original data as reported by the authors of the datasets and an enhanced dataset that includes ancillary geospatial data calculated within the ISRaD framework. ISRaD also provides data management tools in the ISRaD-R package that provide a starting point for data analysis; as an open-source project, the broader soil community is invited and encouraged to add data, tools, and ideas for improvement. As a whole, ISRaD provides resources to aid our evaluation of soil dynamics across a range of spatial and temporal scales. The ISRaD v1.0 dataset is archived and freely available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2613911 (Lawrence et al., 2019).Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry; European Research CouncilEuropean Research Council (ERC) [695101]; USGS Land Change Science mission area; US Department of AgricultureUnited States Department of Agriculture (USDA) [2018-67003-27935]; US Geological Survey Powell Center for the working group on Soil Carbon Storage and FeedbacksOpen access journalThis item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at [email protected]