Energija vezanja donora u paraboličkoj kvantnoj jami

We solved the impurity problem in a parabolic quantum well. The binding energy of a neutral donor in GaAs-Alx Ga1!xAs parabolic quantum well is determined variationally. For a dopant at the well center, and at the edge of the well in the interface region, the changes in the binding energy of donors are calculated, for different well sizes and depths. The 2s excited state is reported.Riješili smo problem primjese u paraboličkoj kvantnoj jami. Energija vezanja neutralnog donora u GaAs-Alx Ga1−xAs paraboličkoj kvantnoj jami se rješava varijacijski. Izračunali smo energije vezanja donora ako je u sredini jame i ako je uz rub u međusloju, za različite širine i dubine jame. Izvješćujemo o uzbuđenom stanju 2s

Eksitonska stanja u kvantnoj točki

The exciton binding energies in finite-potential quantum dot discs of GaAs are obtained and the eigenstates and the eigenvalues of the exciton are calculated. We present the exciton binding energy for different values of the disc radius (R) and the disc half-width (L/2). The exciton-state stability for large and small sizes of the dot is discussed. We compare our results with the existing theoretical and experimental results. Our results give good estimates for the optimal quantum dot disc geometry, and represent useful data in studies of the optical properties of quantum dots in nano-scale devices.Izračunali smo energiju vezanja, svojstvena stanja i svojstvene vrijednosti eksitona u kvantnoj točki s konačnim potencijalom. Opisujemo energiju vezanja eksitona za više vrijednosti polumjera (R) i poluširine (L/2) diska. Raspravljamo stabilnost eksitona za male i veće dimenzije diska. Uspoređujemo naše rezultate s poznatim drugim teorijskim i eksperimentalnim rezultatima. Naši rezultati daju dobre ocjene za povoljnu veličinu diska kvantne točke, i predstavljaju korisne podatke za proučavanje optičkih svojstava kvantnih točaka u napravama nano veličine

A randomized, placebo-controlled phase 2 study of paclitaxel in combination with reparixin compared to paclitaxel alone as front-line therapy for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (fRida)

Purpose: CXCR1, one of the receptors for CXCL8, has been identified as a druggable target on breast cancer cancer stem cells (CSC). Reparixin (R), an investigational oral inhibitor of CXCR1, was safely administered to metastatic breast cancer patients in combination with paclitaxel (P) and appeared to reduce CSC in a window-of-opportunity trial in operable breast cancer. The fRida trial (NCT02370238) evaluated the addition of R to weekly as first-line therapy for metastatic (m) TNBC. Subjects and Methods: Subjects with untreated mTNBC were randomized 1:1 to R or placebo days 1–21 in combination with weekly P 80 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, 15 of 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was PFS by central review. Results: 123 subjects were randomized (62 to R + P and 61 to placebo + P). PFS was not different between the 2 groups (median 5.5 and 5.6 months for R + P and placebo + P, respectively; HR 1.13, p = 0.5996). ALDH+ and CD24−/CD44+ CSC centrally evaluated by IHC were found in 16 and 34 of the 54 subjects who provided a metastatic tissue biopsy at study entry. Serious adverse events (21.3 and 20% of subjects) and grade ≥ 3 adverse reactions (ADR) (9.1 and 6.3% of all ADRs) occurred at similar frequency in both groups. Conclusion: fRida is the first randomized, double-blind clinical trial of a CSC-targeting agent in combination with chemotherapy in breast cancer. The primary endpoint of prolonged PFS was not met. Clinical Trial Registration/Date of Registration: NCT01861054/February 24, 2015

Pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone for patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma previously treated with lenalidomide (OPTIMISMM): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial

Background As lenalidomide becomes increasingly established for upfront treatment of multiple myeloma, patients refractory to this drug represent a population with an unmet need. The combination of pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone has shown promising results in phase 1/2 trials of patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of this triplet regimen in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma who previously received lenalidomide.Methods We did a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial at 133 hospitals and research centres in 21 countries. We enrolled patients (aged >= 18 years) with a diagnosis of multiple myeloma and measurable disease, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, who received one to three previous regimens, including a lenalidomide-containing regimen for at least two consecutive cycles. We randomly assigned patients (1:1) to bortezomib and dexamethasone with or without pomalidomide using a permutated blocked design in blocks of four, stratified according to age, number of previous regimens, and concentration of beta(2) microglobulin at screening. Bortezomib (1.3 mg/m(2)) was administered intravenously until protocol amendment 1 then either intravenously or subcutaneously on days 1,4, 8, and 11 for the first eight cycles and subsequently on days 1 and 8. Dexamethasone (20 mg [10 mg if age >75 years]) was administered orally on the same days as bortezomib and the day after. Patients allocated pomalidomide received 4 mg orally on days 1-14. Treatment cycles were every 21 days. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population, as assessed by an independent review committee. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study medication. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01734928; patients are no longer being enrolled.Findings Between Jan 7, 2013, and May 15,2017,559 patients were enrolled. 281 patients were assigned pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone and 278 were allocated bortezomib and dexamethasone. Median follow-up was 15.9 months (IQR 9.9-21.7). Pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone significantly improved progression-free survival compared with bortezomib and dexamethasone (median 11.20 months [95% CI 9.66-13-73] vs 7.10 months [5.88-8-48]; hazard ratio 0.61, 95% CI 0.49-0-77; p<0-0001). 278 patients received at least one dose of pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone and 270 patients received at least one dose of bortezomib and dexamethasone, and these patients were included in safety assessments. The most common grade 3 or 4 treatment-emergent adverse events were neutropenia (116 [42%] of 278 patients vs 23 [9%1 of 270 patients; nine p.m vs no patients had febrile neutropenia), infections (86 [31%] vs 48 118%1), and thrombocytopenia (76 [27%1 vs 79 [29%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 159 (57%) of 278 patients versus 114 (42%) of 270 patients. Eight deaths were related to treatment; six (2%) were recorded in patients who received pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (pneumonia [n=2], unknown cause [n=2], cardiac arrest [n=1], cardiorespiratory arrest [n=11) and two (1%) were reported in patients who received bortezomib and dexamethasone (pneumonia In=11, hepatic encephalopathy [n=1.]).Interpretation Patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma who previously received lenalidomide had significantly improved progression-free survival when treated with pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone compared with bortezomib and dexamethasone. Adverse events accorded with the individual profiles of pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone. This study supports use of pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone as a treatment option in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma who previously received lenalidomide. Copyright (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved