Simultaneous in-field boost for patients with 1 to 4 brain metastasis/es treated with volumetric modulated arc therapy: a prospective study on quality-of-life

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Purpose</p> <p>To assess treatment toxicity and patients' survival/quality of life (QoL) after volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with simultaneous in-field boost (SIB) for cancer patients with 1 - 4 brain metastases (BM) treated with or without surgery.</p> <p>Methods and Materials</p> <p>Between March and December 2010, 29 BM patients (total volume BM, < 40 cm³) aged < 80 years, KPS ≥ 70, RPA < III were included in this prospective trial. Whole brain VMAT (30 Gy) and a SIB to the BM (40 Gy) was delivered in 10 fraction. Mean age was 62.1 ± 8.5 years. Fifteen (51.7%) underwent surgery. KPS and MMSE were prospectively assessed. A self-assessed questionnaire was used to assess the QoL (EORTC QLQ-C30 with -BN20 module).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>As of April 2011 and after a mean FU of 5.4 ± 2.8 months, 14 (48.3%) patients died. The 6-month overall survival was 55.1%. Alopecia was only observed in 9 (31%) patients. In 3-month survivors, KPS was significantly (<it>p </it>= 0.01) decreased. MMSE score remained however stable (<it>p </it>= 0.33). Overall, QoL did decrease after VMAT. The mean QLQ-C30 global health status (<it>p </it>= 0.72) and emotional functional (<it>p </it>= 0.91) scores were decreased (low QoL). Physical (<it>p </it>= 0.05) and role functioning score (<it>p </it>= 0.01) were significantly worse and rapidly decreased during treatment. The majority of BN20 domains and single items worsened 3 months after VMAT except headaches (<it>p </it>= 0.046) and bladder control (<it>p </it>= 0.26) which improved.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The delivery of 40 Gy in 10 fractions to 1 - 4 BM using VMAT was achieved with no significant toxicity. QoL, performance status, but not MMSE, was however compromised 3 months after treatment in this selected cohort of BM patients.</p

Penal Disenfranchisement

This paper considers the justifiability of removing the right to vote from those convicted of crimes. Firstly, I consider the claim that the removal of the right to vote from prisoners (or serious offenders) is necessary as a practical matter to protect the democratic process from those who have shown themselves to be untrustworthy. Secondly, I look at the claim that offenders have broken the social contract and forfeited rights to participate in making law. And thirdly, I look at the claim that the voting ban is essential part of the justified punishment of serious offenders. These arguments have in common the feature that they attempt to articulate the sense in which rights imply responsibilities, particularly that voting rights should be conditional on one's having met one's civic responsibilities. I argue that the only interpretation of this view that could justify prisoner disenfranchisement is that which thinks of disenfranchisement as fair and deserved retributive punishment for crime. Against widespread opposition to, and confusion about, the importance of retributive punishment, I offer a brief defence. However, I conclude that even if legitimate retributive purposes could in principle justify prisoner disenfranchisement, the significance of disenfranchisement is such that it should be reserved for the most serious crimes. © 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

Elevation of the antifibrotic peptide N-acetyl-seryl-aspartyl-lysyl-proline: a blood pressure-independent beneficial effect of angiotensin I-converting enzyme inhibitors

Blockade of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) is well recognized as an essential therapy in hypertensive, heart, and kidney diseases. There are several classes of drugs that block the RAS; these drugs are known to exhibit antifibrotic action. An analysis of the molecular mechanisms of action for these drugs can reveal potential differences in their antifibrotic roles. In this review, we discuss the antifibrotic action of RAS blockade with an emphasis on the potential importance of angiotensin I-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibition associated with the antifibrotic peptide N-acetyl-seryl-aspartyl-lysyl-proline (AcSDKP)

P3HT-Based Solar Cells: Structural Properties and Photovoltaic Performance

Each year we are bombarded with B.Sc. and Ph.D. applications from students that want to improve the world. They have learned that their future depends on changing the type of fuel we use and that solar energy is our future. The hope and energy of these young people will transform future energy technologies, but it will not happen quickly. Organic photovoltaic devices are easy to sketch, but the materials, processing steps, and ways of measuring the properties of the materials are very complicated. It is not trivial to make a systematic measurement that will change the way other research groups think or practice. In approaching this chapter, we thought about what a new researcher would need to know about organic photovoltaic devices and materials in order to have a good start in the subject. Then, we simplified that to focus on what a new researcher would need to know about poly-3-hexylthiophene:phenyl-C61-butyric acid methyl ester blends (P3HT: PCBM) to make research progress with these materials. This chapter is by no means authoritative or a compendium of all things on P3HT:PCBM. We have selected to explain how the sample fabrication techniques lead to control of morphology and structural features and how these morphological features have specific optical and electronic consequences for organic photovoltaic device applications