Garden and landscape-scale correlates of moths of differing conservation status: significant effects of urbanization and habitat diversity

Moths are abundant and ubiquitous in vegetated terrestrial environments and are pollinators, important herbivores of wild plants, and food for birds, bats and rodents. In recent years, many once abundant and widespread species have shown sharp declines that have been cited by some as indicative of a widespread insect biodiversity crisis. Likely causes of these declines include agricultural intensification, light pollution, climate change, and urbanization; however, the real underlying cause(s) is still open to conjecture. We used data collected from the citizen science Garden Moth Scheme (GMS) to explore the spatial association between the abundance of 195 widespread British species of moth, and garden habitat and landscape features, to see if spatial habitat and landscape associations varied for species of differing conservation status. We found that associations with habitat and landscape composition were species-specific, but that there were consistent trends in species richness and total moth abundance. Gardens with more diverse and extensive microhabitats were associated with higher species richness and moth abundance; gardens near to the coast were associated with higher richness and moth abundance; and gardens in more urbanized locations were associated with lower species richness and moth abundance. The same trends were also found for species classified as increasing, declining and vulnerable under IUCN (World Conservation Union) criteria

Role of mammography screening as a predictor of survival in postmenopausal breast cancer patients

We examined the effect of population-based screening programme on tumour characteristics by comparing carcinomas diagnosed during the prescreening (N=341) and screening (N=552) periods. We identified screen detected (N=224), interval (N=99) and clinical cancer (N=229) cases. Median tumour size and proportion of axillary lymph node negative cases were 1.5 cm and 65% in the screen detected group, 2.0 cm and 44% in cases found outside the screening, and 3.2 cm and 41% in the cases from the prescreening period. Survival of the breast cancer patients was 66% (95% CI, 60–71%) in the prescreening era group and 73% (95% CI, 66–78%) in the screening era group after 10 years of follow-up. In the screening era group the survival of the screen detected cases was 86% (95% CI, 80–90%) and that of the clinical cancer cases 73% (95% CI, 66–78%) after 10 years. In multivariate analysis the risk of breast cancer death was not significantly different between the prescreening and screening periods (HR 0.82; 95% CI 0.59–1.12, P=0.21). Detection by screening was not an independent prognostic factor in multivariate analysis (HR 0.75; CI 95% 0.50–1.12; P=0.17)

Total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer in an unselected population: quality assessment in a low volume center.

Item does not contain fulltextOBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to review the results and long-term outcome after total mesorectal excision (TME) for adenocarcinoma of the rectum in an unselected population in a community teaching hospital. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 1996 and 2003, 210 patients with rectal cancer were identified in our prospective database, containing patient characteristics, radiotherapy plans, operation notes, histopathological reports, and follow-up details. An evaluation of prognostic factors for local recurrence, distant metastases, and overall survival was performed. RESULTS: The mean age at diagnosis was 69 years (range 40-91 years). A total of 145 patients were treated by anterior rectal resection; 65 patients had to undergo an abdominoperineal resection (APR). Anastomotic leakage rate was 5%. Postoperative mortality was 3%. After a median follow-up of 3.6 years, the local recurrence-free rate in patients with microscopically complete resections was 91%. The 5-year overall survival rate was 58%. An increased serum carcinoembryonic antigen, an APR, positive lymph nodes, and an incomplete resection all significantly influenced the 5-year overall survival and local recurrence rate. In a multivariate analysis, age was the most important prognostic factor for overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with rectal cancer can safely be treated with TME in a community teaching hospital and leads to a good overall survival and an excellent local control. In patients aged above 80, treatment-related mortality is an important competitive risk factor, which obscures the positive effect of modern rectal cancer treatment