Bright source of spectrally uncorrelated polarization-entangled photons with nearly single-mode emission

We present results of a bright polarization-entangled photon source operating at 1552 nm via type-II collinear degenerate spontaneous parametric down-conversion in a periodically poled potassium titanyl phosphate crystal. We report a conservative inferred pair generation rate of 123,000 pairs/s/mW into collection modes. Minimization of spectral and spatial entanglement was achieved by group velocity matching the pump, signal and idler modes and through properly focusing the pump beam. By utilizing a pair of calcite beam displacers, we are able to overlap photons from adjacent down-conversion processes to obtain polarization-entanglement visibility of 94.7 +/- 1.1% with accidentals subtracted.Comment: 4 pages, 7 color figures. Revised manuscript includes the following changes: corrected pair generation rate from 44,000/s/mW pump to 123,000/s/mW pump; replaced Fig. 1b to enhance clarity; minor alterations to the title, abstract and introduction; grammatical correction

U.S. MOPEX DATA SET

A key step in applying land surface parameterization schemes is to estimate model parameters that vary spatially and are unique to each computational element. Improved methods for parameter estimation (especially for parameters important to runoff response) are needed and require data from a wide range of climate regimes throughout the world. Accordingly, the GEWEX Hydrometeorology Panel (GHP) endorsed the concept of an international Model Parameter Estimation Project (MOPEX) at its Toronto meeting, August 1996. Phase I of MOPEX was funded by NOAA in FY 1997, Phase II in FY 2000 and Phase III in FY 2003. MOPEX was adopted as projects of the IAHS/WMO Committee on GEWEX and of the WMO Commission on Hydrology (CHy) and now is a contributor to the Combine Enhanced Observing Period (CEOP) of the World Climate Research Program (WCRP). In 2004 MOPEX became a Working Group of the IAHS Prediction for Ungaged Basins (PUB) Initiative. MOPEX also is expected to contribute to the work of the Hydrologic Ensemble Prediction Experiment (HEPEX) (Franz et al, 2005). The primary goal of MOPEX is to develop techniques for the a priori estimation of the parameters used in land surface parameterization schemes of atmospheric models and in hydrologic models. A major early effort of MOPEX has been to assemble a large number of high quality historical hydrometeorological and river basin characteristics data sets for a wide range of river basins (500-10,000 km{sup 2}) throughout the world. MOPEX data sets are available via the Internet (ftp://hydrology.nws.noaa.gov). This paper documents the development of data sets for U.S. river basins. Several highly successful parameter estimation workshops have been organized by MOPEX. The first was held as part of the IAHS meeting in Birmingham, England in July, 1999. The second workshop was hosted April, 2002 in Tucson, AZ by SAHRA/University of Arizona. The third MOPEX workshop was held as part of the IAHS meeting in Sapporo, July, 2003. The fourth workshop, Paris, July,2005 was organized by the Cemagref in collaboration with the ENGREF, Meteo France, National Weather Service and the SAHRA/University of Arizona. The fifth workshop was held as part of the IAHS meeting, February, 2005, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil. The purpose of the future phases of the project is to: (1) continue collect additional international data sets; update data from the U.S. by adding recent years, including data for elevation zones in mountainous areas and refining energy forcing; (2) continue to conduct international MOPEX workshops; (3) provide leadership to develop a better scientific understanding of how to improve procedures for a priori parameter estimation, (4) make a significant hydrological contribution to CEOP and PUBS, and (5) demonstrate transferability of MOPEX results. The basic data collection strategy being used in MOPEX is to seek most readily available and highest quality data first. During the next 3 years analyses of the available MOPEX data sets by the international scientific community will be emphasized

Induction therapy with ipilimumab and nivolumab followed by consolidative chemoradiation as organ-sparing treatment in urothelial bladder cancer:study protocol of the INDIBLADE trial

Introduction: Studies that assessed the efficacy of pre-operative immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) in locally advanced urothelial cancer of the bladder showed encouraging pathological complete response rates, suggesting that a bladder-sparing approach may be a viable option in a subset of patients. Chemoradiation is an alternative for radical cystectomy with similar oncological outcomes, but is still mainly used in selected patients with organ-confined tumors or patients ineligible to undergo radical cystectomy. We propose to sequentially administer ICB and chemoradiation to patients with (locally advanced) muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Methods: The INDIBLADE trial is an investigator-initiated, single-arm, multicenter phase 2 trial. Fifty patients with cT2-4aN0-2M0 urothelial bladder cancer will be treated with ipilimumab 3 mg/kg on day 1, ipilimumab 3 mg/kg plus nivolumab 1 mg/kg on day 22, and nivolumab 3 mg/kg on day 43 followed by chemoradiation. The primary endpoint is the bladder-intact event-free survival (BI-EFS). Events include: local or distant recurrence, salvage cystectomy, death and switch to platinum-based chemotherapy. We will also evaluate the potential of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the bladder to identify non-responders, and we will assess the clearance of circulating tumor DNA as a biomarker for ICB treatment response. Discussion: This is the first trial in which the efficacy of induction combination ICB followed by chemoradiation is being evaluated to provide bladder-preservation in patients with (locally advanced) urothelial bladder cancer. Clinical Trial Registration: The INDIBLADE trial was registered on clinicaltrials.gov on January 21, 2022 (NCT05200988).</p

Patterns of Recurrence and Survival After Pelvic Treatment for Locally Advanced Penile Cancer

BACKGROUND: Penile cancer (PeCa) is rare, and the survival of patients with advanced disease remains poor. A better understanding of where treatment fails could aid the development of new treatment strategies. OBJECTIVE: To describe the disease course after pelvic lymph node (LN) treatment for PeCa. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We retrospectively analysed 228 patients who underwent pelvic LN treatment with curative intent from 1969 to 2016. The main treatment modalities were neoadjuvant chemotherapy, chemoradiation, and pelvic LN dissection. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: In the case of multiple recurrence locations, the most distant location was taken and recorded as follows: local (penis), regional (inguinal and pelvic LN), and distant (any other location). A competing risk analysis was used to calculate the time to recurrence per location, and a Kaplan-Meier analysis was used for overall survival (OS). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The median follow-up of the surviving patients was 79 mo. The reason for pelvic treatment was pelvic involvement on imaging (29%), two or more tumour-positive inguinal LNs (61%), or inguinal extranodal extension (52%). More than half of the patients (61%) developed a recurrence. The median recurrence-free survival was 11 mo. The distribution was local in 9%, regional in 27%, and distant in 64% of patients. The infield control rate of nonsystemically treated patients was 61% (113/184). From the start of pelvic treatment, the median OS was 17 mo (95% confidence interval 12–22). After regional or distant recurrence, all but one patient died of PeCa with median OS after a recurrence of 4.4 (regional) and 3.1 (distant) mo. This study is limited by its retrospective nature. CONCLUSIONS: The prognosis of PeCa patients treated on their pelvis who recur despite locoregional treatment is poor. The tendency for systemic spread emphasises the need for more effective systemic treatment strategies. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we looked at the outcomes of penile cancer patients in an expert centre undergoing various treatments on their pelvis. We found that survival is poor after recurrence despite locoregional treatment. Therefore, better systemic treatments are necessary