Higher-order QED effects in hadronic processes

In this presentation, we describe the computation of higher-order QED effects relevant in hadronic collisions. In particular, we discuss the calculation of mixed QCD-QED one-loop contributions to the Altarelli-Parisi splittings functions, as well as the pure two-loop QED corrections. We explain how to extend the DGLAP equations to deal with new parton distributions, emphasizing the consequences of the novel corrections in the determination (and evolution) of the photon distributions.Comment: 7 pages, 2 figures. Contribution to the Proceedings of the EPS-HEP 2017 Conferenc

Workflow for the same-day <i>KRAS</i> mutation analysis in fresh EUS-FNA biopsy specimens using dPCR.

<p>EUS-FNA biopsy specimens are processed for DNA extraction within half an hour from the time of biopsy. Next, the extracted DNA is prepared for analysis with dPCR. The entire thermocycling protocol requires approximately 3 hours. Following completion of the PCR step, the dPCR chip is read and analyzed using the chip-reader. Output data are inspected manually for quality check and <i>KRAS</i> mutation status is determined.</p

Cross-reactivity of allele-specific TaqMan probes for <i>KRAS</i> mutation subtypes.

<p>(A) DNA extracted from HPAF-II (G12D <i>KRAS</i> mutation; heterozygous with 3:1 mutant allele specific amplification), CFPAC (G12V <i>KRAS</i> mutation: heterozygous with 1:1 mutant to WT alleles), MDAMB-231 (G<b>13</b>D <i>KRAS</i> mutation) and Jurkat cells (WT <i>KRAS</i>) were analyzed by dPCR using the <i>KRAS</i>_520 probe that is specific for G12V mutant subtype. Presence of the FAM fluorescence signal, which is indicative of mutant <i>KRAS</i> allele, was seen only in the dPCR reaction that used DNA extracted from CFPAC cells. (B) The same groups of DNA were analyzed using the <i>KRAS</i>_521 probe that is specific for G12D mutation subtype. As expected, FAM signal was seen only in the dPCR reaction that used DNA extracted from HPAF-II cells.</p

dPCR <i>KRAS</i> mutation analysis in FFPE EUS-FNA pancreas biopsy specimens.

<p>dPCR <i>KRAS</i> mutation analysis in FFPE EUS-FNA pancreas biopsy specimens.</p

Minimal cellular input required for mutant allele detection by dPCR.

<p>HPAF-II cells and Jurkat cells were laser-microdissected to obtain exact number of cells. 1 and 10 HPAF-II cells and 200 Jurkat cells were laser-microdissected. Mixtures of 1 HPAF-II cells in 200 Jurkat cells and 10 HPAF-II cells in 200 Jurkat cells were prepared and DNA extracted. (A) dPCR was successful using DNA extracted this 210-cell mixture. Mutant <i>KRAS</i> alleles from the 10 HPAF-II cells were accurately detected. (B) dPCR detected the presence of mutant <i>KRAS</i> allele in a single HPAF-II cell in the mixture of 1 HPAF-II cell and 200 Jurkat cells.</p

Comparison of <i>KRAS</i> mutation analysis in FFPE EUS-FNA by dPCR and surgically resected tissue by Sanger sequencing^a.

<p>Comparison of <i>KRAS</i> mutation analysis in FFPE EUS-FNA by dPCR and surgically resected tissue by Sanger sequencing<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0170897#t002fn001" target="_blank">^a</a>.</p

FFPE EUS-FNA specimens shown to have more than one <i>KRAS</i> mutations.

<p>dPCR <i>KRAS</i> analysis in FNA specimens were compared to Sanger sequencing done in matching surgically resected specimens. Since Sanger sequencing is known to have limited sensitivity, these surgical tissues were further analyzed by dPCR, which showed concordance with findings noted in FNA specimens. Mutant allele fractions for the mutant <i>KRAS</i> subtypes not seen in Sanger sequencing were all well below the theoretical limit of detection by Sanger sequencing.</p

An example of FFPE pancreas EUS-FNA section containing minimal number of cells.

<p>This H&E stained 10um FFPE section was imaged with 10x magnification.</p

<i>KRAS</i> mutation analysis in fresh (non-fixed) EUS-FNA biopsy specimens.

<p><i>KRAS</i> mutation analysis in fresh (non-fixed) EUS-FNA biopsy specimens.</p