50 research outputs found

    New models and online calculator for predicting non-sentinel lymph node status in sentinel lymph node positive breast cancer patients

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Current practice is to perform a completion axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) for breast cancer patients with tumor-involved sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs), although fewer than half will have non-sentinel node (NSLN) metastasis. Our goal was to develop new models to quantify the risk of NSLN metastasis in SLN-positive patients and to compare predictive capabilities to another widely used model.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We constructed three models to predict NSLN status: recursive partitioning with receiver operating characteristic curves (RP-ROC), boosted Classification and Regression Trees (CART), and multivariate logistic regression (MLR) informed by CART. Data were compiled from a multicenter Northern California and Oregon database of 784 patients who prospectively underwent SLN biopsy and completion ALND. We compared the predictive abilities of our best model and the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Breast Cancer Nomogram (Nomogram) in our dataset and an independent dataset from Northwestern University.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>285 patients had positive SLNs, of which 213 had known angiolymphatic invasion status and 171 had complete pathologic data including hormone receptor status. 264 (93%) patients had limited SLN disease (micrometastasis, 70%, or isolated tumor cells, 23%). 101 (35%) of all SLN-positive patients had tumor-involved NSLNs. Three variables (tumor size, angiolymphatic invasion, and SLN metastasis size) predicted risk in all our models. RP-ROC and boosted CART stratified patients into four risk levels. MLR informed by CART was most accurate. Using two composite predictors calculated from three variables, MLR informed by CART was more accurate than the Nomogram computed using eight predictors. In our dataset, area under ROC curve (AUC) was 0.83/0.85 for MLR (n = 213/n = 171) and 0.77 for Nomogram (n = 171). When applied to an independent dataset (n = 77), AUC was 0.74 for our model and 0.62 for Nomogram. The composite predictors in our model were the product of angiolymphatic invasion and size of SLN metastasis, and the product of tumor size and square of SLN metastasis size.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>We present a new model developed from a community-based SLN database that uses only three rather than eight variables to achieve higher accuracy than the Nomogram for predicting NSLN status in two different datasets. </p

    Production of dust by massive stars at high redshift

    Full text link
    The large amounts of dust detected in sub-millimeter galaxies and quasars at high redshift pose a challenge to galaxy formation models and theories of cosmic dust formation. At z > 6 only stars of relatively high mass (> 3 Msun) are sufficiently short-lived to be potential stellar sources of dust. This review is devoted to identifying and quantifying the most important stellar channels of rapid dust formation. We ascertain the dust production efficiency of stars in the mass range 3-40 Msun using both observed and theoretical dust yields of evolved massive stars and supernovae (SNe) and provide analytical expressions for the dust production efficiencies in various scenarios. We also address the strong sensitivity of the total dust productivity to the initial mass function. From simple considerations, we find that, in the early Universe, high-mass (> 3 Msun) asymptotic giant branch stars can only be dominant dust producers if SNe generate <~ 3 x 10^-3 Msun of dust whereas SNe prevail if they are more efficient. We address the challenges in inferring dust masses and star-formation rates from observations of high-redshift galaxies. We conclude that significant SN dust production at high redshift is likely required to reproduce current dust mass estimates, possibly coupled with rapid dust grain growth in the interstellar medium.Comment: 72 pages, 9 figures, 5 tables; to be published in The Astronomy and Astrophysics Revie

    Scaling matters: incorporating body composition into Weddell seal seasonal oxygen store comparisons reveals maintenance of aerobic capacities

    Full text link
    Adult Weddell seals (Leptonychotes weddellii) haul-out on the ice in October/November (austral spring) for the breeding season and reduce foraging activities for ~4 months until their molt in the austral fall (January/February). After these periods, animals are at their leanest and resume actively foraging for the austral winter. In mammals, decreased exercise and hypoxia exposure typically lead to decreased production of O2-carrying proteins and muscle wasting, while endurance training increases aerobic potential. To test whether similar effects were present in marine mammals, this study compared the physiology of 53 post-molt female Weddell seals in the austral fall to 47 pre-breeding females during the spring in McMurdo Sound, Antarctica. Once body mass and condition (lipid) were controlled for, there were no seasonal changes in total body oxygen (TBO2) stores. Within each season, hematocrit and hemoglobin values were negatively correlated with animal size, and larger animals had lower mass-specific TBO2 stores. But because larger seals had lower mass-specific metabolic rates, their calculated aerobic dive limit was similar to smaller seals. Indicators of muscular efficiency, myosin heavy chain composition, myoglobin concentrations, and aerobic enzyme activities (citrate synthase and ÎČ-hydroxyacyl CoA dehydrogenase) were likewise maintained across the year. The preservation of aerobic capacity is likely critical to foraging capabilities, so that following the molt Weddell seals can rapidly regain body mass at the start of winter foraging. In contrast, muscle lactate dehydrogenase activity, a marker of anaerobic metabolism, exhibited seasonal plasticity in this diving top predator and was lowest after the summer period of reduced activity

    A critical review and development of a conceptual model of exclusion from social relations for older people

    Get PDF
    Social exclusion is complex and dynamic, and it leads to the non-realization of social, economic, political or cultural rights or participation within a society. This critical review takes stock of the literature on exclusion of social relations. Social relations are defined as comprising social resources, social connections and social networks. An evidence review group undertook a critical review which integrates, interprets and synthesizes information across studies to develop a conceptual model of exclusion from social relations. The resulting model is a subjective interpretation of the literature and is intended to be the starting point for further evaluations. The conceptual model identifies individual risks for exclusion from social relations (personal attributes, biological and neurological risk, retirement, socio-economic status, exclusion from material resources and migration). It incorporates the evaluation of social relations, and the influence of psychosocial resources and socioemotional processes, sociocultural, social-structural, environmental and policy contextual influences on exclusion from social relations. It includes distal outcomes of exclusion from social relations, that is, individual well-being, health and functioning, social opportunities and social cohesion. The dynamic relationships between elements of the model are also reported. We conclude that the model provides a subjective interpretation of the data and an excellent starting point for further phases of conceptual development and systematic evaluation(s). Future research needs to consider the use of sophisticated analytical tools and an interdisciplinary approach in order to understand the underlying biological and ecopsychosocial associations that contribute to individual and dynamic differences in the experience of exclusion from social relation

    Disease: A Hitherto Unexplored Constraint on the Spread of Dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) in Pre-Columbian South America

    Get PDF
    Although debate continues, there is agreement that dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) were first domesticated in Eurasia, spreading from there to other parts of the world. However, while that expansion already extended as far as Europe, China, and North America by the early Holocene, dogs spread into (and south of) the tropics only much later. In South America, for example, the earliest well attested instances of their presence do not reach back much beyond 3000 cal. BC, and dogs were still absent from large parts of the continent – Amazonia, the Gran Chaco, and much of the Southern Cone – at European contact. Previous explanations for these patterns have focused on cultural choice, the unsuitability of dogs for hunting certain kinds of tropical forest prey, and otherwise unspecified environmental hazards, while acknowledging that Neotropical lowland forests witness high rates of canine mortality. Building on previous work in Sub-Saharan Africa (Mitchell 2015) and noting that the dog’s closest relatives, the grey wolf (C. lupus) and the coyote (C. latrans), were likewise absent from South and most of Central America in Pre- Columbian times, this paper explores instead the possibility that infectious disease constrained the spread of dogs into Neotropical environments. Four diseases are considered, all likely to be native and/or endemic to South America: canine distemper, canine trypanosomiasis, canine rangeliosis, and canine visceral leishmaniasis caused by infection with Leishmania amazonensis and L. colombiensis. The paper concludes by suggesting ways in which the hypothesis that disease constrained the expansion of dogs into South America can be developed further

    Single-dose administration and the influence of the timing of the booster dose on immunogenicity and efficacy of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine: a pooled analysis of four randomised trials.

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: The ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine has been approved for emergency use by the UK regulatory authority, Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, with a regimen of two standard doses given with an interval of 4-12 weeks. The planned roll-out in the UK will involve vaccinating people in high-risk categories with their first dose immediately, and delivering the second dose 12 weeks later. Here, we provide both a further prespecified pooled analysis of trials of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and exploratory analyses of the impact on immunogenicity and efficacy of extending the interval between priming and booster doses. In addition, we show the immunogenicity and protection afforded by the first dose, before a booster dose has been offered. METHODS: We present data from three single-blind randomised controlled trials-one phase 1/2 study in the UK (COV001), one phase 2/3 study in the UK (COV002), and a phase 3 study in Brazil (COV003)-and one double-blind phase 1/2 study in South Africa (COV005). As previously described, individuals 18 years and older were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive two standard doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (5 × 1010 viral particles) or a control vaccine or saline placebo. In the UK trial, a subset of participants received a lower dose (2·2 × 1010 viral particles) of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 for the first dose. The primary outcome was virologically confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 disease, defined as a nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT)-positive swab combined with at least one qualifying symptom (fever ≄37·8°C, cough, shortness of breath, or anosmia or ageusia) more than 14 days after the second dose. Secondary efficacy analyses included cases occuring at least 22 days after the first dose. Antibody responses measured by immunoassay and by pseudovirus neutralisation were exploratory outcomes. All cases of COVID-19 with a NAAT-positive swab were adjudicated for inclusion in the analysis by a masked independent endpoint review committee. The primary analysis included all participants who were SARS-CoV-2 N protein seronegative at baseline, had had at least 14 days of follow-up after the second dose, and had no evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection from NAAT swabs. Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose. The four trials are registered at ISRCTN89951424 (COV003) and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606 (COV001), NCT04400838 (COV002), and NCT04444674 (COV005). FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Dec 6, 2020, 24 422 participants were recruited and vaccinated across the four studies, of whom 17 178 were included in the primary analysis (8597 receiving ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and 8581 receiving control vaccine). The data cutoff for these analyses was Dec 7, 2020. 332 NAAT-positive infections met the primary endpoint of symptomatic infection more than 14 days after the second dose. Overall vaccine efficacy more than 14 days after the second dose was 66·7% (95% CI 57·4-74·0), with 84 (1·0%) cases in the 8597 participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 248 (2·9%) in the 8581 participants in the control group. There were no hospital admissions for COVID-19 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group after the initial 21-day exclusion period, and 15 in the control group. 108 (0·9%) of 12 282 participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 127 (1·1%) of 11 962 participants in the control group had serious adverse events. There were seven deaths considered unrelated to vaccination (two in the ChAdOx1 nCov-19 group and five in the control group), including one COVID-19-related death in one participant in the control group. Exploratory analyses showed that vaccine efficacy after a single standard dose of vaccine from day 22 to day 90 after vaccination was 76·0% (59·3-85·9). Our modelling analysis indicated that protection did not wane during this initial 3-month period. Similarly, antibody levels were maintained during this period with minimal waning by day 90 (geometric mean ratio [GMR] 0·66 [95% CI 0·59-0·74]). In the participants who received two standard doses, after the second dose, efficacy was higher in those with a longer prime-boost interval (vaccine efficacy 81·3% [95% CI 60·3-91·2] at ≄12 weeks) than in those with a short interval (vaccine efficacy 55·1% [33·0-69·9] at <6 weeks). These observations are supported by immunogenicity data that showed binding antibody responses more than two-fold higher after an interval of 12 or more weeks compared with an interval of less than 6 weeks in those who were aged 18-55 years (GMR 2·32 [2·01-2·68]). INTERPRETATION: The results of this primary analysis of two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 were consistent with those seen in the interim analysis of the trials and confirm that the vaccine is efficacious, with results varying by dose interval in exploratory analyses. A 3-month dose interval might have advantages over a programme with a short dose interval for roll-out of a pandemic vaccine to protect the largest number of individuals in the population as early as possible when supplies are scarce, while also improving protection after receiving a second dose. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes of Health Research (NIHR), The Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, the Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

    The “Outcome Reporting in Brief Intervention Trials: Alcohol” [ORBITAL] framework: Protocol to determine a core outcome set for efficacy and effectiveness trials of alcohol screening and brief intervention

    Get PDF
    Background: The evidence base to assess the efficacy and effectiveness of alcohol brief interventions (ABI) is weakened by variation in the outcomes measured and by inconsistent reporting. The ‘Outcome Reporting in Brief Intervention Trials: Alcohol’ (ORBITAL) project aims to develop a core outcome set (COS) and reporting guidance for its use in future trials of ABI in a range of settings. Methods/design: An international Special Interest Group was convened through INEBRIA (International Network on Brief Interventions for Alcohol and Other Drugs) to inform the development of a COS for trials of ABI. ORBITAL will incorporate a systematic review to map outcomes used in efficacy and effectiveness trials of ABI and their measurement properties, using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) criteria. This will support a multi-round Delphi study to prioritise outcomes. Delphi panellists will be drawn from a range of settings and stakeholder groups, and the Delphi study will also be used to determine if a single COS is relevant for all settings. A consensus meeting with key stakeholder representation will determine the final COS and associated guidance for its use in trials of ABI. Discussion: ORBITAL will develop a COS for alcohol screening and brief intervention trials, with outcomes stratified into domains and guidance on outcome measurement instruments. The standardisation of ABI outcomes and their measurement will support the ongoing development of ABI studies and a systematic synthesis of emerging research findings. We will track the extent to which the COS delivers on this promise through an exploration of the use of the guidance in the decade following COS publication
    corecore