8 research outputs found
Imaging biomarker roadmap for cancer studies.
Imaging biomarkers (IBs) are integral to the routine management of patients with cancer. IBs used daily in oncology include clinical TNM stage, objective response and left ventricular ejection fraction. Other CT, MRI, PET and ultrasonography biomarkers are used extensively in cancer research and drug development. New IBs need to be established either as useful tools for testing research hypotheses in clinical trials and research studies, or as clinical decision-making tools for use in healthcare, by crossing 'translational gaps' through validation and qualification. Important differences exist between IBs and biospecimen-derived biomarkers and, therefore, the development of IBs requires a tailored 'roadmap'. Recognizing this need, Cancer Research UK (CRUK) and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) assembled experts to review, debate and summarize the challenges of IB validation and qualification. This consensus group has produced 14 key recommendations for accelerating the clinical translation of IBs, which highlight the role of parallel (rather than sequential) tracks of technical (assay) validation, biological/clinical validation and assessment of cost-effectiveness; the need for IB standardization and accreditation systems; the need to continually revisit IB precision; an alternative framework for biological/clinical validation of IBs; and the essential requirements for multicentre studies to qualify IBs for clinical use.Development of this roadmap received support from Cancer Research UK and the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (grant references A/15267, A/16463, A/16464, A/16465, A/16466 and A/18097), the EORTC Cancer Research Fund, and the Innovative Medicines Initiative Joint Undertaking (grant agreement number 115151), resources of which are composed of financial contribution from the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) and European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA) companies' in kind contribution
Crop Updates 2005 - Farming Systems
This session covers forty four papers from different authors:
PLENARY
1. 2005 Outlook, David Stephens and Nicola Telcik, Department of Agriculture
FERTILITY AND NUTRITION
2. The effect of higher nitrogen fertiliser prices on rotation and fertiliser strategies in cropping systems, Ross Kingwell, Department of Agriculture and University of Western Australia
3. Stubble management: The short and long term implications for crop nutrition and soil fertility, Wayne Pluske, Nutrient Management Systems and Bill Bowden, Department of Agriculture
4. Stubble management: The pros and cons of different methods, Bill Bowden, Department of Agriculture, Western Australia and Mike Collins, WANTFA
5. Effect of stubble burning and seasonality on microbial processes and nutrient recycling, Frances Hoyle, The University of Western Australia
6. Soil biology and crop production in Western Australian farming systems, D.V. Murphy, N. Milton, M. Osman, F.C. Hoyle, L.K Abbott, W.R. Cookson and S. Darmawanto, The University of Western Australia
7. Urea is as effective as CAN when no rain for 10 days, Bill Crabtree, Crabtree Agricultural Consulting
8. Fertiliser (N,P,S,K) and lime requirements for wheat production in the Merredin district, Geoff Anderson, Department of Agriculture and Darren Kidson, Summit Fertilizers
9. Trace element applications: Up-front verses foliar? Bill Bowden and Ross Brennan, Department of Agriculture
10. FertcareÂź, Environmental Product Stewardship and Advisor Standards for thee Fertiliser Industry, Nick Drew, Fertilizer Industry Federation of Australia (FIFA)
SOIL AND LAND MANAGEMENT
11. Species response to row spacing, density and nutrition, Bill Bowden, Craig Scanlan, Lisa Sherriff, Bob French and Reg Lunt, Department of Agriculture
12. Investigation into the influence of row orientation in lupin crops, Jeff Russell, Department of Agriculture and Angie Roe, Farm Focus Consultants
13. Deriving variable rate management zones for crops, Ian Maling, Silverfox Solutions and Matthew Adams, DLI
14. In a world of Precision Agriculture, weigh trailers are not passé, Jeff Russell, Department of Agriculture
15. Cover crop management to combat ryegrass resistance and improve yields, Jeff Russell, Department of Agriculture and Angie Roe, Farm Focus Consultants
16. ARGT home page, the place to find information on annual ryegrass toxicity on the web, Dr George Yan, BART Pty Ltd
17. Shallow leading tine (SLT) ripper significantly reduces draft force, improves soil tilth and allows even distribution of subsoil ameliorants, Mohammad Hamza, Glen Riethmuller and Wal Anderson, Department of Agriculture
PASTURE ANS SUMMER CROP SYSTEMS
18. New annual pasture legumes for Mediteranean farming systems, Angelo Loi, Phil Nichols, Clinton Revell and David Ferris, Department of Agriculture
19. How sustainable are phase rotations with Lucerne? Phil Ward, CSIRO Plant Industry
20. Management practicalities of summer cropping, Andrea Hills and Sally-Anne Penny, Department of Agriculture
21. Rainfall zone determines the effect of summer crops on winter yields, Andrea Hills, Sally-Anne Penny and David Hall, Department of Agriculture
22. Summer crops and water use, Andrea Hills, Sally-Anne Penny and David Hall, Department of Agriculture, and Michael Robertson and Don Gaydon, CSIRO Brisbane
23. Risk analysis of sorgum cropping, Andrea Hills and Sally-Anne Penny, Department of Agriculture, and Dr Michael Robertson and Don Gaydon, CSIRO Brisbane
FARMER DECISION SUPPORT AND ADOPTION
24. Variety release and End Point Royalties â a new system? Tress Walmsley, Department of Agriculture
25. Farming system analaysis using the STEP Tool, Caroline Peek and Megan Abrahams, Department of Agriculture
26. The Leakage Calculator: A simple tool for groundwater recharge assessment, Paul Raper, Department of Agriculture
27. The cost of Salinity Calculator â your tool to assessing the profitability of salinity management options, Richard OâDonnell and Trevor Lacey, Department of Agriculture
28. Climate decision support tools, Meredith Fairbanks and David Tennant, Department of Agriculture
29. Horses for courses â using the best tools to manage climate risk, Cameron Weeks, Mingenew-Irwin Group/Planfarm and Richard Quinlan, Planfarm Agronomy
30. Use of seasonal outlook for making N decisions in Merredin, Meredith Fairbanks and Alexandra Edward, Department of Agriculture
31. Forecasts and profits, Benefits or bulldust? Chris Carter and Doug Hamilton, Department of Agriculture
32. A tool to estimate fixed and variable header and tractor depreciation costs, Peter Tozer, Department of Agriculture
33. Partners in grain: âPutting new faces in new placesâ, Renaye Horne, Department of Agriculture
34. Results from the Grower group Alliance, Tracey Gianatti, Grower Group Alliance
35. Local Farmer Group Network â farming systems research opportunities through local groups, Paul Carmody, Local Farmer Group Network
GREENHOUSE GAS AND CLIMATE CHANGE
36. Changing rainfall patterns in the grainbelt, Ian Foster, Department of Agriculture
37. Vulnerability of broadscale agriculture to the impacts of climate change, Michele John, CSIRO (formerly Department of Agriculture) and Ross George, Department of Agriculture
38. Impacts of climate change on wheat yield at Merredin, Imma Farré and Ian Foster, Department of Agriculture
39. Climate change, land use suitability and water security, Ian Kininmonth, Dennis van Gool and Neil Coles, Department of Agriculture
40. Nitrous oxide emissions from cropping systems, Bill Porter, Department of Agriculture, Louise Barton, University of Western Australia
41. The potential of greenhouse sinks to underwrite improved land management in Western Australia, Richard Harper and Peter Ritson, CRC for Greenhouse Accounting and Forest Products Commission, Tony Beck, Tony Beck Consulting Services, Chris Mitchell and Michael Hill, CRC for Greenhouse Accounting
42. Removing uncertainty from greenhouse emissions, Fiona Barker-Reid, Will Gates, Ken Wilson and Rob Baigent, Department of Primary Industries - Victoria and CRC for Greenhouse Accounting (CRCGA), and Ian Galbally, Mick Meyer and Ian Weeks, CSIRO Atmospheric Research and CRCGA
43. Greenhouse in Agriculture Program (GIA), Traci Griffin, CRC for Greenhouse Accounting
44. Grains Greenhouse Accounting framework, D. Rodriguez, M. Probust, M. Meyers, D. Chen, A. Bennett, W. Strong, R. Nussey, I. Galbally and M. Howden
CONTACT DETAILS FOR PRINCIPAL AUTHOR
Imaging biomarker roadmap for cancer studies.
Imaging biomarkers (IBs) are integral to the routine management of patients with cancer. IBs used daily in oncology include clinical TNM stage, objective response and left ventricular ejection fraction. Other CT, MRI, PET and ultrasonography biomarkers are used extensively in cancer research and drug development. New IBs need to be established either as useful tools for testing research hypotheses in clinical trials and research studies, or as clinical decision-making tools for use in healthcare, by crossing 'translational gaps' through validation and qualification. Important differences exist between IBs and biospecimen-derived biomarkers and, therefore, the development of IBs requires a tailored 'roadmap'. Recognizing this need, Cancer Research UK (CRUK) and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) assembled experts to review, debate and summarize the challenges of IB validation and qualification. This consensus group has produced 14 key recommendations for accelerating the clinical translation of IBs, which highlight the role of parallel (rather than sequential) tracks of technical (assay) validation, biological/clinical validation and assessment of cost-effectiveness; the need for IB standardization and accreditation systems; the need to continually revisit IB precision; an alternative framework for biological/clinical validation of IBs; and the essential requirements for multicentre studies to qualify IBs for clinical use.Development of this roadmap received support from Cancer Research UK and the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (grant references A/15267, A/16463, A/16464, A/16465, A/16466 and A/18097), the EORTC Cancer Research Fund, and the Innovative Medicines Initiative Joint Undertaking (grant agreement number 115151), resources of which are composed of financial contribution from the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) and European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA) companies' in kind contribution
Recommended from our members
Imaging biomarker roadmap for cancer studies
Imaging biomarkers (IBs) are integral to the routine management of patients with cancer. IBs used daily in oncology include clinical TNM stage, objective response and left ventricular ejection fraction. Other CT, MRI, PET and ultrasonography biomarkers are used extensively in cancer research and drug development. New IBs need to be established either as useful tools for testing research hypotheses in clinical trials and research studies, or as clinical decision-making tools for use in healthcare, by crossing âtranslational gapsâ through validation and qualification. Important differences exist between IBs and biospecimen-derived biomarkers and, therefore, the development of IBs requires a tailored âroadmapâ. Recognizing this need, Cancer Research UK (CRUK) and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) assembled experts to review, debate and summarize the challenges of IB validation and qualification. This consensus group has produced 14 key recommendations for accelerating the clinical translation of IBs, which highlight the role of parallel (rather than sequential) tracks of technical (assay) validation, biological/clinical validation and assessment of cost-effectiveness; the need for IB standardization and accreditation systems; the need to continually revisit IB precision; an alternative framework for biological/clinical validation of IBs; and the essential requirements for multicentre studies to qualify IBs for clinical use