74 research outputs found

    Science for life: an evaluation of New Zealand\u27s health research investment system based on international benchmarks

    Get PDF
    During the past decade there have been major developments in the way that research investments have been monitored and evaluated. While there are differences in the ways governments fund research around the world, and a diversity of approaches to evaluation, there are a number of common themes that can be observed in national experiences. As the importance of evaluation increases, the gap between current practice and best practice becomes more significant, and the need for comparative study and methods development grows. Current international ‘better-practice’ approaches to research evaluation and performance indicators reflect two important considerations. First, they make a clear distinction between input, output and outcome indicators and assessments of impact. Only limited refinements have occurred in recent years in input and output performance indicators. However, quite considerable developments have occurred in relation to the development of indicators and approaches for assessing the outcomes and impact of research.1 Second, evaluation and reporting mechanisms vary considerably according to the intended audience for the reporting. In particular, as nations move toward strategically targeting limited government research resources reporting demands at the programme level, and for specific stakeholder groups becomes all the more pressing

    Extending Binary Byzantine Agreement to Multivalued Byzantine Agreement.

    Full text link
    A binary Byzantine agreement algorithm can be extended to produce a multivalued Byzantine agreement algorithm. The resulting multivalued algorithm is cheaper than previously published algorithms when the cost of transmitting values from the multivalued domain is significant

    A phase 1, first-in-child, multicenter study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the oncolytic herpes virus talimogene laherparepvec in pediatric patients with advanced solid tumors

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND The survival rates for pediatric patients with relapsed and refractory tumors are poor. Successful treatment strategies are currently lacking and there remains an unmet need for novel therapies for these patients. We report here the results of a phase 1 study of talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) and explore the safety of this oncolytic immunotherapy for the treatment of pediatric patients with advanced non-central nervous system tumors. METHODS T-VEC was delivered by intralesional injection at 106^{6} plaque-forming units (PFU)/ml on the first day, followed by 108^{8} PFU/ml on the first day of week 4 and every 2 weeks thereafter. The primary objective was to evaluate the safety and tolerability as assessed by the incidence of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs). Secondary objectives included efficacy indicated by response and survival per modified immune-related response criteria simulating the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (irRC-RECIST). RESULTS Fifteen patients were enrolled into two cohorts based on age: cohort A1 (n = 13) 12 to ≀21 years old (soft-tissue sarcoma, n = 7; bone sarcoma, n = 3; neuroblastoma, n = 1; nasopharyngeal carcinoma, n = 1; and melanoma, n = 1) and cohort B1 (n = 2) 2 to <12 years old (melanoma, n = 2). Overall, patients received treatment for a median (range) of 5.1 (0.1, 39.4) weeks. No DLTs were observed during the evaluation period. All patients experienced at least one treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE), and 53.3% of patients reported grade ≄3 TEAEs. Overall, 86.7% of patients reported treatment-related TEAEs. No complete or partial responses were observed, and three patients (20%) overall exhibited stable disease as the best response. CONCLUSIONS T-VEC was tolerable as assessed by the observation of no DLTs. The safety data were consistent with the patients' underlying cancer and the known safety profile of T-VEC from studies in the adult population. No objective responses were observed. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02756845. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02756845

    SN 2012fr: Ultraviolet, Optical, and Near-infrared Light Curves of a Type Ia Supernova Observed within a Day of Explosion

    Get PDF
    We present detailed ultraviolet, optical, and near-infrared light curves of the Type Ia supernova (SN) 2012fr, which exploded in the Fornax cluster member NGC 1365. These precise high-cadence light curves provide a dense coverage of the flux evolution from −12 to +140 days with respect to the epoch of B-band maximum (tBmax). Supplementary imaging at the earliest epochs reveals an initial slow and nearly linear rise in luminosity with a duration of ∌2.5 days, followed by a faster rising phase that is well reproduced by an explosion model with a moderate amount of 56Ni mixing in the ejecta. From our analysis of the light curves, we conclude that: (i) the explosion occurred 1800 Å) luminosity was 16.5 ± 0.6 days, (iii) the supernova suffered little or no host-galaxy dust reddening, (iv) the peak luminosity in both the optical and near-infrared was consistent with the bright end of normal Type Ia diversity, and (v) 0.60 ± 0.15 M⊙ of 56Ni was synthesized in the explosion. Despite its normal luminosity, SN 2012fr displayed unusually prevalent high-velocity Ca II and Si II absorption features, and a nearly constant photospheric velocity of the Si II λ6355 line at ∌12,000 km s-1 that began ∌5 days before tBmax. We also highlight some of the other peculiarities in the early phase photometry and the spectral evolution. SN 2012fr also adds to a growing number of Type Ia supernovae that are hosted by galaxies with direct Cepheid distance measurements.Facultad de Ciencias AstronĂłmicas y GeofĂ­sicasInstituto de AstrofĂ­sica de La Plat

    Immuno-transcriptomic profiling of extracranial pediatric solid malignancies.

    Get PDF
    We perform an immunogenomics analysis utilizing whole-transcriptome sequencing of 657 pediatric extracranial solid cancer samples representing 14 diagnoses, and additionally utilize transcriptomes of 131 pediatric cancer cell lines and 147 normal tissue samples for comparison. We describe patterns of infiltrating immune cells, T cell receptor (TCR) clonal expansion, and translationally relevant immune checkpoints. We find that tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and TCR counts vary widely across cancer types and within each diagnosis, and notably are significantly predictive of survival in osteosarcoma patients. We identify potential cancer-specific immunotherapeutic targets for adoptive cell therapies including cell-surface proteins, tumor germline antigens, and lineage-specific transcription factors. Using an orthogonal immunopeptidomics approach, we find several potential immunotherapeutic targets in osteosarcoma and Ewing sarcoma and validated PRAME as a bona fide multi-pediatric cancer target. Importantly, this work provides a critical framework for immune targeting of extracranial solid tumors using parallel immuno-transcriptomic and -peptidomic approaches

    Adjuvant nab-Paclitaxel + Gemcitabine in Resected Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Results From a Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III Trial

    Get PDF
    PURPOSE: This randomized, open -label trial compared the efficacy and safety of adjuvant nabpaclitaxel + gemcitabine with those of gemcitabine for resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01964430). METHODS: We assigned 866 treatment -naive patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma to nab-paclitaxel (125 mg/m2) + gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m(2)) or gemcitabine alone to one 30-40 infusion on days 1, 8, and 15 of six 28 -day cycles. The primary end point was independently assessed disease -free survival (DFS). Additional end points included investigator-assessed DFS, overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-seven of 432 patients and 310 of 434 patients completed nabpaclitaxel + gemcitabine and gemcitabine treatment, respectively. At primary data cutoff (December 31, 2018; median follow-up, 38.5 [interquartile range [IQR], 33.8-43 months), the median independently assessed DFS was 19.4 (nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) versus 18.8 months (gemcitabine; hazard ratio [HR], 0.88; 95% CI, 0.729 to 1.063; P =.18). The median investigator-assessed DFS was 16.6 (IQR, 8.4-47.0) and 13.7 (IQR, 8.3-44.1) months, respectively (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.694 to 0.965; P=.02). The median OS (427 events; 68% mature) was 40.5 (IQR, 20.7 to not reached) and 36.2 (IQR, 17.7-53.3) months, respectively (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.680 to 0.996; P =.045). At a 16 -month follow-up (cutoff, April 3, 2020; median follow-up, 51.4 months [IQR, 47.0-57.0]), the median OS (511 events; 81% mature) was 41.8 (nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) versus 37.7 months (gemcitabine; HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.687 to 0.973; P =.0232). At the 5 -year follow-up (cutoff, April 9, 2021; median follow-up, 63.2 months [IQR, 60.1-68.7]), the median OS (555 events; 88% mature) was 41.8 versus 37.7 months, respectively (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.678 to 0.947; P =.0091). Eighty-six percent (nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) and 68% (gemcitabine) of patients experienced grade >= 3 treatment -emergent adverse events. Two patients per study arm died of treatment -emergent adverse events. CONCLUSION: The primary end point (independently assessed DFS) was not met despite favorable OS seen with nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine

    Some international benchmarks for evaluating Australian health and medical research

    Get PDF
    Recent experience in Australia has seen the requirement by the federal Department of Finance and Administration to conduct output pricing reviews of government agencies including research organisations. Health and medical research, while generally regarded as an important ‘public good’, is now pressed by the same demands as other research fields to account for public investments in terms of value of outcomes and value for investment. This paper reports on current trends towards international benchmarking of health and medical research performance. Comparative data from overseas show unique aspects of the Australian health and medical research funding system. The paper suggests possible future routes for carrying out health research evaluation in Australia
    • 

    corecore