Cyber Infrastructure Protection: Vol. II

View the Executive SummaryIncreased reliance on the Internet and other networked systems raise the risks of cyber attacks that could harm our nation’s cyber infrastructure. The cyber infrastructure encompasses a number of sectors including: the nation’s mass transit and other transportation systems; banking and financial systems; factories; energy systems and the electric power grid; and telecommunications, which increasingly rely on a complex array of computer networks, including the public Internet. However, many of these systems and networks were not built and designed with security in mind. Therefore, our cyber infrastructure contains many holes, risks, and vulnerabilities that may enable an attacker to cause damage or disrupt cyber infrastructure operations. Threats to cyber infrastructure safety and security come from hackers, terrorists, criminal groups, and sophisticated organized crime groups; even nation-states and foreign intelligence services conduct cyber warfare. Cyber attackers can introduce new viruses, worms, and bots capable of defeating many of our efforts. Costs to the economy from these threats are huge and increasing. Government, business, and academia must therefore work together to understand the threat and develop various modes of fighting cyber attacks, and to establish and enhance a framework to assess the vulnerability of our cyber infrastructure and provide strategic policy directions for the protection of such an infrastructure. This book addresses such questions as: How serious is the cyber threat? What technical and policy-based approaches are best suited to securing telecommunications networks and information systems infrastructure security? What role will government and the private sector play in homeland defense against cyber attacks on critical civilian infrastructure, financial, and logistical systems? What legal impediments exist concerning efforts to defend the nation against cyber attacks, especially in preventive, preemptive, and retaliatory actions?https://press.armywarcollege.edu/monographs/1527/thumbnail.jp

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)1.

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field

Cognition, discours, contextes

Ce numéro de Corela a pour objectif de présenter des travaux qui, tout en se réclamant de la linguistique cognitive, ne ressortissent pas strictement ou seulement aux modèles aujourd’hui les plus reconnus, aux domaines d’investigation ou aux terrains d’application les plus visités

Anti-CK7/CK20 Immunohistochemistry Did Not Associate with the Metastatic Site in TTF-1-Negative Lung Cancer

Anti-CK7 and anti-CK20 immunohistochemistry is sometimes used to establish a diagnosis of primary lung cancer. We performed a retrospective study on the value of anti-CK7 and anti-CK20 immunohistochemistry in 359 biopsies of patients with suspected lung carcinoma in order to assess the usefulness of these antibodies in the evaluation of lung tumors in biopsies. Our results showed TTF-1 positivity in 73.3% of patients. EGFR mutations and ALK rearrangements were significantly different between TTF-1 positive and TTF-1 negative tumors (p p = 0.023, respectively). Our results show a significant difference (p < 0.001) between TTF-1 positive and TTF-1 negative carcinomas with a median survival of 21.97 months (CI95% = 17.48–30.9 months) and 6.52 months (CI95% = 3.34–10.3 months), respectively. In the group of TTF-1 negative patients, anti-CK7 and CK20 immunohistochemistry was performed in 70 patients and showed CK7+/CK20- staining in 61 patients (87.1%), CK7-/CK20- in 4 patients (5.7%), CK7+/CK20+ in 3 patients (4.3%), and CK7-/CK20- in 2 patients (2.8%). No specific or molecular pattern was found in these groups of CK7/CK20 combinations. In total, this work brings arguments concerning the uselessness of anti-CK7/CK20 immunohistochemistry in the case of suspicion of primary lung cancer in biopsies