4 research outputs found
The Metaverse: Survey, Trends, Novel Pipeline Ecosystem & Future Directions
The Metaverse offers a second world beyond reality, where boundaries are
non-existent, and possibilities are endless through engagement and immersive
experiences using the virtual reality (VR) technology. Many disciplines can
benefit from the advancement of the Metaverse when accurately developed,
including the fields of technology, gaming, education, art, and culture.
Nevertheless, developing the Metaverse environment to its full potential is an
ambiguous task that needs proper guidance and directions. Existing surveys on
the Metaverse focus only on a specific aspect and discipline of the Metaverse
and lack a holistic view of the entire process. To this end, a more holistic,
multi-disciplinary, in-depth, and academic and industry-oriented review is
required to provide a thorough study of the Metaverse development pipeline. To
address these issues, we present in this survey a novel multi-layered pipeline
ecosystem composed of (1) the Metaverse computing, networking, communications
and hardware infrastructure, (2) environment digitization, and (3) user
interactions. For every layer, we discuss the components that detail the steps
of its development. Also, for each of these components, we examine the impact
of a set of enabling technologies and empowering domains (e.g., Artificial
Intelligence, Security & Privacy, Blockchain, Business, Ethics, and Social) on
its advancement. In addition, we explain the importance of these technologies
to support decentralization, interoperability, user experiences, interactions,
and monetization. Our presented study highlights the existing challenges for
each component, followed by research directions and potential solutions. To the
best of our knowledge, this survey is the most comprehensive and allows users,
scholars, and entrepreneurs to get an in-depth understanding of the Metaverse
ecosystem to find their opportunities and potentials for contribution
Quality of life analyses in patients with multiple myeloma : results from the Selinexor (KPT-330) Treatment of Refractory Myeloma (STORM) phase 2b study
Background: Selinexor is an oral, selective nuclear export inhibitor. STORM was a phase 2b, single-arm, open-label, multicenter trial of selinexor with low dose dexamethasone in patients with penta-exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) that met its primary endpoint, with overall response of 26% (95% confidence interval [CI], 19 to 35%). Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was a secondary endpoint measured using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Multiple Myeloma (FACT-MM). This study examines impact of selinexor treatment on HRQoL of patients treated in STORM and reports two approaches to calculate minimal clinically important differences for the FACT-MM.
Methods: FACT-MM data were collected at baseline, on day 1 of each 4-week treatment cycle, and at end of treatment (EOT). Changes from baseline were analyzed for the FACT-MM total score, FACT-trial outcome index (TOI), FACT-General (FACT-G), and the MM-specific domain using mixed-effects regression models. Two approaches for evaluating minimal clinically important differences were explored: the first defined as 10% of the instrument range, and the second based on estimated mean baseline differences between Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) scores. Post-hoc difference analysis compared change in scores from baseline to EOT for treatment responders and non-responders.
Results: Eighty patients were included in the analysis; the mean number of prior therapies was 7.9 (standard deviation [SD] 3.1), and mean duration of myeloma was 7.6 years (SD 3.4). Each exploratory minimal clinically important difference threshold yielded consistent results whereby most patients did not experience HRQoL decline during the first six cycles of treatment (range: 53.9 to 75.7% for the first approach; range: 52.6 to 72.9% for the second). Treatment responders experienced less decline in HRQoL from baseline to EOT than non-responders, which was significant for the FACT-G, but not for other scores.
Conclusion: The majority of patients did not experience decline in HRQoL based on minimal clinically important differences during early cycles of treatment with selinexor and dexamethasone in the STORM trial. An anchor-based approach utilizing patient-level data (ECOG PS score) to define minimal clinically important differences for the FACT-MM gave consistent results with a distribution-based approach
Quality of life analyses in patients with multiple myeloma: results from the Selinexor (KPT-330) Treatment of Refractory Myeloma (STORM) phase 2b study
Background: Selinexor is an oral, selective nuclear export inhibitor.
STORM was a phase 2b, single-arm, open-label, multicenter trial of
selinexor with low dose dexamethasone in patients with penta-exposed
relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) that met its primary
endpoint, with overall response of 26% (95% confidence interval
[CI], 19 to 35%). Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was a
secondary endpoint measured using the Functional Assessment of Cancer
Therapy - Multiple Myeloma (FACT-MM). This study examines impact of
selinexor treatment on HRQoL of patients treated in STORM and reports
two approaches to calculate minimal clinically important differences for
the FACT-MM.
Methods: FACT-MM data were collected at baseline, on day 1 of each
4-week treatment cycle, and at end of treatment (EOT). Changes from
baseline were analyzed for the FACT-MM total score, FACT-trial outcome
index (TOI), FACT-General (FACT-G), and the MM-specific domain using
mixed-effects regression models. Two approaches for evaluating minimal
clinically important differences were explored: the first defined as
10% of the instrument range, and the second based on estimated mean
baseline differences between Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group
performance status (ECOG PS) scores. Post-hoc difference analysis
compared change in scores from baseline to EOT for treatment responders
and non-responders.
Results: Eighty patients were included in the analysis; the mean number
of prior therapies was 7.9 (standard deviation [SD] 3.1), and mean
duration of myeloma was 7.6 years (SD 3.4). Each exploratory minimal
clinically important difference threshold yielded consistent results
whereby most patients did not experience HRQoL decline during the first
six cycles of treatment (range: 53.9 to 75.7% for the first approach;
range: 52.6 to 72.9% for the second). Treatment responders experienced
less decline in HRQoL from baseline to EOT than non-responders, which
was significant for the FACT-G, but not for other scores.
Conclusion: The majority of patients did not experience decline in HRQoL
based on minimal clinically important differences during early cycles of
treatment with selinexor and dexamethasone in the STORM trial. An
anchor-based approach utilizing patient-level data (ECOG PS score) to
define minimal clinically important differences for the FACT-MM gave
consistent results with a distribution-based approach
SARS-CoV-2 vaccination modelling for safe surgery to save lives: data from an international prospective cohort study
Background: Preoperative SARS-CoV-2 vaccination could support safer elective surgery. Vaccine numbers are limited so this study aimed to inform their prioritization by modelling.
Methods: The primary outcome was the number needed to vaccinate (NNV) to prevent one COVID-19-related death in 1 year. NNVs were based on postoperative SARS-CoV-2 rates and mortality in an international cohort study (surgical patients), and community SARS-CoV-2 incidence and case fatality data (general population). NNV estimates were stratified by age (18-49, 50-69, 70 or more years) and type of surgery. Best- and worst-case scenarios were used to describe uncertainty.
Results: NNVs were more favourable in surgical patients than the general population. The most favourable NNVs were in patients aged 70 years or more needing cancer surgery (351; best case 196, worst case 816) or non-cancer surgery (733; best case 407, worst case 1664). Both exceeded the NNV in the general population (1840; best case 1196, worst case 3066). NNVs for surgical patients remained favourable at a range of SARS-CoV-2 incidence rates in sensitivity analysis modelling. Globally, prioritizing preoperative vaccination of patients needing elective surgery ahead of the general population could prevent an additional 58 687 (best case 115 007, worst case 20 177) COVID-19-related deaths in 1 year.
Conclusion: As global roll out of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination proceeds, patients needing elective surgery should be prioritized ahead of the general population