Real-time scheduling algorithms, task visualization

Real-time systems are computer systems that require responses to events within specified time limits or constraints. Many real-time systems are digital control systems comprised entirely of binary logic or a microprocessor dedicated to one software application that is its own operating system. In recent years, the reliability of general-purpose real-time operating systems (RTOS) consisting of a scheduler and system resource management have improved. In this project, I write a real-time simulator, a workload generator, analysis tools, several test cases, and run and interpret results. My experiments focus on providing evidence to support the claim that for the Rate Monotonic scheduling algorithm (RM), workloads with harmonically non-similar, periodic tasks are more difficult to schedule. The analysis tool I have developed is a measurement system and real-time simulator that analyzes real-time scheduling strategies. I have also developed a visualization system to display the scheduling decisions of a real-time scheduler. Using the measurement and visualization systems, I investigate scheduling algorithms for real-time schedulers and compare their performance. I run different workloads to test the scheduling algorithms and analyze what types of workload characteristics are preferred for real-time benchmarks

Predictive factors and outcomes for ibrutinib in relapsed/refractory marginal zone lymphoma: a multicenter cohort study

Abstract Ibrutinib is effective in the treatment of relapsed/refractory (R/R) marginal zone lymphoma (MZL) with an overall response rate (ORR) of 48%. However, factors associated with response (or lack thereof) to ibrutinib in R/R MZL in clinical practice are largely unknown. To answer this question, we performed a multicenter (25 US centers) cohort study and divided the study population into three groups: “ibrutinib responders”—patients who achieved complete or partial response (CR/PR) to ibrutinib; “stable disease (SD)”; and “primary progressors (PP)”—patients with progression of disease as their best response to ibrutinib. One hundred and nineteen patients met the eligibility criteria with 58%/17% ORR/CR, 29% with SD, and 13% with PP. The median PFS and OS were 29 and 71.4 months, respectively, with no difference in PFS or OS based on the ibrutinib line of therapy or type of therapy before ibrutinib. Patients with complex cytogenetics had an inferior PFS (HR = 3.08, 95% CI 1.23–7.67, p = 0.02), while those with both complex cytogenetics (HR = 3.00, 95% CI 1.03–8.68, p = 0.04) and PP (HR = 13.94, 95% CI 5.17–37.62, p < 0.001) had inferior OS. Only primary refractory disease to first-line therapy predicted a higher probability of PP to ibrutinib (RR = 3.77, 95% CI 1.15–12.33, p = 0.03). In this largest study to date evaluating outcomes of R/R MZL treated with ibrutinib, we show that patients with primary refractory disease and those with PP on ibrutinib are very high-risk subsets and need to be prioritized for experimental therapies

Predictive Factors and Outcomes for Ibrutinib in Relapsed/refractory Marginal Zone Lymphoma: A multicenter Cohort Study

Ibrutinib is effective in the treatment of relapsed/refractory (R/R) marginal zone lymphoma (MZL) with an overall response rate (ORR) of 48%. However, factors associated with response (or lack thereof) to ibrutinib in R/R MZL in clinical practice are largely unknown. To answer this question, we performed a multicenter (25 US centers) cohort study and divided the study population into three groups: ibrutinib responders -patients who achieved complete or partial response (CR/PR) to ibrutinib; stable disease (SD) ; and primary progressors (PP) -patients with progression of disease as their best response to ibrutinib. One hundred and nineteen patients met the eligibility criteria with 58%/17% ORR/CR, 29% with SD, and 13% with PP. The median PFS and OS were 29 and 71.4 months, respectively, with no difference in PFS or OS based on the ibrutinib line of therapy or type of therapy before ibrutinib. Patients with complex cytogenetics had an inferior PFS (HR = 3.08, 95% CI 1.23-7.67, p = 0.02), while those with both complex cytogenetics (HR = 3.00, 95% CI 1.03-8.68, p = 0.04) and PP (HR = 13.94, 95% CI 5.17-37.62, p \u3c 0.001) had inferior OS. Only primary refractory disease to first-line therapy predicted a higher probability of PP to ibrutinib (RR = 3.77, 95% CI 1.15-12.33, p = 0.03). In this largest study to date evaluating outcomes of R/R MZL treated with ibrutinib, we show that patients with primary refractory disease and those with PP on ibrutinib are very high-risk subsets and need to be prioritized for experimental therapies