Clinical outcome after first and recurrent hemorrhage in patients with untreated brain arteriovenous malformation

Background and Purpose: The morbidity from spontaneous hemorrhage of untreated brain arteriovenous malformations (AVM) is not well described. Methods: The 241 consecutive AVM patients (mean age 3716 years, 52% women) from the prospective Columbia AVM Databank initially presenting with hemorrhage were evaluated using the Rankin Scale (RS) and the National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS). From the 241 AVM patients, 29 (12%) had subsequent intracranial hemorrhage during follow-up. For further comparisons, 84 non-AVM patients with intracerebral hemorrhage from the Northern Manhattan Study (NOMAS) served as a control group. Results: In 241 AVM patients presenting with hemorrhage the median RS was 2 and the median NIHSS was 1 (49% RS 0 to 1, 61% NIHSS 2). The median time between hemorrhage and clinical evaluation was 11 days (mean 219 days). Recurrent AVM hemorrhage during follow-up resulted in no significant increase in morbidity (median RS 2, P0.004; median NIHSS 3, P0.322; time between hemorrhage and study evaluation: median 55 days, mean 657 days). Among AVM-hemorrhage subtypes, parenchymatous AVM hemorrhage was associated with higher stroke morbidity (odds ratio, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.5 to 5.8 for NIHSS 2) than nonparenchymatous hemorrhages. Parenchymatous AVM hemorrhage had a significantly better outcome (median NIHSS 1) than non-AVM related hemorrhage (median NIHSS 12; P0.0001). Conclusions: Hemorrhage, either at initial presentation or during follow-up of untreated AVM patients appears to carry

'Danger Theory: The Link between AIS and IDS?'

Abstract We present ideas about creating a next generation Intrusion Detection System (IDS) based on the latest immunological theories. The central challenge with computer security is determining the difference between normal and potentially harmful activity. For half a century, developers have protected their systems by coding rules that identify and block specific events. However, the nature of current and future threats in conjunction with ever larger IT systems urgently requires the development of automated and adaptive defensive tools. A promising solution is emerging in the form of Artificial Immune Systems (AIS): The Human Immune System (HIS) can detect and defend against harmful and previously unseen invaders, so can we not build a similar Intrusion Detection System (IDS) for our computers? Presumably, those systems would then have the same beneficial properties as HIS like error tolerance, adaptation and self-monitoring. Current AIS have been successful on test systems, but the algorithms rely on self-nonself discrimination, as stipulated in classical immunology. However, immunologist are increasingly finding fault with traditional self-nonself thinking and a new 'Danger Theory' (DT) is emerging. This new theory suggests that the immune system reacts to threats based on the correlation of various (danger) signals and it provides a method of 'grounding' the immune response, i.e. linking it directly to the attacker. Little is currently understood of the precise nature and correlation of these signals and the theory is a topic of hot debate. It is the aim of this research to investigate this correlation and to translate the DT into the realms of computer security, thereby creating AIS that are no longer limited by self-nonself discrimination. It should be noted that we do not intend to defend this controversial theory per se, although as a deliverable this project will add to the body of knowledge in this area. Rather we are interested in its merits for scaling up AIS applications by overcoming self-nonself discrimination problems.

'Danger Theory: The Link between AIS and IDS?'

Abstract We present ideas about creating a next generation Intrusion Detection System (IDS) based on the latest immunological theories. The central challenge with computer security is determining the difference between normal and potentially harmful activity. For half a century, developers have protected their systems by coding rules that identify and block specific events. However, the nature of current and future threats in conjunction with ever larger IT systems urgently requires the development of automated and adaptive defensive tools. A promising solution is emerging in the form of Artificial Immune Systems (AIS): The Human Immune System (HIS) can detect and defend against harmful and previously unseen invaders, so can we not build a similar Intrusion Detection System (IDS) for our computers? Presumably, those systems would then have the same beneficial properties as HIS like error tolerance, adaptation and self-monitoring. Current AIS have been successful on test systems, but the algorithms rely on self-nonself discrimination, as stipulated in classical immunology. However, immunologist are increasingly finding fault with traditional self-nonself thinking and a new 'Danger Theory' (DT) is emerging. This new theory suggests that the immune system reacts to threats based on the correlation of various (danger) signals and it provides a method of 'grounding' the immune response, i.e. linking it directly to the attacker. Little is currently understood of the precise nature and correlation of these signals and the theory is a topic of hot debate. It is the aim of this research to investigate this correlation and to translate the DT into the realms of computer security, thereby creating AIS that are no longer limited by self-nonself discrimination. It should be noted that we do not intend to defend this controversial theory per se, although as a deliverable this project will add to the body of knowledge in this area. Rather we are interested in its merits for scaling up AIS applications by overcoming self-nonself discrimination problems.

Danger theory: the link between AIS and IDS?

We present ideas about creating a next generation Intrusion Detection System (IDS) based on the latest immunological theories. The central challenge with computer security is determining the difference between normal and potentially harmful activity. For half a century, developers have protected their systems by coding rules that identify and block specific events. However, the nature of current and future threats in conjunction with ever larger IT systems urgently requires the development of automated and adaptive defensive tools. A promising solution is emerging in the form of Artificial Immune Systems (AIS): The Human Immune System (HIS) can detect and defend against harmful and previously unseen invaders, so can we not build a similar Intrusion Detection System (IDS) for our computers? Presumably, those systems would then have the same beneficial properties as HIS like error tolerance, adaptation and self-monitoring. Current AIS have been successful on test systems, but the algorithms rely on self-nonself discrimination, as stipulated in classical immunology. However, immunologist are increasingly finding fault with traditional self-nonself thinking and a new ‘Danger Theory’ (DT) is emerging. This new theory suggests that the immune system reacts to threats based on the correlation of various (danger) signals and it provides a method of ‘grounding’ the immune response, i.e. linking it directly to the attacker. Little is currently understood of the precise nature and correlation of these signals and the theory is a topic of hot debate. It is the aim of this research to investigate this correlation and to translate the DT into the realms of computer security, thereby creating AIS that are no longer limited by self-nonself discrimination. It should be noted that we do not intend to defend this controversial theory per se, although as a deliverable this project will add to the body of knowledge in this area. Rather we are interested in its merits for scaling up AIS applications by overcoming self-nonself discrimination problems.