393 resultados para Controlled fusion.
Resumo:
Background: This multicentre, open-label, randomized, controlled phase II study evaluated cilengitide in combination with cetuximab and platinum-based chemotherapy, compared with cetuximab and chemotherapy alone, as first-line treatment of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and methods: Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to receive cetuximab plus platinum-based chemotherapy alone (control), or combined with cilengitide 2000 mg 1×/week i.v. (CIL-once) or 2×/week i.v. (CIL-twice). A protocol amendment limited enrolment to patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) histoscore ≥200 and closed the CIL-twice arm for practical feasibility issues. Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS; independent read); secondary end points included overall survival (OS), safety, and biomarker analyses. A comparison between the CIL-once and control arms is reported, both for the total cohorts, as well as for patients with EGFR histoscore ≥200. Results: There were 85 patients in the CIL-once group and 84 in the control group. The PFS (independent read) was 6.2 versus 5.0 months for CIL-once versus control [hazard ratio (HR) 0.72; P = 0.085]; for patients with EGFR histoscore ≥200, PFS was 6.8 versus 5.6 months, respectively (HR 0.57; P = 0.0446). Median OS was 13.6 for CIL-once versus 9.7 months for control (HR 0.81; P = 0.265). In patients with EGFR ≥200, OS was 13.2 versus 11.8 months, respectively (HR 0.95; P = 0.855). No major differences in adverse events between CIL-once and control were reported; nausea (59% versus 56%, respectively) and neutropenia (54% versus 46%, respectively) were the most frequent. There was no increased incidence of thromboembolic events or haemorrhage in cilengitide-treated patients. αvβ3 and αvβ5 expression was neither a predictive nor a prognostic indicator. Conclusions: The addition of cilengitide to cetuximab/chemotherapy indicated potential clinical activity, with a trend for PFS difference in the independent-read analysis. However, the observed inconsistencies across end points suggest additional investigations are required to substantiate a potential role of other integrin inhibitors in NSCLC treatment.
Resumo:
The increased availability of image capturing devices has enabled collections of digital images to rapidly expand in both size and diversity. This has created a constantly growing need for efficient and effective image browsing, searching, and retrieval tools. Pseudo-relevance feedback (PRF) has proven to be an effective mechanism for improving retrieval accuracy. An original, simple yet effective rank-based PRF mechanism (RB-PRF) that takes into account the initial rank order of each image to improve retrieval accuracy is proposed. This RB-PRF mechanism innovates by making use of binary image signatures to improve retrieval precision by promoting images similar to highly ranked images and demoting images similar to lower ranked images. Empirical evaluations based on standard benchmarks, namely Wang, Oliva & Torralba, and Corel datasets demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed RB-PRF mechanism in image retrieval.
Resumo:
Aim To investigate the efficacy of Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing for postoperative pain management in adolescents. Background Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing is an inexpensive, non-pharmacological intervention that has successfully been used to treat chronic pain. It holds promise in the treatment of acute, postsurgical pain based on its purported effects on the brain and nervous system. Design A randomized controlled trial was used. Methods Fifty-six adolescent surgical patients aged between 12-18 years were allocated to gender-balanced Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (treatment) or non-Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (control) groups. Pain was measured using the Wong-Baker FACES® Pain Rating Scale (WBFS) before and after the intervention (or non-intervention for the control group). Findings A Wilcoxon signed-rank test demonstrated that the Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing group experienced a significant reduction in pain intensity after treatment intervention, whereas the control group did not. Additionally, a Mann–Whitney U-test showed that, while there was no significant difference between the two groups at time 1, there was a significant difference in pain intensity between the two groups at time 2, with the Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing group experiencing lower levels of pain. Conclusion These results suggest that Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing may be an effective treatment modality for postoperative pain.