Pulmonary neuroendocrine (carcinoid) tumors: European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society expert consensus and recommendations for best practice for typical and atypical pulmonary carcinoids.

BACKGROUND Pulmonary carcinoids (PCs) are rare tumors. As there is a paucity of randomized studies, this expert consensus document represents an initiative by the European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society to provide guidance on their management. PATIENTS AND METHODS Bibliographical searches were carried out in PubMed for the terms 'pulmonary neuroendocrine tumors', 'bronchial neuroendocrine tumors', 'bronchial carcinoid tumors', 'pulmonary carcinoid', 'pulmonary typical/atypical carcinoid', and 'pulmonary carcinoid and diagnosis/treatment/epidemiology/prognosis'. A systematic review of the relevant literature was carried out, followed by expert review. RESULTS PCs are well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors and include low- and intermediate-grade malignant tumors, i.e. typical (TC) and atypical carcinoid (AC), respectively. Contrast CT scan is the diagnostic gold standard for PCs, but pathology examination is mandatory for their correct classification. Somatostatin receptor imaging may visualize nearly 80% of the primary tumors and is most sensitive for metastatic disease. Plasma chromogranin A can be increased in PCs. Surgery is the treatment of choice for PCs with the aim of removing the tumor and preserving as much lung tissue as possible. Resection of metastases should be considered whenever possible with curative intent. Somatostatin analogs are the first-line treatment of carcinoid syndrome and may be considered as first-line systemic antiproliferative treatment in unresectable PCs, particularly of low-grade TC and AC. Locoregional or radiotargeted therapies should be considered for metastatic disease. Systemic chemotherapy is used for progressive PCs, although cytotoxic regimens have demonstrated limited effects with etoposide and platinum combination the most commonly used, however, temozolomide has shown most clinical benefit. CONCLUSIONS PCs are complex tumors which require a multidisciplinary approach and long-term follow-up.

A methodology for appraising and selecting strategies to mitigate desertification based on stakeholder participation and global best practices

The main aim of the methodology presented in this paper is to provide a framework for a participatory process for the appraisal and selection of options to mitigate desertification and land degradation. This methodology is being developed within the EU project DESIRE (www.desire-project.eu/) in collaboration with WOCAT (www.wocat.org). It is used to select promising conservation strategies for test-implementation in each of the 16 degradation and desertification hotspot sites in the Mediterranean and around the world. The methodology consists of three main parts: In a first step, prevention and mitigation strategies already applied at the respective DESIRE study site are identified and listed during a workshop with representatives of different stakeholders groups (land users, policy makers, researchers). The participatory and process-oriented approach initiates a mutual learning process among the different stakeholders by sharing knowledge and jointly reflecting on current problems and solutions related to land degradation and desertification. In the second step these identified, locally applied solutions (technologies and approaches) are assessed with the help of the WOCAT methodology. Comprehensive questionnaires and a database system have been developed to document and evaluate all relevant aspects of technical measures as well as implementation approaches by teams of researchers and specialists, together with land users. This research process ensures systematic assessing and piecing together of local information, together with specific details about the environmental and socio-economic setting. The third part consists of another stakeholder workshop where promising strategies for sustainable land management in the given context are selected, based on the best practices database of WOCAT, including the evaluated locally applied strategies at the DESIRE sites. These promising strategies will be assessed with the help of a selection and decision support tool and adapted for test-implementation at the study site.

Best practices and innovative capacity development approaches in ARD programmes of ERA-ARD consortium members: Draft compilation of National Contribution

In the framework of the European Research Area for Agricultural Research for Development (ERA-ARD) project, a survey of innovative approaches in capacity development (CD) was undertaken. All Consortium members were asked to describe innovative approaches and best practices of CD mechanisms within their ARD programmes. A tabular overview of all the programmes or mechanisms can be found on page 4. Abstracts of the programmes or mechanisms are compiled in alphabetic order of the consortium members in this document. The intention of this catalogue of mechanisms is to give an overview of different approaches and practices and not to provide a comprehensive mapping of all the ongoing CD activities of the Consortium members. Thus, the programmes described represent only a fraction of all the ongoing CD programmes on the national level.

What’s the best method? Comparison of different short forms oft he Pathological Narcissism Inventory

Recent research emphasizes the various facets of narcissism. As a consequence, newly developed questionnaires for narcissism have a large number of subscales and items. However, for the daily use in research and practice, short measures are crucial. In this study we compare different short forms of the Pathological Narcissism Questionnaire, a 54 item measure with seven subscales. In different samples (total N>2000) we applied different theoretical models to construct short forms of approximately 20 items. In particular, we compared IRT, item-total correlation, and factor loading based short forms and versions based on content validity and random selection. In all versions the original subscale structure was preserved. Results show that the short forms all have high correlations with the original version. Furthermore, correlations with criterion validation measures were comparable. We conclude that the item number can be reduced substantially without loosing information. Pros and cons of the different reduction methods are discussed.

Do multiple true-false items beat the commonly used one-best-answers questions regarding to the Ottawa Criteria for Good Assessment? Results of a literature review

Background: Multiple True-False-Items (MTF-Items) might offer some advantages compared to one-best-answer-questions (TypeA) as they allow more than one correct answer and may better represent clinical decisions. However, in medical education assessment MTF-Items are seldom used. Summary of Work: With this literature review existing findings on MTF-items and on TypeA were compared along the Ottawa Criteria for Good Assessment, i.e. (1) reproducibility, (2) feasibility, (3) validity, (4) acceptance, (5) educational effect, (6) catalytic effects, and (7) equivalence. We conducted a literature research on ERIC and Google Scholar including papers from the years 1935 to 2014. We used the search terms “multiple true-false”, “true-false”, “true/false”, and “Kprim” combined with “exam”, “test”, and “assessment”. Summary of Results: We included 29 out of 33 studies. Four of them were carried out in the medical field Compared to TypeA, MTF-Items are associated with (1) higher reproducibility (2) lower feasibility (3) similar validity (4) higher acceptance (5) higher educational effect (6) no studies on catalytic effects or (7) equivalence. Discussion and Conclusions: While studies show overall good characteristics of MTF items according to the Ottawa criteria, this type of question seems to be rather seldom used. One reason might be the reported lower feasibility. Overall the literature base is still weak. Furthermore, only 14 % of literature is from the medical domain. Further studies to better understand the characteristics of MTF-Items in the medical domain are warranted. Take-home messages: Overall the literature base is weak and therefore further studies are needed. Existing studies show that: MTF-Items show higher reliability, acceptance and educational effect; MTF-Items are more difficult to produce

Which Anesthesia Regimen Is Best to Reduce Morbidity and Mortality in Lung Surgery? A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND One-lung ventilation during thoracic surgery is associated with hypoxia-reoxygenation injury in the deflated and subsequently reventilated lung. Numerous studies have reported volatile anesthesia-induced attenuation of inflammatory responses in such scenarios. If the effect also extends to clinical outcome is yet undetermined. We hypothesized that volatile anesthesia is superior to intravenous anesthesia regarding postoperative complications. METHODS Five centers in Switzerland participated in the randomized controlled trial. Patients scheduled for lung surgery with one-lung ventilation were randomly assigned to one of two parallel arms to receive either propofol or desflurane as general anesthetic. Patients and surgeons were blinded to group allocation. Time to occurrence of the first major complication according to the Clavien-Dindo score was defined as primary (during hospitalization) or secondary (6-month follow-up) endpoint. Cox regression models were used with adjustment for prestratification variables and age. RESULTS Of 767 screened patients, 460 were randomized and analyzed (n = 230 for each arm). Demographics, disease and intraoperative characteristics were comparable in both groups. Incidence of major complications during hospitalization was 16.5% in the propofol and 13.0% in the desflurane groups (hazard ratio for desflurane vs. propofol, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.46 to 1.22; P = 0.24). Incidence of major complications within 6 months from surgery was 40.4% in the propofol and 39.6% in the desflurane groups (hazard ratio for desflurane vs. propofol, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.71 to 1.28; P = 0.71). CONCLUSIONS This is the first multicenter randomized controlled trial addressing the effect of volatile versus intravenous anesthetics on major complications after lung surgery. No difference between the two anesthesia regimens was evident.