Histoire du dix-neuvième siècle depuis les traités de Vienne. Tome 18 / G. G. Gervinus,... ; traduit de l'allemand par J.-F. Minssen,...

Collection : Collection d'historiens contemporains

Lottery Action, September 27-October 10, 2004, Vol. 11, no. 18

Iowa Lottery Retailer Newsletter

Lung cancer mortality in European women: trends and predictions.

Female lung cancer mortality increased by 50% between the mid 1960s and the early 2000s in the European Union (EU). To monitor the current lung cancer epidemic in European women, we analyzed mortality trends in 33 European countries between 1970 and 2009 and estimated rates for the year 2015 using data from the World Health Organization. Female lung cancer mortality has been increasing up to recent calendar years in most European countries, with the exceptions of Belarus, Russia, and Ukraine, with relatively low rates, and the UK, Iceland and Ireland, where high rates were reached in mid/late 1990s to leveled off thereafter. In the EU, female lung cancer mortality rates rose over the last decade from 11.3 to 12.7/100,000 (+2.3% per year) at all ages and from 18.6 to 21.5/100,000 (+3.0% per year) in middle-age. A further increase is predicted, to reach 14/100,000 women in 2015. Lung cancer mortality trends have been more favorable over the last decade in young women (20-44 years), particularly in the UK and other former high-risk countries from northern and central/eastern Europe, but also in France, Italy, and Spain where mortality in young women has been increasing up to the early 2000s. In the EU as a whole, mortality at age 20-44 years decreased from 1.6 to 1.4/100,000 (-2.2% per year). Although the female lung cancer epidemic in Europe is still expanding, the epidemic may be controlled through the implementation of effective anti-tobacco measures, and it will probably never reach the top US rates.

Diagnostic Accuracy of (18)F-FDG-PET and PET/CT in the Differential Diagnosis between Malignant and Benign Pleural Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: To systematically review and meta-analyze published data about the diagnostic accuracy of fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose ((18)F-FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) and PET/computed tomography (CT) in the differential diagnosis between malignant and benign pleural lesions. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A comprehensive literature search of studies published through June 2013 regarding the diagnostic performance of (18)F-FDG-PET and PET/CT in the differential diagnosis of pleural lesions was carried out. All retrieved studies were reviewed and qualitatively analyzed. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratio (LR+ and LR-) and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of (18)F-FDG-PET or PET/CT in the differential diagnosis of pleural lesions on a per-patient-based analysis were calculated. The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was calculated to measure the accuracy of these methods. Subanalyses considering device used (PET or PET/CT) were performed. RESULTS: Sixteen studies including 745 patients were included in the systematic review. The meta-analysis of 11 selected studies provided the following results: sensitivity 95% (95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 92-97%), specificity 82% (95%CI: 76-88%), LR+ 5.3 (95%CI: 2.4-11.8), LR- 0.09 (95%CI: 0.05-0.14), DOR 74 (95%CI: 34-161). The AUC was 0.95. No significant improvement of the diagnostic accuracy considering PET/CT studies only was found. CONCLUSIONS: (18)F-FDG-PET and PET/CT demonstrated to be accurate diagnostic imaging methods in the differential diagnosis between malignant and benign pleural lesions; nevertheless, possible sources of false-negative and false-positive results should be kept in mind.

ABD e-News February 18, 2005

Weekly Newsletter

Vitae sanctorum.

Abdo et Sennes (262-263v) ; Acisclus et Victoria (163-165) ; Adrianus (72v-77) ; Affra (45v) ; Amancius (122-125v) ; Andochius (90v-92v) ; Andreas (186-194v) ; Antoninus (68v-70v, 221v) ; Apollinaris (1bis-1bis v); Audardus (254-259) ; Augustinus (231-232v) ; Bartholomeus (55v-59v) ; Bricius Turonensis (162v-163) ; Caprasius (107-108) ; Caprasius et Fides (218-219v) ; Cassianus (48v) ; Cecilia (168v-174v) ; Christina (12-16v) ; Christoforus (22-24) ; Ciricus et Julita (2v-6, 260v-262) ; Cirillus (2-2v) ; Ciprianus (47v-48v) ; Claudius, Asterius, Neo (54v-55v) ; Clemens (174v-176) ; Cosmas et Damianus (97v-98v) ; Crisantus et Daria (179-182v) ; Crucis exaltatio (83-84) ; Cucufas (24-25) ; Dalmacius Rutenae urbis (131-132v) ; Desiderius Caturcensis (207v-217v) ; Dionisius (105-106v) ; Donatus (263v-265v) ; Eleazarus (38-38v) ; Eptadius (59v-61v) ; Eufemia (84-86) ; Eugenia (78-83) ; Eulalia (195v-199) ; Eustachius (125v-129v) ; Fabius (34v-36v) ; Fausta (52-53v) ; Faustus, Januarius et Marcialis (106v-107) ; Felix (36v-38) ; Felix Nolensis ep. (25-27) ; Filibertus (227v-231) ; Genesius Arelatensis (61v-62v) ; Germanus Autissiodorensis (33-34) ; Gervasius et Protasius (259v-260v) ; Gregorius papa (222-224v) ; Grisogonus (176v-178) ; Jacobus major (20v-21v) ; Jeronimus (100-102) ; Johannis Baptistae decollatio (66v-68v) ; Johannes et Paulus (227-227v) ; Julia (11-12) ; Julianus (64-64v) ; Julianus, auct. Gregorio Turonense (265v-272) ; Julius (178-178v) ; Justa et Rufina (6v-7) ; Justina et Ciprianus (92v-97v) ; Justus et Pastor (44v-45) ; Laurianus (167v-168v) ; Leochadia (195-195v) ; Leodegarius (102-104v) ; Licerius (62v-64) ; Longinus (195) ; Lucia (199-200v) ; Machabei (34-34v) ; Mammes (45v-47v) ; Marcellinus et Petrus (259-259v) ; Marcellus (114) ; Marcellus Cavalonis (219v-220) ; Marcellus Kavilonensis (1v-1bis) ; Marcus (224v-225) ; Marciana (129v-131) ; Marcianus (206-206v) ; Margarita (7-11) ; Mariae assumptio (48v-51) ; Martinus, auct. Sulpicio Severo (133-160v) ; Matheus (86-89) ; Mauricius (89-90v) ; Mauricius, Exuperius, Candidus, Innocentius, Victor cum sociis eorum (272-272v) ; Maurinus (245-247v) ; Maximus (241-244v) ; Medardus (225-227) ; Mennas (160v-162v) ; Michael (98v-100) ; Mimius (39v-40) ; Nazarius et Celsus (27-31v) ; Omnes Sancti (118v-122) ; Pantaleo (31v-32v) ; Petri cathedra (220-221v, 249-250) ; Petrus, ep. Alexandriae (248-249) ; Procopius (39-39v) ; Quintinus (114-118v) ; Regina (70v-72v) ; Reparata (104v-105) ; Romanus (165-167) ; Sabina (64v-66v) ; Salvius (77-78) ; Saturninus et Sisinnius (178v) ; Saturninus Tolosanensis (182v-185v, 232v-239) ; Segolena (16v-20v) ; Servandus et Germanus (108-109) ; Sixtus, Laurentius et Ypolitus (40-44v); Symo et Judas (109-112v) ; Symphorianus (53v-54v) ; Teodota (38v-39) ; Terencianus (239-241) ; Theodardus Narbonensis (250-254) ; Thomas (200v-206) ; Valerianus (206v-207) ; Vamnes (51-52) ; Vincentius et Savina (112v-114). Le f. 220v contient un catalogue ancien de la bibliothèque de Moissac.

ABD e-News March 18, 2005

Weekly Newsletter

Measured and predicted resting metabolic rate in obese and nonobese adolescents.

OBJECTIVES: The validity of equations for the calculation of resting metabolic rate (RMR) were studied and new predictive equations were developed. STUDY DESIGN: The RMR was measured in a sample of 371 10- to 16-year-old prepubertal and postpubertal children. The study group included 193 male (116 nonobese and 77 obese) and 178 female (119 nonobese and 59 obese) subjects; for each group the RMRs predicted from five equations recommended for this age group were compared. The RMR was assessed by indirect calorimetry with a ventilated hood system for 45 minutes after an overnight fast. Body composition was estimated from skin-fold measurements. RESULTS: The mean +/- SD RMR was found to be 5600 +/- 972 kJ/24 hr and 7223 +/- 1220 kJ/24 hr in nonobese and obese boys, and 5112 +/- 632 kJ/24 hr and 6665 +/- 1106 kJ/24 hr in nonobese and obese girls, respectively. All five equations applicable to 10- to 16-year-old children overestimated RMR by 7.5% to 18.1% (p < 0.001 for each equation). Stepwise regression analysis, with independent variables such as age, weight, height, and gender, allowed development of new predictive equations for the calculation of RMR in 10- to 16-year-old boys (RMR = 50.9 Weight (kg) + 25.3 Height (cm) -50.3 Age (yr) + 26.9; R2 = 0.884, p < 0.0001) and girls (RMR = 51.2 Weight (kg) + 24.5 Height (cm) - 207.5 Age (yr) + 1629.8; R2 = 0.824, p < 0.0001). These predictive equations were tested in a second, independent cohort of children (80 male and 61 female subject) and were found to give a reliable estimate of RMR in 10- to 16-year-old obese and nonobese adolescents. CONCLUSIONS: The currently used predictive equations overestimate RMR in 10- to 16-year-old children. The use of the newly developed equations is recommended.

Lottery Action, September 26-October 9, Vol. 12, no. 18

Iowa Lottery newsletter for lottery retailers