Prognostic factors in lymph node metastases of prostatic cancer patients: the size of the metastases but not extranodal extension independently predicts survival

AIMS: To analyse tumour characteristics and the prognostic significance of prostatic cancers with extranodal extension of lymph node metastases (ENE) in 102 node-positive, hormone treatment-naive patients undergoing radical prostatectomy and extended lymphadenectomy. METHODS AND RESULTS: The median number of nodes examined per patient was 21 (range 9-68), and the median follow-up time was 92 months (range 12-191). ENE was observed in 71 patients (70%). They had significantly more, larger and less differentiated nodal metastases, paralleled by significantly larger primary tumours at more advanced stages and with higher Gleason scores than patients without ENE. ENE defined a subgroup with significantly decreased biochemical recurrence-free (P = 0.038) and overall survival (P = 0.037). In multivariate analyses the diameter of the largest metastasis and Gleason score of the primary tumour were independent predictors of survival. CONCLUSIONS: ENE in prostatic cancer is an indicator lesion for advanced/aggressive tumours with poor outcome. However, the strong correlation with larger metastases suggests that ENE may result from their size, which was the only independent risk factor in the metastasizing component. Consequently, histopathological reports should specify the true indicator of poor survival in the lymphadenectomy specimens, which is the size of the largest metastasis in each patient.

Writing center handbooks and travel guidebooks : redesigning instructional texts for multicultural, multilingual, and multinational contexts

In an increasingly interconnected world characterized by the accelerating interplay of cultural, linguistic, and national difference, the ability to negotiate that difference in an equitable and ethical manner is a crucial skill for both individuals and larger social groups. This dissertation, Writing Center Handbooks and Travel Guidebooks: Redesigning Instructional Texts for Multicultural, Multilingual, and Multinational Contexts, considers how instructional texts that ostensibly support the negotiation of difference (i.e., accepting and learning from difference) actually promote the management of difference (i.e., rejecting, assimilating, and erasing difference). As a corrective to this focus on managing difference, chapter two constructs a theoretical framework that facilitates the redesign of handbooks, guidebooks, and similar instructional texts. This framework centers on reflexive design practices and is informed by literacy theory (Gee; New London Group; Street), social learning theory (Wenger), globalization theory (Nederveen Pieterse), and composition theory (Canagarajah; Horner and Trimbur; Lu; Matsuda; Pratt). By implementing reflexive design practices in the redesign of instructional texts, this dissertation argues that instructional texts can promote the negotiation of difference and a multicultural/multilingual sensibility that accounts for twenty-first century linguistic and cultural realities. Informed by the theoretical framework of chapter two, chapters three and four conduct a rhetorical analysis of two forms of instructional text that are representative of the larger genre: writing center coach handbooks and travel guidebooks to Hong Kong. This rhetorical analysis reveals how both forms of text employ rhetorical strategies that uphold dominant monolingual and monocultural assumptions. Alternative rhetorical strategies are then proposed that can be used to redesign these two forms of instructional texts in a manner that aligns with multicultural and multilingual assumptions. These chapters draw on the work of scholars in Writing Center Studies (Boquet and Lerner; Carino; DiPardo; Grimm; North; Severino) and Technical Communication (Barton and Barton; Dilger; Johnson; Kimball; Slack), respectively. Chapter five explores how the redesign of coach handbooks and travel guidebooks proposed in this dissertation can be conceptualized as a political act. Ultimately, this dissertation argues that instructional texts are powerful heuristic tools that can enact social change if they are redesigned to foster the negotiation of difference and to promote multicultural/multilingual world views.

Low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma with inferior vena cava tumor thrombus and intracardiac extension: radical resection may improve recurrence free survival

BACKGROUND: Endometrial stromal sarcoma (ESS) represents 0.2% of all uterine malignancies. Based on the mitotic activity, a distinction is made between low and high-grade ESS. Although the overall five-year survival rate for low-grade ESS exceeds 80%, about 50% of the patients show tumor recurrence, mostly after a long latency period. Tumor invasion of the great vessels is extremely rare. We describe a patient with advanced low-grade ESS with tumor invasion of the infrarenal aorta and the inferior vena cava. The patient presented with a large tumor thrombus extending from the inferior vena cava into the right atrium. METHODS: Review of literature and identification of 19 patients, including our own case report, with advanced low-grade ESS with invasion of the great vessels and formation of an inferior vena cava tumor thrombus. RESULTS: All 19 patients presented with an abdominal tumor mass and a tumor thrombus protruding into the inferior vena cava. The tumor thrombus extended into the right heart cavities in nine patients reaching the right atrium in four, the right ventricle in three and the pulmonary artery in two patients. There were 5 patients with an advanced primary tumor and 14 patients with an advanced recurrent tumor. Seven patients presented with synchronous metastatic disease and six patients with a pelvic tumor infiltrating the bladder, the rectosigmoid colon or the infrarenal aorta. Mean age at surgery was 45.9+/-12.3 years (median 47, range 25-65 years). Tumor thrombectomy was accomplished by cavatomy or by right atriotomy after installation of a cardiopulmonary bypass. There was no peri-operative mortality and a very low morbidity. Radical tumor resections were achieved in 10 patients. The follow-up for these 10 patients was 2+/-1.3 years (median 2, range 0.3-4.5 years). Nine patients remained recurrence free whereas one patient suffered an asymptomatic local recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Low-grade ESS is a rare angioinvasive tumor with a high recurrence rate. Resection of an inferior vena cava tumor thrombus, even with extension into the right heart cavities, can be performed safely. Extensive radical surgery is therefore justified in the treatment of advanced tumor manifestations of a low-grade ESS potentially improving recurrence free survival.

STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA)--an extension of the STROBE statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modelling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed, but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct or analysis.

STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association Studies (STREGA)--an extension of the STROBE statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modelling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

Strengthening the reporting of genetic association studies (STREGA): an extension of the strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence, the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association (STREGA) studies initiative builds on the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modeling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed, but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association Studies (STREGA): an extension of the STROBE statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modelling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA): an extension of the STROBE Statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information into the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the STrengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modeling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and issues of data volume that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

Strengthening the reporting of genetic association studies (STREGA): an extension of the STROBE statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modeling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

Strengthening the reporting of genetic association studies (STREGA): an extension of the STROBE Statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modeling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

The use of extraoral implants for distal-extension removable dentures: a clinical evaluation up to 8 years

PURPOSE: This retrospective study reports the clinical outcome following placement of extraoral implants in severely resorbed posterior ridges to support distal-extension removable dentures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Consecutively treated patients with partially or completely edentulous ridges, with available bone height in the posterior region of 6 mm or less, were included in the study. Implants originally intended for extraoral use (Straumann) were placed in second molar regions and allowed to heal for 4 to 6 months before abutment connection. At recall appointments, the peri-implant hard and soft tissues were evaluated. Complications with implant components, as well as mechanical and structural failures of the prostheses, were recorded. Two-year survival rates were calculated and life table analyses undertaken. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients (19 women and 10 men; average age 61.2 years, range, 44 to 75 years) were included in the study. Forty-seven extraoral implants in 26 patients were placed in the second molar site of the mandible. Two extraoral implants in 2 patients failed during the osseointegration phase, yielding an 8-year cumulative success rate of 91.8%. The mean distance from the extraoral implants to the most distal tooth/implant was 28.1 mm (range, 16.7 to 39.2 mm). Twenty-three extraoral implants were restored with magnets, 18 with ball anchors, and 4 with conical cylinders. Replacement of abutments and retention elements was necessary in 2 patients. Four abutments in 2 patients were disconnected from the restorations. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limits of the employed research design, extraoral implants may be used successfully to provide support for distal-extension removable dentures in severely resorbed posterior alveolar ridges.

Interview and translation strategies: coping with multilingual settings and data

Central Eastern Europe, the research area this paper is concerned with, is a region characterized by a high diversity of languages and cultures. It is, at the same time, an area where political, cultural and social conflicts have emerged over time, nowadays especially in border zones, where people of different ethnic, cultural or linguistic background live. In this context, it is important for us researchers to get balanced interview data, and consequently we very often have to conduct interviews in several different languages and within changing cultural contexts. In order to avoid "communication problems" or even conflictual (interview) situations, which might damage the outcome of the research, we are thus challenged to find appropriate communication strategies for any of these situations. This is especially difficult when we are confronted with language or culture-specific terminology or taboo expressions that carry political meaning(s). Once the interview data is collected and it comes to translating and analysing it, we face further challenges and new questions arise. First of all, we have to decide what a good translation strategy would be. Many words and phrases that exist in one language do not have an exact equivalent in another. Therefore we have to find a solution for translating these expressions and concepts in a way that their meanings do not get "lost by translation". In this paper I discuss and provide insights to these challenges by presenting and discussing numerous examples from the region in question. Specifically, I focus on the deconstruction of the meaning of geographical names and politically loaded expressions in order to show the sensitivities of language, the difficulties of research in multilingual settings and with multilingual data as well as the strategies or "ways out" of certain dilemmas.