Shakespeare's tragedy of King Richard the Third,

Mode of access: Internet.

Memoirs of King Richard the Third and some of his contemporaries, with an historical drama on the battle of Bosworth.

Mode of access: Internet.

The troublesome raigne of John, king of England. The first quarto, 1591, which Shakspere rewrote (about 1595) as his "Life and death of King John"...

"Forewords" to pt. II contain extracts from the sources of the play(Hall's and Holinshed's chronicles) : p. iii-xxxviii.

The autobiography and correspondence of Mary Granville, Mrs. Delany : with interesting reminiscences of King George the Third and Queen Charlotte /

Mode of access: Internet.

The autobiography and correspondence of Mary Granville, Mrs. Delany : with interesting reminiscences of King George the Third and Queen Charlotte /

Mode of access: Internet.

Dzieje panowania Zygmunta III : Króla polskiego, wielkiego księcia litewskiego, itd. /

Includes bibliographical references and index.

King Edward III : an historical drama /

"Errata": p. xv.

The tragedie of King Richard the third : contayning his treacherous plots against his brother Clarence: the pittifull murder of his innocent nephewes: his tyrannicall vsurpation: with the whole course of his detested life, and most deserued death. As it hath been lately acted by the kings maiesties seruants /

Mode of access: Internet.

Lives of the Hanoverian queens of England.

I. Sophia Dorothea of Celle, wife of George I. Caroline of Ansbach, queen of George II.--II. Charlotte Sophia of Mecklenburg-Strelitz, queen of George III. Amelia Elizabeth Caroline of Brunswick, queen of George IV. Adelaide f Saxe Meiningen, queen of William IV.

The royal dukes and princesses of the family of George III. A view of court life and manners for seventy years, 1760-1830.

Mode of access: Internet.

Evaluation of piezoelectric PVDF polymers for use in space environments. III. Comparison of the effects of vacuum UV and gamma radiation

Films of piezoelectric PVDF and P(VDF-TrFE) were exposed to vacuum UV (115-300 nm VUV) and -radiation to investigate how these two forms of radiation affect the chemical, morphological, and piezoelectric properties of the polymers. The extent of crosslinking was almost identical in both polymers after -irradiation, but surprisingly, was significantly higher for the TrFE copolymer after VUV-irradiation. Changes in the melting behavior were also more significant in the TrFE copolymer after VUV-irradiation due to both surface and bulk crosslinking, compared with only surface crosslinking for the PVDF films. The piezoelectric properties (measured using d33 piezoelectric coefficients and D-E hysteresis loops) were unchanged in the PVDF homopolymer, while the TrFE copolymer exhibited more narrow D-E loops after exposure to either - or VUV-radiation. The more severe damage to the TrFE copolymer in comparison with the PVDF homopolymer after VUV-irradiation is explained by different energy deposition characteristics. The short wavelength, highly energetic photons are undoubtedly absorbed in the surface layers of both polymers, and we propose that while the longer wavelength components of the VUV-radiation are absorbed by the bulk of the TrFE copolymer causing crosslinking, they are transmitted harmlessly in the PVDF homopolymer.

Phase III study of matrix metalloproteinase inhibitor prinomastat in non-small-cell lung cancer

Purpose: Matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) degrade extracellular proteins and facilitate tumor growth, invasion, metastasis, and angiogenesis. This trial was undertaken to determine the effect of prinomastat, an inhibitor of selected MMPs, on the survival of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), when given in combination with gemcitabine-cisplatin chemotherapy. Patients and Methods: Chemotherapy-naive patients were randomly assigned to receive prinomastat 15 mg or placebo twice daily orally continuously, in combination with gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m2 days 1 and 8 plus cisplatin 75 mg/m2 day 1, every 21 days for up to six cycles. The planned sample size was 420 patients. Results: Study results at an interim analysis and lack of efficacy in another phase III trial prompted early closure of this study. There were 362 patients randomized (181 on prinomastat and 181 on placebo). One hundred thirty-four patients had stage IIIB disease with T4 primary tumor, 193 had stage IV disease, and 34 had recurrent disease (one enrolled patient was ineligible with stage IIIA disease). Overall response rates for the two treatment arms were similar (27% for prinomastat v 26% for placebo; P = .81). There was no difference in overall survival or time to progression; for prinomastat versus placebo patients, the median overall survival times were 11.5 versus 10.8 months (P = .82), 1-year survival rates were 43% v 38% (P = .45), and progression-free survival times were 6.1 v 5.5 months (P = .11), respectively. The toxicities of prinomastat were arthralgia, stiffness, and joint swelling. Treatment interruption was required in 38% of prinomastat patients and 12% of placebo patients. Conclusion: Prinomastat does not improve the outcome of chemotherapy in advanced NSCLC. © 2005 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.

A phase III trial of docetaxel/carboplatin versus mitomycin C/ifosfamide/ cisplatin (MIC) or mitomycin C/vinblastine/cisplatin (MVP) in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer : a randomised multicentre trial of the British Thoracic Oncology Group (BTOG1)

Background: Phase III studies suggest that non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with cisplatin-docetaxel may have higher response rates and better survival compared with other platinum-based regimens. We report the final results of a randomised phase III study of docetaxel and carboplatin versus MIC or MVP in patients with advanced NSCLC. Patients and methods: Patients with biopsy proven stage III-IV NSCLC not suitable for curative surgery or radiotherapy were randomised to receive four cycles of either DCb (docetaxel 75 mg/m 2, carboplatin AUC 6), or MIC/MVP (mitomycin 6 mg/m 2, ifosfamide 3 g/m 2 and cisplatin 50 mg/m 2 or mitomycin 6 mg/ m 2, vinblastine 6 mg/m 2 and cisplatin 50 mg/m 2, respectively), 3 weekly. The primary end point was survival, secondary end points included response rates, toxicity and quality of life. Results: The median follow-up was 17.4 months. Overall response rate was 32% for both arms (partial response = 31%, complete response = 1%); 32% of MIC/MVP and 26% of DCb patients had stable disease. One-year survival was 39% and 35% for DCb and MIC/MVP, respectively. Two-year survival was 13% with both arms. Grade 3/4 neutropenia (74% versus 43%, P < 0.005), infection (18% versus 9%, P = 0.01) and mucositis (5% versus 1%, P = 0.02) were more common with DCb than MIC/MVP. The MIC/MVP arm had significant worsening in overall EORTC score and global health status whereas the DCb arm showed no significant change. Conclusions: The combination of DCb had similar efficacy to MIC/MVP but quality of life was better maintained. © 2006 European Society for Medical Oncology.

Phase III trial of gemcitabine and carboplatin versus mitomycin, ifosfamide, and cisplatin or mitomycin, vinblastine, and cisplatin in patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung carcinoma

BACKGROUND. The authors compared gemcitabine and carboplatin (GC) with mitomycin, ifosfamide, and cisplatin (MIC) or mitomycin, vinblastine, and cisplatin (MVP) in patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC). The primary objective was survival. Secondary objectives were time to disease progression, response rates, evaluation of toxicity, disease-related symptoms, World Health Organization performance status (PS), and quality of life (QoL). METHODS. Three hundred seventy-two chemotherapy-naïve patients with International Staging System Stage III/IV NSCLC who were ineligible for curative radiotherapy or surgery were randomized to receive either 4 cycles of gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 on Days 1, 8, and 15) plus carboplatin (area under the serum concentration-time curve, 5; given on Day 1) every 4 weeks (the GC arm) or MIC/MVP every 3 weeks (the MIC/MVP arm). RESULTS. There was no significant difference in median survival (248 days in the MIC/MVP arm vs. 236 days in the GC arm) or time to progression (225 days in the MIC/MVP arm vs. 218 days in the GC arm) between the 2 treatment arms. The 2-year survival rate was 11.8% in the MIC/MVP arm and 6.9% in the GC arm. The 1-year survival rate was 32.5% in the MIC/MVP arm and 33.2% in the GC arm. In the MIC/MVP arm, 33% of patients responded (4 complete responses [CRs] and 57 partial responses [PRs]) whereas in the GC arm, 30% of patients responded (3 CRs and 54 PRs). Nonhematologic toxicity was comparable for patients with Grade 3-4 symptoms, except there was more alopecia among patients in the MIC/MVP arm. GC appeared to produce more hematologic toxicity and necessitated more transfusions. There was no difference in performance status, disease-related symptoms, of QoL between patients in the two treatment arms. Fewer inpatient stays for complications were required with GC. CONCLUSIONS. The results of the current study failed to demonstrate any difference in efficacy between the newer regimen of GC and the older regimens of MIC and MVP. © 2003 American Cancer Society.

Treatment rationale study design for the MetLung trial : a randomized, double-blind phase III study of onartuzumab (MetMAb) in combination with erlotinib versus erlotinib alone in patients who have received standard chemotherapy for stage IIIB or IV met-positive non-small-cell lung cancer

We present the treatment rationale and study design of the MetLung phase III study. This study will investigate onartuzumab (MetMAb) in combination with erlotinib compared with erlotinib alone, as second- or third-line treatment, in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who are Met-positive by immunohistochemistry. Approximately 490 patients (245 per treatment arm) will receive erlotinib (150 mg oral daily) plus onartuzumab or placebo (15 mg/kg intravenous every 3 weeks) until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, patient or physician decision to discontinue, or death. The efficacy objectives of this study are to compare overall survival (OS) (primary endpoint), progression-free survival, and response rates between the 2 treatment arms. In addition, safety, quality of life, pharmacokinetics, and translational research will be investigated across treatment arms. If the primary objective (OS) is achieved, this study will provide robust results toward an alternative treatment option for patients with Met-positive second- or third-line NSCLC. © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved.