| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Kristan, M., et al.
(författare)
-
The Eighth Visual Object Tracking VOT2020 Challenge Results
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Computer Vision. - Cham : Springer International Publishing. - 9783030682378 ; , s. 547-601
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- The Visual Object Tracking challenge VOT2020 is the eighth annual tracker benchmarking activity organized by the VOT initiative. Results of 58 trackers are presented; many are state-of-the-art trackers published at major computer vision conferences or in journals in the recent years. The VOT2020 challenge was composed of five sub-challenges focusing on different tracking domains: (i) VOT-ST2020 challenge focused on short-term tracking in RGB, (ii) VOT-RT2020 challenge focused on “real-time” short-term tracking in RGB, (iii) VOT-LT2020 focused on long-term tracking namely coping with target disappearance and reappearance, (iv) VOT-RGBT2020 challenge focused on short-term tracking in RGB and thermal imagery and (v) VOT-RGBD2020 challenge focused on long-term tracking in RGB and depth imagery. Only the VOT-ST2020 datasets were refreshed. A significant novelty is introduction of a new VOT short-term tracking evaluation methodology, and introduction of segmentation ground truth in the VOT-ST2020 challenge – bounding boxes will no longer be used in the VOT-ST challenges. A new VOT Python toolkit that implements all these novelites was introduced. Performance of the tested trackers typically by far exceeds standard baselines. The source code for most of the trackers is publicly available from the VOT page. The dataset, the evaluation kit and the results are publicly available at the challenge website (http://votchallenge.net ).
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- Banys-Paluchowski, M, et al.
(författare)
-
Surgical Management of the Axilla in Clinically Node-Positive Breast Cancer Patients Converting to Clinical Node Negativity through Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Current Status, Knowledge Gaps, and Rationale for the EUBREAST-03 AXSANA Study
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Cancers. - : MDPI AG. - 2072-6694. ; 13:7
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In the last two decades, surgical methods for axillary staging in breast cancer patients have become less extensive, and full axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) is confined to selected patients. In initially node-positive patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy, however, the optimal management remains unclear. Current guidelines vary widely, endorsing different strategies. We performed a literature review on axillary staging strategies and their place in international recommendations. This overview defines knowledge gaps associated with specific procedures, summarizes currently ongoing clinical trials that address these unsolved issues, and provides the rationale for further research. While some guidelines have already implemented surgical de-escalation, replacing ALND with, e.g., sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) or targeted axillary dissection (TAD) in cN+ patients converting to clinical node negativity, others recommend ALND. Numerous techniques are in use for tagging lymph node metastasis, but many questions regarding the marking technique, i.e., the optimal time for marker placement and the number of marked nodes, remain unanswered. The optimal number of SLNs to be excised also remains a matter of debate. Data on oncological safety and quality of life following different staging procedures are lacking. These results provide the rationale for the multinational prospective cohort study AXSANA initiated by EUBREAST, which started enrollment in June 2020 and aims at recruiting 3000 patients in 20 countries (NCT04373655; Funded by AGO-B, Claudia von Schilling Foundation for Breast Cancer Research, AWOgyn, EndoMag, Mammotome, and MeritMedical).
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Lange, C., et al.
(författare)
-
Perspectives for personalized therapy for patients with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Journal of Internal Medicine. - : WILEY. - 0954-6820 .- 1365-2796. ; 284:2, s. 163-188
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- According to the World Health Organization (WHO), tuberculosis is the leading cause of death attributed to a single microbial pathogen worldwide. In addition to the large number of patients affected by tuberculosis, the emergence of Mycobacterium tuberculosis drug-resistance is complicating tuberculosis control in many high-burden countries. During the past 5years, the global number of patients identified with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB), defined as bacillary resistance at least against rifampicin and isoniazid, the two most active drugs in a treatment regimen, has increased by more than 20% annually. Today we experience a historical peak in the number of patients affected by MDR-TB. The management of MDR-TB is characterized by delayed diagnosis, uncertainty of the extent of bacillary drug-resistance, imprecise standardized drug regimens and dosages, very long duration of therapy and high frequency of adverse events which all translate into a poor prognosis for many of the affected patients. Major scientific and technological advances in recent years provide new perspectives through treatment regimens tailor-made to individual needs. Where available, such personalized treatment has major implications on the treatment outcomes of patients with MDR-TB. The challenge now is to bring these adances to those patients that need them most.
|
|
| 9. |
- Pearce, Neil E, et al.
(författare)
-
IARC Monographs : 40 Years of Evaluating Carcinogenic Hazards to Humans
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Journal of Environmental Health Perspectives. - : Environmental Health Perspectives. - 0091-6765 .- 1552-9924. ; 123:6, s. 507-514
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Recently the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Programme for the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans has been criticized for several of its evaluations, and also the approach used to perform these evaluations. Some critics have claimed that IARC Working Groups' failures to recognize study weaknesses and biases of Working Group members have led to inappropriate classification of a number of agents as carcinogenic to humans.OBJECTIVES: The authors of this paper are scientists from various disciplines relevant to the identification and hazard evaluation of human carcinogens. We have examined here criticisms of the IARC classification process to determine the validity of these concerns. We review the history of IARC evaluations and describe how the IARC evaluations are performed.DISCUSSION: We conclude that these recent criticisms are unconvincing. The procedures employed by IARC to assemble Working Groups of scientists from the various discipline and the techniques followed to review the literature and perform hazard assessment of various agents provide a balanced evaluation and an appropriate indication of the weight of the evidence. Some disagreement by individual scientists to some evaluations is not evidence of process failure. The review process has been modified over time and will undoubtedly be altered in the future to improve the process. Any process can in theory be improved, and we would support continued review and improvement of the IARC processes. This does not mean, however, that the current procedures are flawed.CONCLUSIONS: The IARC Monographs have made, and continue to make, major contributions to the scientific underpinning for societal actions to improve the public's health.
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
