| 1. |
- McDonnell, J.J., et al.
(författare)
-
How old is streamwater? : Open questions in catchment transit time conceptualization, modelling and analysis
- 2010
-
Ingår i: Hydrological Processes. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 0885-6087 .- 1099-1085. ; 24:12, s. 1745-1754
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The time water spends travelling subsurface through a catchment to the stream network (i.e. the catchment water transit time) fundamentally describes the storage, flow pathway heterogeneity and sources of water in a catchment. The distribution of transit times reflects how catchments retain and release water and solutes that in turn set biogeochemical conditions and affect contamination release or persistence. Thus, quan- tifying the transit time distribution provides an important constraint on biogeochemical processes and catchment sensitivity to anthropogenic inputs, contamination and land-use change. Although the assumptions and limitations of past and present transit time modelling approaches have been recently reviewed (McGuire and McDonnell, 2006), there remain many fundamental research challenges for understanding how transit time can be used to quantify catchment flow processes and aid in the development and testing of rainfall–runoff models. In this Commen- tary study, we summarize what we think are the open research questions in transit time research. These thoughts come from a 3-day workshop in January 2009 at the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna. We attempt to lay out a roadmap for this work for the hydrological commu- nity over the next 10 years. We do this by first defining what we mean (qualitatively and quantitatively) by transit time and then organize our vision around needs in transit time theory, needs in field studies of tran- sit time and needs in rainfall – runoff modelling. Our goal in presenting this material is to encourage widespread use of transit time information in process studies to provide new insights to catchment function and to inform the structural development and testing of hydrologic models.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Rodesch, G, et al.
(författare)
-
Editorial: «Interventional Neuroradiology: a Neuroscience sub-specialty?»
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences. - : SAGE Publications. - 1591-0199. ; 19:4, s. 521-523
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Interventional Neuroradiology (INR) is not bound by the classical limits of a speciality, and is not restricted by standard formats of teaching and education. Open and naturally linked towards neurosciences, INR has become a unique source of novel ideas for research, development and progress allowing new and improved approaches to challenging pathologies resulting in better anatomo-clinical results. Opening INR to Neurosciences is the best way to keep it alive and growing. Anchored in Neuroradiology, at the crossroad of neurosciences, INR will further participate to progress and innovation as it has often been in the past.
|
|
| 4. |
- Rodesch, G, et al.
(författare)
-
«Interventional Neuroradiology: a neuroscience sub-specialty?»
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences. - : SAGE Publications. - 1591-0199. ; 19:3, s. 263-265
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Interventional Neuroradiology (INR) is not bound by the classical limits of a speciality, and is not restricted by standard formats of teaching and education. Open and naturally linked towards neurosciences, INR has become a unique source of novel ideas for research, development and progress allowing new and improved approaches to challenging pathologies resulting in better anatomo-clinical results. Opening INR to Neurosciences is the best way to keep it alive and growing. Anchored in Neuroradiology, at the crossroad of neurosciences, INR will further participate to progress and innovation as it has often been in the past.
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- Buitenkamp, Trudy D., et al.
(författare)
-
Acute lymphoblastic leukemia in children with Down syndrome : a retrospective analysis from the Ponte di Legno study group
- 2014
-
Ingår i: Blood. - : American Society of Hematology. - 0006-4971 .- 1528-0020. ; 123:1, s. 70-77
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Children with Down syndrome (DS) have an increased risk of B-cell precursor (BCP) acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). The prognostic factors and outcome of DS-ALL patients treated in contemporary protocols are uncertain. We studied 653 DS-ALL patients enrolled in 16 international trials from 1995 to 2004. Non-DS BCP-ALL patients from the Dutch Child Oncology Group and Berlin-Frankfurt-Munster were reference cohorts. DS-ALL patients had a higher 8-year cumulative incidence of relapse (26% +/- 2% vs 15% +/- 1%, P < .001) and 2-year treatment-related mortality (TRM) (7% +/- 1% vs 2.0% +/- < 1%, P < .0001) than non-DS patients, resulting in lower 8-year event-free survival (EFS) (64% +/- 2% vs 81% +/- 2%, P < .0001) and overall survival (74% +/- 2% vs 89% +/- 1%, P < .0001). Independent favorable prognostic factors include age <6 years (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.58, P = .002), white blood cell (WBC) count <10 x 10(9)/L (HR = 0.60, P = .005), and ETV6-RUNX1 (HR = 0.14, P = .006) for EFS and age (HR = 0.48, P < .001), ETV6-RUNX1 (HR = 0.1, P = .016) and high hyperdiploidy (HeH) (HR = 0.29, P = .04) for relapse-free survival. TRM was the major cause of death in ETV6-RUNX1 and HeH DS-ALLs. Thus, while relapse is the main contributor to poorer survival in DS-ALL, infection-associated TRM was increased in all protocol elements, unrelated to treatment phase or regimen. Future strategies to improve outcome in DS-ALL should include improved supportive care throughout therapy and reduction of therapy in newly identified good-prognosis subgroups.
|
|
