| 21. |
- Fukui, Akihiko, et al.
(författare)
-
TOI-2285b: A 1.7 Earth-radius planet near the habitable zone around a nearby M dwarf
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Publication of the Astronomical Society of Japan. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 2053-051X .- 0004-6264. ; 74:1, s. L1-L8
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- We report the discovery of TO1-2285b, a sub-Neptune-sized planet transiting a nearby (42 pc) M dwarf with a period of 27.3 d. We identified the transit signal from the Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite photometric data, which we confirmed with ground-based photometric observations using the multiband imagers MuSCAT2 and MuSCAT3. Combining these data with other follow-up observations including high-resolution spectroscopy with the Tillinghast Reflector Echelle Spectrograph, high-resolution imaging with the SPeckle Polarimeter, and radial velocity (RV) measurements with the InfraRed Doppler instrument, we find that the planet has a radius of 1.74 +/- 0.08 R-circle plus, a mass of <19.5 M-circle plus + (95% c.I.), and an insolation flux of 1.54 +/- 0.14 times that of the Earth. Although the planet resides just outside the habitable zone for a rocky planet, if the planet harbors an H2O layer under a hydrogen-rich atmosphere, then liquid water could exist on the surface of the H2O layer depending on the planetary mass and water mass fraction. The bright host star in the near-infrared (K-s = 9.0) makes this planet an excellent target for further RV and atmospheric observations to improve our understanding of the composition, formation, and habitability of sub-Neptune-sized planets.
|
|
| 22. |
|
|
| 23. |
- Wegwarth, O, et al.
(författare)
-
What do European women know about their female cancer risks and cancer screening? A cross-sectional online intervention survey in five European countries
- 2018
-
Ingår i: BMJ open. - : BMJ. - 2044-6055. ; 8:12, s. e023789-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Informed decisions about cancer screening require accurate knowledge regarding cancer risks and screening. This study investigates: (1) European women’s knowledge of their risk of developing breast, ovarian, cervical or endometrial cancer, (2) their knowledge about mammography screening and (3) whether an evidence-based leaflet improves their knowledge.DesignCross-sectional online intervention survey.SettingNational samples from five European countries (Czech Republic, Germany, UK, Italy and Sweden)—drawn from the Harris Interactive and the Toluna panel, respectively, in January 2017—were queried on their knowledge of age-specific risks of developing breast, cervical, ovarian or endometrial cancer within the next 10 years and of mammography screening before and after intervention.ParticipantsOf 3629 women (inclusion criteria: age 40–75 years) invited, 2092 responded and 1675 completed the survey (response rate: 61.4%).InterventionEvidence-based leaflet summarising information on age-adjusted female cancer risks, mammography and aspects of cancer prevention.Primary outcome measuresProportion of women (1) accurately estimating their risk of four female cancers, (2) holding correct assumptions of mammography screening and (3) changing their estimations and assumptions after exposure to leaflet.FindingsAcross countries, 59.2% (95% CI 56.8% to 61.6%) to 91.8% (95% CI 90.3% to 93.0%) overestimated their female cancer risks 7–33 fold (mediansacross tumours: 50.0 to 200.0). 26.5% (95% CI 24.4% to 28.7%) were aware that mammography screening has both benefits and harms. Women who accurately estimated their breast cancer risk were less likely to believe that mammography prevents cancer (p<0.001). After leaflet intervention, knowledge of cancer risks improved by 27.0 (95% CI 24.9 to 29.2) to 37.1 (95% CI 34.8 to 39.4) percentage points and of mammography by 23.0 (95% CI 21.0 to 25.1) percentage points.ConclusionA considerable number of women in five European countries may not possess the prerequisites for an informed choice on cancer screening. Evidence-based information in patient leaflets can improve this situation.
|
|
| 24. |
|
|
| 25. |
|
|
| 26. |
|
|
| 27. |
- Curigliano, G, et al.
(författare)
-
De-escalating and escalating treatments for early-stage breast cancer: the St. Gallen International Expert Consensus Conference on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2017.
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology. - : Elsevier BV. - 1569-8041. ; 28:8, s. 1700-1712
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The 15th St. Gallen International Breast Cancer Conference 2017 in Vienna, Austria reviewed substantial new evidence on loco-regional and systemic therapies for early breast cancer. Treatments were assessed in light of their intensity, duration and side-effects, seeking where appropriate to escalate or de-escalate therapies based on likely benefits as predicted by tumor stage and tumor biology. The Panel favored several interventions that may reduce surgical morbidity, including acceptance of 2 mm margins for DCIS, the resection of residual cancer (but not baseline extent of cancer) in women undergoing neoadjuvant therapy, acceptance of sentinel node biopsy following neoadjuvant treatment of many patients, and the preference for neoadjuvant therapy in HER2 positive and triple-negative, stage II and III breast cancer. The Panel favored escalating radiation therapy with regional nodal irradiation in high-risk patients, while encouraging omission of boost in low-risk patients. The Panel endorsed gene expression signatures that permit avoidance of chemotherapy in many patients with ER positive breast cancer. For women with higher risk tumors, the Panel escalated recommendations for adjuvant endocrine treatment to include ovarian suppression in premenopausal women, and extended therapy for postmenopausal women. However, low-risk patients can avoid these treatments. Finally, the Panel recommended bisphosphonate use in postmenopausal women to prevent breast cancer recurrence. The Panel recognized that recommendations are not intended for all patients, but rather to address the clinical needs of the majority of common presentations. Individualization of adjuvant therapy means adjusting to the tumor characteristics, patient comorbidities and preferences, and managing constraints of treatment cost and access that may affect care in both the developed and developing world.
|
|
| 28. |
|
|
| 29. |
|
|
| 30. |
|
|
