| 1. |
- Klein-Hessling, W., et al.
(author)
-
Conclusions on severe accident research priorities
- 2014
-
In: Annals of Nuclear Energy. - : Elsevier BV. - 0306-4549 .- 1873-2100. ; 74, s. 4-11
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The objectives of the SARNET network of excellence are to define and work on common research programs in the field of severe accidents in Gen. II-III nuclear power plants and to further develop common tools and methodologies for safety assessment in this area. In order to ensure that the research conducted on severe accidents is efficient and well-focused, it is necessary to periodically evaluate and rank the priorities of research. This was done at the end of 2008 by the Severe Accident Research Priority (SARP) group at the end of the SARNET project of the 6th Framework Programme of European Commission (FP6). This group has updated this work in the FP7 SARNET2 project by accounting for the recent experimental results, the remaining safety issues as e.g. highlighted by Level 2 PSA national studies and the results of the recent ASAMPSA2 FP7 project. These evaluation activities were conducted in close relation with the work performed under the auspices of international organizations like OECD or IAEA. The Fukushima-Daiichi severe accidents, which occurred while SARNET2 was running, had some effects on the prioritization and definition of new research topics. Although significant progress has been gained and simulation models (e.g. the ASTEC integral code, jointly developed by IRSN and GRS) were improved, leading to an increased confidence in the predictive capabilities for assessing the success potential of countermeasures and/or mitigation measures, most of the selected research topics in 2008 are still of high priority. But the Fukushima-Daiichi accidents underlined that research efforts had to focus still more to improve severe accident management efficiency.
|
|
| 2. |
- Longo, C., et al.
(author)
-
Delphi Consensus Among International Experts on the Diagnosis, Management, and Surveillance for Lentigo Maligna
- 2023
-
In: Dermatology Practical & Conceptual. - 2160-9381. ; 13:3
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Introduction: Melanoma of the lentigo maligna (LM) type is challenging. There is lack of consensus on the optimal diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up. Objectives: To obtain general consensus on the diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up for LM. Methods: A modified Delphi method was used. The invited participants were either members of the International Dermoscopy Society, academic experts, or authors of published articles relating to skin cancer and melanoma. Participants were required to respond across three rounds using a 4-point Likert scale). Consensus was defined as >75% of participants agreeing/strongly agreeing or disagreeing/strongly disagreeing. Results: Of the 31 experts invited to participate in this Delphi study, 29 participants completed Round 1 (89.9% response rate), 25/31 completed Round 2 (77.5% response rate), and 25/31 completed Round 3 (77.5% response rate). Experts agreed that LM diagnosis should be based on a clinical and dermatoscopic approach (92%) followed by a biopsy. The most appropriate primary treatment of LM was deemed to be margin-controlled surgery (83.3%), although non-surgical modalities, especially imiquimod, were commonly used either as alternative off-label primary treatment in selected patients or as adjuvant therapy following surgery; 62% participants responded life-long clinical follow-up was needed for LM. Conclusions: Clinical and histological diagnosis of LM is challenging and should be based on macroscopic, dermatoscopic, and RCM examination followed by a biopsy. Different treatment modalities and follow-up should be carefully discussed with the patient.
|
|
