1,720,999 research outputs found
A patient with AL amyloidosis with negative free light chain results
No full texthttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2667789
A workflow management system for the biological samples exchange within the amyloidosis network
No full textA phase 2 trial of pomalidomide and dexamethasone rescue treatment in patients with AL amyloidosis
No full textSequential response-driven bortezomib-based therapy followed by autologous stem cell transplant in AL amyloidosis
No full textAutologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) is highly effective in selected patients with light chain (AL) amyloidosis. Bortezomib, preceding or following ASCT, improves responses. Satisfactory responses, including at least a partial response, very good partial response (VGPR) with organ response, or complete response, can be observed after induction therapy alone. We report 139 patients treated upfront with cyclophosphamide/bortezomib/dexamethasone (CyBorD), followed by ASCT only if response was unsatisfactory. Only 1 treatment-related death was observed. After CyBorD, hematologic response (HR) rate was 68% (VGPR or better, 51%), with 45% satisfactory responses. Transplant was performed in 55 (40%) subjects and resulted in an 80% HR rate (65% >= VGPR). Five-year survival was 86% and 84% in patients treated with ASCT or CyBorD alone, respectively (P = .438). Also, 6- and 12-month landmark analyses did not show differences in survival. Duration of response was not different in the 2 groups (60 vs 49 months; P = .670). Twenty-one (15%) patients with an unsatisfactory response to CyBorD could not undergo ASCT because of ineligibility or refusal; instead, they received rescue chemotherapy, with HR in 38% of cases and 51% 5-year survival. This sequential response-driven approach, offering ASCT to patients who do not attain satisfactory response to upfront CyBorD, is very safe and effective in AL amyloidosis
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Full text linkWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Full text linkWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
- …
