10 research outputs found
A rare case of oral multisystem Langerhans cell histiocytosis
No full textLangerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH) is a rare disorder characterized by high proliferation of Langerhans dendritic cells. LCH is a solitary or multifocal disease that primarily involves bone tissue and often affects children and young men. A 29 years-old Caucasian man was referred to the Oral Surgery Unit of George Eastman Hospital - Umberto I teaching hospital, with third degree mobility of teeth belonging to second, third and fourth quadrant. Panoramic radiograph showed multiple radiolucent areas with well demarcated borders on the right and left site of the mandible and on the left site of the maxilla. Extractions of compromised teeth and biopsy of the osteolytic tissue were performed. The final diagnosis of multisystem Langerhans cell histiocytosis of the soft and hard tissues of the oral cavity was made. The patient was sent to the Hematology department of Umberto I Teaching Hospital of ?Sapienza? ? University of Rome for the proper treatment. The present case of rare multisystem LCH involving oral hard and soft tissues shows the strong importance of better investigate, with appropriate additional exams, initial shifty symptoms that could lead to a misdiagnosis
Pneumonectomy with en bloc chest wall resection: is it worthwhile? Report on 34 patients from two institutions
No full textOBJECTIVESPneumonectomy with en bloc chest wall resection is often denied because of the procedure-related high risk. We evaluated the short- and long-term outcome of this procedure.METHODSFrom January 1995 to October 2011, 34 patients (30 males and 4 females; mean age: 61.8 years) underwent pneumonectomy with en bloc chest wall resection for 33 non-small-cell lung cancer and 1 metastatic osteosarcoma in two institutions. Data were retrospectively reviewed.RESULTSOperative (30-day) mortality was 2.9% (1 of 34), and morbidity was 38.2% (13 of 34). There were 14 (41.1%) right-side procedures and 20 (58.8%) left-side procedures. Three (8.8%) patients developed bronchopleural fistulas. The mean number of resected ribs per patient was 2.7 ± 1.1. In 13 (38.2%) patients, a prosthetic reconstruction of the chest wall was needed. In 3 (8.8%) cases, the bronchial step was buttressed. Preoperative pain was statistically significantly related to the depth of chest wall invasion (P = 0.026). The N status was N0 in 18 (52.9%) cases, N1 in 9 (26.4%), N2 in 6 (17.6%) and Nx in 1 (metastatic osteosarcoma). Patients were followed-up for a total of 979 months. The median survival was 40 months. The overall 5-year survival was 46.8% (±95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.2-0.6): 45.2 (±95% CI: 0.03-0.8) for right-side and 48.4% (±95% CI: 0.2-0.7) for left-side procedures, respectively. According to the N status, the 5-year survival was 59.7 (±95% CI: 0.3-0.8) in N0, 55.5 (±95% CI: 0.06-1) in N1 and 16.6% (±95% CI: 0-0.4) in N2. The subgroup N0 plus N1 (27 patients) showed a 58.08% (±95% CI: 0.3-0.8) 5-year survival compared with 16.6% (±95% CI: 0-0.4) in N2 (χ2: 3.7; P = 0.053). CONCLUSIONSPneumonectomy with en bloc chest wall reconstruction can be safely offered to selected patients. The addition of en bloc chest wall resection to pneumonectomy does not affect operative mortality and morbidity compared with standard pneumonectomy. The pivotal additional effect of the chest wall resection should not be considered a contraindication for such procedures. Survival showed a clinically relevant difference by comparing N0 plus N1 with N2 (58.1 vs 16.6%), not confirmed by the statistical analysis (P = 0.053). © 2013 The Author. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. All rights reserved
Attribute Inference Attacks in Online Multiplayer Video Games: A Case Study on DOTA2
No full textDid you know that over 70 million of Dota2 players have their in-game data freely accessible? What if such data is used in malicious ways? This paper is the first to investigate such a problem. Motivated by the widespread popularity of video games, we propose the first threat model for Attribute Inference Attacks (AIA) in the Dota2 context. We explain how (and why) attackers can exploit the abundant public data in the Dota2 ecosystem to infer private information about its players. Due to lack of concrete evidence on the efficacy of our AIA, we empirically prove and assess their impact in reality. By conducting an extensive survey on 500 Dota2 players spanning over 26k matches, we verify whether a correlation exists between a player's Dota2 activity and their real-life. Then, after finding such a link (p < 0.01 and ρ > 0.3), we ethically perform diverse AIA. We leverage the capabilities of machine learning to infer real-life attributes of the respondents of our survey by using their publicly available in-game data. Our results show that, by applyingdomain expertise, some AIA can reach up to 98% precision and over 90% accuracy. This paper hence raises the alarm on a subtle, but concrete threat that can potentially affect the entire competitive gaming landscape. We alerted the developers of Dota2. Green Open Access added to TU Delft Institutional Repository ‘You share, we take care!’ – Taverne project https://www.openaccess.nl/en/you-share-we-take-care Otherwise as indicated in the copyright section: the publisher is the copyright holder of this work and the author uses the Dutch legislation to make this work public.Cyber Securit
Dolmetschqualität aus Sicht der Dolmetscher/innen und Nutzer/innen
No full textDas Ziel der vorliegenden Masterarbeit ist es, die Erwartungen der Dolmetscher/innen sowie der Nutzer/innen an das Simultandolmetschen und an die Rollenauffassungen bezüglich des Dolmetscher/inberufs zu untersuchen. Nach einer kurzen Einführung betreffend das Simultandolmetschen und die Rolle des/r Dolmetschers/in, wird auf den Qualitätsbegriff insbesondere auf die verschiedenen Darstellungen einer hochqualitativer Simultandolmetschung eingegangen. Dabei wird die Qualität als soziales Konstrukt, dessen Wahrnehmung sich in Abhängigkeit von Kontext und Blickwinkel ändert, dargestellt. Die Dolmetschqualität wird außerdem mit Blick auf ihre Messung in Zusammenhang mit den für den empirischen Teil ausgewählten Qualitätsparametern und Störfaktoren in Verbindung gesetzt, wobei diesbezüglich relevante Forschungsergebnisse im Dolmetschbereich erörtert werden. Es folgt eine Beschreibung der Arbeiten von Bühler (1986), Kopczyńsky (1994), Collados Aís (1998) und Pöch-hacker/Zwischenberger (2010), die als grundlegende Basis für die Ausarbeitung des für die vorliegende Masterarbeit erstellten Fragebogens, welcher mit dem Einsatz der webgestützten Plattform Google Formulare verfasst wurde, dienten. Nach der Auswertung der Ergebnisse kann die Hypothese betreffend die Übereinstimmung der Erwartungen der Dolmetscher/innen und jenen der Nutzer/innen bestätigen, während hingegen der Einfluss soziodemographischer Faktoren nicht nachgewiesen werden konnte.The present master thesis aims to investigate interpreters’ and users’ expectations in regard to quality in simultaneous interpretation as well as to the role of the interpreter. After a short introduction about simultaneous interpretation and the role of the interpreter, this master thesis describes the concept of quality with particular focus on different perspectives on what makes a high qualitative simultaneous interpretation. In this regard, quality is presented as a social construct, whose perception changes depending on context and perspective. Moreover, interpretation quality has been linked with respect to its assessment to the quality criteria and irritating factors chosen for the empirical part of this master thesis. It follows the presentation of studies carried out by Bühler (1986), Kopczyńsky (1994), Collados Aís (1998) and Pöchhacker/Zwischenberger (2010), which constitute the basis for the elaboration on the online platform Google Forms of the questionnaire created for this master thesis. After analysing the test results, the author can confirm her hypothesis regarding the congruence of interpreters’ and users’ expectations, whereas the influence of sociodemographic factors could not be demonstrated
IPOL: Image Processing On Line
No full text<p>Presented at the Oxford Future of Science conference "Rigour and Openness in 21st Century Science", 2013-04-11, Oxford, UK</p>
<p> </p>
<p>It’s clear that software is important in modern science. It’s used to SOLVE real scientific problems in a variety of fields ranging from physics, to medicine and economics. However research software is not like general purpose equipment (like a telescopes or compilers). Research software is usually made by scientist for scientists, tailored to a concrete experimental process. So this code is not meant to be released nor published and even less reviewed. Nevertheless the research code is very important, since it embodies the process itself. So the research software is key for attaining a truly reproducible research.</p>
<p>In this talk I’m going to share our experience with IPOL: an on-line journal for image processing, a journal that publishes algorithm descriptions along with the code that implement them. IPOL follows the open access and reproducible research models. Since it is a journal, the code is also peer-reviewed to verify that it corresponds to the algorithm description.</p>
<p>The distinguishing characteristic of IPOL articles is that each article also includes an on-line demo that permits to easily test the code with new data and parameters from the web, and a public archive that stores all original test data used in the demo. Both the demo and the archive provide great insight into the algorithm inner workings and limitations, facilitating the experimentation and leading in the end to a stricter verification of the algorithm.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Derived from a presentation of N. Limare: http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.155649</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p><br>---------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>Speech (RAW):<br>---------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>1. In this talk I’m going to share our experience with IPOL: an on-line journal for image processing, which follows the open access and reproducible research models.</p>
<p>2. Software. It’s clear that software is important in modern science. It’s used to SOLVE real scientific problems in a variety of fields ranging from physics, to medicine and economics.</p>
<p>3. However research software is not like general purpose equipment (like a telescope).<br>Research software is usually made by scientist for scientists, tailored to a concrete experimental process. So this code is not meant to be released nor published and even less reviewed.</p>
<p>4. (REPRODUCIBLE RESEARCH RECOGNIZES THE IMPORTANCE OF SOFTWARE)<br>But the research code is very important, since it embodies the process itself so the results are linked to it. So the research software is key for attaining a truly reproducible research.<br>Note that theoretical sciences have proofs, experimental sciences procedures but computational sciences have:<br>(in many occasions) incomplete descriptions, missing steps and/or data and missing pre/post processes.</p>
<p>5. These observations led to the emergence of many reproducible research initiatives. Which are aimed at making available to the community the missing data and/or code.</p>
<p>6. And the science code manifesto proposes five principles concerning: copyright, citation, credit and curation of code, which should be followed when software is used in (open) science.</p>
<p>7. And there’s the open access, which is important by itself. However I will not expand on it. Let me just recommend a 9-minute video from Jorge Cham (the author of phdcomics) in which is explained what open access is about. And it is very clear about it.</p>
<p>8-11. Now, what’s wrong with traditional articles? In the field of image processing (which is the one I know) the articles usually describe some algorithm and then show some results. But rarely provide a way to reproduce these results (the code). As you can image this is suspicious.<br>But what are the reasons to hide the software?<br>I can only imagine 3 reasons.<br>* The first is to keep a competitive “advantage” with respect to other researchers. But in that case the optimal strategy whould be not publishing at all.<br>* The second is that the author believes the code is not proper enough or not ready to be seen.<br>* And the third is to prevent the incorrect use by miss-setting the parameters, and then claiming that it doesn’t work.</p>
<p>12-13. So the question is: Can we convince researchers to share their code? The key is to understand why researchers publish in the first place. Ideally research should be as depicted on the left: “sharing for the greater good”. But in practice we know that the depiction of the right is more faithful to reality. The circumstances that got us here aren’t important now.<br>I just want to remark that a way to convince the researchers is here.</p>
<p>14-15. (CREATE INCENTIVE)<br>With a less dramatic representation, we can depict the traditional feedback loop in which the researcher publishes its findings and the community “rewards” him with cites.<br>However until recently there were no incentive for the researcher to publish any code.<br>Can we promote a similar feedback process for the research code?<br>The anwert is Yes! (maybe) Following the ideas of the manifesto. First we need to be able to cite the code, and then we need to “convince” the community that code is also a form of publication.</p>
<p>16. IPOL implements the first step. It is a research journal for image processing that publishes algorithm descriptions along with the code that implement them.<br>Since it is a journal, the code is also peer-reviewed to verify that it corresponds to the algorithm description. And to verify that follows some basic guidelines for ensuring correctness documentation and portability.</p>
<p>17. The goal of IPOL is to provide reference implementations for classical and new image processing algorithms.<br>IPOL is not a prototype, in fact it’s been running since 2011.<br>IPOL is a true journal with DOI ISSN and international editorial committee, we hace a partnership with a SIAM journal for publishing on both journals.</p>
<p>Lastly, let me say that IPOL came into existence because no other journal did it.</p>
<p>18-20. So, What’s in the box? Each ipol article comprehends three parts:<br>* an algorithm description, and the code. The description is like a standard pdf article and the code has been peer-reviewed to assure that corresponds to the description.<br>* the second part is an on-line demo, this interface permits to easily test the code with new data and parameters from the web.<br>* and last but not least ipol stores a public archive of original test data used in the demo.<br>This archive provides a great insight into the applicability of the algorithm and its limitations, which are usually spotted looking at the experiments made by other users.</p>
<p>21-22. Producing the on line demo requires some effort but it’s worth it. As it facilitates the experimentation and in the end leads to stricter verification of the claims about the algorithm. Sometimes it’s hard to compile, setup and run the code, while with the demo that’s immediate.</p>
<p>23. As for 2013 IPOL has 30 published articles, and 20 more in preparation. It has a sustained activity and its building momentum.</p>
<p>24. On the good side IPOL:<br>* provides reference implementations,<br>* And since it implies a deep analysis of the algorithm it usually leads to improvements,<br>* and the reviewers usually contribute to improve code and algorithms</p>
<p>25-26. (AWARENESS OF LIMITATIONS)<br>The challenges. It remains an asymmetry between the effort needed to publish the code and the reward. To address this we need on one hand, to facilitate the preparation of articles (which is technical), and on the other improve the community response (which is social).<br>Also there exists the issue that reproducible is not necessarily reusable. Reproducible code is not aimed at reusing. A possible way to reduce the complexity associated with the preparation of the demo is to team-up with web designers or visualization scientists.</p>
<p>27-28. If you want a single take home message from IPOL let it be:<br>"the on-line demo and achieve allow for a faster experimentation and stricter validation of the results.</p>
<p>Thank you for your attention.</p>
<p><br>---------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>Presentation points:<br>---------------------------------------------------------------------------</p>
<p>SOFTWARE IS EVERYWHERE</p>
<p>REPRODUCIBLE RESEARCH RECOGNIZES THE IMPORTANCE OF SOFTWARE</p>
<p>NOT THE FIRST TIME THAT THIS HAS BEEN NOTICED (OTHER INITIATIVES)</p>
<p>WHAT’S WRONG WITH TRADITIONAL RESEARCH AND THE CODE</p>
<p>RESEARCH OBJECTIVES : Researchers are not interested in sharing code</p>
<p>RESEARCH OBJECTIVES: CREATE INCENTIVE FOR SHARING THE CODE</p>
<p>IPOL: PUBLISHES ALGORITHMS (3 pieces): [DESCRIPTION+CODE]+DEMO+ARCHIVE</p>
<p>IPOL: GROWING</p>
<p>OPEN ACCESS BET</p>
<p>CHALLENGES: DEMO PRODUCTION, REUSABILITY, CODE REVIEW C</p>
<p>CHALLENGES: CREATE THE HABIT OF PUBLISHING THE CODE<br>---------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>---------------------------------------------------------------------------</p>
<p> </p
Erratum: The Cancer Genome Atlas Comprehensive Molecular Characterization of Renal Cell Carcinoma (Cell Reports (2018) 23(1) (313–326.e5) (S2211124718304364) (10.1016/j.celrep.2018.03.075))
No full text(Cell Reports 23, 313–326; April 3, 2018) In the originally published version of this article, the author list contained two errors. Specifically, David J. Kwiatkowski was misspelled as David J. Kwaitkowski, and William Y. Kim was inadvertently written as William T. Kim. Both names have been corrected online. The authors regret this error
The Immune Landscape of Cancer (Immunity (2018) 48 (812–832), (S1074-7613(18)30121-3), (10.1016/j.immuni.2018.03.023))
No full text(Immunity 48, 812–830.e1–e14; April 17, 2018) In the originally published version of this article, the authors neglected to include Younes Mokrab and Aaron M. Newman as co-authors and misspelled the names of authors Charles S. Rabkin and Ilya Shmulevich. The author names have been corrected here and online. In addition, the concluding sentence of the subsection “Immune Signature Compilation” in the Method Details in the original published article was deemed unclear because it did not specify differences among the gene set scoring methods. The concluding sentences now reads “Gene sets from Bindea et al., Senbabaoglu et al., and the MSigDB C7 collection were scored using single-sample gene set enrichment (ssGSEA) analysis (Barbie et al., 2009), as implemented in the GSVA R package (Hänzelmann et al., 2013). All other signatures were scored using methods found in the associated citations.
Best practices for the management of thymic epithelial tumors: A position paper by the Italian collaborative group for ThYmic MalignanciEs (TYME)
No full textThymic epithelial tumors (TETs) are a heterogenous group of rare tumors, with a complex histopatological classification. Furthermore, the recent introduction of the first TNM staging system, that is scheduled to replace the Masaoka-Koga system, may create further difficulties in TET management, that remains challenging. Several guidelines for treatment of TETs are available and provide recommendations based mainly on non randomized trials and retrospective or limited series. Often the lack of evidence leads to formulation of indications based on expert opinions. As for other rare cancers it is crucial to create networks to coordinate the work among centres involved in treatment of these diseases in order to offer the best diagnostic and therapeutic tools. For this purpose, in 2014 a network named TYME (ThYmic MalignanciEs), was founded in Italy with the aim of improving care and research in TETs. In September 2017 a panel of multidisciplinary experts from TYME network and from other Italian centres strongly involved in TET diagnosis and treatment convened a first Italian Expert meeting together with representatives of association for patients affected by rare thoracic cancers Tu.To.R, to explore how these tumors are managed in the different centres of Italy compared to ESMO guidelines. In this paper we summarize the issues discussed during that meeting and we propose recommandations based on Masaoka Koga and the new TNM staging system
Comprehensive molecular characterization of the Hippo signaling pathway in cancer
No full textHippo signaling has been recognized as a key tumor suppressor pathway. Here, we perform a comprehensive molecular characterization of 19 Hippo core genes in 9,125 tumor samples across 33 cancer types using multidimensional “omic” data from The Cancer Genome Atlas. We identify somatic drivers among Hippo genes and the related microRNA (miRNA) regulators, and using functional genomic approaches, we experimentally characterize YAP and TAZ mutation effects and miR-590 and miR-200a regulation for TAZ. Hippo pathway activity is best characterized by a YAP/TAZ transcriptional target signature of 22 genes, which shows robust prognostic power across cancer types. Our elastic-net integrated modeling further reveals cancer-type-specific pathway regulators and associated cancer drivers. Our results highlight the importance of Hippo signaling in squamous cell cancers, characterized by frequent amplification of YAP/TAZ, high expression heterogeneity, and significant prognostic patterns. This study represents a systems-biology approach to characterizing key cancer signaling pathways in the post-genomic era
