40,917 research outputs found
Solar Power in the Garden State
No full textThis special issue on energy and solar power in New Jersey was made possible because of the extensive portfolio of research centers and institutes at the Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy. Dr. Frank A. Felder, an Associate Research Professor, has been director of the School’s Center for Energy, Economic & Environmental Policy (CEEEP) since 2006. Frank is a nuclear engineer with a PhD degree from MIT, and he, along with his CEEEP colleague, Shankar N. Chandramowli, coauthored the main article in this issue of the Advance & Rutgers Report. CEEEP has worked extensively with the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities on projects, including New Jersey’s current Energy Master Plan.Shining Brightly: Bloustein's Centers of Excellence / by James W. Hughes and Joseph S. Seneca -- Solar Power in the Garden States / by Shankar N. Chandramowli and Frank A. Felder.Guest contributors include Shankar N. Chandramowli and Frank A. Felder, PhD, Director—Center for Energy, Economic and Environmental Policy at the Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public PolicyReports published as Issue Paper Number 5, May 2011, in Advance & Rutgers Report, Special Issue
Evidence for the decay B0→J/ψω and measurement of the relative branching fractions of meson decays to J/ψη and J/ψη′
No full textFirst evidence of the B 0 → J / ψ ω decay is found and the B s 0 → J / ψ η and B s 0 → J / ψ η ′ decays are studied using a dataset corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 1.0 fb -1 collected by the LHCb experiment in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of sqrt(s) = 7 TeV. The branching fractions of these decays are measured relative to that of the B 0 → J / ψ ρ 0 decay:frac(B (B 0 → J / ψ ω), B (B 0 → J / ψ ρ 0)) = 0.89 ± 0.19 (stat) - 0.13 + 0.07 (syst),frac(B (B s 0 → J / ψ η), B (B 0 → J / ψ ρ 0)) = 14.0 ± 1.2 (stat) - 1.5 + 1.1 (syst) - 1.0 + 1.1 (frac(f d, f s)),frac(B (B s 0 → J / ψ η ′), B (B 0 → J / ψ ρ 0)) = 12.7 ± 1.1 (stat) - 1.3 + 0.5 (syst) - 0.9 + 1.0 (frac(f d, f s)), where the last uncertainty is due to the knowledge of f d / f s, the ratio of b-quark hadronization factors that accounts for the different production rate of B 0 and B s 0 mesons. The ratio of the branching fractions of B s 0 → J / ψ η ′ and B s 0 → J / ψ η decays is measured to befrac(B (B s 0 → J / ψ η ′), B (B s 0 → J / ψ η)) = 0.90 ± 0.09 (stat) - 0.02 + 0.06 (syst)
The vanishing author in computer-generated works: a critical analysis of recent Australian case law
No full textAbstract
The use of software is ubiquitous in the creation of many copyright works, yet the requirement in copyright law that every work have a human author who engages in independent intellectual effort means that its use may prevent copyright subsistence. Several recent Australian cases have refocused attention on authorship as an essential criterion of copyright subsistence, and these cases suggest that much computer-produced output may be authorless and thus lack copyright protection. This article, the first in a two-part series, analyses how each case deals with the question of authorship of computer-produced works and why the use of software diminishes copyright protection for a significant number of computer-generated works. The article critiques the application of conventional notions of human authorship developed in the pre-computer age to modern productions and suggests alternative approaches to authorship that satisfy both the major objectives of copyright policy and the need to adapt to the computer age. The article argues that, without a broader judicial approach to authorship of computer-generated works, Parliament must remedy the lacuna in protection for these ‘authorless’ works. Possible solutions for reform are suggested. In a forthcoming article, the author comprehensively examines those reform proposals
Measurement of the time-dependent CP asymmetry in B0 -> J/ψ KS0 decays
No full textThis Letter reports a measurement of the CP violation observables SJ/ψK0S and CJ/ψK0S in the decay channel B0→J/ψK0S performed with 1.0 fb−1 of pp collisions at s√=7 TeV collected by the LHCb experiment. The fit to the data yields SJ/ψK0S=0.73±0.07(stat)±0.04(syst) and CJ/ψK0S=0.03±0.09(stat)±0.01(syst). Both values are consistent with the current world averages and within
expectations from the Standard Model
Poetry Reading by Raina J. Le??n
No full textThis event is sponsored by Critical Race, Gender and Sexuality Studies (CRGS) Department, The HSU Diversity Program Funding, the HSU Library, and the English Department.Raina J. Le??n is the author of two prize-wining poetry collections, Canticle of Idols, and Boogeyman Dawn. Her third book, dis(locate), will be released in 2016. She will read in the Library Fishbowl on Wednesday, March 4 at Noon. She is a founding editor of The Acentos Review, an online journal devoted to Latino and Latina arts. She is a member of the Carolina African American Writers Collective, and a fellow of Cave Canem and CantoMundo. She is an assistant professor of education at Saint Mary???s College of California
Measurement of the ratio of prompt χ c to J / ψ production in pp collisions at √s = 7 TeV
No full textThe prompt production of charmonium χ c and J / ψ states is studied in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of √s = 7 TeV at the Large Hadron Collider. The χ c and J / ψ mesons are identified through their decays χ c → J / ψ γ and J / ψ → μ + μ - using 36 pb - 1 of data collected by the LHCb detector in 2010. The ratio of the prompt production cross-sections for χ c and J / ψ, σ (χ c → J / ψ γ) / σ (J / ψ), is determined as a function of the J / ψ transverse momentum in the range 2 < p T J / ψ < 15 GeV / c. The results are in excellent agreement with next-to-leading order non-relativistic expectations and show a significant discrepancy compared with the colour singlet model prediction at leading order, especially in the low p T J / ψ region
Abstract IA11: Chemoprevention in hereditary GI cancer syndromes
No full textAbstract
Chemoprevention offers an attractive option to prevent the occurrence of cancer in high risk cancer syndromes, such as familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) and Lynch syndrome. However, data, especially from clinical trials, is sparse. This presentation will review the state of art concepts of chemoprevention in regards to these hereditary GI cancer syndromes.
Lynch Syndrome: In the randomized CAPP2 trial, 861 participants with Lynch syndrome took either daily aspirin (600 mg) or placebo for up to 4 years; the primary endpoint was the development of CRC (1). After a mean follow-up of 55.7 months, participants taking daily aspirin for at least 2 years had a 63% reduction in the incidence of CRC (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.37; 95% CI, 0.18–0.78; P = .008). These participants also saw a reduced risk from all Lynch syndrome cancers (IRR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.25–0.72; P = .001). Risk of colorectal neoplasia was unaffected, and there was no protection seen for participants who completed &lt;2 years of the intervention. Subgroup analyses from this trial showed that the association between obesity and CRC in patients with Lynch syndrome may be attenuated by taking daily aspirin (2). However, limitations of the CAPP2 trial highlight the need for larger and long-term randomized trials in this area (3, 4). Similar findings have been reported in an observational study from the Colon Cancer Family Registry. In 1,858 patients who have Lynch syndrome, aspirin use was associated with reduced risk of CRC, for both patients who took aspirin for 5 or more years (HR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.10—0.62; P = .003) and between 1 month and 4.9 years (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.27—0.90; P = .02), compared to those who took aspirin for less than 1 month (5)
Based on the limited evidence above, we suggest that aspirin may be used to prevent cancer in patients with Lynch syndrome, but it is emphasized that the optimal dose is currently unknown. This is consistent with the stance of the American Gastroenterological Association (6). In contrast, the American College of Gastroenterology does not recommend standard use of aspirin for chemoprevention (7). Many expert clinics advise their patients with LS to use either 81 mg or 300 mg per day of Aspirin, which may provide a chemopreventive benefit while reducing the likelihood of side effects (ie. peptic ulcer disease, gastrointestinal bleeding, hemorrhagic stroke)—but again this dosing has yet to be shown to be effective in clinical trials. The CAPP3 trial which is currently enrolling participants in Europe will involve a double blind dose non-inferiority trial comparing 100, 300 or 600 mg daily in 3,000 Lynch syndrome gene carriers and will provide much needed clarity, however not for at least 5 years.
Familial Adenomatous Polyposis: FAP has always been first and foremost a surgical disease, whose treatment with colectomy has long been known to reduce the risk of premature death. Because prophylactic colectomy carries appreciable short and long-term complications, there has always been a desire to reduce polyp burden and potentially delay surgical intervention through the use of medication. However, most of the clinical trials efforts to date have dealt with patients who have already undergone prophylactic colectomy and in whom recurrent adenomas in the retained rectum are being managed. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents have been the most commonly employed chemopreventive agents, with sulindac being the most extensively studied and clinically used. Review of all the historical clinical trials is beyond the scope of this paper but we will selectively highlight the most significant. The most influential and often cited study supporting the use of sulindac is a relatively small but controlled trial by Giardiello et al. 22 FAP patients (18 of whom had not yet undergone colectomy) were treated for 9 months with sulindac at a dose of 150 mg twice a day and assessed at intervals of 3 months (8). A 56% reduction in adenoma count and 65% reduction in average adenoma diameter were observed. However, no complete adenoma regression was observed and regrowth occurred by 3 months following discontinuation of sulindac, implying the need for continuous therapy. Similar findings have been shown in a number of other studies, varying the dose of the sulindac or route of delivery and length of follow-up (9-11). There is concern that sulindac therapy changes the morphology of adenomas from protruding to flat lesions and that such lesions continue to serve as precursors for CRC development but are more difficult to visualize and remove with optic colonoscopy (12, 13). Celecoxib, a selective Cox-2 inhibitor which potentially has the advantage of reduced gastrointestinal side effects, was found to have an adenoma regression effect only at higher doses of 400 mg twice a day. However, the Food and Drug Administration indication of FAP for Celebrex was withdrawn recently due to a failure to perform a postmarketing study intended to verify clinical benefit.
Sulindac, though not available in all countries, is used in the US at a dose of 150 mg twice daily primarily for the control of polyposis in the retained rectum of patients with FAP who have already undergone a colectomy with an IRA or an IPAA with a rectal cuff. It is imperative that these patients continue to undergo annual surveillance due to the risk of subsequent cancers.
Patients with FAP are also at greatly increased risk for duodenal neoplasia, with duodenal adenomas eventually forming in &gt;50% of patients and duodenal adenocarcinoma occurring in up to 12% (14, 15). Following colectomy, duodenal adenocarcinoma is the leading cause of cancer death in these patients, and prevention of duodenal adenocarcinomas by endoscopic surveillance with polyp resection, duodenectomy, Whipple surgical procedure, and ampullectomy are often challenging and suboptimal (16). NSAIDs have much less efficacy in duodenal adenomas (17, 18). A recent trial involving 92 FAP patients randomized to therapy with dual COX and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibition, with sulindac 150 mg twice daily and erlotinib 75 mg daily respectively, reported a 71% decrease in duodenal polyp burden after 6 months of therapy (19). However, the frequency of side effects, primarily an acne-like rash, may limit the use of these medications at the doses used in this study. Follow-up clinical trials with EGFR inhibition are now underway to explore reduced dosing options to mitigate these side effects while retaining chemopreventive efficacy.
References
1. Burn J, Mathers JC, Bishop DT. Chemoprevention in Lynch syndrome. Familial cancer. 2013;12(4):707-18. Epub 2013/07/25.
2. Movahedi M, Bishop DT, Macrae F, Mecklin JP, Moeslein G, Olschwang S, et al. Obesity, Aspirin, and Risk of Colorectal Cancer in Carriers of Hereditary Colorectal Cancer: A Prospective Investigation in the CAPP2 Study. J Clin Oncol. 2015. Epub 2015/08/19.
3. Cleland JG. Does aspirin really reduce the risk of colon cancer? Lancet. 2012;379(9826):1586; author reply 7. Epub 2012/05/01.
4. Jankowski J, Barr H, Moayyedi P. Does aspirin really reduce the risk of colon cancer? Lancet. 2012;379(9826):1586-7; author reply 7. Epub 2012/05/01.
5. Ait Ouakrim D, Dashti SG, Chau R, Buchanan DD, Clendenning M, Rosty C, et al. Aspirin, Ibuprofen, and the Risk of Colorectal Cancer in Lynch Syndrome. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2015;107(9). Epub 2015/06/26.
6. Rubenstein JH, Enns R, Heidelbaugh J, Barkun A. American Gastroenterological Association Institute Guideline on the Diagnosis and Management of Lynch Syndrome. Gastroenterology. 2015;149(3):777-82; quiz e16-7. Epub 2015/08/01.
7. Syngal S, Brand RE, Church JM, Giardiello FM, Hampel HL, Burt RW. ACG clinical guideline: Genetic testing and management of hereditary gastrointestinal cancer syndromes. Am J Gastroenterol. 2015;110(2):223-62; quiz 63. Epub 2015/02/04.
8. Giardiello FM, Hamilton SR, Krush AJ, Piantadosi S, Hylind LM, Celano P, et al. Treatment of colonic and rectal adenomas with sulindac in familial adenomatous polyposis. The New England journal of medicine. 1993;328(18):1313-6.
9. Winde G, Gumbinger HG, Osswald H, Kemper F, Bunte H. The NSAID sulindac reverses rectal adenomas in colectomized patients with familial adenomatous polyposis: clinical results of a dose-finding study on rectal sulindac administration. International journal of colorectal disease. 1993;8(1):13-7. Epub 1993/03/01.
10. Winde G, Schmid KW, Schlegel W, Fischer R, Osswald H, Bunte H. Complete reversion and prevention of rectal adenomas in colectomized patients with familial adenomatous polyposis by rectal low-dose sulindac maintenance treatment. Advantages of a low-dose nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug regimen in reversing adenomas exceeding 33 months. Diseases of the colon and rectum. 1995;38(8):813-30. Epub 1995/08/01.
11. Cruz-Correa M, Hylind LM, Romans KE, Booker SV, Giardiello FM. Long-term treatment with sulindac in familial adenomatous polyposis: a prospective cohort study. Gastroenterology. 2002;122(3):641-5. Epub 2002/03/05.
12. Lynch HT, Thorson AG, Smyrk T. Rectal cancer after prolonged sulindac chemoprevention. A case report. Cancer. 1995;75(4):936-8. Epub 1995/02/15.
13. Matsumoto T, Nakamura S, Esaki M, Yao T, Iida M. Effect of the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug sulindac on colorectal adenomas of uncolectomized familial adenomatous polyposis. Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology. 2006;21(1 Pt 2):251-7. Epub 2006/02/08.
14. Jasperson KW, Tuohy TM, Neklason DW, Burt RW. Hereditary and familial colon cancer. Gastroenterology. 2010;138(6):2044-58. Epub 2010/04/28.
15. Biasco G, Pantaleo MA, Di Febo G, Calabrese C, Brandi G, Bulow S. Risk of duodenal cancer in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. Gut. 2004;53(10):1547; author reply Epub 2004/09/14.
16. Conio M, Gostout CJ. Management of duodenal adenomas in 98 patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. Gastrointestinal endoscopy. 2001;53(2):265-6. Epub 2001/03/30.
17. Debinski HS, Trojan J, Nugent KP, Spigelman AD, Phillips RK. Effect of sulindac on small polyps in familial adenomatous polyposis. Lancet. 1995;345(8953):855-6. Epub 1995/04/01.
18. Nugent KP, Farmer KC, Spigelman AD, Williams CB, Phillips RK. Randomized controlled trial of the effect of sulindac on duodenal and rectal polyposis and cell proliferation in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. The British journal of surgery. 1993;80(12):1618-9. Epub 1993/12/01.
19. Samadder NJ, Neklason DW, Boucher KM, Byrne KR, Kanth P, Samowitz W, et al. Effect of Sulindac and Erlotinib vs Placebo on Duodenal Neoplasia in Familial Adenomatous Polyposis: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association. 2016;315(12):1266-75. Epub 2016/03/24.
Citation Format: N. Jewel Samadder. Chemoprevention in hereditary GI cancer syndromes. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference on Colorectal Cancer: From Initiation to Outcomes; 2016 Sep 17-20; Tampa, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(3 Suppl):Abstract nr IA11.</jats:p
Pyridine ylide formation by capture of phenylchlorocarbene and tert-butylchlorocarbene. Reaction rates of an alkylchlorocarbene by laser flash photolysis
No full textPT: J; CR: BARCUS RL, 1986, J AM CHEM SOC, V108, P3928 CHATGILIALOGLU C, 1982, J AM CHEM SOC, V104, P5124 GOULD IR, 1985, TETRAHEDRON, V41, P1587 GRILLER D, 1984, J AM CHEM SOC, V106, P2227 LIU MTH, 1985, TETRAHEDRON LETT, V26, P3071 MOSS RA, 1981, TETRAHEDRON LETT, V38, P3749 SOUNDARARAJAN N, IN PRESS J AM CHEM S SOUNDARARAJAN N, IN PRESS TETRAHEDRON SOUNDARARAJAN N, UNPUB TURRO NJ, 1985, J ORG CHEM, V50, P4417 TURRO NJ, 1987, J AM CHEM SOC, V109, P2101 ZUGRAVESCU I, 1976, N YLID CHEM; NR: 12; TC: 144; J9: J AMER CHEM SOC; PG: 2; GA: P5279Source type: Electronic(1
Measurement of the CP-violating phase \phi s in Bs->J/\psi\pi+\pi- decays
No full textMeasurement of the mixing-induced CP-violating phase phi_s in Bs decays is of prime importance in probing new physics. Here 7421 +/- 105 signal events from the dominantly CP-odd final state J/\psi pi+ pi- are selected in 1/fb of pp collision data collected at sqrt{s} = 7 TeV with the LHCb detector. A time-dependent fit to the data yields a value of phi_s=-0.019^{+0.173+0.004}_{-0.174-0.003} rad, consistent with the Standard Model expectation. No evidence of direct CP violation is found
In-vitro formation, disposition and toxicity of n-acetoxy-sulffamethoxazole, a potential mediator of sulfamethoxazole toxicity
No full textVariation in the formation and disposition of the hydroxylamine of (SMX-HA) is thought to play an important role in the pathogenesis of sulfamethoxazole(SMX)-induced idiosyncratic adverse drug reactions. We hypothesized that, in analogy to carcinogenic arylamines, SMX-HA might be further converted to an electrophilic N-acetoxy metabolite which could play a role in mediating SMX toxicity. Accordingly, we chemically synthesized N-acetoxy-SMX, and examined the characteristics of its formation, metabolism, cytotoxicity and mutagenicity in human and bacterial test systems. The human arylamine N-acetyltransferases, (NAT)1 and NAT2, were capable of converting SMX-HA to N-acetoxy-SMX. NAT1 and NAT2 possessed similar affinities for SMX-HA (apparent K-m values of 650 and 520 mu M, respectively), but the apparent maximal velocity of the NAT1-mediated acetylation was higher than that of NAT2. (1332 vs. 37 nmol/min/U of immunoreactive NAT protein). Human peripheral blood mononuclear cells 12,000 x g supernatant fractions converted N-acetoxy-SMX mainly back to SMX-HA, and also to a lesser extent to SMX, at clinically relevant concentrations. Similar pathways were observed in human hepatic cytosolic fractions. In a cytotoxicity assay, N-acetoxy-SMX was significantly more toxic to human peripheral blood mononuclear cells than SMX-HA (16.6 vs. 11.5% dead cells at a concentration of 300 mu M). N-acetoxy-SMX was weakly mutagenic to the Salmonella typhimurium TA100 strain in the Ames test. These data suggest that the N-acetoxy metabolites of sulfonamides could potentially play a role in mediating sulfonamide idiosyncratic adverse drug reactions.PT: J; CR: BRADFORD MM, 1976, ANAL BIOCHEM, V72, P248 CRIBB AE, 1990, DRUG METAB DISPOS, V18, P784 CRIBB AE, 1990, VET RES COMMUN, V14, P241 CRIBB AE, 1991, DRUG METAB DISPOS, V19, P900 CRIBB AE, 1991, J PHARMACOL EXP THER, V259, P1241 CRIBB AE, 1991, MOL PHARMACOL, V38, P744 CRIBB AE, 1992, CLIN PHARMACOL THER, V51, P522 CRIBB AE, 1993, BIOCHEM PHARMACOL, V45, P1277 DUPRET JM, 1992, J BIOL CHEM, V267, P7381 FAMULOK M, 1989, ANGEW CHEM INT EDIT, V28, P337 GRANT DM, 1990, J CLIN INVEST, V85, P968 GRANT DM, 1991, MOL PHARMACOL, V39, P184 GRANT DM, 1992, CANCER RES, V52, P1 HANNA PE, 1985, BIOACTIVATION FOREIG, P375 HEIN DW, 1987, CARCINOGENESIS, V8, P1767 HEIN DW, 1993, CARCINOGENESIS, V14, P1633 MCMANUS ME, 1989, CLIN EXP PHARMACOL P, V16, P491 RIEDER MJ, 1987, J PHARMACOL EXP THER, V244, P724 RIEDER MJ, 1989, ANN INTERN MED, V110, P286 RIEDER MJ, 1991, CLIN PHARMACOL THER, V49, P13 RILEY RJ, 1991, BIOCHEM PHARMACOL, V42, P696 SHEAR NH, 1985, CAN J PHYSIOL PHARM, V63, P1370 SHEAR NH, 1986, ANN INTERN MED, V105, P179 SPIELBERG SP, 1980, J PHARMACOL EXP THER, V213, P395 THOMPSON DC, 1992, MUTAT RES, V279, P83; NR: 25; TC: 21; J9: J PHARMACOL EXP THER; PG: 6; GA: RV893Source type: Electronic(1
- …
