Institution
Russian Railways
Government•Moscow, Russia•
About: Russian Railways is a government organization based out in Moscow, Russia. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Thyroid & Medicine. The organization has 318 authors who have published 259 publications receiving 2129 citations. The organization is also known as: Russian Railways & RŽD.
Topics: Thyroid, Medicine, Population, Voltage, Randomized controlled trial
Papers
More filters
••
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center1, Netherlands Cancer Institute2, Cleveland Clinic3, Institut Gustave Roussy4, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center5, University of Glasgow6, University of British Columbia7, University of Lyon8, Osaka University9, University of Ulsan10, Russian Railways11, McGill University12, Medical University of Vienna13, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust14, Georgetown University15, University of Tübingen16, Pfizer17, Harvard University18
TL;DR: Progression‐free survival was significantly longer with avelumab plus axitinib than with sunit inib among patients who received these agents as first‐line treatment for advanced renal‐cell carcinoma.
Abstract: Background In a single-group, phase 1b trial, avelumab plus axitinib resulted in objective responses in patients with advanced renal-cell carcinoma. This phase 3 trial involving previously...
1,597 citations
••
University of Brescia1, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust2, Mansoura University3, Ahmadu Bello University4, Başkent University5, Mustafa Kemal University6, Sakarya University7, Medical University Plovdiv8, Hadassah Medical Center9, UCLA Medical Center10, Sapienza University of Rome11, University of California, San Diego12, Central University, India13, Qatar Airways14, State University of Campinas15, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens16, Karadeniz Technical University17, Government Medical College, Thiruvananthapuram18, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki19, Erzincan University20, Hospital of Lithuanian University of Health Sciences Kaunas Clinics21, University of Belgrade22, Turku University Hospital23, Jubilee Mission Medical College and Research Institute24, Jagiellonian University Medical College25, LAC+USC Medical Center26, Inje University27, Edendale Hospital28, Mahidol University29, University Hospital Centre Zagreb30, University of the West Indies31, AHEPA University Hospital32, University of Ilorin33, King Abdullah University Hospital34, University of Valle35, SIDI36, King George's Medical University37, Bharati Vidyapeeth University38, Russells Hall Hospital39, Tan Tock Seng Hospital40, Russian Railways41, Jagiellonian University42, Tbilisi State Medical University43, University of Pécs44, Kocaeli University45, Memorial Hospital of South Bend46, Nankai University47
TL;DR: The results of the present study confirm the clinical value of imaging techniques and prognostic scores and confirm that appendectomy remains the most effective treatment of acute appendicitis.
Abstract: Acute appendicitis (AA) is the most common surgical disease, and appendectomy is the treatment of choice in the majority of cases. A correct diagnosis is key for decreasing the negative appendectomy rate. The management can become difficult in case of complicated appendicitis. The aim of this study is to describe the worldwide clinical and diagnostic work-up and management of AA in surgical departments. This prospective multicenter observational study was performed in 116 worldwide surgical departments from 44 countries over a 6-month period (April 1, 2016–September 30, 2016). All consecutive patients admitted to surgical departments with a clinical diagnosis of AA were included in the study. A total of 4282 patients were enrolled in the POSAW study, 1928 (45%) women and 2354 (55%) men, with a median age of 29 years. Nine hundred and seven (21.2%) patients underwent an abdominal CT scan, 1856 (43.3%) patients an US, and 285 (6.7%) patients both CT scan and US. A total of 4097 (95.7%) patients underwent surgery; 1809 (42.2%) underwent open appendectomy and 2215 (51.7%) had laparoscopic appendectomy. One hundred eighty-five (4.3%) patients were managed conservatively. Major complications occurred in 199 patients (4.6%). The overall mortality rate was 0.28%. The results of the present study confirm the clinical value of imaging techniques and prognostic scores. Appendectomy remains the most effective treatment of acute appendicitis. Mortality rate is low.
153 citations
••
TL;DR: Overall survival with the combination of lenalidomide, docetaxel, and prednisone was significantly worse than with docetAXel andprednisone for chemotherapy-naive men with metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer.
Abstract: Summary Background Patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer have few treatment options. We investigated the safety and efficacy of lenalidomide, an immunomodulatory agent with anti-angiogenic properties, in combination with docetaxel and prednisone in chemotherapy-naive patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Methods In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study, we randomly assigned chemotherapy-naive patients with progressive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer in a 1:1 ratio to receive docetaxel (75 mg/m 2 ) on day 1 and prednisone (5 mg twice daily) on days 1–21 and either lenalidomide (25 mg) or placebo once daily on days 1–14 of each 21 day treatment cycle. Permuted block randomisation was done with an interactive voice response system and stratified by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, geographic region, and type of disease progression. Clinicians, patients, and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Efficacy analysis was by intention to treat. Patients who received at least one dose of study drug were included in the safety analyses. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00988208. Findings 1059 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned between Nov 11, 2009, and Nov 23, 2011 (533 to the lenalidomide group and 526 to the control group), and 1046 patients received study treatment (525 in the lenalidomide group and 521 in the placebo group). At data cutoff (Jan 13, 2012) after a median follow-up of 8 months (IQR 5–12), 221 patients had died: 129 in the lenalidomide group and 92 in the placebo group. Median overall survival was 17·7 months (95% CI 14·8–18·8) in the lenalidomide group and not reached in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR] 1·53, 95% CI 1·17–2·00, p=0·0017). The trial was subsequently closed early due to futility. The number of deaths that occurred during treatment or less than 28 days since the last dose were similar in both groups (18 [3%] of 525 patients in the lenalidomide group vs 13 [2%] of 521 patients). 109 (21%) patients in the lenalidomide group and 78 (15%) in the placebo group died more than 28 days from last dose, mainly due to disease progression. At least one grade 3 or higher adverse event was reported in 381 (73%) of 525 patients receiving lenalidomide and 303 (58%) of 521 patients receiving placebo. Grade 3–4 neutropenia (114 [22%] for lenalidomide vs 85 [16%] for placebo), febrile neutropenia (62 [12%] vs 23 [4%]), diarrhoea (37 [7%] vs 12 [2%]), pneumonia (24 [5%] vs five [1%]), dyspnoea (22 [4%] vs nine [2%]), asthenia (27 [5%] vs 17 [3%]), and pulmonary embolism (32 [6%] vs seven [1%]) occurred more frequently in the lenalidomide group than in the placebo group. Interpretation Overall survival with the combination of lenalidomide, docetaxel, and prednisone was significantly worse than with docetaxel and prednisone for chemotherapy-naive men with metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer. Further research with this treatment combination is not warranted. Funding Celgene Corporation.
133 citations
••
TL;DR: By changing the types of ANN and the number of input factors applied, models were created that demonstrated 64-94% accuracy and the best accuracy was obtained with a neural networks topology of multilayer perceptron with two hidden layers for models included by both genetic and non-genetic CHD risk factors.
103 citations
••
TL;DR: A generalized approach to two-photon imaging of the papillary dermis components is proposed, which extends the capabilities of this technique in skin diagnosis and investigates the role of collagen I and elastin in the capillary structure.
Abstract: The papillary dermis of human skin is responsible for its biomechanical properties and for supply of epidermis with chemicals. Dermis is mainly composed of structural protein molecules, including collagen and elastin, and contains blood capillaries. Connective tissue diseases, as well as cardiovascular complications have manifestations on the molecular level in the papillary dermis (e.g. alteration of collagen I and III content) and in the capillary structure. In this paper we assessed the molecular structure of internal and external regions of skin capillaries using two-photon fluorescence lifetime imaging (FLIM) of endogenous compounds. It was shown that the capillaries are characterized by a fast fluorescence decay, which is originated from red blood cells and blood plasma. Using the second harmonic generation signal, FLIM segmentation was performed, which provided for spatial localization and fluorescence decay parameters distribution of collagen I and elastin in the dermal papillae. It was demonstrated that the lifetime distribution was different for the inner area of dermal papillae around the capillary loop that was suggested to be due to collagen III. Hence, we propose a generalized approach to two-photon imaging of the papillary dermis components, which extends the capabilities of this technique in skin diagnosis.
75 citations
Authors
Showing all 319 results
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Vladimir Semiglazov | 56 | 207 | 27217 |
Vadim A. Byvaltsev | 16 | 127 | 848 |
Ildar Muftahov | 8 | 22 | 187 |
Andrey A. Kalinin | 8 | 44 | 162 |
A. V. Gleim | 7 | 44 | 294 |
Yu. I. Gurfinkel | 7 | 27 | 120 |
M. L. Sasonko | 6 | 15 | 93 |
Dmitry Smirnov | 5 | 5 | 382 |
V V Genkel | 5 | 16 | 51 |
A. L. Vasin | 4 | 4 | 39 |
Kaptsov Va | 3 | 14 | 36 |
I.A. Loskutov | 3 | 8 | 18 |
Tatiana L Poloz | 3 | 4 | 38 |
Dobretsov Kg | 3 | 5 | 59 |
O. S. Valinsky | 3 | 3 | 13 |