University of Colorado Boulder

About: University of Colorado Boulder is a education organization based out in Boulder, Colorado, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Galaxy. The organization has 48794 authors who have published 115151 publications receiving 5387328 citations. The organization is also known as: CU Boulder & UCB.

The human microbiome project.

Abstract: A strategy to understand the microbial components of the human genetic and metabolic landscape and how they contribute to normal physiology and predisposition to disease.

Radiotherapy plus Cetuximab for Squamous-Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck

Abstract: BACKGROUND We conducted a multinational, randomized study to compare radiotherapy alone with radiotherapy plus cetuximab, a monoclonal antibody against the epidermal growth factor receptor, in the treatment of locoregionally advanced squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck. METHODS Patients with locoregionally advanced head and neck cancer were randomly assigned to treatment with high-dose radiotherapy alone (213 patients) or high-dose radiotherapy plus weekly cetuximab (211 patients) at an initial dose of 400 mg per square meter of body-surface area, followed by 250 mg per square meter weekly for the duration of radiotherapy. The primary end point was the duration of control of locoregional disease; secondary end points were overall survival, progression-free survival, the response rate, and safety. RESULTS The median duration of locoregional control was 24.4 months among patients treated with cetuximab plus radiotherapy and 14.9 months among those given radiotherapy alone (hazard ratio for locoregional progression or death, 0.68; P = 0.005). With a median follow-up of 54.0 months, the median duration of overall survival was 49.0 months among patients treated with combined therapy and 29.3 months among those treated with radiotherapy alone (hazard ratio for death, 0.74; P = 0.03). Radiotherapy plus cetuximab significantly prolonged progression-free survival (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.70; P = 0.006). With the exception of acneiform rash and infusion reactions, the incidence of grade 3 or greater toxic effects, including mucositis, did not differ significantly between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS Treatment of locoregionally advanced head and neck cancer with concomitant highdose radiotherapy plus cetuximab improves locoregional control and reduces mortality without increasing the common toxic effects associated with radiotherapy to the head and neck. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00004227.)

Nitrogen cycles: past, present, and future

Abstract: This paper contrasts the natural and anthropogenic controls on the conversion of unreactive N2 to more reactive forms of nitrogen (Nr). A variety of data sets are used to construct global N budgets for 1860 and the early 1990s and to make projections for the global N budget in 2050. Regional N budgets for Asia, North America, and other major regions for the early 1990s, as well as the marine N budget, are presented to highlight the dominant fluxes of nitrogen in each region. Important findings are that human activities increasingly dominate the N budget at the global and at most regional scales, the terrestrial and open ocean N budgets are essentially dis- connected, and the fixed forms of N are accumulating in most environmental reservoirs. The largest uncertainties in our understanding of the N budget at most scales are the rates of natural biological nitrogen fixation, the amount of Nr storage in most environmental reservoirs, and the production rates of N2 by denitrification.

Primary, Secondary, and Meta-Analysis of Research

Abstract: M y subject is data analysis at three levels. Primary analysis is the original analysis of data in a research study. It is what one typically imagines as the application of statistical methods. Secondary analysis is the re-analysis of data for the purpose of answering the original research question with better statistical techniques, or answering new questions with old data. Secondary analysis is an important feature of the research and evaluation enterprise. Tom Cook (1974) at Northwestern University has written about its purposes and methods. Some of our best methodologists have pursued secondary analyses in such grand style that its importance has eclipsed that of the primary analysis. We can cite with pride some state of the art documents: the MostellerMoynihan secondary analysis of the Coleman study; the Campbell-Erlebacher analysis of the Ohio-Westinghouse Headstart evaluation; and the Elashoff-Snow secondary analysis of Pygmalion in the Classroom, to name three. About all that can effectively be done to insure that secondary analyses of important studies are carried out is to see that the data from the original studies are preserved and that secondary analyses are funded. The preservation of original data could improve. Last month, one of our graduate students, Karl White, spent 15 hours and made 30 phone calls attempting to obtain from the government a copy of the data tapes for the Coleman study only to learn in the end that they had been irretrievably filed in unmarked tape cannisters with some 2,000 other unmarked data tapes. Tom Cook remarked in an Annual Meeting symposium on secondary analysis that you can get the data if you have chutzpah or if you're socio metrically well-connected. The whole business is too important to be treated so casually. On the other extreme, one can point with satisfaction to the ready availability to any researcher of the data tapes from Project TALENT or the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Others are advancing the practice of secondary analysis. My major interest currently is in what we have come to call—not for want of a less pretentious name—the meta-analysis of research. The term is a bit grand, but it is precise, and apt, and in the spirit of "metamathematics," "meta-psychology," and "meta-evaluation." Meta-analysis refers to the analysis of analyses. I use it to refer to the statistical analysis of a large collection of analysis results from individual studies for the purpose of integrating the findings. It connotes a rigorous alternative to the casual, narrative discussions of research studies which typify our attempts to make sense of the rapidly expanding research literature. The need for the meta-analysis of research is clear. The literature on dozens of topics in education is growing at an astounding rate. In five years time, researchers can produce literally hundreds of studies on IQ and creativity, or impulsive vs. reflective cognitive styles, or any other topic.