Institution
University of Colorado Denver
Education•Denver, Colorado, United States•
About: University of Colorado Denver is a education organization based out in Denver, Colorado, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Health care. The organization has 27444 authors who have published 57213 publications receiving 2539937 citations. The organization is also known as: CU Denver & UCD.
Topics: Population, Health care, Poison control, Medicine, Diabetes mellitus
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
TL;DR: Results indicate that caspase-dependent cleavage of specific proteins induces the turn off of survival pathways, such as the extracellular signal-regulated kinase and phosphatidylinositol-3 kinase/Akt pathways, that could otherwise interfere with the apoptotic response.
448 citations
••
University of California, Irvine1, Thomas Jefferson University2, Carolinas Medical Center3, University of Pittsburgh4, McMaster University5, Ohio State University6, California Pacific Medical Center7, University of Colorado Denver8, Harvard University9, University of California, San Francisco10, University of Wisconsin-Madison11, Henry Ford Health System12, Emory University13, NorthShore University HealthSystem14, Barrow Neurological Institute15, Allen Institute for Brain Science16
TL;DR: Regular careful surveillance is warranted for patients treated with SRS alone in order to provide early identification of local and distant recurrences so that salvage therapy can be initiated at the soonest possible time.
Abstract: Should patients with newly-diagnosed metastatic brain tumors undergo stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) compared with other treatment modalities? Target population
These recommendations apply to adults with newly diagnosed solid brain metastases amenable to SRS; lesions amenable to SRS are typically defined as measuring less than 3 cm in maximum diameter and producing minimal (less than 1 cm of midline shift) mass effect. Recommendations
SRS plus WBRT vs. WBRT alone
Level 1 Single-dose SRS along with WBRT leads to significantly longer patient survival compared with WBRT alone for patients with single metastatic brain tumors who have a KPS ≥ 70. Level 2 Single-dose SRS along with WBRT is superior in terms of local tumor control and maintaining functional status when compared to WBRT alone for patients with 1–4 metastatic brain tumors who have a KPS ≥ 70. Level 3 Single-dose SRS along with WBRT may lead to significantly longer patient survival than WBRT alone for patients with 2–3 metastatic brain tumors. Level 4 There is class III evidence demonstrating that single-dose SRS along with WBRT is superior to WBRT alone for improving patient survival for patients with single or multiple brain metastases and a KPS < 70. SRS plus WBRT vs. SRS alone
Level 2 Single-dose SRS alone may provide an equivalent survival advantage for patients with brain metastases compared with WBRT + single-dose SRS. There is conflicting class I and II evidence regarding the risk of both local and distant recurrence when SRS is used in isolation, and class I evidence demonstrates a lower risk of distant recurrence with WBRT; thus, regular careful surveillance is warranted for patients treated with SRS alone in order to provide early identification of local and distant recurrences so that salvage therapy can be initiated at the soonest possible time. Surgical Resection plus WBRT vs. SRS ± WBRT Level 2 Surgical resection plus WBRT, vs. SRS plus WBRT, both represent effective treatment strategies, resulting in relatively equal survival rates. SRS has not been assessed from an evidence-based standpoint for larger lesions (>3 cm) or for those causing significant mass effect (>1 cm midline shift). Level 3: Underpowered class I evidence along with the preponderance of conflicting class II evidence suggests that SRS alone may provide equivalent functional and survival outcomes compared with resection + WBRT for patients with single brain metastases, so long as ready detection of distant site failure and salvage SRS are possible. SRS alone vs. WBRT alone
Level 3 While both single-dose SRS and WBRT are effective for treating patients with brain metastases, single-dose SRS alone appears to be superior to WBRT alone for patients with up to three metastatic brain tumors in terms of patient survival advantage.
448 citations
••
Charité1, Amgen2, University of Tübingen3, Goethe University Frankfurt4, Boston Children's Hospital5, University of Düsseldorf6, University of Pavia7, University of Milano-Bicocca8, University of Padua9, Erasmus University Rotterdam10, University of Pennsylvania11, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center12, Children's Hospital Los Angeles13, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia14, Seattle Children's15, Primary Children's Hospital16, Harvard University17, University of Colorado Denver18, University of Toronto19
TL;DR: This trial, which to the best of the authors' knowledge was the first such trial in pediatrics, demonstrated antileukemic activity of single-agent blinatumomab with complete minimal residual disease response in children with relapsed/refractory BCP-ALL.
Abstract: Purpose Blinatumomab is a bispecific T-cell engager antibody construct targeting CD19 on B-cell lymphoblasts. We evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics, recommended dosage, and potential for efficacy of blinatumomab in children with relapsed/refractory B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia (BCP-ALL). Methods This open-label study enrolled children < 18 years old with relapsed/refractory BCP-ALL in a phase I dosage-escalation part and a phase II part, using 6-week treatment cycles. Primary end points were maximum-tolerated dosage (phase I) and complete remission rate within the first two cycles (phase II). Results We treated 49 patients in phase I and 44 patients in phase II. Four patients had dose-limiting toxicities in cycle 1 (phase I). Three experienced grade 4 cytokine-release syndrome (one attributed to grade 5 cardiac failure); one had fatal respiratory failure. The maximum-tolerated dosage was 15 µg/m2/d. Blinatumomab pharmacokinetics was linear across dosage levels and consistent among age groups. On the basis of the phase I data, the recommended blinatumomab dosage for children with relapsed/refractory ALL was 5 µg/m2/d for the first 7 days, followed by 15 µg/m2/d thereafter. Among the 70 patients who received the recommended dosage, 27 (39%; 95% CI, 27% to 51%) achieved complete remission within the first two cycles, 14 (52%) of whom achieved complete minimal residual disease response. The most frequent grade ≥ 3 adverse events were anemia (36%), thrombocytopenia (21%), and hypokalemia (17%). Three patients (4%) and one patient (1%) had cytokine-release syndrome of grade 3 and 4, respectively. Two patients (3%) interrupted treatment after grade 2 seizures. Conclusion This trial, which to the best of our knowledge was the first such trial in pediatrics, demonstrated antileukemic activity of single-agent blinatumomab with complete minimal residual disease response in children with relapsed/refractory BCP-ALL. Blinatumomab may represent an important new treatment option in this setting, requiring further investigation in curative indications.
446 citations
••
TL;DR: Cell cycle regulation by protein phosphorylation ensures that pre-RC assembly can only occur in G1 phase, whereas helicase activation and loading canonly occur in S phase, and checkpoint regulation maintains high fidelity by stabilizing replication forks and preventing cell cycle progression during replication stress or damage.
Abstract: Eukaryotic DNA replication is regulated to ensure all chromosomes replicate once and only once per cell cycle. Replication begins at many origins scattered along each chromosome. Except for budding yeast, origins are not defined DNA sequences and probably are inherited by epigenetic mechanisms. Initiation at origins occurs throughout the S phase according to a temporal program that is important in regulating gene expression during development. Most replication proteins are conserved in evolution in eukaryotes and archaea, but not in bacteria. However, the mechanism of initiation is conserved and consists of origin recognition, assembly of prereplication (pre-RC) initiative complexes, helicase activation, and replisome loading. Cell cycle regulation by protein phosphorylation ensures that pre-RC assembly can only occur in G1 phase, whereas helicase activation and loading can only occur in S phase. Checkpoint regulation maintains high fidelity by stabilizing replication forks and preventing cell cycle progression during replication stress or damage.
446 citations
••
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors compared clinical features and treatment outcomes between patients with M. abscessus lung disease and those with massiliense lung disease, and found that the clinical and radiographic manifestations of disease caused by each species were similar.
Abstract: Rationale: Mycobacterium massiliense has been recognized as a separate species from Mycobacterium abscessus; however, little is known regarding the clinical impact of this differentiation.Objectives: To compare clinical features and treatment outcomes between patients with M. abscessus lung disease and those with M. massiliense lung disease.Methods: We performed molecular identification of stored clinical isolates of M. abscessus complex and compared clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes between 64 patients with M. abscessus lung disease and 81 patients with M. massiliense lung disease.Measurements and Main Results: The clinical and radiographic manifestations of disease caused by each species were similar. Standardized combination antibiotic therapy, including a clarithromycin-containing regimen in combination with an initial 4-week course of cefoxitin and amikacin, was given to 57 patients (24 with M. abscessus and 33 with M. massiliense) for more than 12 months. The proportion of patients wit...
445 citations
Authors
Showing all 27683 results
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Matthew Meyerson | 194 | 553 | 243726 |
Charles A. Dinarello | 190 | 1058 | 139668 |
Gad Getz | 189 | 520 | 247560 |
Gordon B. Mills | 187 | 1273 | 186451 |
Jasvinder A. Singh | 176 | 2382 | 223370 |
David Haussler | 172 | 488 | 224960 |
Donald G. Truhlar | 165 | 1518 | 157965 |
Charles M. Perou | 156 | 573 | 202951 |
David Cella | 156 | 1258 | 106402 |
Bruce D. Walker | 155 | 779 | 86020 |
Marco A. Marra | 153 | 620 | 184684 |
Thomas E. Starzl | 150 | 1625 | 91704 |
Marc Humbert | 149 | 1184 | 100577 |
Rajesh Kumar | 149 | 4439 | 140830 |
Martin J. Blaser | 147 | 820 | 104104 |