scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Institution

University of Münster

EducationMünster, Germany
About: University of Münster is a education organization based out in Münster, Germany. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Catalysis. The organization has 35609 authors who have published 69059 publications receiving 2278534 citations. The organization is also known as: University of Munster & University of Muenster.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Results showed no difference in survival in patients treated with complete lymph node dissection compared with observation only, and complete lymph nodes dissection should not be recommended in patients with melanoma with lymph node micrometastases of at least a diameter of 1 mm or smaller.
Abstract: Summary Background Complete lymph node dissection is recommended in patients with positive sentinel lymph node biopsy results. To date, the effect of complete lymph node dissection on prognosis is controversial. In the DeCOG-SLT trial, we assessed whether complete lymph node dissection resulted in increased survival compared with observation. Methods In this multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients with cutaneous melanoma of the torso, arms, or legs from 41 German skin cancer centres. Patients with positive sentinel lymph node biopsy results were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to undergo complete lymph node dissection or observation with permuted blocks of variable size and stratified by primary tumour thickness, ulceration of primary tumour, and intended adjuvant interferon therapy. Treatment assignment was not masked. The primary endpoint was distant metastasis-free survival and analysed by intention to treat. All patients in the intention-to-treat population of the complete lymph node dissection group were included in the safety analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02434107. Follow-up is ongoing, but the trial no longer recruiting patients. Findings Between Jan 1, 2006, and Dec 1, 2014, 5547 patients were screened with sentinel lymph node biopsy and 1269 (23%) patients were positive for micrometastasis. Of these, 483 (39%) agreed to randomisation into the clinical trial; due to difficulties enrolling and a low event rate the trial closed early on Dec 1, 2014. 241 patients were randomly assigned to the observation group and 242 to the complete lymph node dissection group. Ten patients did not meet the inclusion criteria, so 233 patients were analysed in the observation group and 240 patients were analysed in the complete lymph node dissection group, as the intention-to-treat population. 311 (66%) patients (158 in the observation group and 153 in the dissection group) had sentinel lymph node metastases of 1 mm or less. Median follow-up was 35 months (IQR 20–54). Distant metastasis-free survival at 3 years was 77·0% (90% CI 71·9–82·1; 55 events) in the observation group and 74·9% (69·5–80·3; 54 events) in the complete lymph node dissection group. In the complete lymph node dissection group, grade 3 and 4 events occurred in 15 patients (6%) and 19 patients (8%) patients, respectively. Adverse events included lymph oedema (grade 3 in seven patients, grade 4 in 13 patients), lymph fistula (grade 3 in one patient, grade 4 in two patients), seroma (grade 3 in three patients, no grade 4), infection (grade 3 in three patients, no grade 4), and delayed wound healing (grade 3 in one patient, grade 4 in four patients); no serious adverse events were reported. Interpretation Although we did not achieve the required number of events, leading to the trial being underpowered, our results showed no difference in survival in patients treated with complete lymph node dissection compared with observation only. Consequently, complete lymph node dissection should not be recommended in patients with melanoma with lymph node micrometastases of at least a diameter of 1 mm or smaller. Funding German Cancer Aid.

516 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
K. Aamodt1, Betty Abelev2, A. Abrahantes Quintana, Dagmar Adamová3  +972 moreInstitutions (84)
11 Jul 2011
TL;DR: The first measurement of the triangular v3, quadrangular v4, and pentagonal v5 charged particle flow in Pb-Pb collisions is reported, and a double peaked structure in the two-particle azimuthal correlations is observed, which can be naturally explained from the measured anisotropic flow Fourier coefficients.
Abstract: We report on the first measurement of the triangular nu(3), quadrangular nu(4), and pentagonal nu(5) charged particle flow in Pb-Pb collisions at root s(NN) = 2.76 TeV measured with the ALICE detector at the CERN Large Hadron Collider. We show that the triangular flow can be described in terms of the initial spatial anisotropy and its fluctuations, which provides strong constraints on its origin. In the most central events, where the elliptic flow nu(2) and nu(3) have similar magnitude, a double peaked structure in the two-particle azimuthal correlations is observed, which is often interpreted as a Mach cone response to fast partons. We show that this structure can be naturally explained from the measured anisotropic flow Fourier coefficients.

515 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The systematic literature further emphasis the heterogeneity of existing multimorbidity indices, however, one important similarity is that the focus is on diseases with a high prevalence and a severe impact on affected individuals.
Abstract: Multimorbidity, defined as the coexistence of 2 or more chronic diseases, is a common phenomenon especially in older people. Numerous efforts to establish a standardized instrument to assess the level of multimorbidity have failed until now, and indices are primarily characterized by their high heterogeneity. Thus, the objective is to provide a comprehensive overview on existing instruments on the basis of a systematic literature review.

515 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Nasim Mavaddat1, Daniel Barrowdale1, Irene L. Andrulis2, Susan M. Domchek3, Diana Eccles4, Heli Nevanlinna5, Susan J. Ramus6, Amanda B. Spurdle7, Mark E. Robson8, Mark E. Sherman9, Anna Marie Mulligan2, Fergus J. Couch10, Christoph Engel11, Lesley McGuffog1, Sue Healey7, Olga M. Sinilnikova12, Melissa C. Southey13, Mary Beth Terry8, David E. Goldgar14, Frances P. O'Malley2, Esther M. John15, Ramunas Janavicius16, Laima Tihomirova17, Thomas Hansen18, Finn Cilius Nielsen18, Ana Osorio, Alexandra V. Stavropoulou, Javier Benitez19, Siranoush Manoukian, Bernard Peissel, Monica Barile, Sara Volorio, Barbara Pasini20, Riccardo Dolcetti, Anna Laura Putignano21, Laura Ottini22, Paolo Radice, Ute Hamann23, Muhammad Usman Rashid24, Frans B. L. Hogervorst, Mieke Kriege25, Rob B. van der Luijt26, Susan Peock1, Debra Frost1, D. Gareth Evans, Carole Brewer27, Lisa Walker28, Mark T. Rogers29, Lucy Side30, C. E. Houghton, Jo Ellen Weaver31, Andrew K. Godwin32, Rita K. Schmutzler33, Barbara Wappenschmidt33, Alfons Meindl34, Karin Kast35, Norbert Arnold36, Dieter Niederacher37, Christian Sutter38, Helmut Deissler39, Doroteha Gadzicki40, Sabine Preisler-Adams41, Raymonda Varon-Mateeva42, Ines Schönbuchner43, Heidrun Gevensleben, Dominique Stoppa-Lyonnet44, Muriel Belotti, Laure Barjhoux12, Claudine Isaacs45, Beth N. Peshkin45, Trinidad Caldés19, Miguel De Al Hoya, Carmen Cañadas, Tuomas Heikkinen5, Päivi Heikkilä5, Kristiina Aittomäki5, Ignacio Blanco, Conxi Lázaro, Joan Brunet, Bjarni A. Agnarsson, Adalgeir Arason, Rosa B. Barkardottir, Martine Dumont46, Jacques Simard46, Marco Montagna, Simona Agata, Emma D'Andrea47, Max Yan, Stephen B. Fox48, Timothy R. Rebbeck, Wendy S. Rubinstein49, Nadine Tung, Judy Garber50, Xianshu Wang10, Zachary S. Fredericksen10, Vernon S. Pankratz10, Noralane M. Lindor10, Csilla Szabo51, Kenneth Offit8, Rita A. Sakr8, Mia M. Gaudet52, Christian F. Singer53, Muy Kheng Tea53, Christine Rappaport53, Phuong L. Mai9, Mark H. Greene9, Anna P. Sokolenko, Evgeny N. Imyanitov, Amanda E. Toland54, Leigha Senter54, Kevin Sweet54, Mads Thomassen55, Anne-Marie Gerdes18, Torben A Kruse55, Maria A. Caligo56, Paolo Aretini56, Johanna Rantala57, Anna Von Wachenfeld57, Karin M. Henriksson58, Linda Steele59, Susan L. Neuhausen59, Robert L. Nussbaum60, Mary S. Beattie60, Kunle Odunsi61, Lara Sucheston61, Simon A. Gayther6, Katherine L. Nathanson3, Jenny Gross62, Christine Walsh62, Beth Y. Karlan62, Georgia Chenevix-Trench7, Douglas F. Easton1, Antonis C. Antoniou1 
University of Cambridge1, University of Toronto2, University of Pennsylvania3, University of Southampton4, University of Helsinki5, University of Southern California6, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute7, Columbia University8, National Institutes of Health9, Mayo Clinic10, Leipzig University11, Claude Bernard University Lyon 112, University of Melbourne13, University of Utah14, Cancer Prevention Institute of California15, Vilnius University16, University of Latvia17, University of Copenhagen18, Complutense University of Madrid19, University of Turin20, University of Florence21, Sapienza University of Rome22, German Cancer Research Center23, Memorial Hospital of South Bend24, Erasmus University Rotterdam25, Utrecht University26, Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital27, Churchill Hospital28, University Hospital of Wales29, University College London30, Fox Chase Cancer Center31, University of Kansas32, University of Cologne33, Technische Universität München34, Dresden University of Technology35, University of Kiel36, University of Düsseldorf37, Heidelberg University38, University of Ulm39, Hannover Medical School40, University of Münster41, Charité42, University of Würzburg43, University of Paris44, Georgetown University45, Laval University46, University of Padua47, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre48, University of Chicago49, Harvard University50, University of Delaware51, American Cancer Society52, Medical University of Vienna53, Ohio State University54, University of Southern Denmark55, University of Pisa56, Karolinska Institutet57, Lund University58, City of Hope National Medical Center59, University of California, San Francisco60, Roswell Park Cancer Institute61, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center62
TL;DR: Pathologic characteristics of BRCA1 and BRCa2 tumors may be useful for improving risk-prediction algorithms and informing clinical strategies for screening and prophylaxis.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Previously, small studies have found that BRCA1 and BRCA2 breast tumors differ in their pathology. Analysis of larger datasets of mutation carriers should allow further tumor characterization.METHODS: We used data from 4,325 BRCA1 and 2,568 BRCA2 mutation carriers to analyze the pathology of invasive breast, ovarian, and contralateral breast cancers.RESULTS: There was strong evidence that the proportion of estrogen receptor (ER)-negative breast tumors decreased with age at diagnosis among BRCA1 (P-trend = 1.2 × 10(-5)), but increased with age at diagnosis among BRCA2, carriers (P-trend = 6.8 × 10(-6)). The proportion of triple-negative tumors decreased with age at diagnosis in BRCA1 carriers but increased with age at diagnosis of BRCA2 carriers. In both BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers, ER-negative tumors were of higher histologic grade than ER-positive tumors (grade 3 vs. grade 1; P = 1.2 × 10(-13) for BRCA1 and P = 0.001 for BRCA2). ER and progesterone receptor (PR) expression were independently associated with mutation carrier status [ER-positive odds ratio (OR) for BRCA2 = 9.4, 95% CI: 7.0-12.6 and PR-positive OR = 1.7, 95% CI: 1.3-2.3, under joint analysis]. Lobular tumors were more likely to be BRCA2-related (OR for BRCA2 = 3.3, 95% CI: 2.4-4.4; P = 4.4 × 10(-14)), and medullary tumors BRCA1-related (OR for BRCA2 = 0.25, 95% CI: 0.18-0.35; P = 2.3 × 10(-15)). ER-status of the first breast cancer was predictive of ER-status of asynchronous contralateral breast cancer (P = 0.0004 for BRCA1; P = 0.002 for BRCA2). There were no significant differences in ovarian cancer morphology between BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers (serous: 67%; mucinous: 1%; endometrioid: 12%; clear-cell: 2%).Conclusions/Impact: Pathologic characteristics of BRCA1 and BRCA2 tumors may be useful for improving risk-prediction algorithms and informing clinical strategies for screening and prophylaxis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 1-14. ©2011 AACR.

514 citations


Authors

Showing all 36075 results

NameH-indexPapersCitations
Hyun-Chul Kim1764076183227
Klaus Müllen1642125140748
Giacomo Bruno1581687124368
Anders M. Dale156823133891
Holger J. Schünemann141810113169
Joachim Heinrich136130976887
Markus Merschmeyer132118884975
Klaus Ley12949557964
Robert W. Mahley12836360774
Robert J. Kurman12739760277
Bart Barlogie12677957803
Thomas Schwarz12370154560
Carlos Caldas12254773840
Klaus Weber12152460346
Andrey L. Rogach11757646820
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich
161.5K papers, 5.7M citations

96% related

University of Zurich
124K papers, 5.3M citations

96% related

University of Amsterdam
140.8K papers, 5.9M citations

95% related

University of Pittsburgh
201K papers, 9.6M citations

95% related

University of California, Irvine
113.6K papers, 5.5M citations

95% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
2023253
2022831
20213,683
20203,499
20193,236
20182,918