scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Institution

Wayne State University

EducationDetroit, Michigan, United States
About: Wayne State University is a education organization based out in Detroit, Michigan, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Cancer. The organization has 42801 authors who have published 82738 publications receiving 3083713 citations. The organization is also known as: WSU & Wayne University.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Tumor HPV status is a strong and independent prognostic factor for survival among patients with oropharyngeal cancer and the risk of death significantly increased with each additional pack-year of tobacco smoking.
Abstract: Background Oropharyngeal squamous-cell carcinomas caused by human papillomavirus (HPV) are associated with favorable survival, but the independent prognostic significance of tumor HPV status remains unknown. Methods We performed a retrospective analysis of the association between tumor HPV status and survival among patients with stage III or IV oropharyngeal squamous-cell carcinoma who were enrolled in a randomized trial comparing accelerated-fractionation radiotherapy (with acceleration by means of concomitant boost radiotherapy) with standard-fractionation radiotherapy, each combined with cisplatin therapy, in patients with squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck. Proportional-hazards models were used to compare the risk of death among patients with HPV-positive cancer and those with HPV-negative cancer. Results The median follow-up period was 4.8 years. The 3-year rate of overall survival was similar in the group receiving accelerated-fractionation radiotherapy and the group receiving standard-fractionation radiotherapy (70.3% vs. 64.3%; P = 0.18; hazard ratio for death with accelerated-fractionation radiotherapy, 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72 to 1.13), as were the rates of high-grade acute and late toxic events. A total of 63.8% of patients with oropharyngeal cancer (206 of 323) had HPV-positive tumors; these patients had better 3-year rates of overall survival (82.4%, vs. 57.1% among patients with HPV-negative tumors; P<0.001 by the log-rank test) and, after adjustment for age, race, tumor and nodal stage, tobacco exposure, and treatment assignment, had a 58% reduction in the risk of death (hazard ratio, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.27 to 0.66). The risk of death significantly increased with each additional packyear of tobacco smoking. Using recursive-partitioning analysis, we classified our patients as having a low, intermediate, or high risk of death on the basis of four factors: HPV status, pack-years of tobacco smoking, tumor stage, and nodal stage. Conclusions Tumor HPV status is a strong and independent prognostic factor for survival among patients with oropharyngeal cancer. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00047008.)

5,263 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Weisong Shi1, Jie Cao1, Quan Zhang1, Youhuizi Li1, Lanyu Xu1 
TL;DR: The definition of edge computing is introduced, followed by several case studies, ranging from cloud offloading to smart home and city, as well as collaborative edge to materialize the concept of edge Computing.
Abstract: The proliferation of Internet of Things (IoT) and the success of rich cloud services have pushed the horizon of a new computing paradigm, edge computing, which calls for processing the data at the edge of the network. Edge computing has the potential to address the concerns of response time requirement, battery life constraint, bandwidth cost saving, as well as data safety and privacy. In this paper, we introduce the definition of edge computing, followed by several case studies, ranging from cloud offloading to smart home and city, as well as collaborative edge to materialize the concept of edge computing. Finally, we present several challenges and opportunities in the field of edge computing, and hope this paper will gain attention from the community and inspire more research in this direction.

5,198 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Daniel J. Klionsky1, Kotb Abdelmohsen2, Akihisa Abe3, Joynal Abedin4  +2519 moreInstitutions (695)
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macro-autophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes.
Abstract: In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. For example, a key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process versus those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process including the amount and rate of cargo sequestered and degraded). In particular, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation must be differentiated from stimuli that increase autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. It is worth emphasizing here that lysosomal digestion is a stage of autophagy and evaluating its competence is a crucial part of the evaluation of autophagic flux, or complete autophagy. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. Along these lines, because of the potential for pleiotropic effects due to blocking autophagy through genetic manipulation, it is imperative to target by gene knockout or RNA interference more than one autophagy-related protein. In addition, some individual Atg proteins, or groups of proteins, are involved in other cellular pathways implying that not all Atg proteins can be used as a specific marker for an autophagic process. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field.

5,187 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Haidong Wang1, Mohsen Naghavi1, Christine Allen1, Ryan M Barber1  +841 moreInstitutions (293)
TL;DR: The Global Burden of Disease 2015 Study provides a comprehensive assessment of all-cause and cause-specific mortality for 249 causes in 195 countries and territories from 1980 to 2015, finding several countries in sub-Saharan Africa had very large gains in life expectancy, rebounding from an era of exceedingly high loss of life due to HIV/AIDS.

4,804 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Christopher G. Goetz1, Barbara C. Tilley2, Stephanie R. Shaftman2, Glenn T. Stebbins1, Stanley Fahn3, Pablo Martinez-Martin, Werner Poewe4, Cristina Sampaio5, Matthew B. Stern6, Richard Dodel7, Bruno Dubois8, Robert G. Holloway9, Joseph Jankovic10, Jaime Kulisevsky11, Anthony E. Lang12, Andrew J. Lees13, Sue Leurgans1, Peter A. LeWitt14, David L. Nyenhuis15, C. Warren Olanow16, Olivier Rascol17, Anette Schrag13, Jeanne A. Teresi3, Jacobus J. van Hilten18, Nancy R. LaPelle19, Pinky Agarwal, Saima Athar, Yvette Bordelan, Helen Bronte-Stewart, Richard Camicioli, Kelvin L. Chou, Wendy Cole, Arif Dalvi, Holly Delgado, Alan Diamond, Jeremy P.R. Dick, John E. Duda, Rodger J. Elble, Carol Evans, V. G. H. Evidente, Hubert H. Fernandez, Susan H. Fox, Joseph H. Friedman, Robin D. Fross, David A. Gallagher, Deborah A. Hall, Neal Hermanowicz, Vanessa K. Hinson, Stacy Horn, Howard I. Hurtig, Un Jung Kang, Galit Kleiner-Fisman, Olga Klepitskaya, Katie Kompoliti, Eugene C. Lai, Maureen L. Leehey, Iracema Leroi, Kelly E. Lyons, Terry McClain, Steven W. Metzer, Janis M. Miyasaki, John C. Morgan, Martha Nance, Joanne Nemeth, Rajesh Pahwa, Sotirios A. Parashos, Jay S. Schneider, Kapil D. Sethi, Lisa M. Shulman, Andrew Siderowf, Monty Silverdale, Tanya Simuni, Mark Stacy, Robert Malcolm Stewart, Kelly L. Sullivan, David M. Swope, Pettaruse M. Wadia, Richard Walker, Ruth H. Walker, William J. Weiner, Jill Wiener, Jayne R. Wilkinson, Joanna M. Wojcieszek, Summer C. Wolfrath, Frederick Wooten, Allen Wu, Theresa A. Zesiewicz, Richard M. Zweig 
TL;DR: The combined clinimetric results of this study support the validity of the MDS‐UPDRS for rating PD.
Abstract: We present a clinimetric assessment of the Movement Disorder Society (MDS)-sponsored revision of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS). The MDS-UDPRS Task Force revised and expanded the UPDRS using recommendations from a published critique. The MDS-UPDRS has four parts, namely, I: Non-motor Experiences of Daily Living; II: Motor Experiences of Daily Living; III: Motor Examination; IV: Motor Complications. Twenty questions are completed by the patient/caregiver. Item-specific instructions and an appendix of complementary additional scales are provided. Movement disorder specialists and study coordinators administered the UPDRS (55 items) and MDS-UPDRS (65 items) to 877 English speaking (78% non-Latino Caucasian) patients with Parkinson's disease from 39 sites. We compared the two scales using correlative techniques and factor analysis. The MDS-UPDRS showed high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.79-0.93 across parts) and correlated with the original UPDRS (rho = 0.96). MDS-UPDRS across-part correlations ranged from 0.22 to 0.66. Reliable factor structures for each part were obtained (comparative fit index > 0.90 for each part), which support the use of sum scores for each part in preference to a total score of all parts. The combined clinimetric results of this study support the validity of the MDS-UPDRS for rating PD.

4,589 citations


Authors

Showing all 43073 results

NameH-indexPapersCitations
Robert Langer2812324326306
Eugene Braunwald2301711264576
Rakesh K. Jain2001467177727
Anil K. Jain1831016192151
Richard A. Gibbs172889249708
Bradley Cox1692150156200
Jun Wang1661093141621
David Altshuler162345201782
Elliott M. Antman161716179462
Jovan Milosevic1521433106802
Roberto Romero1511516108321
Kypros H. Nicolaides147130287091
John F. Hartwig14571466472
Charles Maguire142119795026
Mingshui Chen1411543125369
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
Duke University
200.3K papers, 10.7M citations

96% related

University of Pennsylvania
257.6K papers, 14.1M citations

96% related

University of Minnesota
257.9K papers, 11.9M citations

96% related

University of Michigan
342.3K papers, 17.6M citations

95% related

Washington University in St. Louis
163.7K papers, 10M citations

95% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
202391
2022407
20213,537
20203,508
20193,011
20182,963