Добірка наукової літератури з теми "21.97 decorative art: other"

The art of carving, known as carving, or decoration with various flora, fauna, figurative and even geometric motifs which is an ornate image with some parts being concave and some parts convex both horizontally and vertically and elliptically arranged in a very beautiful image. (Study of Cultural Anthropology)(1) The carvings, which are known in the works of Decorative Arts, still survive and are in demand and are found in various areas such as the Biak Numfor Islands, Yapen Islands, Waropen Wondama Bay and various other areas that are included in the Kuripasai cultural family, Mananarmakeri, and Sairei. A special highlight in this writing is the carving motifs that are still practiced by carving craftsmen in Woinap Village, Wonawa District, Yapen Islands Regency, where until now there are very few carvers. This carving motif was inspired by the legend of "Suandei" by Drs. Frits Maurid Kirihio, alumni of the University of Leyden, the Netherlands, in the 1950s, who was recorded in the book “Dongen Tanah Kita,(2) Descriptive analysis method is a method used to analyze data by describing or describing the data that has been collected as it is without intending to make conclusions that apply to generalization or generalization, Sugiyono (2014:21)(3) Excellence Carving motifs based on beliefs that have been practiced so far in the village of Woinap, Yapen Islands Regency. or skulls, all of which are manifested and the decorations that are usually displayed on family tools such as boats, wooden pans (sempe) art tools (tifa) net buoys, all take symbolic or philosophical meanings from their original form.(4) The indigenous people of Woinap are a community categorized as living in the outermost area of ​​the Yap . Islands Regency en and still isolated from the rapid development of the era. However, it cannot be separated from local wisdom techniques that are often adopted from neighboring areas which are more innovative in people's lifestyles because culture is dynamic and always moves with the times, so the people of Woinap also move with the habit of living with the times by way of -a new way that is still considered cultural even though indigenous cultural values ​​have been eroded.(5) The cultural heritage of the Papuan people in the saireri strait region, especially the unique carving art of the Woinap community, has an economic potential that can bring ecotourism and increase the PAD of the Islands district government Yapen.(6)

ABSTRACT The existence of novel endogenous retrovirus elements in the chicken genome, designated EAV-HP, with close sequence identity to theenv gene of avian leukosis virus (ALV) subgroup J has been reported (L. M. Smith, A. A. Toye, K. Howes, N. Bumstead, L. N. Payne, and K. Venugopal, J. Gen. Virol. 80:261–268, 1999). To resolve the genome structure of these retroviral elements, we have determined the complete sequence of two proviral clones of EAV-HP from a line N chicken genomic DNA yeast artificial chromosome library and from a meat-type chicken line 21 lambda library. The EAV-HP sequences from the two lines were 98% identical and had a typical provirus structure. The two EAV-HP clones showed identical large deletions spanning part of the gag, the entirepol, and part of the env genes. Theenv region of the EAV-HP clones was 97% identical to theenv sequence of HPRS-103, the prototype subgroup J ALV. The 5′ region of EAV-HP comprising the R and U5 regions of the long terminal repeat (LTR), the untranslated leader, and the 5′ end of the putative gag region were 97% identical to the avian retrotransposon sequence, ART-CH. The remaining gagsequence shared less than 60% identity with other ALV sequences. The U3 region of the LTR was distinct from those of other retroviruses but contained some of the conserved motifs required for functioning as a promoter. To examine the ability of this endogenous retroviral LTR to function as a transcriptional promoter, the EAV-HP and HPRS-103 LTR U3 regions were compared in a luciferase reporter gene assay. The low luciferase activity detected with the EAV-HP LTR U3 constructs, at levels close to those observed for a control vector lacking the promoter or enhancer elements, suggested that these elements function as a weak promoter, possibly accounting for their low expression levels in chicken embryos.

9001 Background: The role of adjuvant radiotherapy following lymphadenectomy in melanoma patients identified as at high risk for further recurrence has been controversial. This final report of a multicenter randomized trial updates survival and lymph node field (LNF) control, and reports long term treatment toxicity, lymphedema and quality of life (QOL) (Lancet Oncol 2012;13:589-97). Methods: Patients at high risk of LNF relapse (≥1 parotid, ≥2 cervical or axillary or ≥3 groin positive nodes; or extra-nodal spread of tumour; or minimum metastatic node diameter of 3cm (neck or axilla) or 4cm (groin)) received adjuvant radiotherapy (ART) (48Gy in 20 fractions) or observation (OBS). LNF relapse, as a 1st relapse, was the primary endpoint; morbidity, QOL, patterns of relapse, disease free and overall survival were secondary endpoints. A target sample size of 250 enabled detection of a difference in 3 year relapse rates of 30% and 15% to be detected (2-sided logrank test, power of 80%). Results: 250 patients from 16 centres were randomized from Mar 02 to Sept 07 (123 ART; 127 OBS) with 217 fully eligible (109 ART, 108 OBS). Mean follow-up 73 months (range 21–116). LNF recurrence was reduced in the ART arm (HR=0.52 (0.31- 0.88) p=0.023) but there was no difference in survival (HR=1.13 (0.82 – 1.55) p =0.21). QOL was assessed by comparison of area under the curve from baseline to 5 years (or recurrence) with the FACT-G tool using both total score and the 4 major domains (physical, social, emotional and functional wellbeing), no difference. Regional symptoms (standardised questionnaire) were higher in the ART arm (p=0.035). Limb volumes were higher in the ART arm (leg 7.3% difference p=0.014, arm 3.4% p=0.25). Grade 2-4 RT toxicity was common for head + neck: skin (33%); axilla: skin (44%), subcutaneous tissue (41%); Groin: skin (46%), subcutaneous tissue (67%), other (38%). Conclusions: RT reduced the risk of LNF relapse by 52% but there was no impact on survival. In the ART arm loco-regional symptoms were worse, limb volumes were somewhat increased and Grade 2 - 4 long term RT toxicity was relatively common. However QOL as assessed by a validated tool (FACT-G) was similar in both groups. Clinical trial information: NCT00287196.

Background Hypertension is a major public health concern in low-and middle-income countries. A nationwide Health, Population, and Nutrition Sector Development Program in Bangladesh has been shown to be effective in resource-poor settings. This article aims to investigate whether the prevalence and determinants of adult hypertension changed from 2011 to 2018. Methods The determinants of adult hypertension were assessed in 2011 and 2018 data of Bangladesh Demographic and Health surveys. These two surveys included both men and women over the age of 34 years and measured their blood pressure, weight, height, and other covariates. For both surveys, we estimated the age-standard prevalence of hypertension and relative, attributable and mediated risk of determinants of hypertension using hierarchical mixed-effects sequential Poisson regression models. Results The prevalence of adult hypertension increased by 10.9% from 29.5% in 2011 to 40.4% in 2018. The nationwide awareness program on the Health, Population and Nutrition Sector changed the risks associated with hypertension determinants over the years. During 2011, Socio-economic status (SES) was a major distal determinant of adult hypertension, explaining 21% of population-attributable risk (ART). However, other factors accounted for 90% of risk, mainly by excessive body weight (51%) and awareness of hypertension (39%). In contrast, SES only explained 16% of ART risk, with 97% of the risk mediated by excessive body weight (55%) and awareness of hypertension (41%). Conclusion The study results highlight that hypertension among older adult was significantly increased over the six-year period. Specially, the socio-economic status, awareness of hypertension and excessive body weight were the significant determinants. Being awareness of hypertension and excessive body weight changed the causal pathways of socio-economic status. The results also highlight the value of studying the effect of non-communicable disease awareness programs to enhance our comprehension of factors influencing health.

The paper features the problem of identification of natural-historical shrines in the case of petroglyphs of Mount TuruAlty in Kosh-Agachsk district of the Altai Republic. Currently, all rock art sites in Southern Siberia are considered in scientific literature as rock art monuments. The authors studied the Mount Turu-Alty, the location of the petroglyphs, and other archaeological monuments in the neighborhood. As a result, they offer a different scientific interpretation of the monument as a natural-historical shrine. On the mountain top there is a rocky platform with a vertically standing large stone that faces the south and is completely covered with images. In the vicinity, there are several stone mounds. The mountain top is clearly visible from the foot on the sides of the southern slope. From this center, there are two ridges of large stones extending down to the right and left: they go round the terrace-like platforms of the steep southern slope. This natural formation has the shape of an amphitheater. On its top, there is an altar-like large stone. Standing at the foot of the southern slope, one cannot but feel the sacredness of this natural formation. On the large boulders that frame the southern slope, there are grouped and single etchings of animals. The field studies revealed images on 271 stones; 97 of the images are grouped, most are thematic. According to the plots, most of the images refer to the first millennium BC and the first half of first millennium AD. At the beginning of the first millennium BC, in the early Saka period, Mount Turu-Alty obviously acquired a special sacred status and began to function as a natural-historical shrine. The "altar" stone played a special role in this geological composition. It stands vertically on the top of the mountain, and its southern side is covered with 101 images of stylized deer, sheep, and goats. The stone is the main symbol of Turu-Alty. In the center, there are two large figures of deer flying to the east. All the other silhouettes are much smaller; all but one face the east. The animals are subject to eastward movement towards the sun. The authors consider the Turu-Alty complex as a natural-historical shrine from the period of the first millennium BC – first millennium AD.

Abstract Background CAB+RPV LA administered monthly for HIV treatment is non-inferior to daily oral ART at maintaining viral suppression and preferred by most participants in clinical trials over daily ART. CUSTOMIZE, an implementation-effectiveness study, evaluated facilitators and barriers to clinic implementation of CAB+RPV LA from the patient perspective. Methods 115 participants were enrolled across 8 HIV clinics. Semi-structured phone interviews were conducted with a randomized subgroup of 3-6 participants per site, prior to the 1st (Baseline [BL], N=34) and 12th CAB+RPV LA injections (Month 12 [M12], N=31). Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research-guided interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded using ATLAS.ti. Results At BL, 97% (n=33) of those interviewed indicated ≥1 challenge taking daily oral ART, including concerns about adherence (n=19; 56%), dosing frequency (n=13; 38%) and side effects (n=12; 35%). Twenty-seven (79%) reported anticipated challenges of CAB+RPV LA such as worry about side effects (n=15; 44%) and discomfort from injections (n=14; 41%). Participants reported at BL that CAB+RPV LA may help with adherence (n=17; 50%) or reduce fears of HIV status disclosure (n=10; 29%). At M12, 35% (n=11) reported some pain/discomfort from injections, but 87% (n=27) reported satisfaction with CAB+RPV LA, most commonly due to preferring the monthly regimen over the daily pill (n=15; 48%). Facilitators reported by participants as most helpful during early implementation were verbal education by clinic staff (14%), reminder texts/calls (13%), and an educational video about the regimen (6%). Most (n=25; 81%) indicated clinic hours were not a barrier, but 19% (n=6) noted taking time off work for the visits. Many participants (n=21; 68%) described positive aspects of going to the clinic each month, none complained about visit length, and 94% (n=29) reported intent to continue CAB+RPV LA after the study. Conclusion Interviewed participants reported several challenges with daily oral ART that monthly CAB+RPV LA may help overcome. Some initial concerns about receiving CAB+RPV LA were reported at BL, but most participants were satisfied with the regimen after one year and plan to continue receiving CAB+RPV LA following the study. Disclosures Cindy Garris, MS, GlaxoSmithKline (Shareholder)ViiV Healthcare (Employee) Larissa Stassek, MPH, GlaxoSmithKline (Consultant, Other Financial or Material Support, My company (Evidera) received funding from GSK to conduct this research. We did not receive funding for work on this abstract.) Ronald D’Amico, DO, MSc, GlaxoSmithKline (Shareholder)ViiV Healthcare (Employee) Marybeth Dalessandro, BS, ViiV Healthcare (Employee, Shareholder) Sheila Adkins, BS, GSK (Employee)GSK (Employee, Stock) Maggie Czarnogorski, MD, MPH, GlaxoSmithKline (Shareholder)ViiV Healthcare (Employee)

e13602 Background: The prognosis of cancer patients is heavily influenced by performance status which also informs an oncologist’s decision for initiating or continuing with cancer treatment. From SEER data, there is evidence that oncology patients who are discharged to a skilled nursing facility are less likely to receive chemotherapy and radiation. Patients with advanced cancer discharged from hospital also have a readmission rate as high as 34 percent. Those that are unlikely to follow up are a vulnerable population that should be identified to discuss how to best optimize post hospitalization care. Methods: University of Florida's Integrated Data Repository (IDR) was queried for established oncology patients at University of Florida Health from 2012 – 2023. The cohort was further narrowed down to patients who had exposures to antineoplastics within 6 months and loss to follow up was defined as not having a clinic visit within 6 months of hospital discharge. The study cohort included 194 patients and 97 patients were not lost to follow up and 97 patients were lost to follow up. Structured health data including ICD-9 and 10 codes, antineoplastic drug exposures, Area Deprivation Index (ADI), discharge vitals were extracted. Dataset was split into 70% training and 30% testing. Using logistic regression, random forest and XGBoost, loss to follow up was predicted with 5 fold cross validation and hyperparameter tuning with GridSearchCV for the best ROC AUC. Results: The median Charlson score for cohort was 11, median length of stay in the hospital was 7 days, median ED visits within 6 months was 8, median LACE score of 21. 86% of the cohort had Medicare, 6% with Medicaid, 6% Blue Cross, 2% Managed Care and 0.5% Other. There were 96 females and 98 males. 66% of the cohort was Caucasian and 31% Black, 3.9% Hispanic, 1% Asian, 0.5% multiracial. XGBoost and random forest performed better than logistic regression, both achieving a AUC ROC of 0.83 vs. 0.78. XGBoost had a higher F1 score of 0.75, sensitivity of 0.71, compared to 0.68 and 0.55 respectively for both Random Forest and logistic regression. The most important features for Random Forest were ED visits within 6 months, followed by diastolic blood pressure, heart rate, temperature then systolic blood pressure on day of discharge. The most important features for XGBoost were diagnoses of pulmonary congestion, pulmonary embolism, pleural effusion and type 2 diabetes with complications. Conclusions: Our XGBoost model achieved metrics which are in line with the higher performances seen with machine learning models predicting readmissions following hospital discharge. This serves as a good baseline model to compare against new state of the art models that incorporate unstructured data such as clinical notes and radiology image reports. These models are currently under development by the same authors using the clinical large language model GatorTron.

BackgroundOcular and Neurobehçet’s Disease (NBD) are the most severe manifestations of Behcet’s disease (1-4). NBD can be classified as a) primary neural parenchymal lesions, also known as parenchymal NBD (p-NBD) or b) secondary to vascular involvement or non-parenchymal NBD (np-NBD) (4). Response to biologic therapy (BT) in these two refractory subtypes of NBD is unknown.ObjectivesTo assess efficacy and safety of BT in refractory subtypes of NBD.MethodsOpen-label multicenter study of refractory NBD from 21 different referral National Hospitals. NBD diagnosis was based on the International Consensus Recommendation criteria (4). Efficacy was determined by complete or partial response and no-response. Complete, partial or no response was defined according to the resolution of the neurological syndrome (signs and/or symptoms) after the BT onset.ResultsWe studied 41 patients (21 women/20 men; mean age: 40.6±10.8 years). NBD was classified as p-NBD (n= 33, 80.5%) and np-NBD (n=17, 41.5%). There were no significant differences in baseline general features and in neurological clinical response in both subgroups (Table 1 and Figure 1). The first BT used in p-NBD were Infliximab (IFX) (n=15), Adalimumab (ADA) (n=11), Golimumab (GLM) (n=3), Tocilizumab (TCZ) (n=2) and Etanercept (ETN) (n=2) and in np-NBD were IFX (n=9), ADA (n=6), TCZ (n=1) and ETN (n=1).Table 1.Main features of p-NBD and np-NBDTotalp-NBDnp-NBDP p-NBD vs np-NBDAge at biological therapy initiation, years (mean±SD)44±13.941.4±9.639.4±10.60.412Gender, n (m/f) (%)21/20 (48.8/52.2)18/15 (54.5/45.5)5/12 (29.4/70.6)0.091HLAB51 +/ patients tested, n (%)15/31 (57.7)14/25 (58.3)4/10 (40)0.391Oral aphthae, n (%)40 (97.6)32 (97)15 (88.2)0.323Cutaneous involvement, n (%)28 (63.4)23 (69.7)10 (58.8)0.603Ocular involvement, n (%)21 (48.8)15 (45.5)9 (52.9)0.616Vascular involvement, n (%)9 (22)10 (30.3)7 (41.2)0.442Articular involvement, n (%)9 (22)7 (21.2)3 (17.6)0.765Previous conventional Immunosuppressive drugs to BTAzathioprine24 (58.5)20 (60.6)10 (58.8)-Methotrexate16 (39.0)12 (36.4)3 (17.6)-Cyclophosphamide13 (31.7)13 (39.4)5 (29.4)-Cyclosporine A9 (22.0)8 (24.2)3 (17.6)-Mycophenolate Mofetil2 (4.9)2 (6.1)0-Figure 1.Response to biological therapy according to NBD subtypes.After an overall mean follow-up of 57.5±50.9 months BT was switched in 22 patients due to inefficacy (n=16) or Adverse Effects (AE) (n=6) and in 4 cases was definitively discontinued because of complete prolonged remission (n=3) or AE (n=1). AE were observed in 7 (17.1%) patients. Severe AE were observed in 2 cases, one due to demyelinating disease and the other due to pulmonary tuberculosis, both in patients undergoing IFX therapy. The other 6 AE were infusion reaction to IFX (n=1), IFX-induced psoriasis (n=1), IFX-induced acneiform eruption (n=1), infusion reaction to TCZ (n=1), intolerance to IFX and recurrent mild infections (n=1) and erosive lichen planus and bullous impetigo (n=1).ConclusionIn our series, BT seems equally effective and safe in both refractory p-NBD and np-NBD.References[1]Martín-Varillas JL, et al. Ophthalmology 2018 Sep;125(9):1444-1451. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2018.02.020.[2]Atienza-Mateo B, et al. Arthritis Rheumatol 2019 Dec;71(12):2081-2089. doi: 10.1002/art.41026.[3]Santos-Gómez M, et al. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2016 Sep-Oct;34(6 Suppl 102): S34-S40.[4]Kalra S, et al. Diagnosis and management of Neuro-Behçet’s disease: international consensus recommendations. J Neurol. 2014 Sep;261(9):1662–76.Disclosure of InterestsAlba Herrero-Morant: None declared, José Luis Martín-Varillas Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Pfizer, Lilly, Janssen, UCB, and Celgene, Santos Castañeda Paid instructor for: Assistant professor of the Cátedra UAM-ROCHE, EPID-Future, UAM, Madrid, Spain, Olga Maiz-Alonso: None declared, Julio Sanchez-Martin: None declared, Norberto Ortego: None declared, Enrique Raya: None declared, Águeda Prior-Español: None declared, Clara Moriano: None declared, Rafael Melero: None declared, Jenaro Graña: None declared, ANA URRUTICOECHEA-ARANA: None declared, Angel Ramos Calvo: None declared, Marta Loredo Martínez: None declared, Eva Salgado-Pérez: None declared, Francisca Sivera: None declared, Ignacio Torre-Salaberri: None declared, J. Narváez Speakers bureau: Bristol-Myers Squibb, José Luis Andréu Sánchez: None declared, Olga Martínez González: None declared, Ricardo Gómez de la Torre: None declared, Sabela Fernández: None declared, Susana Romero-Yuste: None declared, Iñigo Gonzalez-Mazon: None declared, Carmen Álvarez-Reguera: None declared, David Martínez-López: None declared, J. Luis Hernández: None declared, Miguel Á. González-Gay Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Roche, Sanofi, Lilly, Celgene, Sobi, and MSD, Grant/research support from: Abbvie, MSD, Janssen, and Roche, Ricardo Blanco Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Lilly, Pfizer, Roche, BMS, Janssen, and MSD, Grant/research support from: Abbvie, MSD, and Roche

Background: Standard first-line treatment for patients diagnosed with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is the R-CHOP regimen. Despite numerous efforts to improve on this regimen, in all comers and specifically in those with activated B-cell (ABC)-type DLBCL, results from large randomized studies have failed to show a significant clinical advantage above this standard. Recently, 2 large clinical trials in previously untreated DLBCL evaluated the combination of lenalidomide/R-CHOP (R2-CHOP) vs standard R-CHOP and demonstrated discordant results. We analyzed data from these trials to identify differences that may have impacted the disparate trial outcomes while identifying patient characteristics associated with benefit from the addition of lenalidomide across the trials. Methods: The 2 trials included in this evaluation are ROBUST, an international, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, phase III study of R2-CHOP vs placebo/R-CHOP, and the Intergroup ECOG-ACRIN 1412 (E1412) trial, a US-only, randomized, open-label, phase II study of R2-CHOP vs R-CHOP. Additional key study design differences included dosing, and subtype timing and inclusion (both studies used gene expression profiling [GEP] by NanoString). R-CHOP dosing differed only for prednisone, which was a flat 100 mg dose, d1-5 in ROBUST and 100 mg/m2, d1-5 in E1412. The lenalidomide dose and schedule varied between studies: 15 mg/d, d1-14/21 for ROBUST (210 mg/cycle) and 25 mg/d, d1-10/21 (250 mg/cycle) for E1412. ROBUST enrolled only patients prospectively identified with the ABC subtype, whereas E1412 enrolled all otherwise eligible patients and retrospectively evaluated for ABC-type with prespecified ABC-type accrual and power parameters. Both studies enrolled patients with IPI status ≥ 2, ECOG PS 0-2, and Ann Arbor stage II-IV (E1412 stage II with mass > 10 cm). The primary endpoint in both was progression-free survival (PFS; central review for ROBUST and investigator-assessed for E1412). Secondary endpoints included event-free survival (EFS; key for ROBUST), overall and complete response rates, overall survival (OS), and safety. Results: ROBUST enrolled 570 ABC patients and E1412 enrolled 280 GCB, ABC, and unclassified DLBCL patients. Patient profiles in both studies (ROBUST [ABC]/E1412 [all COO]) were similar in terms of median ages (65 y/66 y), male sex (58%/61%), and ECOG PS 1-2 (55%/63%). Patients in E1412 were more high risk: IPI 2 (42% ROBUST/34% E1412), IPI ≥ 3 (58%/66%), and Ann Arbor stage III/IV disease (87%/97%). Importantly, there was a notable difference in the time from patient diagnosis to treatment: median 31 days for ROBUST and 21 days (22% > 31 d) for E1412. Only 6% of patients in ROBUST were treated within 2 weeks of diagnosis vs 30% in E1412. At a median follow-up of ~2.5 y for both studies, E1412 met its primary endpoint of improvement in PFS with 34% reduction in the risk of PD/death (2-y PFS: 76% vs 70%) for all patients, but did not reach statistical significance in ABC-DLBCL patients for 2-y PFS (71% vs 61%) or 2-y OS (88% vs 76%). ROBUST showed no significant improvement in the primary PFS endpoint (2-y PFS: 67% vs 64%) or 2-y OS (79% vs 80%) in ABC patients. Subgroup analyses of PFS comparing R2-CHOP vs R-CHOP control within each study suggested that certain baseline factors favor the R2-CHOP arm, including: female sex, high IPI score (≥ 3), non-bulky disease (< 7 cm), and high Ann Arbor stage IV disease. Conclusion: While the ROBUST study design integrated state-of-the-art, real-time GEP to prospectively identify ABC-DLBCL patients with rapid lab turnaround time, cases of logistical delays in tissue submission for central analysis and staging procedures may have resulted in accrual of patients with lower-risk DLBCL and prolonged time from diagnosis to treatment. In contrast, E1412 retrospectively stratified patients by COO through GEP and was able to accrue higher-risk patients irrespective of COO within a shorter time from diagnosis to treatment, which among other differences (eg, smaller population size, study phase), could contribute to the improvement over R-CHOP control. Our comparative findings have significant implications for the design of future biomarker-driven trials and provide momentum for studies of novel combinations with R-CHOP in DLBCL. Further investigation into other factors, including dose intensity and their correlation with outcomes, will be presented. Disclosures Nowakowski: Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; NanoString: Research Funding; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Research Funding; Selvita: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Curis: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding. Chiappella:Servier: Other: advisory board, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Speakers Bureau; Teva: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Other: advisory board, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Other: advisory board, Speakers Bureau. Hong:Dana Farber Cancer Institute: Employment; Merck: Consultancy. Scott:Roche/Genentech: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; NanoString: Patents & Royalties: Named inventor on a patent licensed to NanoSting [Institution], Research Funding. Amengual:Appia Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Epizyme: Speakers Bureau. Leonard:BeiGene: Consultancy; Miltenyi: Consultancy; Sandoz: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; MorphoSys: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; Epizyme, Inc: Consultancy; Miltenyi: Consultancy; Genentech, Inc./F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Akcea Therapeutics: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Nordic Nanovector: Consultancy; Akcea Therapeutics: Consultancy; Bayer Corporation: Consultancy; Sandoz: Consultancy; MorphoSys: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Nordic Nanovector: Consultancy; Sutro Biopharma: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy. Friedberg:Bayer: Honoraria, Other: Data & Safety Monitoring Committee; Acerta: Other: Data & Safety Monitoring Committee. Kostakoglu:F. Hoffman-La Roche: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy. Jurczak:Morphosys: Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Research Funding; Sandoz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novo Nordisk: Research Funding; Servier: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Celtrion: Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Loxo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Yamamoto:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bayer: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Eisai: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Meiji Seika Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; ARIAD: Research Funding; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Ono: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; SymBio: Research Funding; HUYA/IQVIA Services Japan: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Chugai: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria; Sumitomo Dainippon: Honoraria; Incyte: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Kyowa Kirin: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Otsuka: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Solasia Pharma: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Czuczman:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Russo:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hudak:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership; Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zhang:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Wade:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kahl:ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; BeiGene: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy. Vitolo:Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Speakers Bureau; Juno Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Kite: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. OffLabel Disclosure: Yes, these trials discuss off-label clinical trial investigation of lenalidomide plus R-CHOP in patients with newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

Abstract Background: Trisomy 4 is a recurrent but rare cytogenetic abnormality reported in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). The prognostic significance of this abnormality in AML patients is not clear. Prognosis of AML patients with trisomy 4 seems to be poor as compared to that of patients with intermediate-risk cytogenetics. Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HCT) may improve survival if applied early in first complete remission (CR). However, neither prospective clinical nor larger retrospective cohort studies are available to support these results from small series. Aims: To characterize AML patients with trisomy 4 and compare outcomes according to different treatment strategies. Methods: We retrospectively studied 123 AML patients with trisomy 4 (median age at diagnosis, 58 years; range, 16-76 years) treated between 2000 and 2019 within 2 large study groups. Standard statistical methods were applied. Results: Median white blood cell count at diagnosis was 4.8/nl (range, 0.4-255/nl) and platelets 46/nl (range, 2-330/nl). Type of AML was de novo in 97 (79%), secondary after myelodysplastic syndrome/myeloproliferative neoplasm in 18 (15%), and therapy-related in 8 (6%) patients. Sixty-two (50%) patients were female. Cytogenetic analysis revealed trisomy 4 as the sole abnormality in 28 (23%), additional abnormalities in 95 (77%) patients, most frequently ≥3 (n=66) abnormalities, trisomy 8 (n=41), karyotypes characterized by trisomies only (n=21) and t(8;21) or inv(16) (CBF; n=10). A total of 98 patients (80%) had NPM1 and FLT3-ITD mutation testing. Of those, 21 (21%) and 15 (15%) harbored NPM1 and FLT3-ITD mutations. Only 2 (3%) of 72 patients were CEBPA double mutated. Data on response to intensive anthracycline-based induction therapy were available in 117 patients. Early death rate was 5% (n=6). CR was achieved in 68% (n=79) with 22 (19%) requiring an intensive salvage treatment cycle. Notably, patients with trisomy 4 as sole abnormality had a CR rate of 89% (n=25/28). There was no difference in the CR rate in FLT3-ITD positive (n=10/15) as compared to FLT3 wild type (n=56/83) patients (67% each, P=0.99). Univariable analysis revealed trisomy 4 as sole abnormality (OR, 5.76; P=0.007) and NPM1 (OR, 12.08; P=0.02) as favorable factors. An allo-HCT was performed in 40 (34%) patients, of whom 19 patients were transplanted in first CR after induction therapy. Nine patients achieved CR after salvage chemotherapy and went on to allo-HCT; another 12 patients received allo-HCT with active disease. Type of donor was matched-related in 8, matched-unrelated in 30, and unknown in 2 of the 40 patients, respectively. Median follow-up of the intensively treated cohort was 73 months (95%-CI, 36-91 months). Five-year overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) were 31% (95%-CI, 23-42%) and 27% (95%-CI, 18-42%). OS rates were significantly higher in patients with CBF leukemia or patients with trisomy 4 as compared to all other abnormalities (Figure 1; P&lt;0.001). Cox regression analysis on OS revealed CBF/CEBPA (HR, 0.75; P=0.02) and trisomy 4 as sole abnormality (HR, 0.63; P=0.04) as favorable factors; age with a difference of ten years was an in trend adverse factor (HR, 1.15; P=0.06; not significant: NPM1, FLT3-ITD, complex karyotype with ≥3 abnormalities). There was no difference on OS if patients proceeded to allo-HCT in CR1 or with active disease (P=0.8). Five-year RFS was 26% (95%-CI, 14-50%) in patients proceeding to allo-HCT after induction therapy (n=40), as compared to 28% (95%-CI, 17-46%; P=0.99) in those who received consolidation chemotherapy (n=49). Conclusions: Clinically, patients with trisomy 4 are very heterogeneous in particular with respect to cytogenetic and molecular abnormalities. In our cohort, patients with trisomy 4 as a sole abnormality had a high CR rate and favorable clinical outcome. In the total cohort, allo-HCT did not improve RFS. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Krause: Siemens: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; art-tempi: Honoraria; Kosmas: Honoraria; Gilead: Other: travel support; Abbvie: Other: travel support. Schliemann: Philogen S.p.A.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Other: travel grants; Astellas: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Boehringer-Ingelheim: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Other: travel grants; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy. Haenel: Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bayer Vital: Honoraria; Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria; GSK: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Crysandt: Incyte: Honoraria; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Fransecky: Medac: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria. Martinez-Lopez: Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Einsele: Janssen, Celgene/BMS, Amgen, GSK, Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Platzbecker: AbbVie: Honoraria; Celgene/BMS: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Geron: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria. Baldus: Novartis: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene/BMS: Honoraria; Jazz: Honoraria. Müller-Tidow: Pfizer: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bioline: Research Funding. Levis: Astellas and FujiFilm: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen, Astellas Pharma, Daiichi-Sankyo, FujiFilm, and Menarini: Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria. Montesinos: Stemline/Menarini: Consultancy; Teva: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Forma Therapeutics: Consultancy; Glycomimetics: Consultancy; Tolero Pharmaceutical: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Astellas Pharma, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Advisory board, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Röllig: Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Meyer-Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Jazz: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding. Schlenk: Novartis: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Hexal: Honoraria; Neovio Biotech: Honoraria; Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; Astellas: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Honoraria; Agios: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Boehringer Ingelheim: Research Funding.

A home may be beautiful, having a perfectcombination of different art elements and accessories. Other than, basic principles of interiors, accessories are essential for taking the design to the next level. It adds beauty, style, and warmth to various interior spaces of the house. A simple and monotonous place can be changed into a stylish and aesthetically modern place with the use ofthe right accessories. Accessories usually reflectthe interest, sensitivity,style,and personality of the occupants. Some of the accessories will have specific functions, others will be purely decorative. The functional accessoriesinclude clocks, ashtrays, lamps,etc. whereas, decorative accessories include pictures, mirrors, sculptures, flower arrangements, etc. Functional accessoriesmust be useful.In all cases, the accessories should follow the theme of the room and must contribute towards the overall harmony with the surroundings and pleasing to the eyes.Thus, accessories have a very important role to play in interior decoration.