Catalogue Search | MBRL
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
{{itemTitle}}
58,217
result(s) for
"Salvage"
Sort by:
Earth-friendly crafts from recycled stuff in 5 easy steps
\"Provides step-by-step instructions on how to create fourteen simple crafts using various recyclable materials\"--Provided by publisher.
Book
55 Victims ‘positively identified’ so far in AA crash
D.C. Fire and EMS Chief John Donnelly confirmed on Sunday, Feb. 2, that 55 victims had been ’positively identified‘ so far as salvage operations set to begin.
Streaming Video
Making things : finding use, meaning & satisfaction in crafting everyday objects
Through easy-to-follow tutorials for over 100 projects that are both accessible and aspirational, Making Things invites readers to try their hands at a variety of crafts and celebrate the satisfaction that comes from slowly and carefully creating for oneself. Learn to fold magazine pages into Masu Boxes for organizing bits and bobs, make a cardboard loom for weaving potholders out of old linens, braid your own Kumihimo Dog Leash, or starch fabric scraps for decorative bunting. Makers Rose Pearlman and Erin Boyle met in 2018 and immediately struck up a friendship, united by a reverence for everyday objects. Their approach towards craft reflects a shared commitment to sustainability and accessibility - as they write in Making Things' introduction, \"Craft can be exquisite and exacting, the result of formal training and years of practice, but it can also be experimental and messy and not quite perfect.\" Scouring sidewalks, stoops, and thrift stores, the authors repurpose materials to create projects that range from functional to fun and frivolous. Step-by-step guides make it simple to start and finish each project, while the book's stunning photographs show how each craft can fit within an organized, thoughtfully curated home. As Making Things demonstrates, relying on a limited range of supplies and repurposing the same materials can spur our creativity, encouraging us to look at a pile of junk on a stoop and see endless possibilities.
Book
Surgery or Endovascular Therapy for Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia
Patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) require revascularization to improve limb perfusion and thereby limit the risk of amputation. It is uncertain whether an initial strategy of endovascular therapy or surgical revascularization for CLTI is superior for improving limb outcomes.
In this international, randomized trial, we enrolled 1830 patients with CLTI and infrainguinal peripheral artery disease in two parallel-cohort trials. Patients who had a single segment of great saphenous vein that could be used for surgery were assigned to cohort 1. Patients who needed an alternative bypass conduit were assigned to cohort 2. The primary outcome was a composite of a major adverse limb event - which was defined as amputation above the ankle or a major limb reintervention (a new bypass graft or graft revision, thrombectomy, or thrombolysis) - or death from any cause.
In cohort 1, after a median follow-up of 2.7 years, a primary-outcome event occurred in 302 of 709 patients (42.6%) in the surgical group and in 408 of 711 patients (57.4%) in the endovascular group (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59 to 0.79; P<0.001). In cohort 2, a primary-outcome event occurred in 83 of 194 patients (42.8%) in the surgical group and in 95 of 199 patients (47.7%) in the endovascular group (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.58 to 1.06; P = 0.12) after a median follow-up of 1.6 years. The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two groups in the two cohorts.
Among patients with CLTI who had an adequate great saphenous vein for surgical revascularization (cohort 1), the incidence of a major adverse limb event or death was significantly lower in the surgical group than in the endovascular group. Among the patients who lacked an adequate saphenous vein conduit (cohort 2), the outcomes in the two groups were similar. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; BEST-CLI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02060630.).
Journal Article
Earth-friendly engineering crafts
What can you engineer from recycled materials? This books has loads of ideas! Construct an airplane from cardboard and a plastic bottle, transform an old T-shirt into a working wind sock, and build a small city from plastic containers. Detailed instructions and photos of the steps and the finished product will guide crafty engineers-in-training to make engineering-themed projects. Extend learning with additional photos of the maker process, accessible online via QR code.
Book
A randomized phase III study of carfilzomib vs low-dose corticosteroids with optional cyclophosphamide in relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (FOCUS)
This randomized, phase III, open-label, multicenter study compared carfilzomib monotherapy against low-dose corticosteroids and optional cyclophosphamide in relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma patients were randomized (1:1) to receive carfilzomib (10-min intravenous infusion; 20 mg/m
2
on days 1 and 2 of cycle 1; 27 mg/m
2
thereafter) or a control regimen of low-dose corticosteroids (84 mg of dexamethasone or equivalent corticosteroid) with optional cyclophosphamide (1400 mg) for 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Three-hundred and fifteen patients were randomized to carfilzomib (
n
=157) or control (
n
=158). Both groups had a median of five prior regimens. In the control group, 95% of patients received cyclophosphamide. Median OS was 10.2 (95% confidence interval (CI) 8.4–14.4) vs 10.0 months (95% CI 7.7–12.0) with carfilzomib vs control (hazard ratio=0.975; 95% CI 0.760–1.249;
P
=0.4172). Progression-free survival was similar between groups; overall response rate was higher with carfilzomib (19.1 vs 11.4%). The most common grade ⩾3 adverse events were anemia (25.5 vs 30.7%), thrombocytopenia (24.2 vs 22.2%) and neutropenia (7.6 vs 12.4%) with carfilzomib vs control. Median OS for single-agent carfilzomib was similar to that for an active doublet control regimen in heavily pretreated RRMM patients.
Journal Article
Cool odds and ends projects : creative ways to upcycle your trash into treasure
This book presents a variety of craft projects that can be created using recycled trash and found objects.
Book
Brentuximab vedotin as consolidation therapy after autologous stem-cell transplantation in patients with Hodgkin's lymphoma at risk of relapse or progression (AETHERA): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial
High-dose therapy followed by autologous stem-cell transplantation is standard of care for patients with relapsed or primary refractory Hodgkin's lymphoma. Roughly 50% of patients might be cured after autologous stem-cell transplantation; however, most patients with unfavourable risk factors progress after transplantation. We aimed to assess whether brentuximab vedotin improves progression-free survival when given as early consolidation after autologous stem-cell transplantation.
We did this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial at 78 sites in North America and Europe. Patients with unfavourable-risk relapsed or primary refractory classic Hodgkin's lymphoma who had undergone autologous stem-cell transplantation were randomly assigned, by fixed-block randomisation with a computer-generated random number sequence, to receive 16 cycles of 1·8 mg/kg brentuximab vedotin or placebo intravenously every 3 weeks, starting 30–45 days after transplantation. Randomisation was stratified by best clinical response after completion of salvage chemotherapy (complete response vs partial response vs stable disease) and primary refractory Hodgkin's lymphoma versus relapsed disease less than 12 months after completion of frontline therapy versus relapse 12 months or more after treatment completion. Patients and study investigators were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival by independent review, defined as the time from randomisation to the first documentation of tumour progression or death. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01100502.
Between April 6, 2010, and Sept 21, 2012, we randomly assigned 329 patients to the brentuximab vedotin group (n=165) or the placebo group (n=164). Progression-free survival by independent review was significantly improved in patients in the brentuximab vedotin group compared with those in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·57, 95% CI 0·40–0·81; p=0·0013). Median progression-free survival by independent review was 42·9 months (95% CI 30·4–42·9) for patients in the brentuximab vedotin group compared with 24·1 months (11·5–not estimable) for those in the placebo group. We recorded consistent benefit (HR <1) of brentuximab vedotin consolidation across subgroups. The most frequent adverse events in the brentuximab vedotin group were peripheral sensory neuropathy (94 [56%] of 167 patients vs 25 [16%] of 160 patients in the placebo group) and neutropenia (58 [35%] vs 19 [12%] patients). At time of analysis, 28 (17%) of 167 patients had died in the brentuximab vedotin group compared with 25 (16%) of 160 patients in the placebo group.
Early consolidation with brentuximab vedotin after autologous stem-cell transplantation improved progression-free survival in patients with Hodgkin's lymphoma with risk factors for relapse or progression after transplantation. This treatment provides an important therapeutic option for patients undergoing autologous stem-cell transplantation.
Seattle Genetics and Takeda Pharmaceuticals International.
Journal Article
Dolutegravir versus ritonavir-boosted lopinavir both with dual nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor therapy in adults with HIV-1 infection in whom first-line therapy has failed (DAWNING): an open-label, non-inferiority, phase 3b trial
Doubts exist regarding optimal second-line treatment options for HIV-1-infected patients in resource-limited settings. We assessed safety and efficacy of dolutegravir compared with ritonavir-boosted lopinavir, plus two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) in adults in whom previous first-line antiretroviral therapy with a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) plus two NRTIs has failed.
DAWNING is a phase 3b, open-label, parallel-group, non-inferiority, active-controlled trial done at 58 sites in 13 countries. Eligible adults were aged at least 18 years and, during at least 6 months of treatment with a first-line treatment containing an NNRTI and two NRTIs, had virological failure (confirmed HIV-1 RNA ≥400 copies per mL). Participants were randomly assigned by a central randomisation system to receive oral dolutegravir (50 mg once daily) or ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (800 mg lopinavir plus 200 mg ritonavir once daily or 400 mg plus 100 mg twice daily), plus two investigator-selected NRTIs (at least one fully active based on resistance testing at screening). The primary outcome was the proportion of participants achieving viral suppression (defined as plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per mL) at week 48 using the snapshot algorithm and a non-inferiority margin of −12%. The primary analysis was done in an intention-to-treat-exposed (ITT-E) population of participants who received at least one dose of study medication, according to original group assignment. Safety was analysed in all participants who received at least one dose of study drug, according to which drug was received. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02227238, and viiv-studyregister.com, number 200304.
Between Dec 11, 2014, and June 27, 2016, 968 adults were screened and 627 were randomly assigned to the dolutegravir group (n=312) or the ritonavir-boosted lopinavir group (n=315). Three patients in the ritonavir-boosted lopinavir group did not receive study medication and so 624 were included in the ITT-E population. At week 48, 261 (84%) of 312 participants in the dolutegravir group achieved viral suppression compared with 219 (70%) of 312 in the ritonavir-boosted lopinavir group (adjusted difference 13·8%; 95% CI 7·3–20·3). Non-inferiority was achieved on the basis of the 95% CI of the adjusted treatment difference having a lower bound greater than −12% (prespecified non-inferiority margin). Because the lower bound of the 95% CI is greater than zero (7·3%), superiority of dolutegravir was also concluded (p<0·0001). The safety profile for dolutegravir was favourable compared with that of ritonavir-boosted lopinavir. More grade 2–4 drug-related adverse events occurred with ritonavir-boosted lopinavir than dolutegravir (44 [14%] of 310 with ritonavir-boosted lopinavir vs 11 [4%] of 314 with dolutegravir), mainly driven by gastrointestinal disorders.
When administered with two NRTIs, dolutegravir was superior to ritonavir-boosted lopinavir at 48 weeks and can be considered a suitable option for second-line treatment.
ViiV Healthcare.
Journal Article