What is the PROBE design concerning clinical trials- it was described in the IDEAL trial but no specifics?
373234
PROBE is an acronym which stands for Prospective, Randomized, Open-label, Blinded-Endpoint.  These types of clinical trials tend to be easier to do than a double-blinded placebo controlled design (DBPC) for you don't have to have to have a matched placebo group and the "open-label" allows the enrolled patients to receive a marketed form of the drug.  A disadvantage of PROBE studies is that because only the endpoint is blinded, there can be investigator/patient bias introduced, so many researchers believe that the data obtained is less reliable than in double-blind study.
231717
I haven't heard of it. My attitude toward it, however, is to find out WHAT the actual tests consisted of. Though people test products all the time, it does not mean that they tested in a way that could possibly be accurate.
726852
It all depends on how much different you expect the results to be between the experimental group and the control group. I am on simvastatin and have gone periods drinking more green tea. Have not watched my HDL levels closely enough to compared effects. \n\nI use statcalc in EpiInfo to run sample size calculations and find that is easy and accurate. I think that would work for your experiment and your question.
947547
what is meant by the two kit algorith, I think the concept is that we need to rule out false positives after the first test (A good screening test is sensitive but not specific, ELISA in this case) there are multiple reasons for this, the second test, western blot is highly specific. Once confirmed then we can jump up to expensive and detailed things like virus levels  or treatment etc, hope this answers your query, good luck
824598
Not personally, but the hospital i work at works extensively with them.  I would have no worries or second thoughts about entering one of their trials if that was my situation.  We actually use a few of their protocols here.  Hope that helps a little.  :)
1119868
It's a fairly new procedure that shows promise. The body of research is still young and has a small pool of subjects, but looks good. It will only work for type 1 diabetics, but I believe it will improve a lot of these folks lives, if no long term side effects pop up down the road.
829621
This any good\n\nhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9473085&dopt=Abstract
228013
Do a web search for the parameters.  We would need much more information from you on sample types, volumes, etc and you capabilities, instrumentation available, etc.  All of these are factors in deciding a method.
495873
Standard plot of what?  What is the analysis parameter you are interested in measuring?
926749
The alleged murderer could not be located for questioning. \n\nThe alleged cure-all produced no results when it was tested by reputable doctors.
463163
JAMA wouldn't have single case studies but you can find information/teaching tools that cover the things your seeking at the American Cancer Society web site or if this is part of a project contact your state Radiological Society or local hospital radiology department administrator tell them what your doing and see if the have a radiologist  ( licensed person who actually administer the chemo/radio tx under a physicians order) who's willing to help. Most jump at the chance if not swamped. they wont give you personal patient info but they can give you disease and treatment scenarios. hope this helps and good luck.if all else fails, check out the CDC's latest research and statistics. they cover North America and globally.
826531
tiny amounts of chemical can stick to differnt things, like stir bar, stir rod, thermometer and if you remove these items before the experiment is over then you remove some chemicals.  Other kinetics events that your not considering. as in pressure, humididtym and so on.  If you used a Ph probe then maybe it wasn't calibrated right or isn't properly maintained
177423
It binds to a specific sequence of the gene. If the gene is present, it will bind, if not, it will not bind. Usually the probe also has a fluorescence end, therefore you can use a light to show that it did bind or not.
757456
I am hoping that by "investigatory projects" you mean experiments. The importance of experiments is to determine whether observations agree or contradict theory.
342075
Here is an excerpt from the warning letter sent to physicians from the manufacturer of Herceptin:\n\n"Dear Healthcare Provider:\n\nGenentech, Inc. wishes to inform you of updated cardiotoxicity information related to the use of HERCEPTIN® (trastuzumab), obtained from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) study (B-31), a randomized, Phase III trial that was conducted in 2043 women with operable, HER2 overexpressing breast cancer (IHC 3+ or FISH+). \n\nThis study demonstrated a significant increase in cardiotoxicity in patients who were randomized to the HERCEPTIN-containing arm as compared to patients who received chemotherapy alone.\n\nA preliminary analysis of the safety data from Study NSABP B-31 was presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) in May 2005, during the presentation of a joint analysis of Study NSABP B-31 and the North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) study (N9831). Study NSABP B-31 was intended, in part, to characterize cardiotoxicity associated with HERCEPTIN use and to assess the value of serial cardiac monitoring during HERCEPTIN therapy as a predictor of cardiotoxicity and as an aid to early identification of cardiac toxicity.\n\nStudy NSABP B-31 evaluated the addition of HERCEPTIN to standard adjuvant chemotherapy. The chemotherapy regimen\nconsisted of four cycles of doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) followed by four cycles of paclitaxel every 3 weeks; patients were randomized to receive 1 year of HERCEPTIN, at the approved dose and schedule, during and following paclitaxel (Arm 2) or to paclitaxel alone (Arm 1). Patients in this study were required to have a baseline assessment of cardiac function with either multigated acquisition scan (MUGA) or echocardiogram and to have follow-up assessments at the completion of AC and at 6, 9, and 18 months after the initiation of paclitaxel with or without HERCEPTIN. \n\nEligible patients had a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) measurement at baseline (prior to any therapy) that was within normal limits and no history of or active cardiac disease, including cardiomyopathy, congestive heart failure, prior myocardial infarction, or arrhythmia.\nPrior to initiation of HERCEPTIN (Arm 2), LVEF measurements were required to be at or above the radiology facility's lower limit of normal (LLN) and be no more than 15 points below baseline measurements. \n\nFor patients randomized to Arm 2 with asymptomatic decrease in LVEF, the following table lists the guidelines that were employed for dose modification of HERCEPTIN [table unable to be produced here].\n\nHERCEPTIN was permanently discontinued in patients with symptomatic cardiac toxicity. In the event that HERCEPTlN\nadministration was withheld or discontinued because of cardiotoxicity, paclitaxel was administered at the investigator's discretion.\n\nA total of 1019 patients were randomized to the HERCEPTIN-containing arm (Arm 2). Based on preliminary data and analyses through April 2005, 6.8% of patients were unable to initiate HERCEPTlN per the protocol because of decreased LVEF or symptoms of cardiac toxicity experienced during the AC portion of therapy. Among the evaluable patients who had adequate cardiac function and initiated HERCEPTIN, 30.5% required at least one dose delay because of asymptomatic decrease in LVEF or cardiac symptoms. \n\nIn 18.6% of patients, HERCEPTIN was discontinued prior to the completion of 1 year of therapy because of asymptomatic decrease in LVEF (14.3%) and symptomatic cardiac dysfunction/other cardiac toxicity (4.3%). \n\nIn addition, a statistically significant increase in the 3-year cumulative incidence of New York Heart Association Class III and IV congestive heart failure and cardiac death was observed in patients who received the HERCEPTIN-containing regimen (4.1%) compared with control (0.8%). \n\nThere were no cardiac deaths observed in patients who received the HERCEPTIN-containing reg
644127
each case is individual. There are no current stats on reoccurence of this type of tumour.
260130
As a nurse, I can tell you what this means but you should be told by your physician.  If he/she told you that your uptake result was 0%, didn't he tell you what that meant?  I find it hard to believe he gave you the results but didn't tell you the significance...after all, only a doctor should diagnose.