Neoadjuvant concomitant chemoradiotherapy has become a standard treatment of locally advanced rectal adenocarcinomas (LARA). It leads to shrinkage of the tumor mass and subsequently to an increase in complete resections (R0 resections), increasing a feasibility of sphincter-sparing intervention avoiding colostomy. It is based on concurrent application of fluoropyrimidines (5-fluorouracil, capecitabine) and radiotherapy (45 - 50,4 Gy). It shows less acute toxicity and improves local control rate in comparison to adjuvant treatment. Unfortunately, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy is not beneficial for all patients. The treatment response ranges from a complete pathological remission (pCR, ypT0ypN0) to a resistance. It is reported that cca 15 percent of patients with advanced rectal cancer show pCR which is indicative of improved long-term prognosis. DESIGN: The following is a review of the significance of neoadjuvant concomitant chemoradiotherapy in the treatment algorithm of patients with LARA and summary of potentional clinical-pathological and molecular markers of response prediction to neoadjuvant therapy. The most important clinical studies concern serum tumor markers levels, clinical lymph node classification. The components of the carcinogenic pathways are explored, including oncogenes, tumor supressor genes, microsatellite instability (MSI) and potentional markers involved in apoptosis, angiogionesis, proliferation as well as metastasis and invasion, are reviewed. Finally, the role of specific enzymes associated with the metabolism of fluoropyrimidines are examined. CONCLUSIONS: No one marker has been consistently identified as clinically applicable. Studies designed to determine the potentional markers are hampered by various techniques as well as tumor heterogenity and recent scientific approach--studying individual molecular markers. Gene expression profiling analysis of multiple genes from the same tumor is becoming reality. We suppose that this assessment will lead in future in finding combination of markers for predicting prognosis and response to therapy in rectal cancer., Garajová Ingrid, Svoboda M., Slabý O., Kocáková L., Fabian P., Kocák I., Vyzula R., and Lit.: 71
Method of groundwater flow velocity determination in sand and gravel aquifer of Danube river is described in the paper. The solution in which seasonal changes of ground and river water temperatures are used is original. It gives good opportunity for solution of different hydrogeological and water management problems. The method application is demonstrated on the example of Sihoť well field in Bratislava Karlova Ves. Results were used in design ground water zones protection. and V príspevku je opísaná metóda určovania rýchlosti prúdenia podzemnej vody v náplavoch rieky Dunaj. Metodický postup, pri ktorom sú využité sezónne zmeny teploty podzemnej a povrchovej vody, je pôvodný a dáva pomerne veľké možnosti uplatnenia v hydrogeológii a vo vodárenstve. V príspevku je opísané využitie metódy v konkrétnych prírodnych podmienkach zdroja pitnej vody na ostrove Sihoť v Bratislave-Karlovej Vsi. Takto zídkané výsledky boli použité pri navrhovaní pásiem hygienickej ochrany zdroja.
Typing knowledge is capable to resolve Fitch’s knowability paradox. As I have argued elsewhere, Russellian typing knowledge is immune to the recently raised criticism of the typing approach. This paper focuses on a special form of the criticism proposing a revenge problem raised by Williamson, Hart and also Carrara with Fassio. The basic idea of the revenge Fitch’s paradox employs quantification over type levels. However, the formalism used by the critics is ambivalent. I concentrate only on its two most probable readings, explaining also quantification over types and quantification over orders. As I show in details, if such readings went through, they would violate the typing rules in a direct manner. Hence, there is no revenge for the Russellian typing approach to Fitch’s knowability paradox., Znalost psaní je schopna řešit paradox paradigmatu Fitch. Jak jsem se dohadoval jinde, znalosti ruského psaní jsou imunní vůči nedávno vznesené kritice přístupu k psaní. Tato práce se zaměřuje na speciální formu kritiky, která navrhuje, aby se Williamson, Hart a Carrara s Fassiem pokusili o pomstu. Základní myšlenka pomsty Fitchova paradoxu využívá kvantifikaci nad úrovněmi typu. Formalizmus použitý kritiky je však dvojznačný. Soustředím se pouze na dvě nejpravděpodobnější hodnoty, vysvětlující také kvantifikaci nad typy a kvantifikaci nad zakázkami. Jak ukážu podrobně, pokud by takové čtení proběhlo, porušily by pravidla psaní přímo. Není tedy pomsta za Russellianský typizační přístup k paradoxu znalostí Fitch., and Jiří Raclavský