Florida College is a private Christian college in Temple Terrace, Florida. It offers bachelor's and associate degrees.Founded as a junior college in 1946, Florida College now draws its staff, faculty, and the majority of its students from non-institutional churches of Christ. The college is recognized among these churches and the community as a training center for ministers while also providing accredited programs in several high demand fields of study. The college is an autonomous educational entity not beholden to any corporate religious body; it accepts no monetary contributions from any congregation or organized religious bodies and its board members serve as individuals rather than as official representatives of any such entity.The emphasis Florida College places on its Christian roots is expressed in its traditional chapel services held on weekdays during the academic calendar year. All members of the board of directors and all faculty members are active members in a church of Christ as prescribed by the college charter. All students take biblical courses as part of their liberal arts undergraduate curriculum.
Background: When nurse practitioner students start clinical rotations, they may feel unprepared to present patient case information to their preceptors. Although preceptors understand the benefits of active learning, when students provide weak or tangential presentations from lack of a structured model, preceptors may fall back on observational and passive learning due to time management constraints. Objective: This article shows an example of teaching SNAPPS during an on-campus skills lab and the outcomes for students and faculty. Methods: Students were taught the SNAPPS model during a skills lab in advanced health assessment. Utilizing case studies in a role-play format, they practiced acquired course skills and presented patient information using SNAPPS. The students completed surveys both before and after the skills lab. A Likert scale was used to measure their confidence levels at both points of time. Results: A Wilcoxon signed-rank test revealed a statistically significant increase in student confidence across all postsurvey scores (p < .05). Conclusions: Interactive case studies with SNAPPS practice enhance student confidence prior to clinical rotations. Implications for Nursing: As an active learning model, SNAPPS may ease the burden on preceptors and make them more receptive to having students.
This article reports on a parametric investigation of the effect of the microencapsulated phase change material (MEPCM) particle roughness on the heat transfer characteristics of an MEPCM slurry. The MEPCM slurry is hydrodynamically fully developed and flows in a circular tube under laminar conditions with a constant heat flux boundary condition. Three roughness shapes were investigated, and six parameters were analyzed to determine their effect on the heat transfer characteristics of the MEPCM slurry. Results show that the MEPCM particle roughness does have an effect on the heat transfer characteristics of the MEPCM slurry since the average Nusselt number (Nuav) increases by up to 7.23% compared to that of the conventional MEPCM particle. Furthermore, the dimensionless perimeter of the MEPCM particle with roughness was found to increase by up to 110.47% compared to that of the conventional MEPCM particle while keeping the MEPCM particle area constant. Results also show that the rectangular roughness shape has the most effect on the Nuav compared to those of the other investigated roughness shapes. This article provides a different perspective in the field of MEPCM slurries by raising awareness regarding the significance of the particle roughness for future numerical and experimental studies with the goal of increasing the accuracy of the model and developing new varieties of rough MEPCM particles that would enhance heat transfer.
BACKGROUND:Surgical procedures remain the gold standard for treating basal cell carcinoma (BCC), although commonly associated with cosmetic defects. The demand for noninvasive alternatives remains high. OBJECTIVE:To determine efficacy and safety of red light photodynamic therapy (PDT) with 10% 5-aminolevulinic acid (ALA) gel vs vehicle for treatment of superficial BCC. METHODS:This randomized, double-blind, vehicle-controlled, pivotal phase III study was conducted at 21 centers in the US. Eligible participants had ≥1 naïve superficial BCC and received 1-2 PDT cycles (2 PDTs each cycle) followed by clinical and histological assessment 12 weeks after start of the last PDT cycle. RESULTS:Of 187 randomized participants, 145 received PDT with 10% ALA gel and 42 with vehicle. Histological clearance was 75.9% with 10% ALA gel vs 19.0% with vehicle (P < .0001). Clinical clearance was 83.4% with 10% ALA gel vs 21.4% with vehicle (P < .0001). A total of 88.1% of participants treated with 10% ALA gel rated the esthetic outcome as very good or good. No previously unknown adverse events occurred. LIMITATIONS:Few participants with lesions on face/scalp; to date, a 60-month follow-up is still ongoing. CONCLUSION:10% ALA gel showed significantly higher clearance rates than vehicle with unproblematic safety and positive esthetic outcome.
10558 Background: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a prevalent disorder characterized by intermittent hypoxia, systemic inflammation, hypercapnia, and oxidative stress. These factors pose a risk for carcinogenesis and potential tumor formation. The association between OSA and lung cancer remains unclear. This study evaluates the impact of OSA on lung cancer incidence using a large-scale retrospective cohort analysis. Methods: A comparative outcomes analysis was conducted using the TriNetX database. Data were extracted from the Johns Hopkins Medicine healthcare organization. Two cohorts were defined: patients with OSA (Cohort 1, n = 124,100) and those without OSA (Cohort 2, n = 2,330,110). Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to balance baseline characteristics, including age, gender, race, and comorbid conditions, resulting in 62,750 in each cohort. The primary outcome was lung cancer incidence (ICD-10: C34), with risk difference (RD), risk ratio (RR), and odds ratio (OR) calculated to compare the cohorts. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. Results: Before propensity score matching, the OSA cohort had a higher mean age (60.8 ± 16.6 vs. 51.8 ± 20.3 years) and a higher prevalence of comorbid conditions such as obesity, hypertension, and diabetes compared to the non-OSA cohort (all p < 0.001). After PSM, demographic and clinical characteristics were well-balanced between cohorts. In the matched analysis, the incidence of lung cancer was slightly higher in the OSA cohort at 0.8% (n = 530) compared to 0.7% (n = 440) in the non-OSA cohort. The RD was 0.1% (95% CI: 0.0%-0.2%, p = 0.004 via T-Test), and the RR was 1.205 (95% CI: 1.062-1.366). The OR for lung cancer in OSA patients relative to non-OSA patients was 1.206 (95% CI: 1.063-1.369). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed a modestly reduced time to lung cancer diagnosis in the OSA cohort, although the difference was not clinically significant. Conclusions: This study reveals a statistically significant association between OSA and lung cancer risk. Subsequent studies are needed to investigate the degree of clinical significance between OSA and lung cancer. OSA patients may benefit from screening and/or early intervention strategies. Additionally, further research is needed to elucidate the potential mechanism and pathogenesis of lung cancer formation in OSA patients. Lung cancer incidence and associated risk estimates in patients with and without OSA. Cohort Lung cancer incidence RD RR OR OSA (n=62,750) 0.8% (n=530) 0.1% (95% CI: 0.0%-0.2%, p = 0.004 1.205 (95% CI: 1.062-1.366) 1.206 (95% CI: 1.063-1.369) Non-OSA (n=62,750) 0.7% (n=440)
4521 Background: tRCC accounts for approximately 50% of pediatric RCC and 1-5% of RCC cases overall. tRCC, driven by TFE3 or TFEb fusions or amplifications ( TFEb ), are often aggressive with no existing standard for systemic therapy. Methods: AREN1721 was a prospective randomized COG-led NCTN phase 2 trial of nivolumab/axitinib combination therapy vs. axitinib alone (closed early for feasibility) vs. nivolumab alone in children and adults with advanced unresectable or metastatic tRCC. Prior exposure to anti-PD1/PDL1 therapies or axitinib was prohibited. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), defined as the time from randomization to the earliest of disease progression based on immune-modified RECIST criteria or death. The final protocol version targeted enrollment of 28 eligible patients to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.40 for the comparison of nivolumab/axitinib vs. nivolumab alone using a one-sided log-rank test with alpha = 0.15. Results: Despite aggressive approaches for trial recruitment, AREN1721 was closed after enrolling 15 patients (13 eligible) from 2019 to 2023 secondary to poor accrual. Median age 16 years (range 7-42) with 9/13 age < 18 years; 9/13 were male. Six patients were randomized to nivolumab+axitinib, 2 to axitinib alone, and 5 to nivolumab alone. There were no unexpected toxicities. Thirty-three percent of patients randomized to nivolumab+axitinib experienced partial response, compared to 0% in the other arms, and 0% of patients on the combination arm experienced primary disease progression. Addition of axitinib to nivolumab significantly improved PFS (p = 0.0004), extending median PFS from 1.8 to 10.5 months. Overall survival also improved (p = 0.003) with the addition of axitinib. Conclusions: Nivolumab+axitinib combination therapy was statistically more active than nivolumab single agent therapy, which itself was inactive. Whether anti-PD1 pathway inhibitors add benefit to anti-VEGF therapy for tRCC remains to be determined. Optimizing trial recruitment is critical for this rare but aggressive cancer. Clinical trial information: NCT03595124 . Descriptive statistics by arm. Characteristic Arm A: Axitinib/Nivolumab N = 6 Arm B: Axitinib N = 2 Arm C: Nivolumab N = 5 Overall N = 13 p-value 1 Age (Years) 0.715 Mean (SD) 18 (9) 19 (6) 18 (14) 18 (10) Median (Q1, Q3) 16 (10, 21) 19 (15, 23) 15 (12, 16) 16 (12, 21) Min, Max 9, 32 15, 23 7, 42 7, 42 Age Category >0.999 Age < 18 4 (67%) 1 (50%) 4 (80%) 9 (69%) Age 18+ 2 (33%) 1 (50%) 1 (20%) 4 (31%) Prior Anti-VEGF therapy 1 (17%) 0 (0%) 1 (20%) >0.999 No prior systemic therapy 5 (83%) 2 (100%) 4 (80%) 11 (85%) Best Overall Response 0.019 Partial Response 2 (33%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (15%) Stable Disease 4 (67%) 2 (100%) 1 (20%) 7 (54%) Progressive Disease 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (80%) 4 (31%) 1 Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test; Fisher's exact test.
