BACKGROUND & AIMS:Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH) is the progressive form of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver. It is highly prevalent, particularly among individuals with overweight or obesity, and substantially impairs health-related quality of life. Semaglutide 2.4 mg received accelerated approval from the US Food and Drug Administration in August 2025 for adults with noncirrhotic MASH and fibrosis stages F2-F3 based on results from the ESSENCE trial. This study aimed to estimate the impact of semaglutide on health utility in this population. METHODS:This exploratory analysis used Week 72 data from ESSENCE Part 1, a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Adults with biopsy-confirmed MASH and fibrosis stage F2 or F3 were randomized 2:1 to once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide 2.4 mg or placebo plus standard of care. EuroQol 5-‍Dimension (EQ-5D) utilities were mapped from Short Form-36 (SF-36) scores using the Rowen et al. (2009) algorithm. Change from baseline was analyzed with treatment, baseline diabetes status, fibrosis stages as covariates. RESULTS:A total of 800 participants were included in this analysis (semaglutide 2.4 mg n=534; placebo n=266). Mean age was 56.0 years; 57.1% were female; mean body mass index was 34.6 kg/m2 and 55.9% had type 2 diabetes. Baseline mapped EQ-5D utility was approximately 0.78 in both groups. At Week 72, semaglutide significantly improved mapped EQ-5D utility versus placebo (estimated treatment difference 0.03; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.01, 0.06; nominal p=0.0015), with consistent effects across fibrosis stages. CONCLUSIONS:In adults with MASH and F2 or F3 fibrosis, once-weekly semaglutide 2.4 mg was associated with statistically significant improvements in mapped EQ-5D health utility versus placebo. These exploratory findings provide utility estimates that may help to inform cost-effectiveness evaluations and health technology assessments. IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS:This study provides the first estimation of EuroQol 5-Dimension (EQ-5D) health utility gains associated with once-weekly semaglutide 2.4 mg in people with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH) and F2/F3 fibrosis. The findings are important for payers and clinicians because they demonstrate a statistically significant improvement in mapped EQ-5D health utility with semaglutide 2.4 mg over 72 weeks. These results can directly inform cost-effectiveness models and support healthcare decision-making by quantifying the health-related quality of life benefits of semaglutide using a widely accepted preference-based metric. Given the use of mapped rather than directly measured utilities and the UK-specific tariff, the results should be interpreted with appropriate caution.

Multi-level network meta-regression (ML-NMR) has been recently introduced as a new methodology for indirect treatment comparisons in situations where individual patient data (IPD) are available for some but not all trials. ML-NMR allows accounting for effect modifiers and has the potential of treatment comparisons in target populations different from the study populations. We present a case study within the setting of large-scale randomized trials, highlighting how typical issues such as missing data can be dealt with, and how published subgroup analyses can be incorporated to provide additional information to inform population adjustment of treatment effects. ML-NMR was applied in a network of three RCTs on high-doses of GLP-1 RAs (semaglutide, dulaglutide) for the treatment of type 2 diabetes (two studies with IPD (SUSTAIN 7 and SUSTAIN FORTE), one study with aggregate data (AgD) only (AWARD 11)). Missing data was imputed using multiple imputation and the multiply imputed data sets were incorporated into the ML-NMR model. Published effect estimates for subgroups of the AgD trial were used to further explore effect modification and enable robust population adjustment. Using the publicly available R-package multinma, treatment differences for the indirect comparisons were estimated alongside 95% credible intervals in the multiple imputation setup. Results were compared to alternative techniques including simple plugin methods based on frequentist regression models and network meta analysis. Furthermore, applications of the method for treatment comparisons in different target populations resp. subgroups of interest are shown (e.g. obese patients with BMI >=35). From an industry perspective, the ability to more fully leverage IPD in indirect treatment comparisons is important. This case study suggests that ML-NMR is well suited for application in a typical production setting, offering an accessible yet flexible option for coherently accounting for the totality of evidence available across both IPD and AgD.

Aims To evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral semaglutide versus comparators by patient characteristic subgroups in patients with type 2 diabetes. Materials and Methods Change from baseline in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and body weight, and achievement of HbA1c <7.0% with oral semaglutide 7 mg, oral semaglutide 14 mg, flexibly dosed oral semaglutide (flex) and comparators were assessed across baseline subgroups (age, race, ethnicity, diabetes duration, body mass index and HbA1c) from the PIONEER programme. Treatment differences were analysed using a mixed model for repeated measurements for continuous variables and a logistic regression model for the binary endpoint. Pooled safety data were analysed descriptively. Results Changes from baseline in HbA1c and body weight, and the odds of achieving HbA1c <7.0%, were greater with oral semaglutide 14 mg/flex (n = 1934) and higher or similar with oral semaglutide 7 mg (n = 823) versus comparators (n = 2077) across most subgroups. Changes in HbA1c with oral semaglutide 14 mg/flex were greater for patients with higher baseline HbA1c (HbA1c >9.0%: -1.7% to -2.6%; HbA1c <8.0%: -0.7% to -1.2%). In some trials, Asian patients experienced greater HbA1c reductions with oral semaglutide 14 mg/flex (-1.5% to -1.8%) than other racial groups (-0.6% to -1.6%). The overall incidence of adverse events (AEs) with oral semaglutide was similar to that with comparators and was consistent across subgroups. More gastrointestinal AEs were observed with oral semaglutide, versus comparators, across subgroups. Conclusions Oral semaglutide demonstrated consistently greater HbA1c and body weight reductions across a range of patient characteristics, with greater HbA1c reductions seen at higher baseline HbA1c levels.

To evaluate the effect of oral semaglutide on energy intake and appetite in subjects with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

Aims Currently, no head-to-head data are available comparing semaglutide 2.0 mg with dulaglutide 3.0 mg or 4.5 mg. We conducted an indirect treatment comparison (ITC) of their effects on glycated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)) and body weight in patients with type 2 diabetes. Materials and methods Multilevel network meta-regression was conducted, based on a connected evidence network of published results from the A Study of the Efficacy and Safety of Dulaglutide (LY2189265) in Participants With Type 2 Diabetes 11 trial and individual patient data from the A Research Study to Compare Two Doses of Semaglutide Taken Once Weekly in People With Type 2 Diabetes (SUSTAIN) and SUSTAIN 7 trials. Results Semaglutide 2.0 mg significantly reduced HbA(1c) vs dulaglutide 3.0 mg and 4.5 mg, with estimated treatment differences (ETDs) of -0.44% points (95% credible interval [CrI], -0.68 to -0.19) and -0.28% points (95% CrI, -0.52 to -0.03), respectively. Semaglutide 2.0 mg also significantly reduced body weight vs dulaglutide 3.0 mg and 4.5 mg with ETDs of -3.29 kg (95% CrI, -4.62 to -1.96) and -2.57 kg (95% CrI, -3.90 to -1.24), respectively. Odds of achieving HbA(1c) < 7.0% were significantly greater for semaglutide 2.0 vs dulaglutide 3.0 mg (odds ratio [OR]: 2.23 [95% CrI, 1.15-3.90]), whereas this did not reach significance for semaglutide 2.0 mg vs dulaglutide 4.5 mg (OR: 1.58 [95% CrI, 0.82-2.78]). Sensitivity analyses supported the main analysis findings. Conclusions This ITC demonstrated significantly greater reductions from baseline in HbA(1c) and body weight with semaglutide 2.0 mg vs dulaglutide 3.0 mg and 4.5 mg. The findings of this study provide important comparative effectiveness information until randomized head-to-head studies become available.

As the first oral GLP-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA), oral semaglutide (sema) may facilitate increased access to the benefits of GLP-1RA therapy in broader care settings. Understanding the management of GLP-1RA therapy when intolerability occurs, including gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events (AEs), is important to overcome potential barriers to treatment persistence. The PIONEER 6 trial (NCT02692716; N=3183) examined the efficacy and safety of oral sema in patients (pts) with T2D either ≥50 years with established cardiovascular (CV) or kidney disease, or ≥60 years with CV risk factors. In total, 27% of pts stopped taking oral sema at least once during the trial due to an AE, but only 12% permanently discontinued due to an AE. We thus evaluated medication management strategies within PIONEER 6 to assess their role in supporting treatment continuation. Pts on oral sema underwent dose escalation starting at 3 mg, increasing to 7 mg after 4 weeks, and 14 mg after 8 weeks. Investigators were permitted to reduce the dose if AEs developed and to re-escalate the dose once symptoms had resolved or diminished. Pts were educated as needed to address GI tolerability issues throughout the trial. Pts who discontinued treatment because of an AE were encouraged to resume treatment once willing or once the AE had ceased. The time off oral sema was considered a treatment pause. If treatment pauses were >21 days, re-escalation from a lower dose was recommended to mitigate GI AEs. Discontinuation of oral sema (temporary and permanent) mostly occurred during the initial dose escalation period. In total, 23% of pts receiving oral sema had ≥1 treatment pause, the majority of whom (72%) had just one pause. The median duration of treatment pause was 21 (IQR 7-51) days. Importantly, 75% of pts restarted oral sema after the first AE-related treatment discontinuation. These data highlight the role of treatment pauses, flexibility, and education in mitigating potential AEs to support treatment persistence on GLP-1RAs. Disclosure V. R. Aroda: Consultant; Self; Applied Therapeutics, Duke, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer Inc., Sanofi, Employee; Spouse/Partner; Janssen, Merck, Research Support; Self; Applied Therapeutics, Eli Lilly and Company, Fractyl, Medpace, Medpace, Novo Nordisk, Premier, Sanofi, Stock/Shareholder; Spouse/Partner; Janssen, Merck. R. Bauer: Employee; Self; Novo Nordisk A/S. A. L. Davies: Employee; Self; Novo Nordisk. E. B. Kreiner: Employee; Self; Novo Nordisk A/S, Stock/Shareholder; Self; Novo Nordisk A/S. P. J. Lin: Advisory Panel; Self; Novo Nordisk, Speaker’s Bureau; Self; AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim (Canada) Ltd., Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Merck & Co., Inc., Novo Nordisk Canada Inc., Sanofi. R. E. Pratley: Other Relationship; Self; Hanmi Pharmaceutical, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., Metavention, Monster Energy Company, Inc., Novo Nordisk, Pfizer Inc., Poxel SA, Sanofi, Scohia Pharma Inc., Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. S. C. Bain: Advisory Panel; Self; AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Lilly Diabetes, Napp Pharmaceuticals, Novo Nordisk A/S, Sanofi, Consultant; Self; ADOCIA, Speaker’s Bureau; Self; Bayer AG, Medscape, WebMD LLC. Funding Novo Nordisk A/S

BACKGROUND:Cardiac interventions account for a significant share of overall healthcare spending and have been the focus of several large-scale interventions to develop effective bundled payments. To date, however, none have proven successful in commercially insured populations. In 2018, we worked with Hawaii Medical Service Association (HMSA), the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Hawaii, to design a novel commercial bundled payment for percutaneous coronary interventions, the Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Episode Payment Model (PCI EPM). METHODS:Descriptive analysis of HMSA's PCI EPM, including its inclusion criteria, contents of the bundle, target prices, shared savings model, and incentivized quality metrics. We also compare HMSA's PCI EPM to Medicare's Bundled Payment for Care Improvement programs and the cancelled Cardiac Care Model. RESULTS:HMSA's PCI EPM was designed through an iterative process with cardiologists and is the first commercial bundle to specifically target a cardiac procedure. PCI EPM incorporates site neutrality and incentivizes providers to shift care to the outpatient setting when medically permissible. Compared to existing non-commercial models, PCI EPM incorporate first-dollar shared savings and incentivized fewer quality metrics. CONCLUSIONS:Reviewing features of the Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Episode Payment Model in comparison to existing Medicare programs is intended to help guide health plan and health policymakers when designing programs and policies related to cardiac interventions. IMPLICATIONS:Bundled commercial payments for interventional cardiology procedures are promising and should continue to be further explored. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:VI.

This paper presents current divisions and distributed Joule heating of two-dimensional (2D) grid microstructures. The current divisions on 2 × 2, 4 × 4, and n × n grid microstructures made of the same conductive beams are analyzed theoretically, and Kirchhoff’s voltage law (KVL) and Kirchhoff’s current law (KCL) are employed to determine the current division factors and directions under different voltage input cases. The equivalent resistances and Joule heating power are therefore derived. 2D 2 × 2 grid microstructures made of gold (60 nm in thickness) and those made of near-equiatomic NiTi (850 nm in thickness) for various independent voltage input cases are fabricated by electron-beam evaporation and co-sputtering, respectively. The equivalent resistances of these grid microstructures are measured by four-terminal resistance measurement at ambient conditions, which show a good agreement with the theoretical results. Further investigation on the electrical resistivities of evaporated gold layer (4.85 × 10–8 Ω m) and co-sputtered NiTi (1.23 × 10–5 Ω m) reveals that the influences of scale effect and fabrication process on the resistivity cannot be neglected. As such, it is found to be necessary to consider the materials’ resistivity in the fabricated grid microstructures before their electro-thermal analysis.

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) and SGLT2 inhibitors (SGLTi) are widely used to treat type 2 diabetes (T2D) but trial data on their combined use are limited. We report the first data on oral semaglutide in combination with SGLT2i. This was a post-hoc subgroup analysis of the 52-week, double-blind, double-dummy PIONEER 4 trial (NCT02863419), in which patients with T2D uncontrolled on metformin with or without SGLT2i were randomized 2:2:1 to once-daily oral semaglutide 14 mg, subcutaneous (s.c.) liraglutide 1.8 mg or placebo. Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and body weight (BW) data presented are for the trial product estimand (on-trial product without rescue medication). In total, 183 (26%) of 711 patients were receiving SGLT2i treatment at baseline which continued throughout the trial. Subgroups of patients receiving SGLT2i had a lower percentage of females, slightly longer mean T2D duration and higher BW. Changes in HbA1c and BW were similar in patients receiving oral semaglutide or s.c. liraglutide with or without SGLT2i. Occurrence of most gastrointestinal adverse events was similar in patients on GLP-1RA with and without SGLT2i. In conclusion, improvements in HbA1c and BW after one year as well as safety profile were similar in patients on GLP-1RA with or without background SGLT2i. Disclosure R.E. Pratley: Other Relationship; Self; AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly and Company, GlaxoSmithKline plc., Glytec, Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC., Lexicon Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Ligand Pharmaceuticals Incorporated, Merck & Co., Inc., Novo Nordisk Inc., Sanofi. R. Bauer: Employee; Self; Novo Nordisk A/S. S.E. Inzucchi: Advisory Panel; Self; AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Lexicon Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Novo Nordisk A/S, Sanofi. Consultant; Self; Abbott, Merck & Co., Inc., vTv Therapeutics. K. Khunti: Advisory Panel; Self; Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer AG, Berlin-Chemie AG, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Eli Lilly and Company, Menarini Group, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., Napp Pharmaceuticals, Novartis AG, Novo Nordisk A/S, Roche Pharma, Sanofi-Aventis, Servier. Board Member; Self; AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly and Company, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., Novo Nordisk A/S, Sanofi-Aventis. Consultant; Self; Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer AG, Berlin-Chemie AG, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Eli Lilly and Company, Menarini Group, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., Napp Pharmaceuticals, Novartis AG, Novo Nordisk A/S, Roche Pharma, Sanofi-Aventis, Servier. Research Support; Self; AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Eli Lilly and Company, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., Novartis AG, Novo Nordisk A/S, Pfizer Inc., Sanofi-Aventis, Servier. Speaker’s Bureau; Self; Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer AG, Berlin-Chemie AG, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Eli Lilly and Company, Menarini Group, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., Napp Pharmaceuticals, Novartis AG, Novo Nordisk A/S, Roche Pharma, Sanofi-Aventis, Servier. E.B. Kreiner: Employee; Self; Novo Nordisk A/S. Stock/Shareholder; Self; Novo Nordisk A/S. P.N. Laursen: Employee; Self; Novo Nordisk A/S. J.J. Meier: Speaker’s Bureau; Self; AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Eli Lilly and Company, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., Novo Nordisk A/S, Sanofi. Funding Novo Nordisk A/S

In an exploratory analysis of 7 global phase 3a trials (PIONEER 1-5, 7, and 8) we evaluated the effect of age at baseline on efficacy (<45, ≥45-<65, or ≥65 years) and safety (<65 or ≥65 years) for oral semaglutide (3, 7, 14 mg once daily) vs. comparators in patients with type 2 diabetes. Efficacy endpoints were change from baseline in HbA1c and body weight. Across all trials, there were 582, 3392, and 1683 patients aged <45, ≥45-<65, and ≥65 years, respectively. Baseline HbA1c was similar across age groups, whereas baseline body weight tended to be higher in younger patients. Overall, reductions in HbA1c were comparable across age groups for all trials and were generally larger with oral semaglutide than comparators, irrespective of age (Table). Body weight reductions were greater for oral semaglutide vs. comparators but without association between age and reductions in body weight. In general, proportions of patients with adverse advents (AEs) and AEs leading to treatment discontinuation were greater in the ≥65 vs. the <65 age group for oral semaglutide and comparators (Table). To conclude, the greater effects of oral semaglutide vs. comparators on HbA1c and body weight were seen for patients regardless of age group in the global PIONEER trials. For the <65 and ≥65 age groups, the safety profile of oral semaglutide was in line with other GLP-1RAs. Overall, there was a generally higher discontinuation rate in older patients. Disclosure V.R. Aroda: Consultant; Self; Duke, Novo Nordisk Inc., Sanofi. Employee; Spouse/Partner; Merck & Co., Inc. Research Support; Self; Applied Therapeutics, Fractyl Laboratories, Inc., Novo Nordisk Inc., Sanofi. Other Relationship; Self; IMNE, Medscape. R. Bauer: Employee; Self; Novo Nordisk A/S. C.L. Hertz: Employee; Self; Novo Nordisk A/S. E. Montanya: Advisory Panel; Self; Sanofi. Consultant; Self; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation. Employee; Spouse/Partner; Almirall. Speaker’s Bureau; Self; AstraZeneca, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., Novo Nordisk A/S. R. Sørrig: Employee; Self; Novo Nordisk A/S. M.L. Warren: Advisory Panel; Self; Eli Lilly and Company, Novo Nordisk Inc., Sanofi. Research Support; Self; Eli Lilly and Company, Gan & Lee Pharmaceuticals, Novo Nordisk Inc., Sanofi. Speaker’s Bureau; Self; AstraZeneca, Merck & Co., Inc., Novo Nordisk Inc., Sanofi. B. Cariou: Advisory Panel; Self; Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead Sciences, Inc., Lexicon Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Novo Nordisk Inc., Sanofi-Aventis. Board Member; Self; GENFIT. Research Support; Self; Amgen, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals. Speaker’s Bureau; Self; Abbott, AstraZeneca. Funding Novo Nordisk A/S

This paper presents a fabrication and characterization of multilayered microstructures with shape memory effects enabling large vertical deployment under electro-thermal actuation. Our previous research demonstrated vertical deployment of such microstructures by the effect of thermal mismatch. Development of equiatomic NiTi layers in the multilayered microstructure is investigated further for shape memory effects. Multilayered microstructures are built by sputtered NiTi layers and a lift-off process. Negative photoresist ma-N1420 enables clean lift-off of 500 nm thick NiTi layers by forming a significant undercut profile after development. The parametric study on co-sputter powers for Ti and Ni50Ti50 targets suggests that 100 W RF on Ti target and 200 W DC on Ni50Ti50 target can deposit Ni49.62Ti50.38 layers. X-Ray Diffraction (XRD) and Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM) were used to study the crystal structures and surface topography of NiTi layers. XRD results of post-annealed Ni49.62Ti50.38 layers show coexistence of austenite and martensitic phases at room temperature, suggesting that the transformation temperature of such NiTi layers should be approximate 20 °C. The surface topography of Ni49.62Ti50.38 layers reveals substantial increase of surface roughness at ambient conditions after the annealing. Experimental verification of the multilayered microstructure for vertical deployment was carried out by Signatone Probe Station and Dual Scanning Electron Microscope/Focused Ion Beam (SEM/FIB) system. A vertical deployment of the two-dimensional (2D) multilayered microstructures for three-dimensional (3D) can be detected by applying a constant voltage of 0.04 V, and the expected 3D deployment displacement is enlarged from 2 μm to 10 μm by introducing the shape memory effect.

Aims An exploratory analysis of data from the global phase 3a PIONEER programme (PIONEER 1–5 and 7–8 trials) evaluated the efficacy of once-daily oral semaglutide 3, 7, 14 mg versus comparators by diabetes duration at baseline. Methods: Data were included from all PIONEER 1–5, 7 and 8 participants (n = 5657). Patients were grouped by diabetes duration (< 5, 5– < 10 and ≥ 10 years) and by trial. In PIONEER, patients were randomised to oral semaglutide (3, 7 or 14mg) or comparator (placebo, empagliflozin, sitagliptin or liraglutide). Endpoints: change from baseline in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c, %) and body weight (kg) at week 26 (week 52 in PIONEER 7); data were analysed for all randomised patients using the trial product estimand. Results: Across trials, mean diabetes duration at baseline ranged from 3.5–15.0 years, with similar mean baseline Hb1Ac (%) across subgroups within each trial. Mean body weight was higher and age was lower in the diabetes duration < 5 years subgroup. HbA1c reductions were generally greater with increasing oral semaglutide dose but were not affected by diabetes duration, and there were generally no statistically significant interactions between treatment and diabetes duration. Estimated treatment differences in HbA1c (%) at week 26 (week 52 in PIONEER 7) were consistent across diabetes duration subgroups. Conclusions: Across the PIONEER trials, oral semaglutide improved glycaemic control versus comparators, with consistent effects across diabetes duration subgroups. These findings support the use of oral semaglutide across a broad population of patients with Type 2 diabetes. Presented at EASD, Sept

The test equipment life-cycle spectrum has two opposing ends. On one end, test equipment focused toward consumer products often outlives any one of the products that it is charged with testing. On the other end, the aerospace/defense industry demands that test systems work with many types of devices under test (DUTs). Furthermore, the test systems themselves must remain in service and often outlive the technology contained within the system. Long-term sustainment can be challenging unless the system is designed with its life cycle in mind. The design and deployment of a successful test system includes test executive software, instrument drivers, instrumentation platforms, instruments, test code, and a tester configuration. Commonality among test requirements means a universal test architecture must have the correct points of variance for testing individual DUTs. Although test engineers can design for expected points of variability in their test systems, obsolescence events of specific components are often unpredictable at the time of development. When obsolescence events occur, comprehensive test system validation often demands that test engineers spend valuable time redesigning and revalidating the entire system. Forward-looking strategies that mitigate both software and hardware obsolescence can help significantly reduce the costs associated with recertifying test systems. A software strategy based on a commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) test executive software architecture can protect against operating system obsolescence. Hardware abstraction layers (HALs) or measurement abstraction layers (MALs) can help with the inevitable end of life of individual hardware components within the tester. In addition, proactively documenting test system requirements with an industry-standard language, such as ATML, helps to ensure a migration path between tester platforms. Hardware obsolescence is more painful because product life cycles and support are left to the vendors, and test system designers can do little to extend the life of a product or component. The growth of modular instrumentation platforms now allows test engineers to build more maintainable systems with "drop in" instrument replacements over time. What happens when a modern platform does not include legacy instrument functionality or performance? Incorporating virtual instruments significantly reduces recertification time by exposing user-programmable FPGAs that can be programmed to mimic the functionality of obsolete instruments and measurements. For example, digital signal processing (DSP) can be implemented in the FPGA of a software-designed digitizer to mimic the expected frequency response of older instrumentation. This paper discusses techniques for proactively managing obsolescence in any test system architecture and replacing the functionality of obsolete instruments with virtual instruments.

System complexity in the aerospace, defense, and automotive industries continues to increase. This puts demand on test engineers to produce novel solutions that decrease the cost of testing system components. Moving forward, these engineers will be faced with the difficulties of maintaining an increasing volume of legacy hardware while simultaneously developing solutions to test new technologies. Software-designed synthetic instruments are a fairly new way of tackling this challenge, however this technology has mainly been applied to larger, depot and intermediate level testers.

Incorporating new is a hallmark of space missions. Missions demand ever-improving tools and techniques to allow them to meet the mission science requirements. In Earth Science, these technologies are normally expressed in new instrument capabilities that can enable new measurement concepts, extended capabilities of existing measurement techniques, or totally new detection capabilities, and also, information systems technologies that can enhance data analysis or enable new data analyses to advance modeling and prediction capabilities. Incorporating new technologies has never been easy. There is a large development step beyond demonstration in a laboratory or on an airborne platform to the eventual space environment that is sometimes referred to as the technology valley of death. Studies have shown that non-validated is a primary cause of NASA and DoD mission delays and cost overruns. With the demise of the New Millennium Program within NASA, opportunities for demonstrating technologies in space have been rare. Many technologies are suitable for a flight project after only ground testing. However, some require validation in a relevant or a space flight environment, which cannot be fully tested on the ground or in airborne systems. NASA's Earth Science Technology Program has initiated a nimble program to provide a fairly rapid turn-around of space validated technologies, and thereby reducing future mission risk in incorporating new technologies. The program, called In-Space Validation of Earth Science Technology (InVEST), now has five tasks in development. Each are 3U CubeSats and they are targeted for launch opportunities in the 2016 time period. Prior to formalizing an InVEST program, the program office was asked to demonstrate how the program would work and what sort of technologies could benefit from space validation. Three projects were developed and launched, and have demonstrated the technologies that they set out to validate. This paper will provide a brief status of the pre-InVEST CubeSats, and discuss the development and status of the InVEST program. Figure

A chip assembly may include: a chip including a plurality of electrical networks, each network comprising at least one electrical bonding pad; and a plurality of formed on the at least one bonding pad of a majority of the plurality of electrical networks columns, wherein the plurality of columns is configured to connect the at least one bonding pad of the majority of the plurality of electrical networks with an off-chip connection region.