MRI technology is an accurate tool that could better identify which patients should go through biopsy and enable targeted biopsy of only areas suspected of malignancy. The PRECISE trial, which is approximated to be completed in three years, will investigate the power of MRI to improve the diagnosis of medically important disease and reduce the requirement for prostate biopsies.
Currently, prostate malignancy is diagnosed by trans-rectal ultrasound (TRUS) -guided biopsy of the prostate, in most cases carrying out a Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) test. TRUS-guided biopsy is associated with potential part results such as an infection and bleeding since it is not targeted, needing numerous biopsy samples (between 10 and 12) to establish an accurate reading. In addition, this current standard of care is not sensitive enough to be able to discriminate between high-risk and very low-risk changes in prostate cells, resulting in the over-diagnosis and over-treatment of many men, exacerbating the chance for side results. Dr. Lincoln Stein, Interim Scientific Director of the Ontario Institute for Cancer Research.
- Common stock not required to be assessed based on the equity method
- Tax credits for public businesses
- ► January (2)
- Financial services (examples: banks, insurance companies)
- 8S. Rep. No. 100–19 at 31; Conference Report at 123. Get back to Text
- Ships and watercraft investment is likely to remain weak
Data management and evaluation for the trial will be conducted by the Ontario Clinical Oncology Group (OCOG) in the Escarpment Cancer Research Institute, a Hamilton Health McMaster, and Sciences University or college institute. Dr. Mark Levine, Director of OCOG. Dr. Stuart Edmonds, PCC’s vice-president of Research and Health Promotion. Dr. Klotz is your physician and researcher structured at the Sunnybrook Health Sciences Center in Toronto. He is also a professor at the University of Toronto and the Seat of the global world Urologic Oncology Federation. Last month he was invested as a Member of the Order of Canada.
It is a means of making sure women and ladies have the ability to live their lives free from violence and misuse. What can be learned in general from monitoring and evaluation of initiatives on violence against women? What strategies and interventions are effective at preventing and responding to violence against women and girls? What services are needed to help women and girls get over violence? What could be the role of different sectors in stopping and addressing violence? What other factors (social, economic, political, cultural etc.) play a role in perpetuating vulnerability to assault or hindering access to services? What types of investments produce more appealing results/ how much do they cost?
If yes, what real difference the treatment is making; how it is causing this to be the difference as well as for whom. The extent to which the intervention is accountable for the measured or observed changes. The unforeseen consequences, if any, that resulted from the intervention? What are some important questions an evaluation can help answer?
Is the intervention feasible and suitable? Did it impact? Why or why not? How as well as for whom did an impact be had by it? Are the results credible? Could it be affordable and cost effective? Can the price be compared with alternatives to investment? Is it applicable to other settings? Where is it reliable? Where is it not applicable?