Search

El en ensayo realizado con anterioridad de parte del estudiante no se respondió completamente la pregunta ya que no se enfocó en los tres elementos (enfoque, motivación y estrategia)

La forma como los estudiantes enfrentan los estudios universitarios da paso a esta investigación en la que se estudió los estilos de aprendizaje de los discentes de las Facultades de Filosofía

La vida de hoy pide un sujeto integral, que aporte a la conformación de una sociedad más equilibrada y justa. En este entorno.

Resumen El cáncer es una enfermedad genética compleja con opciones terapéuticas limitadas, debido a la heterogeneidad tumoral y a la aparición de multirresistencia a los fármacos. La vía metabólica de los esfingolípidos (SL) se caracteriza por ser capaz de integrar diferentes tipos de señales de estrés celular y definir la supervivencia celular. Por lo tanto, sugerimos estudiar las perturbaciones en la vía de los esfingolípidos (SLP) causadas por fármacos quimioterapéuticos utilizando un enfoque de biología de sistemas y evaluar su funcionalidad como sensor de respuesta a fármacos. Usamos un sensor de esfingomielina-BODIPY (SMBOD) para estudiar el metabolismo de SL mediante citometría de flujo e imágenes de células vivas en diferentes modelos de cáncer. Para decodificar la complejidad de la ruta, implementamos modelos de mezcla gaussianos, modelos de ecuaciones diferenciales ordinarias, algoritmos de clasificación no supervisados y un modelo de lógica difusa para evaluar su utilidad como sensor de respuesta a la quimioterapia. Nuestros resultados muestran que los fármacos quimioterapéuticos perturban la SLP de diferentes formas y de una manera específica de la línea celular. Además, encontramos que pocas características de fluorescencia de SM-BOD predicen la quimiosensibilidad con alta precisión. Finalmente, encontramos que la composición relativa de especies de SL parece contribuir a la citotoxicidad resultante de muchos tratamientos. Este informe ofrece un marco conceptual y matemático para desarrollar modelos matemáticos personalizados para predecir y mejorar la terapia del cáncer. Abstract Cancer is a complex genetic disease with reduced treatment alternatives due to tumor heterogeneity and drug multiresistance emergence. The sphingolipid (SL) metabolic pathway integrates different responses of cellular stress signals and defines cell survival. Therefore, we suggest studying the perturbations on the sphingolipid pathway (SLP) caused by chemotherapeutic drugs using a systems biology approach to evaluate its functionality as a drug response sensor. We used a sphingomyelin-BODIPY (SM-BOD) sensor to study SL metabolism by flow cytometry and live cell imaging in different cancer models. To decode pathway complexity, we implemented Gussian mixture models, ordinary differential equations models, unsupervised classification algorithms and a fuzzy logic approach to assess its utility as a chemotherapy response sensor. Our results show that chemotherapeutic drugs perturb the SLP in different ways in a cell line-specific manner. In addition, we found that few SM-BOD fluorescence features predict chemosensitivity with high accuracy. Finally, we found that the relative species composition of SL appears to contribute to the resulting cytotoxicity of many treatments. This report offers a conceptual and mathematical framework for developing personalized mathematical models to predict and improve cancer therapy. Resumo O câncer é uma doença genética complexa com opções terapêuticas limitadas, devido à heterogeneidade tumoral e ao aparecimento de multirresistência aos fármacos. A via metabólica dos esfingolipídeos (SP) é caracterizada por ser capaz de integrar diferentes tipos de sinais de estresse celular e definir a sobrevivência celular. Portanto, sugerimos estudar as perturbações na rota dos esfingolipídeos (SP) causadas por fármacos quimioterápicos usando uma abordagem de biologia de sistemas e avaliar sua funcionalidade como sensor de resposta a fármacos. Usamos um sensor de esfingomielina-BODIPY (SM-BOD) para estudar o metabolismo do SP por citometria de fluxo e imagens de células vivas em diferentes modelos de câncer. Para decodificar a complexidade do caminho, implementamos modelos de mistura gaussiana, modelos de equações diferenciais ordinárias, algoritmos de classificação não supervisionados e um modelo de lógica difusa para avaliar sua utilidade como sensor de resposta à quimioterapia. Nossos resultados mostram que os fármacos quimioterápicos perturbam a rota dos SP de diferentes maneiras e de maneira específica da linhagem celular. Além disso, descobrimos que poucas características de fluorescência do SM-BOD predizem a quimiossensibilidade com alta precisão. Finalmente, descobrimos que a composição relativa de espécies de SP parece contribuir para a citotoxicidade resultante de muitos tratamentos. Este relatório oferece uma estrutura conceitual e matemática para o desenvolvimento de modelos matemáticos personalizados para prever e melhorar a terapia do câncer.

The adaptive thermal comfort concept has been developed over many years and proven in numerous field studies (e.g. Webb 1964, Nicol and Humphreys 1973, Auliciems 1981b, de Dear et al. 1997, McCartney and Nicol 2002, Manu et al. 2016), showing that people are satisfied with a wide range of thermal conditions. Prerequisite is that people are provided with means to make themselves comfortable, that they know which opportunities they have, that it is socially acceptable to use these opportunities and that they are willing to use them (Hellwig, 2015). However, the overall understanding of how to design for such opportunities enabling the occupant to make themselves comfortable in relation to climate and building type, thus how to convert the adaptive thermal comfort concept into building design and concepts for operating buildings, is still limited. There are still common misunderstandings in the interpretation of the adaptive comfort approach among building planners and operators e.g. regarding the amount of control, the seriousness of this topic or the level of information needed by occupants for which reason guidance (e.g. CIBSE 2010, Cook et al. 2020) and knowledge transfer (e.g. Hellwig and Boerstra 2017, 2018) is absolutely essential. Consequently, there is still a gap between scientific research and real-world-application, which this report aims to diminish.In line with the activities within IEA EBC Annex 69 Subtasks A, B, and C, the present report includes four main sections, addressing the above listed identified challenges and barriers to the adoption of the adaptive thermal comfort in practice by explaining the adaptive thermal comfort principles, by illustrating the benefits from applying the adaptive principles in buildings, through guidance on how to implement the adaptive principles in the design and operation of buildings, especially providing guidance on how to design for adaptive opportunities. The Appendices contain additional information on standards, checklists for stakeholders in the design and operation of buildings as well as documentation and lessons learnt from the buildings investigated within this Annex 69 Subtask C. This report is formulated with the help of frameworks (Hellwig et al. 2019, Hellwig et al. 2020) developed to facilitate the adoption of adaptive principles in the design and operation of buildings. We aim to provide the knowledge on a general level of understanding, so that it is possible to apply the knowledge in different types of building usage, different climate zones and occupant groups. However, the majority of examples used in this report stems from office buildings, which is mainly rooted in the fact that the majority of research studies focussed on this type of building. Nevertheless, we have supplemented this report with examples from other building types. The target group of the guidelines in this report are building planners (architects, engineers, sustainability certification consultants/councils) and building operators (facility managers, operators, owners, and tenants). Furthermore, the guidelines in this report are intended as critical sources and guidance to educate future building professionals and stakeholders.The report includes four main sections, as outlined below.Section 2 summarises the three adaptive comfort principles, i.e. physiological, behavioural and psychological adaptation. The section follows with a discussion on the effectiveness of the adaptive principles and on the order of activation of adaptive responses. It ends with a brief account on the development of adaptive models.Section 3 describes the benefits from applying the adaptive principles in buildings, including energy savings, resilience to climate change, improved usability and thermal satisfaction, as well as improved health and well-being.Section 4 presents the developed framework for adopting the adaptive comfort principles in design and operation of buildings. The main elements of the framework are described, i.e. the building context, adaptive responses and actions, the building planning and design, –the adaptive opportunities design, and the operational planning and operation. Each of these subsections includes guidelines to facilitate the integration of adaptive principles. Section 4 ends with considerations and recommendations for adopting adaptive comfort in conditioned buildings, including advice for facilitating free-running mode in building operation as often as possible and ways to integrate the use of the adaptive principles in permanently or long-season conditioned spaces.AppendicesAppendix 1 summarises information on adaptive models used in international and national standards, as well as examples of models developed by research in various locations and climates.Appendix 2 provides checklists of parameters that can help stakeholders implement measures to ensure the availability of adaptive opportunities in buildings.Appendix 3 is a collation of case studies with practical learnings from adaptive buildings investigated in Annex 69 Subtask C.Appendix 4 lists publications, presentations and workshops related to Activity B2 of IEA EBC Annex 69.Authors of main report on guidelines, Appendix 1, 2, 4 worked out in Subtask B, Activity B2Lead: Runa T. Hellwig, Aalborg University, DenmarkCo-lead: Despoina Teli, Chalmers University, SwedenContributors:Marcel Schweiker, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, GermanyRodrigo Mora, British Columbia Institute of Technology, CanadaJoon-Ho Choi, University of Southern California, USARajan Rawal, CEPT University, IndiaM.C.Jeffrey Lee National Taichung University of Science and Technology, TaiwanWang Zhaojun, Harbin Institute of Technology, ChinaFarah Al-Atrash, German Jordanian University, JordanAuthors of Appendix 3 Documentation of buildings investigated in Annex 69, Subtask CLead: Richard de Dear, University of Sydney, AustraliaCo-Lead: Stephanie Gauthier, University of Southampton, UK; Jungsoo Kim, University of Sydney, AustraliaContributors (in alphabetical order): Farah Al-Atrash, German Jordanian University, JordanLeonidas Bourikas, University of Southampton, UK Bin Cao, Tsinghua University, ChinaJoon-Ho Choi, University of Southern California, USAChungyoon Chun, Yonsei University, KoreaHeidi Creighton, Buro Happold Engineering, USAPaul Cooper, University of Wollongong, AustraliaJérôme Damiens, Tsinghua University, ChinaRichard de Dear, University of Sydney, AustraliaStephanie Gauthier, University of Southampton, UKRuna T. Hellwig, Aalborg University, DenmarkWenjie Ji, Tsinghua University, ChinaXinyu Jia, Tsinghua University, ChinaJungsoo Kim, University of Sydney, AustraliaSuhyun Kwon, Yonsei University, KoreaKyeongsuk Lee, University of Southern California, USA