text:
User talk:Mark Foskey

Welcome message
Hello, and welcome to Wikibooks!

Here are some tips to help you get started:
 * To learn the wiki-markup-language syntax, see Help:Editing.
 * Make sure to sign your posts and comments with four tildes, like this: ~~~~
 * There is a box at the top of the edit window (if javascript is enabled on your browser) that will insert it too (looks like part of a signature). This will let others know who left it, and make it easy to reply back to you.
 * Remember to conduct any editing experiments in the sandbox.
 * You can tell the community something about yourself in your userpage.
 * You can get to this page by clicking the tab at the top of the page labeled with your registered username.
 * Wikibooks is a collection of open-source textbooks. (What is Wikibooks).
 * If you are a Wikipedian, see Wikibooks for Wikipedians for a primer on how things work here (it's a little different).
 * If you want to base your work here on materials from Wikipedia, please use WB:RFI (requests for importation) to bring the material over in compliance with the GFDL.
 * If you're an instructor and plan on using Wikibooks for a class project, see Guidelines for class projects
 * Please say hello at the Reading Room with any questions or ideas.
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Help us by participating in policy and guideline creation.
 * Please take a look at Naming policy before starting a new book.
 * Remember to maintain a Neutral point of view.
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and have fun!

You will find more resources in Community Portal. If you want to ask a question, visit the Study help desk, the Reading Room, IRC channel or ask me personally on my talk page. For site news, see the Bulletin board. It might be a good idea to add that page to your "watchlist" so that you can see when any new information is posted there. You can do that by clicking the tab labeled "watch" at the top of the page.

Good luck! --Panic (talk) 05:35, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mark Foskey


text:
User talk:Wesley Gray

Leave a '''message

Welcome message
Hello, and welcome to Wikibooks!

Here are some tips to help you get started:
 * To learn the wiki-markup-language syntax, see Help:Editing.
 * Make sure to sign your posts and comments with four tildes, like this: ~~~~
 * There is a box at the top of the edit window (if javascript is enabled on your browser) that will insert it too (looks like part of a signature). This will let others know who left it, and make it easy to reply back to you.
 * Remember to conduct any editing experiments in the sandbox.
 * You can tell the community something about yourself in your userpage.
 * You can get to this page by clicking the tab at the top of the page labeled with your registered username.
 * Wikibooks is a collection of open-source textbooks. (What is Wikibooks).
 * If you are a Wikipedian, see Wikibooks for Wikipedians for a primer on how things work here (it's a little different).
 * If you want to base your work here on materials from Wikipedia, please use WB:RFI (requests for importation) to bring the material over in compliance with the GFDL.
 * If you're an instructor and plan on using Wikibooks for a class project, see Guidelines for class projects
 * Please say hello at the Reading Room with any questions or ideas.
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Help us by participating in policy and guideline creation.
 * Please take a look at Naming policy before starting a new book.
 * Remember to maintain a Neutral point of view.
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and have fun!

You will find more resources in Community Portal. If you want to ask a question, visit the Study help desk, the Reading Room, IRC channel or ask me personally on my talk page. For site news, see the Bulletin board. It might be a good idea to add that page to your "watchlist" so that you can see when any new information is posted there. You can do that by clicking the tab labeled "watch" at the top of the page.

Good luck! --Panic (talk) 05:35, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Rename Request
Hello,. I've received your rename request. Here is what I need from you:

Once you have satisfied these requirements, send me a message and I can rename you. If you have any questions, or if you need any help, you can ask me on my user talk page, or you can ask the community at WB:CHAT or WB:AN. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 22:48, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

WWII
I'm glad to hear you'll be helping. Somone started it a few years ago, scrapped together a timeline for the war in the Pacific, and left the rest blank. It's a huge project, I doubt we'll finish it anytime soon, especially if it is only us. There really isn't too much on WWII in any other book, so I think this will need to be pretty detailed. Happy to have you here. Red4tribe (talk) 18:47, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

 * I've started a template for it too, to make navigation easier. Red4tribe (talk) 00:37, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

world war II
Im interested in becoming a contributer/joining the World War II book. - Tannertsf (talk) 00:57, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: User talk:Wesley Gray


text:
User talk:Nether~enwikibooks

Welcome message
Hello, and welcome to Wikibooks!

Here are some tips to help you get started:
 * To learn the wiki-markup-language syntax, see Help:Editing.
 * Make sure to sign your posts and comments with four tildes, like this: ~~~~
 * There is a box at the top of the edit window (if javascript is enabled on your browser) that will insert it too (looks like part of a signature). This will let others know who left it, and make it easy to reply back to you.
 * Remember to conduct any editing experiments in the sandbox.
 * You can tell the community something about yourself in your userpage.
 * You can get to this page by clicking the tab at the top of the page labeled with your registered username.
 * Wikibooks is a collection of open-source textbooks. (What is Wikibooks).
 * If you are a Wikipedian, see Wikibooks for Wikipedians for a primer on how things work here (it's a little different).
 * If you want to base your work here on materials from Wikipedia, please use WB:RFI (requests for importation) to bring the material over in compliance with the GFDL.
 * If you're an instructor and plan on using Wikibooks for a class project, see Guidelines for class projects
 * Please say hello at the Reading Room with any questions or ideas.
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Help us by participating in policy and guideline creation.
 * Please take a look at Naming policy before starting a new book.
 * Remember to maintain a Neutral point of view.
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and have fun!

You will find more resources in Community Portal. If you want to ask a question, visit the Study help desk, the Reading Room, IRC channel or ask me personally on my talk page. For site news, see the Bulletin board. It might be a good idea to add that page to your "watchlist" so that you can see when any new information is posted there. You can do that by clicking the tab labeled "watch" at the top of the page.

Good luck! --Panic (talk) 05:35, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Nether. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Nether~enwikibooks that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:32, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 05:18, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Nether~enwikibooks


text:
Talk:Set Theory/Sets

Would it be appropriate to begin this chapter with the following concise definition of a set?

A set is an unordered collection of distinct elements.

--Rickpock (talk) 05:41, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

 * Yes, although be sure to point out that set elements are not necessary distinct per se, it's just that repetitions are ignored so that the set {1, 1} is equal to the set {1}. Skyc (talk) 05:59, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I made the change and continued into elements. I feel like I was stumbling over my words a bit with the elements, but I still feel it was an improvement. This is my first wiki-anything edit, so I'm likely being overly timid.

--Rickpock (talk) 20:43, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Hausdorff's "Mengenlehre" (I only know it in the Dover reprint of the 3rd German edition and I have no idea if it has ever been translated into English) defines a set (in its second sentence) "Eine Menge ist eine Vielheit, als Einheit gedacht." This is a bit difficult to put into English in a satisfactory way. Perhaps "A set is a Multiplicity thought of as a Unity." I would like that better if it were punchier.

I think the definition of a set as "an unordered collection of distinct elements" begs the question because, in fact, it simply defines a set as a collection leaving "collection" up in the air.

There is a question of atmosphere here. If there is an branch of mathematics that should tend to extreme rigor it is set theory. Hence if we use an intuitive description of a what a set is we need to be up front about the fact that rigor has been lost.

The members of a set are conceived of, ontologically speaking, as having existence. Hence they MUST be distinct. Another way of saying that is that they are instances rather than values. It might be well to either start with a discussion of these semi-philosophical considerations or, breezing through them in the main text, to collect them into an appendix.

In most branches of mathematics I could start with postulates/axioms and go on from there. But there are no definitive axioms for set theory and, in light of Goedel's work, can probably never be. The discussion of which axioms to use is an integral part of set theory.

I would recommend Hausdorff to you as a guide except that the scope of his book is different than what people think of as set theory today. DKleinecke (talk) 16:10, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:Set Theory/Sets


text:
User talk:Goldfndr

Welcome message
Hello, and welcome to Wikibooks!

Here are some tips to help you get started:
 * To learn the wiki-markup-language syntax, see Help:Editing.
 * Make sure to sign your posts and comments with four tildes, like this: ~~~~
 * There is a box at the top of the edit window (if javascript is enabled on your browser) that will insert it too (looks like part of a signature). This will let others know who left it, and make it easy to reply back to you.
 * Remember to conduct any editing experiments in the sandbox.
 * You can tell the community something about yourself in your userpage.
 * You can get to this page by clicking the tab at the top of the page labeled with your registered username.
 * Wikibooks is a collection of open-source textbooks. (What is Wikibooks).
 * If you are a Wikipedian, see Wikibooks for Wikipedians for a primer on how things work here (it's a little different).
 * If you want to base your work here on materials from Wikipedia, please use WB:RFI (requests for importation) to bring the material over in compliance with the GFDL.
 * If you're an instructor and plan on using Wikibooks for a class project, see Guidelines for class projects
 * Please say hello at the Reading Room with any questions or ideas.
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Help us by participating in policy and guideline creation.
 * Please take a look at Naming policy before starting a new book.
 * Remember to maintain a Neutral point of view.
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and have fun!

You will find more resources in Community Portal. If you want to ask a question, visit the Study help desk, the Reading Room, IRC channel or ask me personally on my talk page. For site news, see the Bulletin board. It might be a good idea to add that page to your "watchlist" so that you can see when any new information is posted there. You can do that by clicking the tab labeled "watch" at the top of the page.

Good luck! --Panic (talk) 05:53, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:Goldfndr


text:
User talk:Atallcostsky

Welcome message
Hello, and welcome to Wikibooks!

Here are some tips to help you get started:
 * To learn the wiki-markup-language syntax, see Help:Editing.
 * Make sure to sign your posts and comments with four tildes, like this: ~~~~
 * There is a box at the top of the edit window (if javascript is enabled on your browser) that will insert it too (looks like part of a signature). This will let others know who left it, and make it easy to reply back to you.
 * Remember to conduct any editing experiments in the sandbox.
 * You can tell the community something about yourself in your userpage.
 * You can get to this page by clicking the tab at the top of the page labeled with your registered username.
 * Wikibooks is a collection of open-source textbooks. (What is Wikibooks).
 * If you are a Wikipedian, see Wikibooks for Wikipedians for a primer on how things work here (it's a little different).
 * If you want to base your work here on materials from Wikipedia, please use WB:RFI (requests for importation) to bring the material over in compliance with the GFDL.
 * If you're an instructor and plan on using Wikibooks for a class project, see Guidelines for class projects
 * Please say hello at the Reading Room with any questions or ideas.
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Help us by participating in policy and guideline creation.
 * Please take a look at Naming policy before starting a new book.
 * Remember to maintain a Neutral point of view.
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and have fun!

You will find more resources in Community Portal. If you want to ask a question, visit the Study help desk, the Reading Room, IRC channel or ask me personally on my talk page. For site news, see the Bulletin board. It might be a good idea to add that page to your "watchlist" so that you can see when any new information is posted there. You can do that by clicking the tab labeled "watch" at the top of the page.

Good luck! --Panic (talk) 05:53, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:Atallcostsky


text:
User talk:Psygnisfive

Welcome message
Hello, and welcome to Wikibooks!

Here are some tips to help you get started:
 * To learn the wiki-markup-language syntax, see Help:Editing.
 * Make sure to sign your posts and comments with four tildes, like this: ~~~~
 * There is a box at the top of the edit window (if javascript is enabled on your browser) that will insert it too (looks like part of a signature). This will let others know who left it, and make it easy to reply back to you.
 * Remember to conduct any editing experiments in the sandbox.
 * You can tell the community something about yourself in your userpage.
 * You can get to this page by clicking the tab at the top of the page labeled with your registered username.
 * Wikibooks is a collection of open-source textbooks. (What is Wikibooks).
 * If you are a Wikipedian, see Wikibooks for Wikipedians for a primer on how things work here (it's a little different).
 * If you want to base your work here on materials from Wikipedia, please use WB:RFI (requests for importation) to bring the material over in compliance with the GFDL.
 * If you're an instructor and plan on using Wikibooks for a class project, see Guidelines for class projects
 * Please say hello at the Reading Room with any questions or ideas.
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Help us by participating in policy and guideline creation.
 * Please take a look at Naming policy before starting a new book.
 * Remember to maintain a Neutral point of view.
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and have fun!

You will find more resources in Community Portal. If you want to ask a question, visit the Study help desk, the Reading Room, IRC channel or ask me personally on my talk page. For site news, see the Bulletin board. It might be a good idea to add that page to your "watchlist" so that you can see when any new information is posted there. You can do that by clicking the tab labeled "watch" at the top of the page.

Good luck! --Panic (talk) 05:54, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:Psygnisfive


text:
User talk:Alatos~enwikibooks

Welcome message
Hello, and welcome to Wikibooks!

Here are some tips to help you get started:
 * To learn the wiki-markup-language syntax, see Help:Editing.
 * Make sure to sign your posts and comments with four tildes, like this: ~~~~
 * There is a box at the top of the edit window (if javascript is enabled on your browser) that will insert it too (looks like part of a signature). This will let others know who left it, and make it easy to reply back to you.
 * Remember to conduct any editing experiments in the sandbox.
 * You can tell the community something about yourself in your userpage.
 * You can get to this page by clicking the tab at the top of the page labeled with your registered username.
 * Wikibooks is a collection of open-source textbooks. (What is Wikibooks).
 * If you are a Wikipedian, see Wikibooks for Wikipedians for a primer on how things work here (it's a little different).
 * If you want to base your work here on materials from Wikipedia, please use WB:RFI (requests for importation) to bring the material over in compliance with the GFDL.
 * If you're an instructor and plan on using Wikibooks for a class project, see Guidelines for class projects
 * Please say hello at the Reading Room with any questions or ideas.
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Help us by participating in policy and guideline creation.
 * Please take a look at Naming policy before starting a new book.
 * Remember to maintain a Neutral point of view.
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and have fun!

You will find more resources in Community Portal. If you want to ask a question, visit the Study help desk, the Reading Room, IRC channel or ask me personally on my talk page. For site news, see the Bulletin board. It might be a good idea to add that page to your "watchlist" so that you can see when any new information is posted there. You can do that by clicking the tab labeled "watch" at the top of the page.

Good luck! --Panic (talk) 05:54, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Alatos. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Alatos~enwikibooks that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 22:56, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 04:29, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Alatos~enwikibooks


text:
User talk:Wilfre

Welcome message
Hello, and welcome to Wikibooks!

Here are some tips to help you get started:
 * To learn the wiki-markup-language syntax, see Help:Editing.
 * Make sure to sign your posts and comments with four tildes, like this: ~~~~
 * There is a box at the top of the edit window (if javascript is enabled on your browser) that will insert it too (looks like part of a signature). This will let others know who left it, and make it easy to reply back to you.
 * Remember to conduct any editing experiments in the sandbox.
 * You can tell the community something about yourself in your userpage.
 * You can get to this page by clicking the tab at the top of the page labeled with your registered username.
 * Wikibooks is a collection of open-source textbooks. (What is Wikibooks).
 * If you are a Wikipedian, see Wikibooks for Wikipedians for a primer on how things work here (it's a little different).
 * If you want to base your work here on materials from Wikipedia, please use WB:RFI (requests for importation) to bring the material over in compliance with the GFDL.
 * If you're an instructor and plan on using Wikibooks for a class project, see Guidelines for class projects
 * Please say hello at the Reading Room with any questions or ideas.
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Help us by participating in policy and guideline creation.
 * Please take a look at Naming policy before starting a new book.
 * Remember to maintain a Neutral point of view.
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and have fun!

You will find more resources in Community Portal. If you want to ask a question, visit the Study help desk, the Reading Room, IRC channel or ask me personally on my talk page. For site news, see the Bulletin board. It might be a good idea to add that page to your "watchlist" so that you can see when any new information is posted there. You can do that by clicking the tab labeled "watch" at the top of the page.

Good luck! --Panic (talk) 05:54, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:Wilfre


text:
User:Rickpock

I am currently an American master's student with a scientific background, specializing in math, physics, and computer science. I'm interested in contributing to projects related to these disciplines as well as a variety of other subjects including languages, arts & crafts, business, and politics.

title: User:Rickpock


text:
Talk:Muggles' Guide to Harry Potter/Books/Prisoner of Azkaban/Chapter 12

Re: 4 anti-Dementor lessons instead of 12
Just a thought:::But if you put in to thought the fact that He is working for the Order, and could possibly have other business to attend to. I mean, the Order wasn't formed recently. It's been banded for at least 20 years, and I don't think they just stop working towards the cause. They're too informed. So if you put that, The work that is naturally required of a teacher in general, and bouts of werewolfism into effect, he could have only had time to squeeze in 4. And also, you have to think about Harry's Schedule to. I mean, with homework and Quidditch practice, he's also a pretty busy kid. I think it's perfectly plausible.::TMS::.

 * While that is an interesting thought, against this we have to put in Dumbledore's instructions to Sirius at the end of GoF: "Round up the old crew: Remus Lupin, Arabella Figg, Mundungus Fletcher..." which, at least to me, would indicate that the Order has been, if not disbanded, at least recessed for the thirteen years since Voldy went poof. The bouts of werewolfism would knock out three of them, one per month, to leave us about 10, and there is no mention of either Remus or Harry missing days. Plus I am going to argue that Harry is a lazy student; given a choice between real wand work 1-on-1 with Lupin, or homework, I think the homework would be abandoned every time, and we do see that behaviour in other parts of the series. So while I agree that 4 is a possible count of lessons, I think it less likely than this editor; and I think that if JKR had not lost track of time, she would either have mentioned that more than half of them were missed for some reason or other, or would have had more unsucessful lessons in the story. Chazz (talk) 06:19, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

anita dugbartey
like i love when lupin is teaching arry but how would lupin teach harry if he was not that he is but what would happen if he was the defense againist the dark arts teacher how would he help him
 * I'm sorry, I don't understand. Could you try asking the question again, perhaps in different words? Chazz (talk) 01:56, 13 November 2014 (UTC)


text:
Iranian History/Anarchy and Downfall of the Sassanian Empire

When Khusro II died in 628, he was scceeded by Siroe who ascended the throne as Qobad II. But he did not rule the Empire for long and the state fell into a decline ravaged by civil war and anarchy. This condition lasted for a quarter of a century and culminated in the defeat of the Sassanians at the hands of the Arabs and dissolution of the Sassanid Empire.

Military Campaigns of Khusro II
During the reign of Khusro the Sassanid Empire reached the summit of greatness before tumbling down the abyss. When his reign came to an end in 628, Persia was a tired nation. Continuous wars with the Roman Empire had replenished its resources and destroyed its economy. The campaigns of Heraclius had snatched away from their hands all the lands that they had conquered between 603 and 622. Moreover, Khusro's conquest of the Lakhimid kingdom had removed a state which would have survivied as a buffer between the Sassanid Empire and the Islamic Caliphate in the case of an invasion. With Khusro's death in 628, court intrigues came to the fore, Khusro himkself being the victim of intrigue. Soon after his death, his parricidal son Siroe ascended the throne as Qobad II.

Qobad II (Siroe) 628
Siroe arrested his fathyer Khusro Perviz and ascended the throne as Qobad II on the 25th of February 628. Immediately after his accession, peace was concluded with Rome and Roman troops were wiothdrawn. By the terms iof this peace, Persia had to relinquish all the territories it had obtained between 603 and 622.

Qobad was of extremely weak disposition and mind and was unfit to govern the Empire. Fearing that his claim to the throne would be disputed by relatives and rival claimants he ordered the massacre of all individuals intimately connected with the Sassanid royal family. This sealed the fate of the Empire once and for all and it became a matter of time before the nation would be extinguished.

Soon after the massacre, a great plague broke out in the Empire. It consumed nearly one-third of the Persian population. Qobad, himself, became a victim of the plague and passed away in July 629.

Ardeshir III 628 - 630
As Qobad had extinguished the entire male line of the Sassanid royal family, he was succeeded on his death by his minor son Ardeshir who, according to some accounts, was seven years old and acceding to others, one year old on his accession to the throne in July 629. During his reign which lasted a few months, the minister Mihr-Hasis was the real power behind the throne.

Meanwhile, the Persian general had established cordial relations with the Roman Empire by marrying a daughter of the Roman Emperor Heraclius. In 630, he arrived in Ctesiphon at the head of an army of around sixty thousand Roman soldiers and dethroned the young king who was later murdered.

Shahr Barz
In 630, Shahr Barz arrived in Ctesiphon at the head of a alarge army and captured the throne after murdering the young king Ardeshir. He then ascended the throne himself and ruled for two months. He evacuated all the Roman provinces captured during the reign of Khusro Perviz as per the provisions of nthe treaty concluded earlier. He led an expedition against the Khazars and married Purandokht, a daughter of Khusro Perviz to legitimize his claim to the throne. But this proved to be of no avail as his own soldiers murdered him in the open court.

Purandokht
In 630, Shahr Barz was put to death by the nobles of the Sassanid court who handed the crown over to Puramdokht, a daughter of Khusro Perviz and the wife of Shahr Barz who had been spared by QObad II. She was also known as Boran or Puran'. She tried her best to bring stability to the Empire. She reduced the taxes and rebuilt the infrastructure which had considerbly weakened. She was largely unsuccessful in her attempts to restore the power of the central authority which was weakened considerably by civil wars. She died in 631 due to natural causes and was succeeded by her sister Azarmidokht.

Azarmidokht
Purandokht was succeeded by her sister Azarmidokht who ruled for a brief oeriod in 631. She was murdered and succeeded by Ormuzd.

Ormazd VI
On the death of Azarmidokht in 631, a Persian noble ascended the throne and crowned himself Ormazd VI. This nobleman ruled from Nisibis for around two years. He was later murdered and succeeded by Yazdegerd, a grandson of Khusro Perviz.

Yazdegerd III 633 - 651
Yazdegerd was the son of Shahryar and a grandson of Khusro Perviz. He ascended the throne in 632 or 633 at the age of 19. To gain some modest supports from the Persian Empire's old rival, the Roman Empire of the East, he sought an alliance with the Emperor Heraclius who then married off his young granddaughter, Manyanh, the daughter of Heraclius Constantine III and Princess Gregoria of Persia.

With the reign of Yazdegerd, the Sassanian Empire came to an end. Yazdegerd was defeated by the Arabs in a series of battles and forced to flee. He lost his kingdom and spent his last days as a fugitive in Khorasan. He sought refuge at the abode of a miller near Merv who strangled him as he slept and threw the body into a passing stream. The murder of Yazdegerd did trigger a period of national mourning. Yazdegerd's body was found and embalmed and the miller put to death but the Sassanian Empire had passed into history and could not be revived.

Causes of the Downfall of the Sassanian Empire
There were various causes which led to the eventual downfall of the Sassanian Empire.

 * The first and foremost reason was the condition of political instability which prevailed in the Sassanian Empire from 628 when Khusro Perviz died till 633 when Yazdegerd ascended the throne. True, Yazdegerd reigned for a pretty long time but the period of strife and internal discord that had existed between 628 and 633 continued to exist during the time of Yazdegerd and there were many important and powerful nobles who aspired to capture the throne for themselves.

 * The continuous wars with the Byzantine Roman Empire had considerably weakened the kingdom. The army was weary and desired peace.

 * The purges of Qobad II had extinguished the entire male line of Khusro Perviz leaving Yazdegerd the only direct successor to the throne.

 * A terrible plague ravaged the Empire during the time of Qobad II destroying about one-fourth of the total population of the Empire and leaving large stretches of land uncultivable.

 * The conquest of the Lakhimid kingdom by Khusro Perviz had resulted in the destruction of a state which might have served as a buffer between Persia and the Islamic Caliphate.

Immediate Causes

 * The tactical blunders committed by Rostam Farrokhzad at Qadesiyyah and Hormuzgan at Nehavend were the most decisive factors leading to the Sassanian defeat.

 * The Persian Army, which included an elephant corps lacked mobility compared to the lightweight cavalry of the Arabs.

 * The sandstorm on the final day of the Battle of Qadesiyyah decided the fate of the Sassanians. True, the Sassanians did fight back at Nehavend but their weak points had been exposed and morale reduced by their defeat at Qadesiyyah.


text:
Category talk:Chicken recipes

removed recipe
not proper locationMercurywoodrose (discuss • contribs) 07:56, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

title: Category talk:Chicken recipes


text:
User talk:Herbythyme/Compost6

'''This is my talk page archive - don't edit it. New messages on my talk page, thanks'''

Anytime
Good to hear from you, hope you're doing well. Mattb112885 (talk to me) 21:27, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

67.49.250.19
Happy New Year! If you're still around could you block this user please. Thanks --AdRiley (talk) 08:15, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

De-Adminship
I don't use that tool but look at actual contributions. At that rate, I will be listing two admins for de-adminship. Check the RFA page shortly. -within focus 23:02, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Revert
Thanks for the revert on my talk page. an "I love you" message is probably one of the nicer types of vandalism, but is inappropriate nonetheless. Thanks. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 17:35, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi there!
Happy New Year! Some interesting stuff for you and any CU's - testwiki:User:Kelsington/Long term abuse/84.45.219.185 - should be of interest to you, Whiteknight, SBJohnny and Lar! Hope it helps! Thanks, --Solumeiras (talk) 18:31, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

hi!
Seems that the site sushicup.com was hacked! everything works now. Btw it is so far the best sushi making guide online.

yep
I had sent him your way actually... guess I should have told him to mention that :). -- SB_Johnny | PA! 17:05, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry
Sorry, I didn't realize. Unfortunately I seem to be bad enough to get notices from three checkusers (one is bad enough, three is much worse): you, WK, and Mike. Ugh! Laleena (talk) 17:30, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, you're certainly doing a good job. I don't have any criticism. However, while you're at it, I'm not sure if this has suitable content. Could you look? Laleena (talk) 17:40, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Vfd
Thanks for your vote. It might make a difference, I haven't finished yet... --AdRiley (talk) 12:48, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I hope it does. I acted rashly before; I don't even remember looking properly at the page, which is unusual of me..maybe I was in a rush :/ Ah well, I have voted for deletion now. - Anonymous Dissident  Talk 14:25, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Some interesting news for you
Remember when you blocked 84.45.219.185 - well, on my wiki a sysop (and a checkuser too!) blocked the entire range! http://petitionwiki2007.scribblewiki.com/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=&page=User%3A84.45.0.0%2F16

You might want to consider rangeblocking the IP! Thanks, --Solumeiras (talk) 18:00, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the reply. Mind you, en.wiki checkusers Alison and Jpgordon do seem to do rangeblocks as a measure. Should this be discussed at the administrators' noticeboard?? --Solumeiras (talk) 19:25, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Blocks/OPs
In the future, feel free to nuke any of my admins actions, particularly where you have more info about a block I've made. I trust you. – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 01:27, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes - I should have said this earlier. In general I do not interfere in any way with others admin actions (discussion is essential).  However I also trust you so feel free to amend anything of mine Mike - cheers -- Herby  talk thyme 09:04, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Voters Guide
Actually I kind of agree that the Voters Guide isn't really a valid book. I'm guessing that the format to strive for is one of an actual textbook. A voter's guide for a certain election reflects something that is changing often, so it's not really a great topic for a stable textbook. Plus, the articles on Wikipedia do a good job covering the elections and candidates, are easier to access and kept more up-to-date. So, I don't really see the need for a voter's guide on WikiBooks. Julie22193 (talk) 22:21, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikibooks:Reading_room/General#Rollback_and_Patroller_Rights - cough cough
Morning Herby. I've been away in Wales for a few days so missed the final implementation of this one. Got my request in now :-) --AdRiley (talk) 09:32, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

 * Thanks for that RB bit, Herby. I'll try to remember to RTFA before I bug you about it... you've got enough to do, I'm sure. Only thing that I'm concerned about now is that the RB article does seem to indicate that RB does not stop for confirmation. So it's not something I can do a lot of playing with... kinda feel like I have to be certain what I'm doing before I pull the pin. Which is not a bad thing, IMHO. Chazz (talk) 20:53, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

 * I had a chance to try it just now and it is scary fast. But I can see where that is a good thing. Just have to be careful about when and where. Thanks again. Chazz (talk) 08:32, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Tag as...
Txs, What is the tag to propose that Future Media Class be moved to Wikiverisity? VfD ?!? --Panic (talk) 15:57, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes - I would VfD with "move to wv" as the suggestion. -- Herby talk thyme 16:21, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Done. --Panic (talk) 17:05, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

This user should probably be blocked
Sorry, but this user should probably be blocked with exactly 2 warnings. I'll be over to alert others soon, tell me what you've done afterwards :). Laleena (talk) 23:00, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the block...
(that was 207.157.190.2) and rollback sure helped there. One click and our vandal is no more... Chazz (talk) 20:31, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Work...
G'day, well, you asked... this one just needs wikilinks... Cookbook:New Mexico Pork Tamales. Webaware talk 14:21, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Started - work is currently interrupting :) -- Herby talk thyme 14:39, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Hah! Well, I'm off to bed now. Have fun! Webaware talk 14:47, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Your thoughts on a spam policy
Hi Herby (long time no chat!)

As you might know, we're starting to do things with user surveys on Wikiversity. I'd like your thoughts on a spam policy:

http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Colloquium#Policy_proposal:_no_commercial_solicitation_for_survey_and_feedback_respondents

Thanks! -- SB_Johnny | PA! 15:03, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

 * Ugh, I might not have gotten those emails... the spam filter on yahoo is misbehaving very badly :(. I'm not at all interested in working on Wikibooks policies, for reasons you can almost certainly relate to :). -- SB_Johnny | PA! 18:21, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Image problem
Hi there. Can you please look at the Operations Research/The Simplex Method and tell me why is the at the end of the page not loading properly. Only about half of the image is loading properly on my pc. Thanks.--Shahab (talk) 14:15, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * That was some fast response. The image is loading fine now. Thanks--Shahab (talk) 14:33, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Methinks
...that popups has a problem with the new preprocessor. You might check if the code at en.wp has been updated. – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 19:59, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

 * Hum - odd. Working ok on Commons today (I did clear the cache when I came on line).  Not rv'd anything here so far :)  Thanks -- Herby  talk thyme 08:32, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikibook policy question
Hi. What is the wikibook policy regarding online books on the web released under GNU Free Documentation License such as this book. Is there is any way to upload this particular book on wikibooks? Our own Linear Algebra book is in a bad state and this is an excellent substitute.--Shahab (talk) 08:29, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I daresay...
...that your sir, are a furfaggot.

Cheers,124.40.47.150 (talk) 10:46, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Name
Hi Herby

I'm just writing to let you know that I've changed my name from Urbane to User:Reece. Hope this doesnt cause too much confusion. :)

Reece  (Talk)   (Contributions)  15:03, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Changing Book Title
Hi, Herbythyme I started a book called Galileo`s Contribution to Physics which you once visited.But now I want to change the book title to Galileo's Science as I want to make the scope broder.I have already moved the book to Galileo's Science.But now the book appears as a module instead of a book.I have deleted all codes in Galileo`s Contribution to Physics.But still it remains as a book.

Now I want the book Galileo`s Contribution to Physics to be deleted and the new title Galileo's Science to be a book instead of module.Please help. →Farhan Nasim (talk) 08:53, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

User:169.139.185.1
Hmmm... while you were warning him, I was blocking him. I was going to leave a warning, but he got one two weeks ago. If you want to lift the block, I won't object. --Jomegat (talk) 16:34, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

edits
I just came on this site, then was commented just when I was about to get an account about editing, what is this place on? Anyway, I will edit properly and I haven't even edited yet. 212.248.233.1 (talk) 16:46, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry
I am extremely sorry. :-) I thought the time for consensus was 5 days as in Wikipedia. -Ravichandar84 (talk) 18:46, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Delete Galileo`s Contribution to Physics
Please delete the book Galileo`s Contribution to Physics as it is moved to new title Galileo's Science Farhan Nasim (talk) 09:09, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Change book status
Thank you for deleting Galileo`s Contribution to Physics.The new book Galileo's Science appears as a module, please make it a book. Farhan Nasim (talk) 06:38, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Sedum, etc.
Hi Herby. Looks like Sedum acre to me, but I could be wrong (Wildflowers of the British Isles are not my area f specialty, I'm afraid :-)). I'm not back yet, and will be a bit busy for the next few weeks... you'll have mail shortly. -- SB_Johnny | PA! 02:49, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

67.52.164.132 (Talk)
He's running around killing talk and user pages.

I was rollbacking, but apparently Wikibooks thinks I'm doing it too much and throttled me. Chazz (talk) 17:10, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Taken care of :) – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 17:33, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Category:Naming convention change
Is emtpy! I know you are not around so much these days, but I thought you'd like to know. I said I'd get there eventually :-) --AdRiley (talk) 06:26, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

T-bills
G'day mate, that T-bills page has been deleted here before. I wonder if they've stopped to wonder why? Webaware talk 07:54, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry - been busy. Odd I agree, just getting bored of deleting stuff!  Cheers -- Herby  talk thyme 08:06, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

hello
Hi Herby, just an fyi that I've started configuring my accounts on the various other wikis and pasting userpages. See m:User:Jack Merridew/Matrix for the list, if you've not noticed it already. Cheers, User:Jack Merridew a.k.a. David 10:11, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:Herbythyme/Compost6


text: User talk:203.192.90.226

title: User talk:203.192.90.226


text:
Clock and Data Recovery/Buffer Memory (Elastic Buffer)/Clock domains

Master and slaves (slaves: regenerators or end points)
Inside a clock domain all the clocks are locked to a master.

They may jitter with respect to the master and with respect to each other, but they do not drift.

The domain of a master clock

*Definition of slave clock: A clock whose timing output is phase-locked to a reference timing signal received from a higher quality clock.

From the synchronization point of view, a slave Clock Recovery node may be either a regenerator or an end point:
 * A regenerator extracts the clock from the incoming signal in order both:
 * to regenerate the incoming data and
 * to drive the transmission with the regenerated clock on a further link;
 * An end point uses the clock extracted from the incoming signal only to regenerate the data (and to write them in a  memory where they can be retrieved)

 * In general, the slave clock needs not run at the same frequency of the master.

 * There are cases where the frequencies are different (by the ratio of two integer numbers).

 * When the frequencies differ, the same jitter at the master and at the slave (equal if measured in time, i.e. in seconds), corresponds to different values in radian, because:

$ jitter\ [rad] $ = $ \tfrac{2\pi\ jitter\  [sec]}{jitter\  frequency\  [sec^{-1}]}$
 * and the jitter amount at the slave is different than at the master, by the ratio:

$\frac{\omega_{slave}}{\omega_{master}}$|undefined

Free running mode
If a slave gets disconnected from its master, a new domain is created. A slave creates his own domain
 * Definition of free running mode: An operating condition of a clock, the output signal of which is strongly influenced by the oscillating element and not controlled by servo phase-locking techniques. In this mode the clock has never had a network reference input, or the clock has lost external reference and has no access to stored data, that could be acquired from a previously connected external reference.  Free-run begins when the clock output no longer reflects the influence of a connected external reference, or transition from it.  Free-run terminates when the clock output has achieved lock to an external reference.

Between clock domains
If two clocks exhibit a phase difference because they have followed different paths inside the same clock domain, or because they belong to different clock domains, a buffer memory can be used to compensate that difference. The figure below illustrates the second case, where, to compensate for the phase difference of two clocks of different domains, a buffer memory is used at the point of border connection. A buffer inserted between clock domains

 * Definition of slips: Slips arise as a result of the inability of an equipment buffer store (and/or other mechanisms) to accommodate differences between the phases and/or frequencies of the incoming and outgoing signals in cases where the timing of the outgoing signal is not derived from that of the incoming signal. Slips may be controlled or uncontrolled depending on the slip control strategy.

Within the same clock domain
Sometimes two data streams that have followed different paths within a clock domain need to converge on the same path. One of the two streams will keep its own clock, the other shall be phase aligned to it (and lose its own clock). The block that operates this alignment of phase shall be called Phase Aligner.

A phaser aligner is not exactly a slave in the ITU sense of:

A clock whose timing output is phase-locked to a reference timing signal received from a higher quality clock.

The timing output of a phase aligner is exactly the clock (without any additional impairment associated with a phase lock extraction)

that is supplied to the phase aligner to perform the read operation from its elastic buffer.


text:
Wikijunior talk:Bugs/Ant

Completion Change
This article looks more around 75% done, so I changed it on the homepage. I hope none of you mind. -Wes

title: Wikijunior talk:Bugs/Ant


text:
User talk:Matthias M.

Welcome!
Come introduce yourself at the new users page. If you have any questions, you can ask there or contact me personally.--Laleena (talk) 17:43, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:Matthias M.


text:
User talk:G.marco

Come introduce yourself at the new users page. If you have any questions, you can ask there or contact me personally. – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 18:28, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:G.marco


text:
User talk:Dlh2782

Welcome, !

Come introduce yourself at the new users page. If you have any questions, you can ask there or contact me personally. – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 18:00, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:Dlh2782


text:
User talk:72.66.243.112

Join Us!
-- – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 18:42, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:72.66.243.112


text:
Chess Opening Theory/1. e4/1...c5/2. Nf3/2...Nc6/3. d4/3...cxd4/4. Nxd4/4...Nf6/5. Nc3/5...e5

= Sveshnikov Sicilian = Moves: 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5

The variation is named after the Latvian Grandmaster Evgeny Sveshnikov. In the various Najdorf lines where Black plays e5, he gets his desired pawn structure at the cost of leaving his king's bishop stuck behind a pawn on d6. Right now, Black is trying to have his cake and eat it by delaying d6 until the bishop has fled to b4. The standard Najdorf was good enough to be played religiously by Garry Kasparov; White must cut out the threat of ...Bb4 or be faced with an improved Najdorf.

The move that does more or less force ...d6 is Ndb5. The knight threatens to invade the d6 outpost with check. Note that this forks Black's king and c8-bishop, but Black can deal with this easily with 7...Bxd6

Nde2 is the only significant sideline, fortifying the c3 knight to avoid the wrecking of the queenside pawns that would occur after ...Bb4 and ...Bxc3 bxc3. Neither Nb3 nor Nf3 offer anything in particular to compensate for letting the bishop out, Nf5 places the knight on a shaky square that can be instantly exploited with 6...d5! and Nxc6 bxc6 hands control of d5 back to Black.

Theory table
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5


text:
User talk:Kevin hanna

Welcome!
Come introduce yourself at the new users page. If you have any questions, you can ask there or contact me personally.-- – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 19:15, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:Kevin hanna


text:
Trainz

= Trainz: A Comprehensive Guide =

A Brief Overview of Trainz
/Things You Can Do In Trainz/ - Explore the various activities available in Trainz (Updated: July 19, 2013) /Versions Of Trainz/ - Information on different versions of Trainz, including the latest TRS22 and Trainz Plus (Updated: July 19, 2013)

Installation Process
/Hardware Requirements/ - Understanding the hardware requirements for Trainz (Updated: May 20, 2013) /Installation Under Microsoft Windows/ - Steps to install Trainz on Windows platforms (Updated: May 20, 2013) /Using Wide Screen Monitors/ - Tips for optimizing Trainz on wide-screen monitors (Updated: May 20, 2013) /Installing Service Packs/ - Guide to installing updates and service packs for Trainz (Updated: May 20, 2013) /Trainzoptions.txt/ - Configuring Trainz options through text file editing (Updated: May 20, 2013) /Virtual Railroad Magazine/ - A resource for Trainz enthusiasts (Updated: July 19, 2013)

Essential Tips for Beginners
/Essential Hints/ - Basic do's and don'ts for new Trainz users (Updated: July 19, 2013)

Helpful Tips and Tricks
/Tips And Tricks/ - Useful advice for new Trainz users /TS2010EE/ - Insights into Trainz 2010: Engineer's Edition /TRS2012WBE/ - Exploring Trainz 2012: World Builder Edition

Driver Mode in Trainz
Explore the Driver mode in Trainz, where you can operate virtual trains on various routes.

/Basics/ - Fundamentals of train operation in Trainz (Updated: February 19, 2008) /Driving Steam Engines/ - How to operate steam locomotives (Updated: February 19, 2008) /Driving Diesel Engines/ - Guidelines for operating diesel locomotives (Updated: February 19, 2008) /Industries and Products/ - Understanding industries and their products in Trainz (Updated: February 19, 2008) /Driver Mode Keyboard Shortcuts/ - Key shortcuts to enhance your Trainz driving experience (Updated: February 19, 2008)

Surveyor Mode in Trainz
Surveyor mode allows you to create and customize virtual railroads.

/Fundamentals/ - Basic concepts of world-building in Trainz (Updated: February 19, 2008) /Advanced/ - Advanced techniques like gradients, junctions, and track marks (Updated: February 19, 2008) /Notional Railways/ - Creating fictional railroads in Trainz (Updated: February 19, 2008) /Prototype Railways/ - Modeling real-world railroads in Trainz (Updated: February 19, 2008) /Signalling/ - Understanding signaling systems in Trainz (Updated: February 19, 2008) /Surveyor Mode Keyboard Shortcuts/ - Useful hotkeys for the Surveyor mode (Updated: February 19, 2008)

Asset Management in Trainz
Learn how to effectively manage your Trainz assets, a crucial aspect as your collection grows.

 * Main Asset Management TOC: Trainz/AM&C

Explore detailed asset management topics including downloading, organizing, and fixing assets.

Creating Assets in Trainz
Delve into the creative side of Trainz by learning how to develop your own assets.

Discover the rewarding process of creating content for Trainz, using tools like 3D modeling software.

Scripting in Trainz
Scripting adds flexibility and interactivity to Trainz assets, using the TrainzScript language.

Additional Trainz Information
/Taking Screenshots/ - How to capture screenshots in Trainz /Taking Videos/ - Guidelines for recording videos in Trainz /Using the Trainz Discussions Forums/ - Navigating and utilizing the Trainz forums /Rendering/ - Understanding rendering in Trainz

Additional Resources
/Appendixes/ - Supplementary materials for Trainz /Version And Build Numbers/ - Details on different Trainz versions and builds Setting Run-Time Options - Configuring Trainz settings /File Types (File Extensions)/ - Understanding different file types in Trainz /Performance Hints/ - Tips to optimize Trainz performance /Glossary/ - Trainz terminology explained /Index/ - Comprehensive index of Trainz topics /External Links/ - Useful resources for Trainz users, including fansites, tutorials, and enthusiast pages

title: Trainz


text: User:LambaJan~enwikibooks

title: User:LambaJan~enwikibooks


text:
Radiation Oncology/Prostate/External Beam RT/Dose Escalation

Prostate Cancer Dose Escalation Studies

Overview

 * Standard 2D dose cannot reasonably exceed 70Gy due to bowel toxicity.
 * Prospective dose escalation studies (RTOG 94-06, French, Dutch, Memorial Sloan Kettering, and Fox Chase) have shown reasonably good tolerance to doses of at least 81 Gy; GI and GU side effects appear to show more a volume effect.
 * As a result, several Phase III trials evaluated 3D-CRT to escalate dose above 70Gy. All except for the initial Harvard Proton Boost trial in locally advanced disease showed a biochemical progression free survival benefit for higher dose
 * Because they used different doses, it is not clear what actual dose should be used, or whether further dose-escalation would be beneficial
 * The Dutch trial allowed ADT for high risk disease, the MRC trial mandated neoadjuvant ADT; the other trials did not use ADT
 * A prospective non-randomized risk-adapted data from Spain argues for benefit of dose escalation in the presence of ADT

Randomized
Meta-Analysis
 * Sao Paulo, Brazil; 2009
 * Meta-analysis. 7 trials, 2812 patients
 * Outcome, reduction in bPFS (SS), no difference in PCSM (p=0.45), or OS (p=0.38). Low, intermediate, and high risk all benefited. Linear correlation between total dose and bPFS
 * Toxicity: Increased G3+ late GI toxicity
 * Conclusion: High dose RT superior to conventional dose RT, and should be offered for all patients, regardless of risk status
 * PAPER RETRACTED - Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013 Mar 15;85(4):899.Zietman AL, Viani GA.

Individual Trials

 * RTOG 01-26 -- "A Phase III Randomized Study of High Dose 3D-CRT/IMRT vs. Standard Dose 3D-CRT/IMRT in Patients Treated for Localized Prostate Cancer"
 * 3D-CRT/IMRT to 79.2 Gy in 44 fractions vs. 70.2 Gy in 39 fractions; intermediate prognosis tumors
 * Activated March 2002, ongoing, no publications yet

 * GETUG (France) (1999-2002)
 * Randomized. 306 patients, intermediate risk (T2-T3, or T1 and GS 7+ or PS >10, PSA <50 ng/mL). Arm 1) 70/35 Gy vs. Arm 2) 80/40 Gy. 3D-CRT 4F 46/23 then multi-field technique. Rectum wall Dmax 76 Gy, bladder wall Dmax 80 Gy
 * 2004 PMID 15519775 -- "The GETUG 70 Gy vs. 80 Gy randomized trial for localized prostate cancer: feasibility and acute toxicity." (Beckendorf V, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004 Nov 15;60(4):1056-65.)
 * Acute GI toxicity: low dose Grade 2 27%, Grade 3 2% vs. high dose 28%, 2% (NS)
 * Acute GU toxicity: low dose Grade 2 31%, Grade 3 5% vs. high dose 30%, 7% (NS)
 * Conclusion: Acute toxicity acceptable

 * MRC RT01 (UK)(1998-2002) -- 3D-CRT 64 Gy vs. 74 Gy
 * Randomized. 843 men, T1b-T3a (T3 in <20%), PSA <50 ng/mL. . Neoadjuvant AST 3-6 months, then RT Arm 1) 64/32 Gy vs. 74/37 Gy. GTV = prostate +/- SV (depending on risk). CTV = GTV + 0.5 cm. PTV = CTV + 0.5-1.0 cm
 * Pilot 2005 ASCO Abstract -- "Phase III pilot study of dose escalation using conformal radiotherapy (CFRT) in prostate cancer: PSA control and side effects" (Dearnaley, 2005 ASCO)
 * Single institution pilot for MRC RT01 using 2x2 dose (64 Gy vs. 74 Gy) and margin design (1.0 cm vs. 1.5 cm); median follow-up 6.5 years
 * 5-year PSA-DFS dose 74 Gy vs. 64 Gy: 71% vs. 59% (p=0.1)
 * 5-year PSA-DFS margin 1.0 cm vs. 1.5 cm: 67% vs. 63% (p=NS)
 * Acute side effects: GU greater in 74 Gy and 1.5 cm, GI greater in 1.5cm
 * Late side effects: GU (p=NS), GI greater in 1.5cm
 * Conclusion : "Dose escalation from 64 Gy to 74 Gy using CFRT may improve long term PSA control but a treatment margin of 1.5cm is unnecessary and is associated with increased bowel and bladder side effects."
 * 2004 PMID 15297138 -- "Implementing the UK Medical Research Council (MRC) RT01 trial (ISRCTN 47772397): methods and practicalities of a randomised controlled trial of conformal radiotherapy in men with localised prostate cancer." (Sydes MR, Radiother Oncol. 2004 Aug;72(2):199-211.)
 * Early toxicity; 2007 PMID 17391791 -- "The early toxicity of escalated versus standard dose conformal radiotherapy with neo-adjuvant androgen suppression for patients with localised prostate cancer: Results from the MRC RT01 trial (ISRCTN47772397)" (Dearnaley DP, Radiother Oncol. 2007 Mar 26)
 * Early toxicity measured using physician-reported instruments (RTOG, LENT/SOM, Royal Marsden Scales) and patient-reported questionnaires (MOS SF-36, UCLA Prostate Cancer Index, FACT-P)
 * Grade 2 standard vs. escalated: bladder 38% vs. 39%, bowel 30% vs. 33%. Urinary frequency improved from pre-AST, but bowel and sexual function deteriorated
 * 6-month outcomes: RTOG side effects <1%; 6 rectal ulceration (6/6 escalated), 6 hematuria (5/6 escalated), 8 urethral stricture (6/8 escalated)
 * Conclusion: Escalated group broadly similar early toxicity, except immediately post-RT
 * 5-years; 2007 PMID 17482880 -- "Escalated-dose versus standard-dose conformal radiotherapy in prostate cancer: first results from the MRC RT01 randomised controlled trial." (Dearnaley DP, Lancet Oncol. 2007 Jun;8(6):475-87.) Median F/U 5.2 years
 * Outcome: PFS high dose 71% vs. standard dose 60% (SS); clinical PFS 90% vs. 87% (NS)
 * By risk group: low-risk 85% vs. 79%, intermediate-risk 79% vs. 70%, high-risk 57% vs. 43%; benefit across all groups
 * Toxicity: GI Grade 2+ high dose 33% vs. standard dose 24% (SS); GU Grade 2+ 11% vs. 8% (NS); sexual dysfunction prevalent
 * Conclusion: Escalated dose with neoadjuvant AST seems clinically worthwhile, but increased incidence of long-term adverse events
 * Bcl-2; 2010 PMID 20092961 -- "Expression of Bcl-2, p53, and MDM2 in Localized Prostate Cancer with Respect to the Outcome of Radical Radiotherapy Dose Escalation." (Vergis R, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010 Jan 19. [Epub ahead of print])
 * Subset analysis. 308 patients, neoadjuvant ADT and RT. Tumor expression of Bcl-2, p53, and MDM2 evaluated. Median F/U 7 years
 * Outcome: Univariate, Bcl-2 and p53 but not MDM2 associated with 5-year bPFS. Bcl-2 associated on MVA. For Bcl-2+ tumors, 7-year bPFS 64 Gy 41% vs 74 Gy 61% (SS). For Bcl-2- tumors, 81% vs 87% (NS)
 * Conclusion: Bcl-2 positive patients had worse biochemical control, and benefited from dose escalation

 * Mount Vernon, UK (1997-2005) -- 55/20 vs 35.75/13 + 17/2
 * Randomized. 220 patients, prostate cancer T1-T3M0 (T3 26%), PSA <50. Arm 1) EBRT 55/20 vs Arm 2) EBRT 35.75/13 + HDR 17/2. ADT 76%.
 * Initial; 2007 PMID 17531335 -- "High dose rate brachytherapy in combination with external beam radiotherapy in the radical treatment of prostate cancer: initial results of a randomised phase three trial." (Hoskin PJ, Radiother Oncol. 2007 Aug;84(2):114-20. Epub 2007 May 24.) Median F/U 1.25
 * Outcome: Mean bRFS combined modality 5.1 years vs EBRT 4.3 years (SS). Improvement seen in all risk groups
 * Toxicity: Acute GI toxicity better in combined group, other acute and late toxicities comparable. QoL FACT-P score better in combined group
 * Conclusion: HDR brachytherapy + EBRT results in improved outcome with less acute toxicity and improved QoL

 * Dutch CKVO96-10 (1997-2003) -- 68 Gy vs. 78 Gy
 * Randomized. 664 patients, T1b-T4, with PSA < 60 (excluded low risk: T1a, T1b-c with GS<5 and PSA <=4; excluded pN+). Arm 1) 68/34 Gy vs. Arm 2) 78/39 Gy. Both 3D-CRT. CTV = prostate +/- SV (depending on risk group); PTV = 1.0 cm margin to 68 Gy, then 0.5 mm and 0 mm posteriorly. Prescription dose was to the isocenter. Stratified by risk group. Hormonal therapy in 22%
 * Toxicity, 2005 PMID 15752881 — "Acute and late complications after radiotherapy for prostate cancer: results of a multicenter randomized trial comparing 68 Gy to 78 Gy." (Peeters ST, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005 Mar 15;61(4):1019-34.)
 * No acute toxicity differences (p=NS)
 * No late GI and GU toxicity difference (p=NS), except for rectal bleeding requiring laser treatment or transfusion (p = 0.007) and nocturia (p = 0.05)
 * Conclusion: Acute and late toxicity higher, but not NS except late rectal bleeding and late nocturia
 * 5-years, 2006 PMID 16648499 — "Dose-response in radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: results of the Dutch multicenter randomized phase III trial comparing 68 Gy of radiotherapy with 78 Gy." (Peeters ST, J Clin Oncol. 2006 May 1;24(13):1990-6.). Median F/U 4.2 years
 * Outcome: 5-year FFS high-dose 64% vs low-dose 54% (SS). Clinical failure both groups 76% (NS), OS 82% vs. 83% (NS)
 * Toxicity: GI Grade 2+ high-dose 32% vs. low-dose 27% (NS), GI Grade 3+ 5% vs. 4% (NS). GU Grade 2+ 39% vs. 41% (NS), GU Grade 3+ 13% vs. 12% (NS).
 * Conclusion: Significantly improved FFS, with comparable toxicity
 * Sexual fn, 2007 PMID 17331667 -- "Sexual function after three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy for prostate cancer: results from a dose-escalation trial." (van der Wielen GJ, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007 Jun 1;68(2):479-84.)
 * 268 patient subset. Baseline ED 28%
 * ED in pretreatment potent men: at 1 year 27%, at 2 years 36%, at 3 years 38%. No difference between low and high dose.
 * 2-year outcome: 30% had considerable/very much sexual desire; 14% used sexual aids
 * Conclusion: Lower % of ED than previously reported
 * Urinary obstruction; 2010 PMID 20056354 -- "Urinary Obstruction in Prostate Cancer Patients From the Dutch Trial (68 Gy vs. 78 Gy): Relationships with Local Dose, Acute Effects, and Baseline Characteristics." (Heemsbergen WD, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010 Jan 5. [Epub ahead of print])
 * Subset analysis. 40 patients with urinary obstruction (19 low dose arm and 21 high dose arm). Dose-difference maps
 * Outcome: Early events within 2 years (47%) predicted by baseline complaints and TURP. Late events after 2 years (53%) predicted by bladder surface receiving ≥ 80 Gy and especially with dose to bladder neck in the trigone
 * Conclusion: Late urinary obstruction associated with local dose to trigone
 * Risk factors; 2010 PMID 20227123 -- "Subgroup analysis of patients with localized prostate cancer treated within the Dutch-randomized dose escalation trial." (Al-Mamgani A, Radiother Oncol. 2010 Mar 11. [Epub ahead of print])
 * Subset analysis. Two prognostic models: Chism risk group (low risk T1-T2 and GS ≤ 6 and PSA ≤ 10; high risk T3-T4 or GS 8-10 or PSA >20) and PSA-level (<10 and ≥ 10)
 * Outcome: 6-year bPFS 68 Gy 51% vs 78 Gy 63% (SS). Low-risk 84% vs 80% (NS); intermediate risk 54% vs 78% (SS); high risk 40% vs 49% (NS). If PSA <10 no difference; if PSA &ge: 10, 62% vs 40% (SS); PSA optimal cut-off for no benefit 8 ng/ml. For patients treated with ADT, bPFS improved with high dose
 * Conclusion: Intermediate-risk group derived greatest benefit from dose escalation, though no indication was found to exclude low-risk or high-risk patients from high-dose RT

 * PROG 95-09 (1996-1999) -- Proton/photon 70.2 Gy vs. 79.2 Gy
 * Randomized. 2 institutions (Harvard and Loma Linda). 392 patients, stage T1b-T2b, PSA <15 ng/mL (median PSA 6.3); 75% GS <7. Low risk 58%, intermediate risk 37%. Arm 1) proton boost 19.8/11 GyE followed by photons 50.4/28 vs. Arm 2) proton boost 28.8/16 followed by photons 50.4/28. Proton CTV = prostate + 5 mm margin. PTV = CTV + 7-10 mm. Loma Linda used opposed lateral beams, 250 MeV protons; Harvard used perineal boost, 160 MeV protons. Rectal Lucite probe, inflated with 25-50 mL saline. Photons were 4F plan, photon CTV = prostate + 10 mm margin. No hormones
 * 5-years; 2005 PMID 16160131 -- "Comparison of conventional-dose vs high-dose conformal radiation therapy in clinically localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate: a randomized controlled trial." (Zietman AL, JAMA. 2005 Sep 14;294(10):1233-9.). Note erratum published after incorrect analysis of failures during initial publication, which changes outcomes. Values below are corrected values. Median F/U 5.5 years
 * Outcome: 5-year bNED 70.2 Gy 79% vs. 79.2 Gy 91% (SS), 59% reduction in risk of failure. LC 48% vs. 67% (SS) No difference in OS 97% vs 96% (NS)
 * Risk stratification: low risk (PSA <10, stage <=T2a, GS <7) 83% vs. 97% (SS); high risk 74% vs. 82% (NS). When high risk sub-analyzed: contemporary intermediate risk 75% vs. 87% (SS), but contemporary high risk not significant, but small number of patients)
 * Late toxicity: Grade 3+ 70.2 Gy 1% vs. 79.2 2%; GU Grade 2 18% vs. 20% (NS), GI Grade 2 8% vs. 17% (SS). Most GI toxicity by 3 years; GU toxicity continuous
 * Conclusion: Men with intermediate-risk clinically localized PCA have better bNED with high dose, without worse severe toxicity and with only small increase in G2 GI toxicity
 * 10-years; 2010 PMID 20124169 -- "Randomized Trial Comparing Conventional-Dose With High-Dose Conformal Radiation Therapy in Early-Stage Adenocarcinoma of the Prostate: Long-Term Results From Proton Radiation Oncology Group/American College of Radiology 95-09." (Zietman AL, J Clin Oncol. 2010 Mar 1;28(7):1106-11.) Median F/U 8.9 years
 * Outcome: 10-year ASTRO (backdating) bPFS low-dose 68% vs. high-dose 83% (SS). For low-risk disease 72% vs 93% (SS); for intermediate-risk 58% vs. 70% (p=0.06). No difference in OS (78% vs 83%)
 * Toxicity: Late Grade 2+ low-dose 29% vs. high-dose 39% (SS); Grade 3+ 2% in both arms (NS)
 * Conclusion: Long-term advantage for high dose in low/intermediate risk PCA patients, with comparable Grade 3 toxicity
 * Patient surveys; 2010 PMID 20233822 -- "Patient-reported long-term outcomes after conventional and high-dose combined proton and photon radiation for early prostate cancer." (Talcott JA, JAMA. 2010 Mar 17;303(11):1046-53.)
 * Post-hoc analysis. 280 patients surveyed (83% of surviving cohort). Main outcome: Prostate Cancer Symptom Indices. Median F/U 9.4 years
 * Outcome: No difference in urinaty obstruction/irritation, urinary incontinence, bowel problems, sexual dysfunction, and most other outcomes. Patients receiving standard dose had less confidence that their dose was under control (76% vs 86%, SS). Many patients reported their function as normal, despite substantial symptoms
 * Conclusion: Higher dose not associated with increase in patient-reported symptoms
 * Rectal DVH; 2010 PMID 20207497 -- "Gastrointestinal Quality of Life After Conventional and High-Dose Radiation for Prostate Cancer: A Subgroup Analysis of a Randomized Trial." (Nguyen PL, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010 Mar 5. [Epub ahead of print])
 * Subset analysis. 50 men with >7 year follow up, QoL questionnaire and DVH data. Anterior rectal wall correlated with patient-reported QoL
 * Outcome: Trend toward association between higher V60, V65, V70, and V75 and long-term GI QoL. No difference between conventional and high-dose arms
 * Conclusion: DVH constraints rather than total prescribed dose have impact on long-term bowel function

 * MD Anderson (1993-1998) -- 70/35 vs. 78/39
 * Randomized. 301 T1-T3 patients, stratified by PSA <10 (65%), 10-20 (35%), >20 (few). Arm 1) 70 Gy vs. Arm 2) 78 Gy. Technique 4F 46/23, Arm 1) 4F RF 24/12, Arm 2) 3D-CRT 6 fields 32/16. CTV = prostate/SV, margin 1.5 cm anterior/inferior, 1.0 cm posterior/superior. No hormones
 * Preliminary; 1996 PMID 8621278 -- "Conventional vs. conformal radiotherapy for prostate cancer: preliminary results of dosimetry and acute toxicity." (Pollack A, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1996 Feb 1;34(3):555-64.)
 * Toxicity; 2000 PMID 11020558 -- "Complications from radiotherapy dose escalation in prostate cancer: preliminary results of a randomized trial." (Storey MR, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000 Oct 1;48(3):635-42.) Median F/U 40 mo.
 * 6-years; 2002 PMID 12128107 -- "Prostate cancer radiation dose response: results of the M. D. Anderson phase III randomized trial." (Pollack A, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002 Aug 1;53(5):1097-105.). Median F/U 5 years
 * Outcome: 6-year overall FFF 64% vs. 70% (p=0.03); however: 6-year FFF if PSA < 10 ~75% in both groups (NS), but FFF if PSA >10 43% vs. 62% (p=0.01). No difference in clinical DFS or OS
 * Toxicity: Grade 2+ rectal toxicity 12% vs. 26% (p=0.001); Grade 2+ bladder toxicity NS
 * Conclusion: Highly significant FFF improvement for intermediate-to-high risk patients, no benefit if PSA <10. Increased rectal toxicity
 * 8-years; 2008 PMID 17765406 -- "Long-term results of the M. D. Anderson randomized dose-escalation trial for prostate cancer." (Kuban DA, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008 Jan 1;70(1):67-74. Epub 2007 Aug 31.) Median F/U 8.7 years
 * 8-year outcome: FFF 78 Gy 78% vs. 70 Gy 59% (SS); if PSA >10 78% vs. 39% (SS), clinical failure 7% vs. 15% (SS); if PSA <10 78% vs. 66% (NS)
 * By risk group: low risk 88% vs. 63% (SS); intermediate risk 86% vs. 76% (NS); high risk 63% vs. 26% (SS). OS 78% vs. 79% (NS)
 * 10-year toxicity: GI Grade 3 7% vs. 1% (SS); GI Grade 2+ 26% vs. 13% (SS); GU Grade 3 5% vs. 4% (NS), GU Grade 2+ 13% vs. 8% (NS)
 * Conclusion: Dose escalation improved PSA and clinical control, particularly if PSA >10 ng/ml
 * Ontario EBRT/LDR (1992-1997) -- EBRT 66/30 vs. EBRT/LDR 75 (LDR 35 + EBRT 40/20)
 * Randomized. 104 patients, locally advanced T2-T3. All underwent staging pelvic lymphadenectomy. Arm 1) EBRT 66/33 vs. Arm 2) LDR 35 Gy (delivered via 18 needles over 48 hours) + EBRT 40/20 for total 75 Gy (>80% of prostate received 80 Gy)
 * 5-years; 2005 PMID 15718316 -- "Randomized trial comparing iridium implant plus external-beam radiation therapy with external-beam radiation therapy alone in node-negative locally advanced cancer of the prostate." (Sathya JR, J Clin Oncol. 2005 Feb 20;23(6):1192-9.). Median F/U 8.2 years
 * Outcome: 5-year FFP high dose 71% vs. standard dose 39% (SS); positive biopsy 24% vs. 51% (SS). OS 94% vs. 92% (NS)
 * Late toxicity: Grade 3 GU high dose 14% vs. standard dose 4% (NS); Grade 3 GI 4% vs 2% (NS)
 * Conclusion: Higher doses of radiation over shorter duration results in better control

 * Harvard Proton Boost (1982-1992) -- Proton (dose escalated) vs. photon boost
 * Randomized. 202 patients, Stage T3-T4Nx,0-2. Standard photons 50.4 Gy four-field, then Arm 1) Conformal protons 25.2 CGE (total 75.6 CGE) vs. Arm 2) Photons 16.8 Gy (total 67.2 Gy). Median F/U 5.1 years
 * 1993 PMID 8514551 -- "Late rectal bleeding following combined X-ray and proton high dose irradiation for patients with stages T3-T4 prostate carcinoma" (Benk VA, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1993 Jun 15;26(3):551-7.) Median F/U 3.7 years
 * Rectal bleeding (none Grade 3-4): high dose 34% vs. low dose 16% (SS)
 * DVH evaluation: significant bleeding risk if >40% anterior rectum gets >75 CGE
 * 1995 PMID 7721636 -- "Advanced prostate cancer: the results of a randomized comparative trial of high dose irradiation boosting with conformal protons compared with conventional dose irradiation using photons alone." (Shipley WU, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1995 Apr 30;32(1):3-12.)
 * Outcome: 5-year LC photon+proton 92% vs. photons 80% (NS), no difference in OS, DSS, TRFS. GS 4/5 patients 94% vs. 64% (SS)
 * Toxicity: Rectal bleeding photon+proton 32% vs. photons 12% (SS), urethral stricture 19% vs. 8% (p=0.07)
 * Conclusion: Boosting dose with protons increased LC in poorly differentiated tumors, but also worsened late toxicity. No impact on DFS or OS
 * 2002 PMID 11743288 -- "Late normal tissue sequelae in the second decade after high dose radiation therapy with combined photons and conformal protons for locally advanced prostate cancer." (Gardner BG, J Urol. 2002 Jan;167(1):123-6.)
 * Retrospective. 39/42 patients alive from original cohort of 167 patients, T3-T4, treated with 4 field box photons to 50.4 Gy, follower by perineal proton boost to 27 Gy in 11 fractions. Median F/U 13.1 years
 * GU toxicity: G2+ GU 59% at 15 years but persisted in 18%. G2+ hematuria 21% at 5 years, 47% at 15 years. G3+ hematuria 3% and 8%. Urethral stricture 10%, urinary incontinence 8% (strongly associated with prior/subsequent prostate surgery)
 * GI toxicity: G2+ GI 13% at 15 years; G1 rectal bleeding in 41%
 * Conclusion: High dose RT results in high rate of low-grade rectal bleeding, but low rate of G2+ GI toxicity; stable after 5 years. GU morbidity continues to worsen over time, but high-grade uncommon

Prospective Dose-Escalation

 * Memorial Sloan Kettering
 * 86.4 Gy; 2012 (1997-2008) PMID 22795805-- "Long-term Survival and Toxicity in Patients Treated With High-Dose Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer." (Spratt DE, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012 Jul 12. Epub 2012.)
 * Started as prospective trial. 1002 patients. NCCN very low risk 10%, low risk 10%, intermediate risk 46%, high risk 34%. RT 86.4/48. PTV 0.6 cm rectal, otherwise 1 cm, weekly portal imaging. ADT x 3-6 months at discretion. Median F/U 5.5 years
 * 7-year bRFS very low risk 100%, low risk 97.7%, intermediate risk 85.6%, high risk 67.9%
 * 7-year DMFS very low risk 100%, low risk 98.9%, intermediate risk 94.1%, high risk 82%
 * 7-year PCSM very low risk 0%, low risk 0%, intermediate risk 3.3%, high risk 8.1%
 * Late toxicity: Actuarial 7-yr late Grade 3 GI and GU, 0.7% and 2.2% respectively.
 * Of 427 men with full potency at baseline, 74% retained sexual function at time of last follow-up.
 * Conclusions: Ultra-high dose escalation to 86.4 Gy is safe and effective with remarkable long term outcomes, especially for the lower risk groups.
 * Strengths: Highest EBRT dose published in the literature with over 1000 patients. It is the largest IMRT series to date (when published) with remarkably low late toxicities despite dose escalation.  One of the first reports to include the very low risk group (requires prostate volume measurements).
 * 81 Gy; 1998 PMID 9635694 -- "Dose escalation with three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy affects the outcome in prostate cancer." (Zelefsky MJ, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1998 Jun 1;41(3):491-500.
 * 743 patients with clinically localized PCA (T1-2 74%); median follow-up 3 years. Dose escalation: 64.8 Gy (96 pts) -> 70.2 Gy (266 pts) -> 75.6 Gy (320 pts) -> 81.0 Gy (61 pts)
 * Toxicity: urinary (18% Grade I/II, 1% Grade III), rectal (22% Grade I/II, 1% Grade III)
 * Initial clinical response (PSA nadir <=1.0): 56% (64.8 Gy) vs. 76% (70.2 Gy) vs. 90% (75.6 Gy and 81.0 Gy) (p<0.001)
 * 5-year PSA outcomes: 85% favorable (PSA <=10, T1-2, GS <=6) vs. 65% intermediate (1 risk) vs. 35% unfavorable (2+ risks) (p<0.001)
 * Dose response: escalation to 75.6/81.0 Gy improved PSA-DFS of intermediate (p=0.04) and unfavorable (p=0.03) patients, but not favorable (p=0.5) patients
 * Positive follow-up prostate bx (2.5+ years): 57% (64.8 Gy) vs. 45% (70.2 Gy) vs. 48% (75.6 Gy) vs. 7% (81.0 Gy) (p<0.05)
 * Neoadjuvant AST: No impact on PSA outcome, significant impact (p<0.001) on local control but also impotence (p<0.001)
 * Conclusion: "The data provide evidence for a significant effect of dose escalation on the response of human prostate cancer to irradiation and defines new standards for curative radiotherapy in this disease."

 * RTOG 94-06 Protocol (1994-2000) - Dose escalation
 * Phase I dose escalation. 1055 men. 3D Conformal. 3 patient groups. Group 1 (T1-T2, low risk of SV) treated to prostate only; Group 2 (T1-T2, >15% of SV involvement) treated to prostate + SV, then prostate boost; Group 3 (T3 tumors) treated to prostate+SV. No Group 3 in Levels III-V. Doses: 68.4 Gy (1.8 Gy/fx; level I), 73.8 Gy (1.8 Gy/fx; level II), 79.2 Gy (1.8 Gy/fx; level III), 74 Gy (2 Gy/fx;level IV), 78 Gy (2 Gy/fx; level V). PTV margins 5-10 mm. see RTOG 94-06 page
 * Long-Term Toxicity; 2010 PMID 19577865 -- "Long-Term Toxicity Following 3D Conformal Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer from the RTOG 9406 Phase I/II Dose Escalation Study." (Michalski JM, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010 Jan 1;76(1):14-22.) Median F/U 6.1 years (Level V) to 12.1 years (Level I)
 * Late Grade 3+ GI/GU toxicity:
 * Group 1 (prostate only): 68.4 - 3%; 73.8 - 4%; 79.2 - 6%; 74 - 7%; 78 - 9% (SS)
 * Group 2 (prostate + SV): 68.5 - 6%; 73.8 - 2%; 79.2 - 6%; 74 - 9%; 78 - 12% (SS)
 * Conclusion: Excellent tolerance; more toxicity with 2 Gy/fx than 1.8 Gy/fx
 * Clinical results; 2012 PMID 22633552 -- "Clinical Outcome of Patients Treated With 3D Conformal Radiation Therapy (3D-CRT) for Prostate Cancer on RTOG 9406." (Michalski J, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012 Jul 1;83(3):e363-70.)
 * Median f/u 9.2-11.8 yrs. 5-yr OS 90%, 87%, 88%, 89%, and 88% for dose levels I-V. 5-yr clinical DFS (excluding PSA definition) 84%, 78%, 81%, 82%, and 82%.
 * 5-yr biochemical failure (Phoenix): 68%, 73%, 67%, 84%, and 80% (low risk); 70%, 62%, 70%, 74%, and 69% (intermediate risk); and 42%, 62%, 68%, 54%, and 67% (high risk)
 * Conclusion: "Dose-escalated 3D-CRT yields favorable outcomes for localized prostate cancer. This multi-institutional experience allows comparison to other experiences with modern radiation therapy."

 * Fox Chase
 * PMID 12243818 -- Dose response in prostate cancer with 8-12 years' follow-up. (2002 Hanks GE, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002 Oct 1;54(2):427-35.)
 * 229/233 assessable patients; median follow-up 9.2 years; favorable definition (T1-T2a, GS 2-6, no PNI)
 * Dose escalation: 68-79 Gy in 2 Gy steps (<70 Gy 50 pts, 70-72.5 Gy 80 pts, 72.5-75 Gy 28 pts, 75- 77.5 Gy 56 pts, 77.5-80Gy 21 pts)
 * Toxicity: dose response for rectal Grade II, none for rectal Grade III and urinary Grade II/III
 * PSA-DFS was 55% at 5 years, 48% at 10 years, and 48% at 12 years (median dose 74 Gy)
 * 8-year PSA-DFS if PSA <10: 68% (<70 Gy) vs. 74% (70-72 Gy) vs. 68% (>72 Gy) (p=NS)
 * 8-year PSA-DFS if PSA 10-20: 19% vs. 31% vs. 84% (p=0.003) Only dose-response seen.
 * 8-year PSA-DFS if PSA >20: 8% vs. 23% vs. 11% (p=NS)
 * Dose response subgroups: unfavorable PSA <10 (p=0.04) and favorable PSA 10-20 (p=0.002), (p=NS) for all other groups
 * Dose response for DM: yes for entire cohort (p=0.03), borderline for PSA <10 (p=0.05), significant for PSA 10-20 (p=0.01), not significant for PSA >20
 * Conclusion : "The long-term results of the original Fox Chase radiation dose escalation study with >9 years of median follow-up confirm the existence of a dose response for both bNED control and FDM. The dose response in prostate cancer is real, and the absence of biochemical recurrence after 8 years demonstrates the lack of late failure and suggests cure."
 * PMID 9635695 -- Dose escalation with 3D conformal treatment: five year outcomes, treatment optimization, and future directions. (1998 Hanks GE, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1998 Jun 1;41(3):501-10.)
 * 233 patients (T1-2 90%), median follow-up 5 years
 * Dose escalation: 68-79 Gy in 2 Gy steps (<70 Gy 50 pts, 70-72.5 Gy 80 pts, 72.5-75 Gy 28 pts, 75- 77.5 Gy 56 pts, 77.5-80Gy 21 pts)
 * Toxicity: RTOG grade 3,4 GI morbidity at 5 years was <1%.
 * 5-year PSA-DFS if PSA <10: 86% (<70 Gy) vs. 77% (70-72 Gy) vs. 84% (>72 Gy) (p=NS)
 * 5-year PSA-DFS if PSA 10-20: 29% vs. 57% vs. 73% (p=0.02)
 * 8-year PSA-DFS if PSA >20: 8% vs. 28% vs. 30% (p=0.02)
 * For each 1 Gy increase in dose, the hazard of bNED failure decreased by 8%
 * Conclusion : "A dose response was observed for patients with pretreatment PSA >10 ng/ml based on 5-year bNED results. No dose response was observed for patients with pretreatment PSA < 10 ng/ml. Dose response was observed for FC-LENT grade 2 and grade 3,4 GI sequelae and for LENT grade 2 GU sequelae. Optimization of treatment was made possible by the results in this report. The improvement in 5-year bNED rates for patients with PSA levels > 10 ng/ml strongly suggests that clinical trials employing radiation should investigate the use of 3DCRT and prostate doses of 76-80 Gy."
 * PMID 9112451 -- Optimization of conformal radiation treatment of prostate cancer: report of a dose escalation study. (1997 Hanks GE, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1997 Feb 1;37(3):543-50.)
 * 233 patients (T1-2 90%), minimum 3-year follow-up
 * Dose escalation: 68-79 Gy in 2 Gy steps (<70 Gy 50 pts, 70-72.5 Gy 80 pts, 72.5-75 Gy 28 pts, 75- 77.5 Gy 56 pts, 77.5-80Gy 21 pts)
 * Toxicity: urinary (8% Grade II, <1% Grade III), rectal (24% Grade II, 5% Grade III)
 * 3-year PSA-DFS in <71.5 Gy vs >=71.5 Gy: PSA <10 90% vs. 87% (NS), PSA >10 39% vs. 71% (p=0.02)
 * Dose response: none if PSA <10, PSA 10-20 (69% 70 Gy vs. 80% 75 Gy vs. 89% 80 Gy), PSA 20+ (36% 70 Gy vs. 46% 75 Gy vs. 57% 80 Gy)
 * Dose response toxicity: Grade III/IV (4% 70 Gy vs. 9% 75 Gy vs. 19% 80Gy)
 * Conclusion : "Patients with pretreatment PSA < 10 ngm/ml do not benefit from dose escalation, and the serious late morbidity of conformal radiation at 70 Gy is < 3%. Patients with PSA values 10-19.9 ngm/ml and 20+ ngm/ml benefit from dose escalation beyond 70 Gy. Treatment beyond 75 Gy results in > 10% serious morbidity unless special precautions are taken to protect the rectal mucosa. All levels of severity of radiation morbidity show a dose response and combined with the dose response for bNED survival these data allow the optimization of treatment."

 * French Multi-Institutional PMID 10974470 -- Dose escalation with 3D-CRT in prostate cancer: French study of dose escalation with conformal 3D radiotherapy in prostate cancer-preliminary results. (2000 Bey P, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000 Sep 1;48(2):513-7.)
 * 5 French cancer centers in Dijon, Lyon, Marseille, Nancy, and Nice; 164 patients
 * Dose escalation: 66 Gy (18 pts) -> 70 Gy (28 pts) -> 74 Gy (49 pts) -> 78 Gy (48 pts) -> 80 Gy (21 pts); (max 72 Gy to SV and 75 Gy to rectal wall). Follow up 32 months (66-70 Gy) and 17.5 months (74-80 Gy)
 * GI toxicity: [66-70 Gy Grade I 19.5%, Grade II 6.5%, Grade III 0%] vs. [74-80 Gy Grade I 26.3%, Grade II 9.3%, Grade III 0%] (p=NS)
 * GU toxicity: [66-70 Gy Grade I 17.3%, Grade II 2%, Grade III 6.5%] vs. [74-80 Gy Grade I 16%, Grade II 3.3%, Grade III 0.8%] (p=NS)
 * Probability to achieve nadir <1ng/ml: better in 74-80 Gy (p=0.003)
 * Conclusion : "This multi-institutional study demonstrated the feasibility of escalating the dose of radiation to 80 Gy in prostate cancer patients."

 * Dutch Multi-Institutional PMID 9588921 -- Estimation of the incidence of late bladder and rectum complications after high-dose (70-78 GY) conformal radiotherapy for prostate cancer, using dose-volume histograms. (1998 Boersma LJ, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1998; 41:83-92.)
 * Conclusion : "These data show that dose escalation up to 78 Gy, using a conformal technique, is feasible. However, these data have also demonstrated that the incidence of severe late rectal bleeding is increased above certain dose-volume thresholds."

 * Wayne State Hyperfractionation PMID 8621290 -- Hyperfractionated conformal radiotherapy in locally advanced prostate cancer: results of a dose escalation study. (1996 Forman JD, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1996; 34:655-62.)
 * 25 patients with locally advanced PCA treated to 78 Gy at 1.3 Gy bid in 6 weeks, followed by 24 patients treated to 82.8 Gy at 1.15 Gy bid in 7 weeks; 30-month follow-up
 * 30-month toxicity: Grade II rectal 17%, Grade II GU 16%, no Grade III/IV
 * 12-month outcome: 84% had PSA <= 4; and 53% < or = 1 ng/ml; 71% had post-RT biopsies that were either negative (55% or showed a marked therapeutic effect (16%).
 * Conclusion : "The use of hyperfractionated conformal radiotherapy facilitated dose escalation with no increase in chronic toxicity compared to standard doses. The initial tumor response based on prostate specific antigen measurements and postradiation biopsies is highly encouraging. Based on these results, an increase in dose to 87.4 Gy has been planned according to the schema of this ongoing dose escalation study."

Retrospective

 * Multi-institutional (1994-5) PMID 15667961 -- Improved biochemical relapse-free survival with increased external radiation doses in patients with localized prostate cancer: the combined experience of nine institutions in patients treated in 1994 and 1995. (2005 Kupelian P, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005)
 * 1325 patients, 1061 treated with <72 Gy and 264 with >=72 Gy during 1994 and 1995
 * Conclusion : "With similar follow-up duration, higher than conventional radiotherapy doses were associated with improved PSA-DFS when controlled for the influence of pretreatment PSA levels, biopsy GS, and clinical T stage."

 * Michigan PMID 12957249 -- Dose escalation for localized prostate cancer: substantial benefit observed with 3D conformal therapy. (2003 Symon Z, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2003; 57:384-90.)
 * Retrospective review of 1473 patients treated with 3D-CRT (1987-2000); median follow-up 35 months
 * Intermediate risk patients (T1-T2 and GS 7 or PSA 10-20): each 1-Gy increment in total radiation dose was associated with a highly significant 8% reduction in the probability of failure (hazard RATIO = 0.92, p = 0.005).
 * Conclusion : "Dose escalation using 3D-CRT significantly reduces the risk of biochemical/disease failure among intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients."

 * RTOG (1975-92) - PMID 10894874 (Full text) — Survival advantage from higher-dose radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer treated on the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group trials. (2000 Valicenti R, J Clin Oncol. 2000 Jul;18(14):2740-6.)
 * Retrospective analysis of 4 Phase III RTOG trials: 75-06, 77-06, 85-31, and 86-10. Included 1465 pts treated with RT alone (no hormonal therapy). Not randomized to dose.
 * Doses: range 10 Gy - 77.7 Gy (median 68.4; 25-75% range, 66 - 70.2 Gy).
 * Higher radiation dose associated with improved DSS and OS only for Gleason 8-10.

 * Multi-institutional PMID 3198435 -- The effect of dose on local control of prostate cancer. (1988 Hanks GE, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. Dec;15(6):1299-305.)
 * 1516 patients from three patterns of care outcome surveys retrospectively reviewed
 * Stage A (168 patients): no dose-response
 * Stage B (725 patients): dose 60-70Gy appropriate; dose <60Gy significant increase in local failure; dose >70 Gy no demonstrable improvement in local control, but increase in complications
 * Stage C (624 patients): appear to require dose >= 70 Gy
 * Conclusion : "The policy of treating all stages of prostate cancer with the same dose is not supported by these data."

 * Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 2003 (1988-2001).
 * 1684 pts. 3D-CRT. Dose increased from 64.8 to 86.4 Gy by 5.4 Gy increments.
 * PMID 14571409 — "Technological Advances in External-Beam Radiation Therapy for the Treatment of Localized Prostate Cancer." Leibel SA et Al. Semin Oncol 30:596-615.
 * Results:
 * Late Toxicity (Grade III)
 * Group 64.8-70.2 Gy	-- 3% (364 pts)
 * Group 75.6-81 Gy	-- 2.2% (507 pts)
 * Group (only IMRT)>=81 Gy -- 1.4% (772 pts )
 * PSA relapse free survival
 * -Favorable(F)      ;-Intermediate(I); unfavorable (U)
 * group 64.8-70.2 Gy --  65% (F)  ;         -- 44%(I);--22%(U)
 * group 75.6 Gy  --   86% (F)  ;           --61%(I);--43%(U)
 * group 81-86.4 Gy --    96% (F);           --87%(I);--69%(U)

 * Fox Chase Retrospective Dose-Response Update Abstract, Pollack, JUrol 2004
 * 839 patients, 3D-CRT, 63-month median follow-up, retrospective
 * RT analyzed as categorical (dose groups <72, 72-75.9 and >=76 Gy) variable
 * Conclusion: RT dose escalation to 76 Gy or greater improved patient outcome for all prognostic groups except those at the favorable (PSA <10 and Gleason 2-6) and unfavorable (PSA >20 and stage T3-T4) extremes.

 * Fox Chase Retrospective Lymph Node Risk Study Abstract Jacob, IJRBOP 2005
 * 420 patients, >15% risk of LN+ (but negative radiologically), 3D-CRT to whole pelvic (WP), partial pelvic (PP), or prostate only (PO) fields. +/- short term androgen deprivation. Median follow-up 43 months
 * RT analyzed as categorical (dose groups <73, 73-76.9 and >=77 Gy) variable
 * 5-year FFBF rate by dose group was 48% for <73 Gy, 64% for 73-76.9 Gy, and 74% for >=77 Gy (p = 0.002).
 * Conclusion: The radiation dose was the most significant determinant of FFBF in patients with a lymph node risk >15% in the patient population studied. These data suggest that the primary tumor takes precedence over lymph node coverage or the use of STAD. Doses >70 Gy are of paramount importance in such intermediate- and high-risk patients.

Biology

 * Fox Chase; 2007 PMID 17398026 -- "What dose of external-beam radiation is high enough for prostate cancer?" (Eade TN, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007 Jul 1;68(3):682-9. Epub 2007 Mar 29.)
 * Dose modeling. 1530 consecutive patients, treated 1989-2002 with 3D-CRT. Four isocenter groups <70 Gy (3%), 70-75 Gy (36%), 75-80 Gy (37%), and >80 (24%)
 * Outcome: Adjusted 5-year Phoenix bNED 70%, 81%, 83%, 89%. 10-year FFDM 93%, 93%, 95%, 96%. Dose-response curve increasing benefit >80 Gy
 * Conclusion: Doses >=80 Gy recommended for most men with prostate cancer

 * MD Anderson
 * Low/Intermediate risk; 2005 PMID 15752878 -- Dose-response characteristics of low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer treated with external beam radiotherapy. (Cheung R,Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005; 61:993-1002.)
 * 235 low-risk (<=T2a, PSA<10, GS<=6) and 387 intermediate-risk (T2b-c, PSA 10-20, GS=7) treated with EBRT 1987 - 1998
 * Low risk: TCD(50): ASTRO def 57.3Gy, dose-response using ASTRO but not using CN+2 definitions. The dose-response curves essentially plateaued at 78 Gy
 * Intermediate risk: TCD(50): ASTRO def 67.5Gy, CN+2 def 57.8Gy
 * Most benefit seen by patients with PSA >7.5
 * Conclusion: Marginal improvement for Phoenix failure definition; little gain with doses >78 Gy for low risk patients. Dose-response for intermediate-risk patients
 * High risk; 2003 PMID 12873666 -- "Dose-response for biochemical control among high-risk prostate cancer patients after external beam radiotherapy." (Cheung R, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2003; 56:1234-40.)
 * 363 high risk patients (T3, PSA >20, GS 8-10) treated with EBRT 1987-1998.
 * TCD(50) was 75.5Gy; Gamma50 was 1.7. 78 Gy dose at the steep portion of dose-response curve. 78 Gy -> 83 Gy may improve PSA control by 10%
 * Conclusion: Benefit to dose escalation in this group.

 * MSKCC PMID 12065099 -- "Risk group dependence of dose-response for biopsy outcome after three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy of prostate cancer." (Levegrun S, Radiother Oncol. 2002)
 * Failure determined by post-treatment prostate bx >2.5 years after treatment
 * TCD(50) for high risk patients is ~10Gy higher than for low risk patients (~65Gy vs. ~75Gy)
 * TCD(95) is 78Gy, 83Gy, and 88Gy for low, intermediate and high risk groups
 * Gamma50 for the entire cohort is 2.9, but increases to ~5 for risk groups stratified by 2-3 factors. This supports that the shallowness of overall RT dose-response is a summation of steeper subgroups
 * Conclusion: "Dose-response of prostate cancer, quantified by TCD(50) and gamma(50), varies by prognostic subgroup."

 * Multi-institutional PMID 7607946 -- "Radiation dose-response of human tumors." (Okunieff P, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1995; 32:1227-37.) using data published in PMID 3967982 -- "Patterns of care studies: dose-response observations for local control of adenocarcinoma of the prostate." (Hanks GE, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1985 Jan;11(1):153-7.)
 * 574 patients treated 1973-1975; failure determined by DRE and at that time standard imaging
 * T1: TCP(50) 28.34Gy; Gamma50 1.00; optimal control at <=60Gy
 * T2: TCP(50) 45.18Gy; Gamma50 1.16; optimal control at 60-65Gy
 * T3: TCP(50) 46.29Gy; Gamma50 0.95; optimal control at 65-70Gy
 * T4: TCP(50) 41.78Gy; Gamma50 0.60; optimal control at >70Gy
 * Conclusion : "A change in institutional policies to treat with optimal doses as indicated by this study would result in an overall increase in local control and a decrease in complications."

 * PMID 7410129 -- Irradiation of carcinoma of the prostate localized to the pelvis: analysis of tumor response and prognosis. (1980 Perez CA, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1980 May;6(5):555-63.)

Conventional EBRT
Excessive toxicity with conventional RT:
 * Netherlands (1983-85) - PMID 2298625 — "Late radiation damage in prostate cancer patients treated by high dose external radiotherapy in relation to rectal dose." Smit WG et al. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1990 Jan;18(1):23-9.
 * 2-yr incidence of moderate or severe proctitis was <22% for 70-75 Gy but increased to 60% when the dose at the anterior rectal wall was > 75 Gy.

Dose Escalation and ADT
See also: Adjuvant ADT See also: Localized Prostate Cancer (Dose Escalation vs ADT)

 * GICOR; 2005 (Spain)(1999-2001) PMID 16170164 -- "Risk-adapted androgen deprivation and escalated three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy for prostate cancer: Does radiation dose influence outcome of patients treated with adjuvant androgen deprivation? A GICOR study." (Zapatero A, J Clin Oncol. 2005 Sep 20;23(27):6561-8.)
 * Prospective, nonrandomized. 416 patients assigned to low, intermediate, and high risk groups. Low risk: 3D-CRT only; Intermediate risk: 3D-CRT and 4-6 months ADT; High risk: 3D-CRT and 2 years ADT. RT dose varied per institution (median 72 Gy, 64.8-82.6). Median F/U 3 years
 * Outcome: 5-year bDFS low risk 80%, intermediate risk 73%, high risk 79%.
 * By dose (<72 vs. >=72 Gy): low risk (no ADT) 66% vs. 96% (SS); intermediate risk (ST-ADT) 56% vs. 94% (NS); high risk (LT-ADT) 63% vs. 84% (SS)
 * Conclusion: Additional benefit of high-dose (>=72 Gy) when combined with ADT

Patient Preference

 * Nijmegen, Netherlands
 * Prospective. 150 patients with T1-3N0 prostate cancer. Asked if they wanted to choose dose, and if so what dose (70 Gy vs 74 Gy). Decision aid used to show higher cure but higher toxicity for 74 Gy dose. Control group of 144 treated with fixed dose without choice. Follow up at baseline, after choice, at 2 weeks and 6 months after RT completion
 * 2008 PMID 17765404 -- "Offering a treatment choice in the irradiation of prostate cancer leads to better informed and more active patients, without harm to well-being." (van Tol-Geerdink, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008 Feb 1;70(2):442-8. Epub 2007 Aug 31.)
 * Outcome: Involved group increased participation (SS), increased knowledge (SS), improved risk perception (SS), higher satisfaction with quality of information (SS), and appropriateness of treatment (SS). No difference in well-being
 * Conclusion: Offering a choice with decision aid led to better-informed patient; no overall impact on well-being
 * 2007 PMID 17634489 -- "Doctors' and patients' preferences for participation and treatment in curative prostate cancer radiotherapy." (Stalmeier PF, J Clin Oncol. 2007 Jul 20;25(21):3096-100.)
 * Physicians gave substitute judgments (their estimate of what the patient would want) after initial consultation, but prior to patient decision
 * Outcome: MDs believed 66% wanted to choose (vs. actual 79%). Lower dose favored by 20% of physician preference, 51% of physician substitute preference, and 71% of patient preference (SS)
 * Conclusion: Physicians had problems predicting patient preference, and underestimated patients preference for less toxic treatment
 * 2006 PMID 17008699 -- "Do patients with localized prostate cancer treatment really want more aggressive treatment?" (van Tol-Geerdink JJ, J Clin Oncol. 2006 Oct 1;24(28):4581-6.)
 * Outcome: 79% wanted to choose dose. In these, 75% chose lower dose. Lower dose chosen more often by older, low-risk, no hormone, or low anxiety/depression score
 * Conclusion: Most patients with localized PCA prefer lower radiation dose; many patients attach more weight to QoL aspects than improving survival


text:
Chess Opening Theory/1. e4/1...c5/2. Nf3/2...Nc6/3. d4/3...cxd4/4. Nxd4/4...Nf6/5. Nc3/5...e5/6. Ndb5

= Sveshnikov Sicilian = Moves:1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5 6.Ndb5

The White knight's threat of check on d6 is a bit awkward: ...Ke7 would be unpleasant so Black would have to surrender his bishop with ...Bxd6, only to have a queen arrive on d6 and single-handedly cramp the whole Black position. She would need to go, too: ...Qe7 Qxe7 Kxe7/Nxe7, and suddenly Black's dodgy d-pawn and slow development are significant factors in the much simplified position. Far better to keep the knight out of d6 for now and then vanquish it to a3 in a move's time with 6...d6.

Theory table
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5 6.Ndb5


text:
Cookbook talk:Pretzels (Soft)

how long does this recipe need to rise for after kneading the dough?

the recipe conflict with two wikipedia articles: Washing Soda and Sodium Hydroxid

title: Cookbook talk:Pretzels (Soft)


text:
Talk:Chess Opening Theory/1. e4/1...e5/2. Nf3/2...Nc6/3. Bb5/3...a6/4. Bxc6/4...dxc6/5. d4

I think the line "as he shouldnt allow White to play Nxe5 or dxe5 which would favor White." needs to be clarified.

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Opening_theory_in_chess/1._e4/1...e5/2._Nf3/2...Nc6/3._Bb5/3...a6/4._Bxc6/4...dxc6/5._Nxe5 where states that Nxe5 is a poor move.

So am I right in saying that in the position of 5. d4 letting White play dxe5 would favour White but Nxe5 doesn't favour white? The syntax might need changing to better reflect this distinction?