This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website

How Do You Add These Nutrients To The Soil? Looking At Well-Balanced Fertilizers
One of the great things about the six essential nutrients is that they are easy to find.
Adding a well-balanced fertilizer is an easy way to increase nutrient levels in the soil. Be sure to check out Holganix's fertilizer options including: Holganix Blue Sky 21-0-0, Holganix 2-10-20 and Holganix granular options.
Unlocking Nutrients In The Soil
Healthy soil is already pumped with these nutrients, although some like nitrogen and phosphorus are often locked in an unusable form for the plant.
Plant and soil probiotics contains ACTIVE, beneficial microorganisms that unlock plant nutrients in the soil. They also nurture longer, more web-like root systems that are better able to mine for nutrients deeper in the soil.
Using Microbes To Improve Soil Health
Holganix Bio 800 + charges soil with over 800 species of soil microbes to improve plant performance. Bu siz uchun nimani anglatadi?
That means you build soil and root health, adding the benefits of better soil structure to whatever soil type you have. This translates to improved yield on crops, better playability on golf courses and a reduced need for fertilizers and pesticides on lawns.
Download our ingredient list below to learn more about the soil microbes in Holganix Bio 800 +

Systemic Therapy for Colon Cancer
Bevacizumab and Angiogenesis
Angiogenesis delivers essential nutrients and oxygen for the sustained growth and metastasis in tumors and presents a rational target in cancer therapy. 93 These tumor-induced blood vessels are often structurally and functionally abnormal, impairing the effective delivery of chemotherapeutic agents to the cancer. 94 The abnormal process is thought to be driven by an imbalance of pro- and antiangiogenic factors, and disrupting the process by neutralizing vascular endothelial growth factor, a key ligand for angiogenesis, has been a focus in colorectal cancer therapy. 95
Bevacizumab is a humanized recombinant monoclonal antibody that binds vascular endothelial growth factor and inhibits liganddependent angiogenesis. The drug's efficacy was demonstrated in two randomized controlled trials, which led to FDA approval for use with any intravenous 5-FU-containing regimen in first- or second-line metastatic colorectal cancer therapy. 96 Several mechanisms have been speculated to explain the activity of bevacizumab and other antiangiogenic agents, including starving the tumor of essential nutrients and oxygen by inhibition of formation of tumor vasculature, and improving the delivery of chemotherapeutic agents by normalizing the tumor vasculature and decreasing interstitial pressures in tumors.
In a small randomized phase II trial, 104 patients were randomized to receive weekly bolus 5-FU and leucovorin (5-FU/LV) (control arm), bevacizumab 5 mg/kg or 10 mg/kg plus 5-FU/LV (low-dose and high-dose bevacizumab arms, respectively). 97 Compared with those in the control arm, patients in both bevacizumab arms had better response rate (control 17% low-dose 40%, high-dose 24%), longer median TTP (5.2, 9.0, and 7.2 months, respectively), and longer median survival (13.8, 21.5, and 16.1 months, respectively). It is interesting that the low-dose bevacizumab arm seemed to be superior to the high-dose arm and was partly attributed to some imbalance in randomization, resulting in more patients with poor prognostic factors in the latter group. The dose of 5 mg/kg for bevacizumab was thus chosen for the subsequent phase III trial. Bleeding (gastrointestinal and epistaxis), hypertension, thrombosis, and proteinuria were more common in the bevacizumab arms.
In the interim, irinotecan plus bolus 5-FU and leucovorin (IFL) became the standard first-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer in the United States (see earlier). As such, the subsequent phase III trial used IFL as the control regimen, and 813 patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer were randomized to IFL plus placebo, IFL plus bevacizumab 5 mg/kg, and 5-FU/LV plus bevacizumab 5 mg/kg. 98 The 5-FU/LV/bevacizumab arm was discontinued during a planned interim analysis when the data monitoring committee found that the addition of bevacizumab to IFL had an acceptable safety profile. The intention-to-treat analysis showed a superior median survival for the IFL plus bevacizumab arm compared with the control arm (20.3 versus 15.6 months P < .001) ( Fig. 15-4 ). The study arm also had a better response rate (44.8% versus 34.8% P = .004) and median duration of response (10.4 versus 7.1 months P = .001). Reversible hypertension and proteinuria were more frequent in the study arm. Other rare but serious adverse events included thrombotic events, gastrointestinal perforation (1.5% of the patients in the bevacizumab arm) and wound dehiscence.
The role of bevacizumab with oxaliplatin-based regimen for second-line therapy for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer was studied in a randomized phase III study (E3200). 99 In the study, previously treated patients were randomly assigned to FOLFOX4 alone or FOLFOX4 plus high-dose bevacizumab (10 mg/kg). Analysis of 829 patients showed superior median survival in the bevacizumab plus FOLFOX4 arm (12.9 versus 10.8 months P = .001). Dose reduction of bevacizumab to 5 mg/kg was allowed in the study for hypertension, bleeding, thrombosis, proteinuria, and abnormal liver tests. About 56% of 240 patients in the FOLFOX4 plus bevacizumab had bevacizumab dose reduction, and the overall survival was not statistically different from the group without dose reduction. 100
Despite the clear role of bevacizumab with intravenous 5-FU-based regimens in first- and second-line therapy for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, more clinical questions still need to be clarified, such as efficacy of continuing bevacizumab into second-line therapy and synergism with oral fluoropyrimidines. Studies addressing the combination of bevacizumab and cetuximab are ongoing. In the BOND (Bowel Oncology with Cetuximab Antibody)-2 trial, 101 patients with advanced colorectal cancer who had unsuccessful irinotecan-based therapy, more than 80% of whom had also been pretreated with oxaliplatin, were enrolled in a randomized phase II trial comparing cetuximab plus bevacizumab with cetuximab/bevacizumab plus irinotecan as salvage therapy. The primary objective of the trial was to document the feasibility of the dual-antibody combinations and to assess the response rate in both arms. In terms of the first objective, no unexpected adverse effects were encountered when cetuximab and bevacizumab were combined the combination was feasible. Moreover, the addition of bevacizumab appeared to enhance the efficacy of cetuximab and cetuximab/irinotecan in terms of response rate, but more strikingly, in terms of time to tumor progression (TTP). This effect is even more noteworthy, since cetuximab monotherapy in BOND-1 was only associated with a rather disappointing median TTP of 1.5 months. Combining cetuximab with bevacizumab increased median TTP dramatically to 6.9 months. A similar effect was seen in the cetuximab + bevacizumab + irinotecan arm. Unfortunately, large clinical trials have indicated that “double biologic” strategies are harmful to patients.
With the latter data showing the feasibility of irinotecan with bevacizumab and cetuximab, several trials have investigated the combinations in first-line conventional chemotherapy and monoclonal antibodies. 102–104 In a randomized phase III trial of chemotherapy/bevacizumab with or without panitumumab (PACCE Study), median PFS in the experimental arm with both the biologics was 10 versus 11.4 months in the experimental versus control arms, respectively, and overall survival was 19.4 versus 24.5 months, also favoring the control arm. 102 The combination was inferior even in K-ras wild-type patients with more death rates and excess toxicity. The results are the same with another large study including cetuximab and bevacizumab (CAIRO 2 Study). 103 In this study, the combination of capecitabine/oxaliplatin/bevacizumab chemotherapy, with or without cetuximab, was tested in 755 untreated metastatic colorectal cancer patients. The primary endpoint was PFS. The study demonstrated worsened PFS in the double biologic arm, 10.7 in the control arm, and 9.5 in the experimental arm (P = .01). The quality-of-life scores were worse and toxicities also more common in the experimental arm. In the subset analysis, even patients with wild-type K-ras also did not benefit.
Most double-biologic arms of ongoing studies were closed based on the latter results, and such combinations should not be used outside of a clinical trial. The CALGB/Southwest Oncology Group Intergroup 80405, a phase III intergroup trial comparing FOLFOX or FOLFIRI-based chemotherapy (investigators' choice) with bevacizumab, cetuximab or both was also evaluating the role of double biologics. This trial has been amended now to include patients with K-ras wild-type only.
VkontakteOdnoklassnikiFacebookTwitterЕще...
Почти 7 лет меня мучила шишка на ноге! А вылечила за 4 дня
Orthofix


Jinsiy quvvatni oshiruvchi oddiy usul
Сила Сулеймана


, вот убийца простатита и частого мочеиспускания
Predstanol