• Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society
• /
• v.19 no.5
• /
• pp.131-138
• /
• 2018

In this study, we investigated the trend of technological development in major countries related to the propulsion equipment of railway vehicles. The propulsion system is the main equipment of electric vehicles. A lot of time and investment are required in order to ensure the development of technology. Therefore, developed countries have maximized their effort to develop technologies with safety, reliability, and convenience of maintenance. They have also done their utmost to prevent technology transfer to other countries after the development of new technologies. For example, Toshiba of Japan developed a new 3,300V/1,500 A class IGBT power device, but was reluctant to export it to foreign countries in order to protect this technology. In this study, we analyzed the patents applied for related to propulsion control systems and presented the direction of development during the technical development of these systems. The patent analysis of the core technologies was conducted using the Thomson Innovation DB. We examined the number of patents applied for by country, year and major applicant. As a result of the analysis, it was found that the proportion of patent applications per country was in the order of China, 48%, Europe 16.6%, and the United States 14.9%. The patent situation of the top 10 principal applicants revealed that (the top three were?) ABB 14%, GE 13%, and CRRC 12%. At the same time, we also conducted a qualitative analysis of the level of technical development by evaluating such factors as the influence index, quotation, market securing power and citation. Based on the result of the patent analysis, we presented the direction of technical development of the propulsion control equipment of railway vehicles. Based on the analysis results, it was found that domestic applicants considerably reduced their efforts to protect their patents from foreign companies. Nowadays, most of the electric motors used in Korea are induction motors. In advanced countries, permanent magnet electric motors are employed in new railway lines. Therefore, intensive investment is needed in new developments.

• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• v.26 no.2
• /
• pp.104-112
• /
• 2008

Purpose: To assess the toxicity and tumor response induced by $DCVac/IR^{(R)}$ dendritic cell(DC) immunotherapy combined with irradiation for refractory colorectal cancer patients with multiple liver metastases. Materials and Methods: Between May 2004 and November 2006, applicants from a pool of refractory colorectal cancer patients with multiple liver metastases were enrolled. The patients were registered after having signed the informed consent form, which had been approved by the Institutional Review Board from the Dong-A University and Busan National University Hospital. DCs were obtained from peripheral blood of each patient, and then cultured in vitro. A total of $6{\times}10^6$ DCs were packed into a vial($DCVac/IR^{(R)}$, 0.5 ml) at the convenience of each patient's schedule. On the day before and on the day of each vaccination, each patient received a 4 Gy radiation dose to the target tumor. On the day of vaccination, the indicated dose of autologous DCs was injected into the irradiated tumor using ultrasound-guided needle injection procedures. A total of four vaccinations were scheduled at three 2-week intervals and one 4 week interval at the Dong-A University and Busan National University Hospital. If the tumor status was deemed to be stable or responding to therapy, an additional vaccination dose or two was approved at 4 week intervals beyond the fourth immunization. A tolerance test for DCs was conducted by injecting a range of doses($3{\times}10^6\;to\;12{\times}10^6$ DCs) after the 3rd injection. Moreover, the maximal tolerable dose was applied to additional patients. Treatment safety was evaluated in all patients who had at least one injection. Treatment feasibility was evaluated by the 10th week by assessing the response of patients having at least 4 injections. For systemic toxicities, the evaluation was performed using the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria, whereas adverse effects were recorded using common WHO toxicity criteria. Results: Of the 24 registered patients, 22 received the DCs injections. Moreover, of the 14 patients that applied for the tolerance test, only 11 patients completed it because 3 patients withdrew their testing agreement. A grade 3 or more side effect, which was possibly related to the DC injection, did not occur in additional patients. The $12{\times}10^6$ DC injection was identified as the maximum tolerable dose, and was then injected in an additional 8 patients. Patients tolerated the injection fairly well, with no fatal side effects. In order to assess the feasibility of DC immunotherapy, the response was evaluated in other hepatic lesions outside of the targeted hepatic lesion. The response evaluation was performed in 15 of the 17 patients who received at least 4 injections. Stable and progressive disease was found in 4 and 11 patients, respectively. Conclusion: The DC-based immunotherapy and radiotherapy is theoretically synergistic for the local control and systemic control. The $DCVac/IR^{(R)}$ immunotherapy combined with irradiation was tolerable and safe in the evaluated cases of refractory colorectal cancer with multiple liver metastases. Future work should include well designed a phase II clinical trials.