ࡱ> ih ZO\p Howard Maile Ba==hC48X@"10Calibri10Calibri10Calibri10Calibri10Calibri1 0Calibri10Calibri140Calibri1 0Calibri10Calibri10Calibri1,60Calibri160Calibri160Calibri1>0Calibri140Calibri1<0Calibri1?0Calibri1*h60 Calibri Light10Calibri1 0Calibri10Calibri10Calibri10Arial10Calibri""#,##0;\-""#,##0""#,##0;[Red]\-""#,##0""#,##0.00;\-""#,##0.00#""#,##0.00;[Red]\-""#,##0.005*0_-""* #,##0_-;\-""* #,##0_-;_-""* "-"_-;_-@_-,)'_-* #,##0_-;\-* #,##0_-;_-* "-"_-;_-@_-=,8_-""* #,##0.00_-;\-""* #,##0.00_-;_-""* "-"??_-;_-@_-4+/_-* #,##0.00_-;\-* #,##0.00_-;_-* "-"??_-;_-@_-"Yes";"Yes";"No""True";"True";"False""On";"On";"Off"],[$ -2]\ #,##0.00_);[Red]\([$ -2]\ #,##0.00\)                                                                       ff + ) , *     P  P        `            a>   8""    8""   #8""    x""    x""    8""   ||DF}-} 00_)}-} 00_)}-} 00_)}-} 00_)}-} 00_)}-} 00_)}-} 00_)}-} 00_)}-} 00_)}-}  00_)}-}  00_)}-}  00_)}-}  00_)}-}  00_)}-} 00_)}-} 00_)}A} 00_)ef[$ -}A} 00_)ef[$ -}A} 00_)ef[$ -}A} 00_)ef[$ -}A} 00_)ef[$ -}A} 00_)ef [$ -}A} 00_)L[$ -}A} 00_)L[$ -}A} 00_)L[$ -}A} 00_)L[$ -}A} 00_)L[$ -}A} 00_)L [$ -}A} 00_)23[$ -}A} 00_)23[$ -}A} 00_)23[$ -}A} 00_)23[$ -}A}  00_)23[$ -}A}! 00_)23 [$ -}A}" 00_)[$ -}A}# 00_)[$ -}A}$ 00_)[$ -}A}% 00_)[$ -}A}& 00_)[$ -}A}' 00_) [$ -}A}( 00_)[$ -}}) }00_)[$ -##0.  }}* 00_)[$ -???##0.??? ??? ???}-}+ 00_)}-}, 00_)}-}- 00_)}-}. 00_)}-}/ 00_)}A}0 a00_)[$ -}A}1 00_)[$ -}A}2 00_)?[$ -}A}3 00_)23[$ -}-}4 00_)}}5 ??v00_)̙[$ -##0.  }A}6 }00_)[$ -}A}7 W00_)[$ -}}8 00_)[$ -##0.  }}9 ???00_)[$ -???##0.??? ??? ???}-}: 00_)}-}; 00_)}U}< 00_)[$ -##0.}-}= 00_)}x}> 00_)[$## ??? ???}x}? 00_)[$## ??? ???}x}@ 00_)[$## ??? ???}}A 00_)[$##??? ??? ???}}B 00_)[$##??? ??? ???}x}C 00_)[$## ??? ??? 20% - Accent1M 20% - Accent1 ef % 20% - Accent2M" 20% - Accent2 ef % 20% - Accent3M& 20% - Accent3 ef % 20% - Accent4M* 20% - Accent4 ef % 20% - Accent5M. 20% - Accent5 ef % 20% - Accent6M2 20% - Accent6  ef % 40% - Accent1M 40% - Accent1 L % 40% - Accent2M# 40% - Accent2 L˭ % 40% - Accent3M' 40% - Accent3 L % 40% - Accent4M+ 40% - Accent4 L % 40% - Accent5M/ 40% - Accent5 L % 40% - Accent6M3 40% - Accent6  L % 60% - Accent1M 60% - Accent1 23 % 60% - Accent2M$ 60% - Accent2 23 % 60% - Accent3M( 60% - Accent3 23 % 60% - Accent4M, 60% - Accent4 23f % 60% - Accent5M0 60% - Accent5 23 %! 60% - Accent6M4 60% - Accent6  23Ў % "Accent1AAccent1 Dr % #Accent2A!Accent2 }1 % $Accent3A%Accent3  % %Accent4A)Accent4  % &Accent5A-Accent5 [ % 'Accent6A1Accent6  pG %(Bad9Bad  %) Calculation Calculation  }% * Check Cell Check Cell  %????????? ???+ Comma,( Comma [0]-&Currency.. Currency [0]/Explanatory TextG5Explanatory Text % 0Good;Good  a%1 Heading 1G Heading 1 DTj%Dr2 Heading 2G Heading 2 DTj%?3 Heading 3G Heading 3 DTj%234 Heading 49 Heading 4 DTj% 5InputuInput ̙ ??v% 6 Linked CellK Linked Cell }% 7NeutralANeutral  W%3Normal % 8Noteb Note   9OutputwOutput  ???%????????? ???:$Percent ;Title1Title DTj% <TotalMTotal %DrDr= Warning Text? Warning Text %XTableStyleMedium2PivotStyleLight16`Sheet1,5 jAuthor and YearTitleSystemCountryAge (normal eyes)% Female (normal eyes) Normal EyesSubclinical Eyes Age (SCKC)% Female (SCKC)Diagnosis DetailsFellow Eye of KCClinically NormalTopography NormalValidation Details Input Details Input TypesMethod Results NotesClassification GroupsSens (%)Spec (%) Accuracy (%) Precision (%)AUC Source codeBArbelaez et al. 2012yUse of a Support Vector Machine for Keratoconus and Subclinical Keratoconus Detection by Topographic and Tomographic DataSirius Oman, Italy15-65No clinical signs of KC, VKG and tomographic localised post/ant surface steepining or paracentral thinning, with BCVA 20/20 or better, and KC suspects as per Klyce 2009NAD200 from each class used for training, remainder used for validationSymmetry Index of Front (SIf), Back Corneal Curvature (SIb), Best-fit radius of the anterior corneal surface (Rbff), Baiocchi Calossi Versaci front index (BCVf), BCV back index (BCVb), Root mean square of higher-order aberrations, Thinnest Corneal Value (8mm area) E, K, P, ASVM!Normal, FFKC, KC, Corneal SurgerySaad et al. 2012RValidation of a New Scoring System for the Detection of Early Forme of KeratoconusOrbscan 34.7 (+/-8.2)33.9 (+/-12.4).normal topographic fellow eyes of diagnosed KCvalidation studyCentral power and radius in both anterior best-fit sphere (BFS) and posterior BFS; maximum anterior central elevation (MACE) and posterior central elevation (MPCE) relative to the BFS in the central 1.0-mm radius zone; simulated keratometry in maximum (SKmax) and minimum (SKmin) dioptric values; irregularity index at 3.0 and 5.0 mm; central pachymetry (CP); thinnest pachymetry (TP); and magnitude of the decentration of the thinnest corneal point from the corneal geometric center (DTP) P, K, E, DDiscriminant Analysis"Original method sens/spec: 93%/92%Suspect, NormalTDetection of Subclinical Keratoconus Using an Automated Decision Tree ClassificationGALILEIFrance\KC fellow eye. No clinical KC, no topograhpic features of KC, no focal/inf steepening/bowtie10-fold cross validation,55 topographic, tomographic parameters + ageK, P, E, A, DG, I Decision Tree FFKC, NormalRamos-Lopez et al. 2013DScreening Subclinical Keratoconus With Placido-Based Corneal IndicesCSO topography systemSpainno clinical findings; and the presence of asymmetric bow tie (AB), inferior steepening (IS), skewed axes (SRAX), or asymmetric bow tie with skewed axes (AB/SRAX) pattern on topographyK-fold cross validation$PI1: the diameter of the set of centers normalized by the total number of rings N, PI2: the total drift or the deviation in the consecutive centers, PI3: the dispersion of the values of the axis ratios of the k-th best-fit ellipse, SL: the absolute value of the slope of the linear regressionE, DLinear RegressionSuspect KC, Normal, KCCao et al. 2014cEvaluating the Performance of Various Machine Learning Algorithms to Detect Subclinical KeratoconusPentacamAustralian Study of Keratoconus Australia30.37 (SD 12.53)~Abnormal corneal topography, including inferior-superior localized steepening or asymmetric bowtie pattern. No clinical signs.5Axial length (AL), spherical equivalent (SE), mean front corneal curvature (front Km), mean back corneal curvature (back Km), central corneal thickness (CCT), corneal thickness at the apex (CTA), corneal thickness at the thinnest point (CTT), anterior chamber depth (ACD), and corneal volume (CV), age, genderK, P, DGRandom Forest, SVM, K-nearest neigbors, Logistic Regression, Discriminant Analysis, Lasso Regression, Decision Tree, Neural Network SCKC, NormalBuhren et al. 2014^Validation of Metrics for the Detection of Subclinical Keratoconus in a New Patient Collective Orbscan IIzGermany(fellow eye) was included if the paracentral inferior superior (I S) dioptric difference was less than 1.4 diopters (D). Other inclusion criteria were no clinical signs or symptoms, eZernike coefficients from the corneal anterior and posterior surfaces, spatial-thickness profile data K, P, A, E'DAP results reported at previous cutoffValidation of an Objective Scoring System for Forme Fruste Keratoconus Detection and Post-Lasik Ectasia Risk Assessment in Asian Eyes<topographically and clinically normal eyes of KC fellow eyes"12 Placido and tomographic indicesAccuracy of Machine Learning Classifiers Using Bilateral Data From a Scheimpflug Camera for Identifying Eyes With Preclinical Signs of KeratoconusHungary33.17 (SD 15.61)eFellow eye of KC with central K < 47.2 D, inferior minus superior average K of <1.40 D, KISA% of <60%170% training, 30% test. 10-fold cross validation.nKflat, Ksteep, astigmatism, 2mm I-S, 4mm I-S, PE, CCT, ThCT, CCT-ThCT,ThCT x, ThCT y, IHA, IHD, PPImax, ARTmax K, P, E, I, DNeural NetworkUnilateral, NormalZCombining Placido and Corneal Wavefront Data for the Detection of Forme Fruste KeratoconusOPD-ScanKtopographically normal eyes of patients with keratoconus in the fellow eye.93 normal, 82 FFKC, 125 KCVertical coma, trefoil, secondary astigmatism, Coefficient of variation of corneal power, Differential sector index , Surface regularity index, Surface asymmetry index, Opposite sector index, Keratoconus prediction indexK, A, IRuiz Hidalgo et al. 2016eEvaluation of a Machine-Learning Classifier for Keratoconus Detection Based on Scheimpflug Tomography Pentacam HRBelgiumMNonsymptomatic Pentacam tomography and elevation, fellow eye with manifest KC)22 topographic and tomographic parametersK, P, AFFKC, Normal (also 5 groups)Ruiz Hidalgo et al. 2017Validation of an Objective Keratoconus Detection System Implemented in a Scheimpflug Tomographer and Comparison With Other Methodstomographically normal fellow eyes of KC, and minor signs of asymmetry were present but too little to consider it as early keratoconus?Index of height decentration (IHD),Index of height asymmetry (IHA),Index of vertical asymmetry (IVA),Index of surface variance (ISV),IS-Value,Keratometric power deviation (KPD),Maximum pachymetry progression (RPI Max),Average of all high order aberrations (Irregul.),Difference between maximum and minimum radius of curvature (SphDiff),Numerical eccentricity of the posterior surface (Num Ecc B),Numerical eccentricity of the anterior surface (Num Ecc F),Eccentricity in the lower meridian (Ecc Inf),Eccentricity in the upper meridian (Ecc Sup),Posterior mean curvature over 5 mm diameter around apex (Sag5mm BACK),Corneal volume (Cor Vol),Anterior chamber depth at the apex (ACD Apex),Keratometry of the back corneal surface (K2 B (D)),Vertical location of minimum pachymetry (Pachy Min Pos Y),Minimum pachymetry (Pachy Min),Vertical location of maximum keratometry ( K Max Y),Maximum keratometry (K Max),Peripheral astigmatism (Asti.Periph.),Central astigmatism (Astig),Radius of curvature in the vertical meridian (Rv F (mm)),Radius of curvature in the horizontal meridian (Rh F (mm))K, P, I1Based on UZA classification (Rothschild sens=100)KC, SS, Normal, PRCharacteristic of Entire Corneal Topography and Tomography for the Detection of Sub-Clinical Keratoconus With Zernike Polynomials Using PentacamChina(fellow eye of unilateral KC): (1) central average keratometry <45.0D; (2) a diagnosis of KC in the contralateral eye; (3) no clinical signs of KC at slit-lamp biomicroscopy, retinoscopy, and ophthalmoscopy; (4) corneal topographical features with I-S values<1.4D of the vertical gradient power across the 6-mm region; and (5) no history of contact lens wear, ocular surgery, or trauma7Separate set: 97 normal, 49 subclinical, 90 keratoconus2Corneal pachymetry and elevation (zernike fitting)P, E, K DTAP validation results reportedqIntegration of Scheimpflug-Based Corneal Tomography and Biomechanical Assessments for Enhancing Ectasia Dete< ctionPentacam + Corvis STBrazil and ItalyFellow eye of KC with normal front surface curvature (topometric) map, keratoconus percentage index (KISA%) score lower than 60 and a paracentral inferior superior (I-S value) asymmetry value at 6 mm (3-mm radii) less than 1.45.LOOCVFull details not available P, E, K, B'Random Forest, SVM, Logistic RegressionNormal, VAE-NTSideroudi et al. 2017jFourier Analysis Algorithm for the Posterior Corneal Keratometric Data: Clinical Usefulness in KeratoconusGreece(i) diagnosis of KC in the fellow eye according to the Amsler Krumleich criteria, (ii) keratoconus percentage (KISA) index between 60% and 100% in the SKC eye,18 and (iii) lack of any KC-related findings/signs in the slit-lamp biomicroscopy; 70/30 split9Fourier analysis of the posterior corneal sagittal curvature data: (i) spherical component, (ii) regular astigmatism, (iii) asymmetry and (iv) Irregular astigmatism; the calculations were performed for cornea rings at 1 mm up to 4 mm, cornea rings at 3 mm up to 4 mm and for each individual cornea ring separatelyKLogistic RegressionSubclinical, NormallWaveform Analysis of Deformation Amplitude and Deflection Amplitude in Normal, Suspect, and Keratoconic Eyes Corvis STIndia 26 (+/-1) 23 (+/- 1)+separate set: 59 normal, 45 suspect, 160 KC16 parameters including deformation amplitude, applanation, corneal stiffness, corneal viscosity, corneal force, whole-eye movementWide definition for KC classAny KC, NormalYousefi et al. 2018GKeratoconus Severity Identification Using Unsupervised Machine Learning SS-1000 CASIAJapan ESI 5 - 29unsupervised - not applicable$420 parameters (excluding ESI Index)E, P, A UnsupervisedCalculated in this report 4 clusters AvailableZEnhanced Tomographic Assessment to Detect Corneal Ectasia Based on Artificial Intelligence!Fellow eye with normal topography#Trained on PLE and tested on VAE-NT!Central simulated Ks, KMax, and its vertical decentration, KMaxY; topometric indices (derived from the front surface: index of surface variance [ISV], index of vertical asymmetry [IVA], IS-value, keratoconus index [KI], central keratoconus index [CKI], index of height asymmetry [IHA], and index of height decentration [IHD]); and tomographic indices (anterior and posterior elevations at the thinnest point [AETP and PETP], anterior and posterior asphericity [AsphQFront and AsphQBack], pachymetry at the thinnest point [TP] and its dencentration [TPy], average and maximum and minimum pachymetric progression indices [PPI-Ave, PPI-Max, PPI-Min], average, maximum, minimum Ambrosio s relational thickness [ART-Ave, ART-Max, and ART-Min], and third version of Belin-Ambrosio display indices [BAD-D]) P, E, I, DGDiscriminant analysis, SVM, Naive Bayes, Neural Networks, Random ForestStable LASIK, VAE-E, VAE-NTsTomographic and Biomechanical Scheimpflug Imaging for Keratoconus Characterization: a Validation of Current IndicesVery asymmetric eyes with normal topography (VAE-NT): the less affected eye (fellow eye) of a keratoconic patient was included if the following criteria were met: KISA% index of less than 60%, I-S difference of less than 1.45 D, and Kmax of 47.00 D or less Random ForestOriginal cutoff resultsVAE-NT, Normal:Computer Aided Diagnosis for Suspect Keratoconus DetectionDenmarkGfellow eye of unilat KC, no symptoms or clinical or tomographical signsR17 anterior corneal parameters, 17 posterior corneal parameters, corneal thicknessE, PKTC suspect vs normal;Bowman's Topography for Improved Detection of Early EctasiaRCTVue + PentacamEyes with very mild localized steepening and suspicious anterior corneal surface topography on both devices were classified as FFKC2Anterior surface, OCT A-E surface, OCT E-B surface K, E, P, A, IFFKC result reportedNormal, FFKC, KC, VAE-NTXie at al. 2020XScreening Candidates for Refractive Surgery With Corneal Tomographic Based Deep LearningZhongshan Ophthalmic Center18-40inferior-superior values outside the reference range or aberrant C-shaped, round posterior surface elevations. or an unusual pachymetric progression.H80% training, 20% test, 100 images from independent dataset used to test&Corneal topographic images (heat maps)HCNN (InceptionResNetV2)+Normal, Suspected KC, Early KC, KC, Post-opKuo et al. 2020KKeratoconus Screening Based on Deep Learning Approach of Corneal TopographyTMS-4 + Pentacam + Corvis STTaiwan>20~27No slitlamp features of KC with Asymmetric bowtie with skewed radial axes (AB/SRAX), asymmetry bowtie with inferior steep (AB/IS) and symmetric bowtie with skewed radial axes (SB/SRAX) on topography}training: 134 KC, 120 normal. Test: 36 KC, 36 normal. FFKC test: 28. Subclinical dataset were used only to test and not train#CNN (VGG16, InceptionV3, ResNet152)#sens: SCKC only, spec: KC vs NormalyMachine Learning Helps Improve Diagnostic Ability of Subclinical Keratoconus Using Scheimpflug and OCT Imaging ModalitiesPentacam + UHR-OCT5Affiliated Eye Hospital of Wenzhou Medical Universityno clinical KC on slit-lamp biomicroscope examination, retinoscopy and ophthalmoscopy; (2) a diagnosis of KC in the contralateral eye; (3) a central average keratometry less than 45.0 D; (4) corneal topographical features with I-S values less than 1.4 D of the vertical power gradient across the 6-mm region; (5) myopia less than  6.0 D with astigmatism less than " 2.0 D; (6) no history of contact lens wear or ocular surgeryK1, K2, Km, Kmax, Emaxf, Emaxb, Ecenterf, Ecenterb, thinnest point, corneal volume, ISV, IHA, IVA, IHD, KI, Rmin, CKI + OCT params: epithelium, Bowman's layer, stroma pachymetry, genderK, E, P, I, DG Normal, SCKCDiagnostic Value of Corneal Epithelial and Stromal Thickness Distribution Profiles in Forme Fruste Keratoconus and Subclinical KeratoconusMS-3927 FFKC, 50 SCKC TFFKC: topographically normal fellow eye; subclinical KC: early topographical changes2Average simulated (sim) K (D), maximum apical curvature power (Kmax, D), thinnest pachymetry (and topographic coordinates), and corneal volume (CV). Point-to-point thickness values at center, on the 5-mm diameter circle (as 5-mm nasal, temporal, superior, inferior, superior-nasal [SN], inferiornasal [IN], superior-temporal [ST], and inferior-tem<z poral [IT]) and 8-mm diameter circle (as 8-mm SN1-2-3, IN1-2-3, ST1-2-3, and IT1-2-3), and thinnest epithelial point. Differences in epithelial thickness values between the 5-mm I-S, SN-IT, ST-IN, and 8-mm thinnest SN sector-opposing IT sector. XY coordinates of the thinnest corneal and epithelial points and their quadrantic localization. E/S thickness ratio was calculated for each sector by dividing epithelial thickness directly to the corresponding stroma thicknessK, P, D.Full results: SCKC: 94%/98.5%, FFKC: 75%/94.3%Normal vs SCKC, Normal vs FFKCELogistic Index for Keratoconus Detection and Severity Scoring (Logik)the contralateral, asymptomatic eye of a subject with clinical keratoconus in one eye, showing no clinical signs of ectasia or tomographic changes 10 fold cross validation (70:30)o45 anterior Zernike coefficients, 45 posterior Zernike coefficients + minimum pachymetry (anterior + posterior)Neural NetworksSuspect KC, NormalLavric et al. 2020FDetecting Keratoconus From Corneal Imaging Data Using Machine LearningRomaniaHigher order irregular astigmatism, Kmax (10mm region), BFS, highest irregularity parameter (5mm region), stdev of pachymetry (5mm region), HOA (4mm), aberration (coma order 5), aberration (sphere order 5)825 Methods: SVM, Neural Network, Logistic Regression etcNormal, FFKC, KCSmadja et al. 2013Chan et al. 2015Kovacs et al. 2016Saad et al. 2016Xu et al. 2017Ambrosio et al. 2017Francis et al. 2017Lopes at al. 2018Steinberg et al. 2018Issarti et al. 2019Chandapura et al. 2019Shi et al. 2020Toprak et al. 2020Issarti et al. 2020Rothschild FoundationUniversity Hospital of Bordeaux"Vissum Alicante and Vissum AlmeriaGoethe-UniversitySingapore National Eye CenterSemmelweis UniversityAntwerp University Hospital1Fondation Rothschild, Antwerp University HospitalWenzhou Medical University<Instituto de Olhos Renato Ambrsio, Vincieye Clinic in MilanEye Institute of Thrace Narayana Nethralaya Eye HospitalMultiple centres across JapanOptical Express, Glasgow & Instituto de Olhos Renato Ambrosio, Rio de Janeiro & Vincieye Clinic, Price Vision Group, Indianapolis, London Vision ClinicUnknown#Department of Ophthalmology in NTUH1VISSUM Innovation and Miguel Hernandez University4Muscat Eye Laser Center, Studio Oculistico d AzegliopUniversity Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, University Campus Hamburg-Eppendorf, CareVision Eye Clinic Hamburg6Antwerp University Hospital, Ghent University Hospital Sample Source SingaporeUK, Brazil, Italy, USAk2 2y334X79a:;w }> AC5EeUGFIOQT1X)xYZQv[McqefAhSi-lIqQvwWx^y}zD| ccW  PK![Content_Types].xmlN0EH-J@%ǎǢ|ș$زULTB l,3;rØJB+$G]7O٭V~&}"!ᇺ_Ν =r!sh ۴T**~ r׮+JOp'M:kүݭjkh [+wc5(_Zw:Mנ_^F֯A)v[_BJ Pl5 cFZԩnΕ(,cuc;P@$=9K !'> BLra)l)oڣh#CZ&beIĐD7 o߼9{og/^=eVe80_~n&_xw_?zоIwOG,:D?DĒ@!vnu6Y7=B>ı0]hq qޜOM#N\{7Ql9=M f-G8S Ǝ=%IJk 9l,k 4I @ʅH~-tx F]n }L-3CS">i}$CތM\[Ht)#,Ky ? v{"%t#LdM!GQ1w}k׺ O!QL×07c]YfGVvi`> X6I?!aW`=@v hT_"BOwxf(_nڼ UΙJpb/N aZG!jxqÕnAr.:M#߉H|nq7\OVlK:RRlkZha$9릫j}W^eu7=M/3\O//٨iG:3hgL(BO}<ь:g#$.Hxω {!J`4T@UK^vVx:lN:E5L+@2_/uR]ӻLf)낀 c3ĖDug`4 }kaQs/\e^Gn~" 8hGOμNO3b/" tMq]{ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ? ? ? ? ? ??@@@z@  ? ?  ?  @@?@ ?" ?# ?$ ?%? ?&?W@?@?@?Ⱦ@? ?! ?' ?( ?) ? ?5 ?*?@c@@8@  ?+ ?  ?, @?@?@? ?- ?. ?/ ?0 ?1 ?2?W@?X@ ??? ?! ? ?3 ?4 ? ?5 ??@ f@@G@  ?! ?  ?6 @?@?@? ?7 ?8 ?9 ?:A B;AH@A@ AAA ?! ?< ?= ?> ? ?? ??@I@@8@  ??  ?@ @@?@ ?A ?B ?C ?D? ?E?@@?S@ ??? ?! ?F ?G ?H ?I ?J ??@C@@H@  ?K~  @8@  ?L @@?@ ?7 ?M ?N ?OA BPAW@AV@ AA~ A@X@ ?! ?Q ?R ?S ? ?T~ @C@?@n@@@@@>@  ?  ?U @?@?@ ?- ?V ?W ?0 ?X ?P?fffffS@?E@?@?~ ?@ ?! ? ?Y ?S ? ?~ @=@?@Z@@8@@>@  ?  ?Z @?@?@? ?- ?[ ?/ ?0? ?;?@?)@ ??? ?! ? ?\ ?H ? ?] ??@N@@.@  ?^~  @N@  ?_ @?@?@? ?` ?a ?b ?cA BdAV@AV@ AA~ AX@ ?! ? ?e ?f ? ?5~ @Ц@ ? @\@@O@@@  ? ?g @?@?@? ?h ?i ?j ?0 ? ?; ?O@?T@ ??? ?! ?k ?l ?m ? ?n @YB@ ? @@h@@P@@@  ? ?o @?@?@? ?7 ?p ?q ?% ? ?r ?fffffS@ ?@?/@ ?? ?! ?s ?t ?m ? ?5 ?? @F@@7@ ?! ? ?u @?@?@? ?- Cv ?w ?% ?x ?y ?N@?R@ ?? ?V-? ?! ? ?z ?m ? ?{ ?? @`b@@@S@ ?~ @5@ ?| @?@?@? ?} ?~ ? ?0 ? ?P ?Y@? U@?r@?@ ? ?! ? ? ? ? ?* @@@L@@~@@W@@Ԭ@@@ ? @?@?@? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?@?X@ ??~ ?X@ ?! ? ? ?H ? ? ??@I@@K@  ??  ? @?@?@ ? ? ? ?? ??@?Y@ ???rh|? ?! ? ? ? ?  ? ??@o@@O@  ? ?  ?, @?@?@? ? ? ? ? ? ??V@?V@ ??? ?! ? ? ? ?  ?~ @ܩ@?@Ȟ@@@  ??  ? @@?@ ? ? ? ? ? ??V@?,@ ??? ? ? ? ?m ?  ? ??@H@@g@  ??  ? @?@?@? ? ? ? ?? ??@?@ ??? ?! ? ? ? ? ?T ??@@Z@@I@  ??  ? @?@?@? ?- ? ? ? ? ??O@?T@?P@ ?? ?! ? ? ?H ? ? ??@s@@V@@A@  ?  ? @?@?@? ?7 ? ? ?c? ??@?@?@?@? ?! ? ? ? ?  ?!~ @@?@k@@R@@b@  ?  ? @@?@ ?7 ? ? ? ? ?$?6@?@?@?@?W@ ?! ? ? ?m ? ?{ ??@`@@@i@  ? ?  ? @@?@ ? ? ? ?? ?? S@?.@ ??~ ?X@ ?! ? ? ? ?  ? ??@@e@@<@  ? ?  ? @@?@ ? ? ? ?? ??<@?@ ??? ?! ? ? ? ? ?{ ??@K@@@@  ??  ? @?@?@? ? ? ? ?c? ??X@?@ ??~ ?@W@ ?! ? ? ? ? ?? ??~ @P@ ?  ??  ? @?@?@? ? ? ? ? ? ??W@?X@ ??? ?! ? ? ?m ? ?n ??@s@@@]@  ??  ? @?@?@? ? ? ? ?? ??@?Q@ ??~ ?R@ ?! ? ? ?   ? ??@Ȟ@@@  ??  ? @@?@ ?7 ? ?q ? ? ??`V@?X@?@W@ ?? ?!: #z6>0&@P2@2FD:.6>4&..8<:202>@ggD Oh+'0@H`x Howard MaileHoward MaileMicrosoft Excel@ʙ@?E ՜.+,0 PXd lt|  Sheet1  Worksheets  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWYZ[\]^_abcdefgRoot Entry FWorkbookSummaryInformation(XDocumentSummaryInformation8`