戻る
「早戻しボタン」を押すと検索画面に戻ります。 [閉じる]

コーパス検索結果 (１語後でソート)

通し番号をクリックするとPubMedの該当ページを表示します
1 te rejection, and decreased after successful antirejection therapy.
2 cute rejection, with a subsequent rise after antirejection therapy.
3 -2 only) and immediately after completion of antirejection therapy.
4  episodes of acute rejection and response to antirejection therapy.
5 ting grafts could be targeted for additional antirejection therapy.
6 he urine increases in response to successful antirejection therapy.
7 uld permit the assessment of the efficacy of antirejection therapy.
8  transplanted intestine, and the response to antirejection therapy.
9  steroid and OKT3 resistance within 48 hr of antirejection therapy.
10 d, but were not eliminated, after successful antirejection therapy.
11 MSCs may serve as a new, safe, and effective antirejection therapy.
12 evel of HCV RNA and genotype and the type of antirejection therapy.
13 nal antibody or gallium nitrate was used for antirejection therapy, (2) this immune status is charact
14 atients with BRR did not respond to standard antirejection therapy and had a substantial increase in
15 sely associated with the initial response to antirejection therapy and long-term graft failure.
16 ff defined acute TCMR should be treated with antirejection therapy and maximized maintenance immunosu
17 r tubulitis, are correlated with response to antirejection therapy and/or 1-yr clinical outcome.
18                                              Antirejection therapies are not always effective, must b
19 outcome and novel therapeutic approaches for antirejection therapy based on targeting of chemokines a
20  for graft loss, and the initial response to antirejection therapy can predict long-term graft outcom
21  plasma (BKP) (group 1) and also tried other antirejection therapies in 13 patients with BK virus in
22                                      Initial antirejection therapy in 12 cases led to clearance of th
23 ternative to the conventional drugs used for antirejection therapy in renal transplantation.
24 ositive UFCs that completely normalized with antirejection therapy (n=8); group III--stable patients
25 reviewed the clinical course and response to antirejection therapy of 24 patients with borderline cha
26                                    Following antirejection therapy of acute TCMR, surveillance protoc
27 y single antigen bead assays 12 months after antirejection therapy onset.
28 harge and at time of AR before initiation of antirejection therapy or at matching timepoints in patie
29  acute rejection showed complete response to antirejection therapy (P=0.25 vs. patients with borderli
30                                    Effective antirejection therapy results in a rapid down-regulation
31                                         Most antirejection therapies target immune activation but may
32                                     No other antirejection therapy was given.
33                                        Usual antirejection therapy was instituted in all but two epis
34                         Complete response to antirejection therapy was seen in 15/24 (63%), partial r
35 esponse, partial response and no response to antirejection therapy were observed in 16/24 (66.7%), 3/
36 sAMRV), and AMRV showed similar responses to antirejection therapy, whereas the grafts with v2- or v3
37 elatacept that are refractory to traditional antirejection therapy with corticosteroids and polyclona
38 safe and allows the avoidance of unnecessary antirejection therapy with its attendant side effects an