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 of STAT3 and its inhibitors, including SHP1, were comparable between 5azaD/TSA and control cultures f
2 sue volume and intramyocellular lipid levels were comparable between 8-wk fructose- and glucose-fed m
3 udes of induction of host cytokine responses were comparable between A(H7N9) and H5N1 virus infection
4                          Duration of support was comparable between ACE-I and control subjects (96 +/
5 sicular stomatitis virus single-cycle yields were comparable between adar1(-/-) and adar2(-/-) cells,
6 ngle-cycle yields and growth kinetics of PyV were comparable between adar1(-/-) and adar2(-/-) geneti
7 s, the median number of positive lymph nodes was comparable between ADC and SRC < 50% (4 vs 5, P = 0.
8 f the gp120- and V1V2-specific IgG responses were comparable between adults and infants immunized wit
9 ne responses to known CD8(+) T cell antigens was comparable between all strains.
10 ical full-length amyloid-beta42 accumulation was comparable between Alzheimer's disease and pathologi
11  risk-standardized unplanned hospital visits were comparable between ambulatory surgery centers and h
12 4(+) T cell depletion, and the onset of AIDS were comparable between anti-IL-15- and control-treated
13 e-carboplatin; grade 3 to 4 thrombocytopenia was comparable between arms and anemia was higher in the
14 e of non-VZV-related herpes viral infections was comparable between arms.
15 sful in avoiding referral bias (participants were comparable between arms on important characteristic
16                               Adverse events were comparable between arms, except for a lower inciden
17  (88% and 84% in arms B and D, respectively) were comparable between arms.
18                        Tolerability profiles were comparable between arms.
19 cteristics and mean tacrolimus trough levels were comparable between arms.
20                                       Trends were comparable between assays.
21                                Image quality was comparable between awake and anesthetized conditions
22   On the other hand, expression levels of HA were comparable between B16-F1 and B16-F10 melanoma cell
23 take of eGFP labelled EVs in recipient cells was comparable between BE-SEC and UC samples.
24 ient and AD patients, while IL-31 expression was comparable between both DOCK8-deficient and AD cohor
25                       Stress myocardial flow was comparable between both groups (2.3 +/- 0.9 vs. 2.3
26 eplacement because of infective endocarditis was comparable between both groups (Melody, 88%; SPVR, 8
27                          Results Engraftment was comparable between both groups.
28 V-MMRV UVV programmes on varicella incidence was comparable between both VCVs at equilibrium.
29 Neointimal thickness and inflammatory scores were comparable between both devices at 180 days.
30 rn size, concomitant injuries, and mortality were comparable between both groups.
31  differences in NFV and regurgitant fraction were comparable between both methods, NFV variation over
32 However, mean ESV and EDV at stress and rest were comparable between both subgroups (p = NS).
33    At the same time point, binary restenosis was comparable between BVS and DES (7.8% versus 8.9%; P=
34 e antisense RAN translation product poly(PR) is comparable between c9ALS/FTD and SCA36 patient sample
35                                  Odds ratios were comparable between Cache County and AlzGene.org whe
36         The prevalence of metabolic syndrome was comparable between cases (17%) and controls (9%) (P
37 es of CD27(-)CD28(-) cells or CD57(+) cells) were comparable between cases and controls.
38 gher in cases, CMV-specific T-cell responses were comparable between cases and controls.
39 lecular pattern (MAMP) content of microbiota were comparable between CD and HC, but a sub-population
40 madelta-17 and gammadelta-IFNgamma effectors were comparable between CD28(+/+) and CD28(-/-) mice.
41             Baseline and clinical parameters were comparable between children receiving LGG and place
42 , CEC-normalized sorption for most compounds was comparable between clays and soil organic matter.
43                     Variant allele fractions were comparable between clonal ICUS (CCUS) and MDS as we
44                  3-CGA concentrations and pH were comparable between cold and hot brews.
45                       Progression of GA area is comparable between color photographs and FAF images,
46 f NBN and ATM recruited to the sites of DSBs was comparable between control cells and those expressin
47                              Post-HCT scores were comparable between controls and autologous and redu
48 lasma arginine and citrulline concentrations were comparable between COPD patients and controls, whol
49  in Finland, although composition of classes was comparable between countries.
50                           Median MBF at rest was comparable between CZT and PET (0.89 [interquartile
51          Posttransplantation kidney function is comparable between DCD and DBD kidney transplantation
52            In multicentric disease, outcomes are comparable between debulking surgery alone, immunoch
53     Frequency of drug-related adverse events was comparable between deferasirox (35.4%) and deferoxam
54     In contrast, monocyte and DC recruitment was comparable between DEP-exposed wild-type and CCR5 kn
55 after CTO percutaneous coronary intervention was comparable between different approaches.
56 cted dose, the levels of gadolinium measured were comparable between different doses, indicating that
57 he growing leaf, while GRF4 and GRF10 levels were comparable between division zone and expansion zone
58                        Kidney graft survival is comparable between donation after cardiac death (DCD)
59        S1P-induced Akt and ERK1/2 activation were comparable between ECs of different in vitro ages;
60  the allelic effects for most of the 10 SNPs were comparable between Europeans and Asians.
61                                Rates of PTMS were comparable between EVR-containing and TAC control r
62                          The VA decline rate was comparable between eyes with initial noncentral and
63                The central corneal thickness was comparable between fellow-eye primary and secondary
64                        Node-positive primary was comparable between FOLFOX and 5-FU but lower in the
65 ion, immune recovery and development of ADEs were comparable between foreign-born and US-born patient
66  to the period of 1978-2015, so that results are comparable between genera, we detected a significant
67 eletal reorganization, and its TrkB receptor were comparable between genotypes.
68 s of leading edge protrusion and retraction, were comparable between genotypes; however, ARPC3(-/-) c
69 though proliferation of isolated fibroblasts was comparable between GPA and controls, GPA samples sho
70 city, reactogenicity, and safety appeared to be comparable between groups.
71 mated glomerular filtration rate at month 36 was comparable between groups (68.1 vs 67.3 mL/min/1.73
72                                  Patient age was comparable between groups (intervention, 45 years +/
73       The probability of being ready for RTx was comparable between groups A and B.
74 of adverse remodeling; however, infarct size was comparable between groups suggesting that the benefi
75                              OXPHOS capacity was comparable between groups when complex I- and comple
76                           Freedom from death was comparable between groups with 1-, 2-, and 5-year su
77                Although LV ejection fraction was comparable between groups, longitudinal peak was red
78                  Whereas whole-body fat mass was comparable between groups, persons with OLD had incr
79 nsulin levels, endogenous glucose production was comparable between groups, suggesting lower hepatic
80                             Safety generally was comparable between groups.
81      Except for HNC, health care utilization was comparable between groups.
82 aled a progressive decrease over time, which was comparable between groups.
83 diastolic dysfunction; however, infarct size was comparable between groups.
84 ence of adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs was comparable between groups.
85  Median time to clearance of the bloodstream was comparable between groups.
86                   Overall, dialysis adequacy was comparable between groups.
87 Meissner corpuscles and dermal nerve bundles were comparable between groups (P>0.07).
88       Mechanical and thermal pain thresholds were comparable between groups (P>0.13).
89  risk (5%).Most recipient and donor features were comparable between groups A and B.The 1- and 3-year
90 in fractional anisotropy within these tracts were comparable between groups across the age span.
91                Mean ECD, CV, and %HEX values were comparable between groups at baseline.
92 ual Analog Scale, and Functional Pain scores were comparable between groups over time.
93                 Bowel screening examinations were comparable between groups throughout.
94                     Baseline characteristics were comparable between groups, including volume of asci
95                     Baseline characteristics were comparable between groups, including volume of asci
96 Rates of HBeAg loss and HBeAg seroconversion were comparable between groups, whereas the rate of alan
97 on, infection, tissue necrosis, and hematoma were comparable between groups.
98                            Safety parameters were comparable between groups.
99  complication rates and BPVA after treatment were comparable between groups.
100 tomach upset and headache, yet dropout rates were comparable between groups.
101 se events and dropouts due to adverse events were comparable between groups.
102 g both uncovered and malapposed at follow-up were comparable between groups.
103 , rates of surgery and moderate-to-severe MR were comparable between groups.
104     Severity of cirrhosis and platelet count were comparable between groups.
105 0 days after the last manipulation, LC rates were comparable between groups.
106 l resistance and incidence of adverse events were comparable between groups.
107 aling complications and other adverse events were comparable between groups.
108 ne demographics and clinical characteristics were comparable between groups.
109 , major infections, and resource utilization were comparable between groups.
110 luding AKI stage and sepsis-related HRS-AKI, were comparable between groups.
111 with than without HF; however, overall rates were comparable between groups.
112 the frequency and severity of adverse events were comparable between groups.
113  postoperative morbidity and mortality rates were comparable between groups.
114                        Histological findings were comparable between groups.
115                               Adverse events were comparable between groups; 16.1% of rituximab and 1
116 2 mumol/g vs. 0.6 +/- 0.3 mumol/g; P = 0.52) were comparable between healthy subjects and T1DM patien
117  arthritic changes associated with knee pain are comparable between hemiplegic and non-hemiplegic kne
118 ecific superenhancers, and global aneuploidy were comparable between high- and low-quality lines, abe
119 ses to long-term lamivudine-containing HAART were comparable between HIV-infected patients with HBV g
120 erstand the extent to which MFC organization is comparable between humans and animals commonly used i
121                 Although Th9 and Th17 levels are comparable between infected TGF-betaRII DN and wild-
122               Composite 1-year outcome rates were comparable between IVSR and VSF-trained surgeons fo
123 tage of cells in each round of cell division are comparable between Jak3-deficent and wild-type T cel
124 els of IL-6, MCP-1, IFN-gamma, and TNF-alpha were comparable between L. monocytogenes-infected AhR(-/
125 mitted per unit dry weight of plant material is comparable between laboratory enclosure measurements
126                        Potencies and effects were comparable between LCLs of two genetically unrelate
127 s, changes in QRS area, SDAT, and LVdP/dtmax were comparable between LVs and HB pacing.
128 an] vs 55 seconds +/- 3, P < .001), and time was comparable between magnetically assisted and standar
129       While Amh-specific receptor expression was comparable between males and females, mRNA and prote
130                    This homeostatic turnover was comparable between memory CD8 T cells of different v
131 cy and safety of the potent P2Y12 inhibitors were comparable between men and women.
132 identification of influenza A virus subtypes were comparable between methods.
133 hospital stay (mean 17 vs 17 days, P > 0.99) were comparable between MIPD and OPD.
134 allbladder, pancreas, spleen, and kidney may be comparable between MR systems from different vendors
135  percentage of oscillating lipid metabolites was comparable between muscle tissue and cultured myotub
136      Substrate uptake and surface expression were comparable between mutant and WT SERTs.
137 morphology, photopic vision-guided behaviour is comparable between normal and cone ERG(absent) RPGRIP
138             Baseline any type HPV prevalence was comparable between obese and nonobese women (18.7% v
139                               Overall safety was comparable between OH+ (n = 288, 27.5%) and OH- (n =
140 ion, movement is directionally biased, speed is comparable between origins, and cell growth can accou
141              The conventional HRV parameters were comparable between PA and EH patients.
142         MS4A1 gene expression levels in PBMC were comparable between patient groups at all timepoints
143                                     Outcomes were comparable between patient groups, and worse than t
144                                     Outcomes are comparable between patients with both types after ad
145    Induction of cytokine-induced SH2 protein was comparable between patients and volunteers, whereas
146                  While in-hospital mortality was comparable between patients with atypical and typica
147 ocleidomastoid and tibialis anterior muscles were comparable between patients and controls.
148 es for systemically administered antibiotics were comparable between patients receiving selective dec
149 files and expected operative mortality rates were comparable between patients who underwent surgery b
150                                 Rates of SVR were comparable between patients whose anemia was manage
151                                    Responses were comparable between patients with euvolemia and thos
152                             Pharmacokinetics were comparable between patients with sarcoma and those
153    Mean better eye logMAR visual acuity (VA) was comparable between PCG and secondary childhood glauc
154 sponse frequency (17/26 donors) and strength were comparable between Phl p 12 and Phl p 1.
155  Plasma IL-6, IL-8, and IL-10 concentrations were comparable between PICU and floor patients, but hig
156 tranded, double-stranded, and mismatched DNA were comparable between Pol and Pol2core.
157                        Dlx2(+) cells in CGEs were comparable between preterm and term pups.
158                      GluR1-GluR4 expressions were comparable between preterm humans and rabbits with
159 ion of type-specific and cross-reactive MBCs were comparable between primary and secondary DENV infec
160  observed after exposure to moderate hypoxia were comparable between rho0 cells, which lack functiona
161 3; 95% confidence interval, 0.47-1.85) risks were comparable between rivaroxaban and VKA new users.
162             The incidences of adverse events were comparable between S/V and enalapril across all 4 s
163                                     Outcomes were comparable between sensitized and control recipient
164  .04), whereas the rate of adenoma detection was comparable between sets.
165 ecreasing BP (i.e. early phase II of the VM) was comparable between sexes, but it was greater in men
166 blood pressure (BP) distribution (variation) was comparable between sexes.
167           PAD severity and medical treatment were comparable between sexes, whereas prior lower extre
168                         CRT-related toxicity was comparable between SGs.
169 ell activation, proliferation, and apoptosis were comparable between SIVmnd-1- and SIVmnd-2-infected
170  and whole salivary IL-1beta and IL-6 levels were comparable between smokers and never-smokers.
171 ilation, or in-hospital all-cause mortality) was comparable between SOTr and controls (40% vs 48%, od
172                                      Running was comparable between strains and VWR reduced body weig
173                   Enrollment characteristics were comparable between study groups.
174 ine, small airway function (R5 -R20 and X5 ) was comparable between subjects with asymptomatic BHR an
175                            Clinical outcomes were comparable between TAVR and SAVR across all groups,
176              TFV-DP concentrations at week 4 were comparable between TGW and TGM (mean difference -6%
177 , QOL, functional outcome, and complications are comparable between the groups.
178  the MRG agonist peptide, BAM15, appeared to be comparable between the BLA assay and the intracellula
179 d point (death/stroke/myocardial infarction) is comparable between the 2 treatment options for diabet
180           While population-based variability is comparable between the routes, FcepsilonRI- and MRGPR
181 risk of patient-oriented composite end point was comparable between the 2 groups (22.7% versus 22.9%;
182                                    Mortality was comparable between the 2 groups (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0
183  however the final visual acuity at 6 months was comparable between the 2 groups.
184                        The risk of infection was comparable between the 2 groups; however, patients w
185 umor growth rate, determined from CT images, was comparable between the animals with recurrent tumors
186         Overall rate of adverse events (AEs) was comparable between the ASA404 and placebo arms.
187                                  Performance was comparable between the best measures of asymmetry an
188                         Cervix visualization was comparable between the Callascope and speculum (83%
189 on of patients experiencing an adverse event was comparable between the combined guselkumab (13/20 [6
190    Favorable neurologic outcome at discharge was comparable between the cyclosporine and control grou
191 e the frequency of medical contraindications was comparable between the genders.
192 y later time points the extent of activation was comparable between the glial cell types.
193                         The 28-day mortality was comparable between the groups (21.4%, G-CSF; 28.6%,
194          Isotopic glomerular filtration rate was comparable between the groups at 1 year (57+/-26 mL/
195 of cartilage damage and joint cyst formation was comparable between the groups, the degree of ligamen
196                                     ICU stay was comparable between the groups.
197 s factor alpha (TNF-alpha)-induced apoptosis was comparable between the HeLa lines.
198                      Although virus shedding was comparable between the N(752) and D(752) variants, i
199                               Meanwhile, CCT was comparable between the PK and control groups (P = .9
200 requency of CD4+ T cells harboring HIV-1 DNA was comparable between the sexes, but there was higher c
201  catheter-related bloodstream infection risk was comparable between the sites.
202                             Patient survival was comparable between the study groups.
203         In five studies, CBL around implants was comparable between the test and control groups.
204  Using this method, neuronal differentiation was comparable between the three genotypes of iPSCs.
205 mean transit time and blood volume fraction) was comparable between the three groups of animals.
206 T and HA whereas the motivation for the drug was comparable between the three groups.
207                  The median duration of POAF was comparable between the treatment and the control gro
208                    The overall response rate was comparable between the two arms (GO, 45%; no GO, 49%
209                                          TTP was comparable between the two arms in treatment-naive p
210 ion and that the magnitude of the modulation was comparable between the two brain areas.
211   Antibiotic administration at 1 and 3 hours was comparable between the two cohorts, but initial anti
212  that resulted in study drug discontinuation was comparable between the two groups.
213  blood blasts (27% v 33%); risk distribution was comparable between the two groups.
214                      Although liver exposure was comparable between the two mouse strains (despite th
215 ime course of pulmonary markers in survivors was comparable between the two serogroups.
216 t required intervention after trabeculectomy were comparable between the 2 groups (DSAEK vs PK, all i
217       Length of stay and total hospital cost were comparable between the 2 groups (P > .05).
218                 Intraoperative complications were comparable between the 2 groups except the occurren
219 9) and mortality rates (6% vs 4%, P = 0.214) were comparable between the 2 groups, patients who under
220 erior reattachment rates and PVR recurrence) were comparable between the 2 groups.
221                    Postoperative pain scores were comparable between the 2 groups.
222 emophilus influenzae type b vaccine antigens were comparable between the 2 groups.
223 and severity of other adverse drug reactions were comparable between the 2 groups.
224  P = 0.03), but the 1- and 5-year DCGS rates were comparable between the 2 groups; moreover, the 1-,
225 roprotection rates, and seroconversion rates were comparable between the 2 vaccines.
226 omes (procedure, fluoroscopy, and PVI times) were comparable between the 3 arms.
227 ron, tear film status, and lid abnormalities were comparable between the 3 groups.
228 nd 2.9+/-1.9 segments, respectively; P=0.77) were comparable between the 4 approaches.
229 Patient demographics and baseline QOL scores were comparable between the 74-Gy and 60-Gy arms.
230             Overall, the sensitivity and NPV were comparable between the assays, but the IHPV assay d
231 fection efficiency in HeLa and NIH/3T3 cells were comparable between the copolymers but pHCathK(10) w
232                      Rates of adverse events were comparable between the denosumab and placebo groups
233  model (a sigmoid curve with variable slope) were comparable between the early XTT and spectrophotome
234  Mean transit time and blood volume fraction were comparable between the four groups of rats.
235                            Hemoglobin levels were comparable between the groups.
236 along with 3-year patient and graft survival were comparable between the groups.
237                     Baseline characteristics were comparable between the groups.
238   Although all the mucoinflammatory features were comparable between the immunocompetent Tg(+) and Ra
239                              Pneumonia rates were comparable between the intervention (24.6%) and con
240 nation rates, although not protocol defined, were comparable between the intervention and comparison
241 ry attenuation values +/- standard deviation were comparable between the iodixanol 270 and iopromide
242 turbances (5% v 0%), grade 3 to 4 toxicities were comparable between the IROX and irinotecan groups,
243                   Safety and reproducibility were comparable between the methods of allergen applicat
244  trends and patterns of biological responses were comparable between the multi-cellular models we pro
245                        Other safety measures were comparable between the olanzapine plus samidorphan
246 onths on study, vision and anatomic outcomes were comparable between the PDS 100-mg/ml and monthly in
247 erm survival and freedom from reintervention were comparable between the Ross procedure and mechanica
248  activity and physical function improvements were comparable between the SC and IV abatacept-treated
249  discontinuation rates due to adverse events were comparable between the tasimelteon (3 [6%] of 52 pa
250            Types and rates of adverse events were comparable between the treatment groups.
251                     Baseline characteristics were comparable between the treatment-naive and treatmen
252                         Grade 3/4 toxicities were comparable between the two arms except that grade 3
253 sponse improvement, and duration of response were comparable between the two arms.
254                               Adverse events were comparable between the two central venous catheter
255 ts revealed that accuracy and reaction times were comparable between the two conditions, suggesting t
256 ng primers specific to this internal control were comparable between the two devices, indicating negl
257  binding of both benzphetamine and efavirenz were comparable between the two enzymes.
258 rius and F4/80 immunostaining, respectively, were comparable between the two groups of mice.
259 ty of Thoracic Surgeons risk score and eGFR, were comparable between the two groups.
260 %; non-CACPR: 96.9.9%, 88.7%, 80.0%; P = .4) were comparable between the two groups.
261                     Baseline characteristics were comparable between the two groups.
262 d 3-year patient survival and renal function were comparable between the two groups.
263 umbers of resident alveolar macrophages (AM) were comparable between the two groups.
264 characteristics and the underlying anomalies were comparable between the two groups.
265            Although overall prevalence rates were comparable between the two methods, results varied
266  neurologists reported that all rsEEG traces were comparable between the wet and dry electrode headse
267     The taxonomic richness and Shannon index were comparable between the WM and MDM but were signific
268 mph nodes and the antibody response in serum were comparable between the WT and KO animals.
269 ms, comorbidities, and durations of symptoms were comparable between time intervals.
270 isms, comorbidities and duration of symptoms were comparable between time-intervals.
271 ers, whereas levels of endogenous mouse CCN2 were comparable between transgenic and wild-type mice.
272                      Illness-related anxiety was comparable between treatment arms at all time points
273 FSR/HFS; 90% v 66%); grade 3 to 4 toxicities were comparable between treatment arms except HFSR/HFS (
274                         Other adverse events were comparable between treatment groups.
275                               Adverse events were comparable between treatment groups.
276 ontrolled trial, yet the time to pre-syncope was comparable between trials (544 +/- 130 vs. 572 +/- 1
277  we show that the frequency of recombination is comparable between Trypanosoma congolense and Trypano
278  capsules, although the normoglycemic period was comparable between two groups of rats receiving tran
279 terrater reliability of handheld dynamometry was comparable between two studies (intraclass correlati
280 ar filtration rates after 1 year and 5 years were comparable between uDCD and cDCD (1 year: uDCD, 44.
281                           Antibody responses were comparable between uninfected and HIV-infected popu
282 arison to controls; by 24 hours, drug uptake was comparable between untreated and BAPTA-treated hair
283 ination (key depression treatment indicators were comparable between usual care participants managed
284 he effect on cellular immunity, Ab responses were comparable between vaccinated wild-type and IL-33-d
285 us-specific cytotoxic-T-lymphocyte responses were comparable between vaccine groups.
286 , mortality rates and LV functional recovery were comparable between valve replacement techniques.
287 ng by each region, normalized lesion volumes were comparable between white and grey matter in primary
288                  Although thymic cellularity was comparable between wild type (WT) and DKO mice, CD3(
289 significant elevation in blood pressure that was comparable between wild-type and CXCL16 knockout mic
290 pression of endogenous LCMV-specific T cells was comparable between wild-type and DeltaDC mice during
291 ogold labeling for GluN2A at MF-CA3 synapses was comparable between wild-type and Neto-null mice, lab
292 growth factor (VEGF) in response to ischemia was comparable between wild-type and Notch mutant mice,
293                   However, cardiac FAO rates were comparable between wild-type and ACC-DKI mice at ba
294 ription activity and p53 protein degradation were comparable between wild-type and p50-/- cells.
295                                  AS severity was comparable between women and men (peak aortic jet ve
296 Bcl-2 or Bcl-XL, because expression of these was comparable between WT and double knockout OTII cells
297 covery of dietary FA in the intestinal lumen was comparable between WT and KO, consistent with the su
298 he staphylococcal superantigen enterotoxin B were comparable between WT and DKO mice.
299                         Levels of impairment are comparable between youths with bipolar disorder and
300                               Adverse events were comparable between zirconium cyclosilicate and plac

 
Page Top