ライフサイエンスコーパス: biologic therapy

1 ing required when administering intravitreal biologic therapy.

2 patients with RA who were receiving anti-TNF biologic therapy.

3 locus predicts improved response to anti-TNF biologic therapy.

4 e guideline was narrowed to chemotherapy and biologic therapy.

5 en rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is treated with biologic therapy.

6 ally lower than noted in published trials of biologic therapy.

7 not recommended for use in combination with biologic therapy.

8 it to sensitize cells to chemotherapy or to biologic therapy.

9 s favorable modification of LRNC in those on biologic therapy.

10 Approximately 25% of patients received biologic therapy.

11 evaluate the varying prevalence and cost of biologic therapy.

12 riasis who achieved a PASI <= 2 after stable biologic therapy.

13 riasis and how LRNC modulates in response to biologic therapy.

14 ospitalization, and reimbursement of another biologic therapy.

15 No definite CD cases occurred during biologic therapy.

16 ic drug monitoring (TDM) prior to changes in biologic therapy.

17 gation of heterogeneous patient responses to biologic therapy.

18 nt burden in the 5 years prior to initiating biologic therapy.

19 is diagnosis and 45.5 years at initiation of biologic therapy.

20 ial and durable improvements while receiving biologic therapy.

21 n 6 weeks after initiation of treatment with biologic therapy.

22 of 41.8 (12.6) years at initiation of first biologic therapy.

23 formed decision to initiate treatment with a biologic therapy.

24 diation, chemotherapy, endocrine therapy, or biologic therapy.

25 f a cohort of patients with asthma receiving biologic therapy.

26 all the patients also required some form of biologic therapy.

27 steroids; and, eventually, pathway-specific biologic therapy.

28 of serious and opportunistic infections with biologic therapy.

29 hritis has been revolutionized by the use of biologic therapy.

30 al and clinical safety testing of anti-IL-17 biologic therapies.

31 ssociations were consistent across different biologic therapies.

32 ights form the conceptual basis for targeted biologic therapies.

33 mplications for the optimal use of expensive biologic therapies.

34 are amenable to treatment with drugs and/or biologic therapies.

35 rapeutic agents, somatostatin analogues, and biologic therapies.

36 han clinical features and were responsive to biologic therapies.

37 tion of ADAs to a broad range of immunogenic biologic therapies.

38 D) or ulcerative colitis (UC) initiated with biologic therapies.

39 and stratifiers of response of psoriasis to biologic therapies.

40 ally and/or locally), immunosuppression, and biologic therapies.

41 n epitope that partially overlaps with other biologic therapies.

42 nical practice by assisting the selection of biologic therapies.

43 mission in patients with asthma treated with biologic therapies.

44 se endotypes and the development of targeted biologic therapies.

45 peutic responsiveness to targeted anti-T(H)2 biologic therapies.

46 with these phenotypes and their response to biologic therapies.

47 lone as monotherapies or in combination with biologic therapies.

48 Treatment of IBD is more and more based on biologic therapies.

49 0.001) when compared to IBD patients without biologic therapies.

50 oncern for patients with psoriasis receiving biologic therapies.

51 ach to prevent the formation of ADAs against biologic therapies.

52 aking placebo, nonbiologic therapy, or other biologic therapies.

53 y act as a barometer of patient responses to biologic therapies.

54 d HBV (prHBV) infection undergoing long-term biologic therapies.

55 nd prevention of antidrug antibodies against biologic therapies.

56 ctious sequelae of both current and emerging biologic therapies.

57 views of factors that affect the response to biologic therapies.

58 A pathogenesis and developing targeted DMARD-biologic therapies.

59 At 1 year, in patients receiving biologic therapy (36 of 73 patients had 1-year coronary

60 Despite the advent of more specific biologic therapies, a notable proportion of individuals

61 Despite treatment advancements with biologic therapies, a significant proportion of RA patie

62 performance status, no prior chemotherapy or biologic therapy, adequate organ function, and measurabl

63 Biologic therapies allow for improved patient quality of

64 the risk of CDI among patients treated with biologic therapy; although such treatments do not seem t

65 40% of patients do not respond to individual biologic therapies and 5-20% are refractory to all.

66 nclusion, drug survival rates differed among biologic therapies and decreased over time; second-line

67 We assessed drug survival of second-line biologic therapies and estimated the risk of recurrent d

68 omide (LEF) monotherapy, in combination with biologic therapies and in combination with each other.

69 apidly evolving, with the induction of novel biologic therapies and newer, often more intensive treat

70 No association between biologic therapies and serious infections in patients wi

71 has also greatly improved the protocols for biologic therapies and the clinical outcomes in certain

72 ul to stratify patients likely to respond to biologic therapies and to follow response to treatment.

73 f immunodeficiency has been long recognised, biologic therapies and unbiased approaches are providing

74 financial and racial barriers to receipt of biologic therapies and underscores the need for addition

75 The relationship between biologic therapy and CDI is controversial.

76 ween June 2017 and October 2019 who received biologic therapy and had a dose change or biologic disco

77 showed no significant difference between any biologic therapy and placebo at weeks 12-16 (overall poo

78 aque psoriasis (n = 6501) being treated with biologic therapy and regularly followed up at the divisi

79 tients with psoriasis who had failed a first biologic therapy and switched to a second in a large, mu

80 ted among patients who had received previous biologic therapy and those who had not received such the

81 so discuss the implications for anticytokine biologic therapy and vaccine development.

82 have important implications for anticytokine biologic therapy and vaccine development.

83 mor necrosis factor-alpha, and 19 with other biologic therapies) and 959 patients without a prHBV inf

84 pipeline, including both small molecule and biologic therapies, and highlights the challenges associ

85 ne the advantages of both small-molecule and biologic therapies, and may address many drawbacks assoc

86 al corticosteroid therapy, 5 (2.3%) received biologic therapy, and 8 (3.6%) underwent a revision poly

87 harmacy claim for corresponding FDA-approved biologic therapy, and a >= 12-month pre-index (index dat

88 tlines treatment indications and forthcoming biologic therapy, and discusses challenges to performing

89 agents compared with chemotherapy, targeted biologic therapy, and treatment of premenopausal women.

90 s bacteria) for the production of chemicals, biologics, therapies, and food.

91 ime course; radiosensitization by chemo- and biologic therapy; and the addition of novel, biologicall

92 fy changes in four outcomes before and after biologic therapy-annual asthma exacerbation rate, FEV(1)

93 The two biologic therapies, anti-IgE (omalizumab) and anti-IL-5

94 There are currently 3 biologic therapies approved for the treatment of CRSwNP-

95 d more are bound to surface, especially when biologic therapies are added to the armamentarium.

96 Biologic therapies are beginning to be explored as adjun

97 Current biologic therapies are beneficial in only a portion of p

98 However, the currently available biologic therapies are clearly not the panacea we have d

99 Advanced biologic therapies are distributed cold, using substanti

100 In 2014, new biologic therapies are emerging for severe asthma based

101 ic diseases are not yet fully characterized, biologic therapies are in development for the treatment

102 Biologic therapies are widely used in patients with ulce

103 Delays in initiating biologic therapy are significantly associated with IBD t

104 involves immunosuppressive drugs, including biologic therapy, as well as intravenous immunoglobulin,

105 .001) and had 59% higher odds of better post-biologic therapy asthma control (95% CI, 26-102%; P < 0.

106 er and recombinantly express novel candidate biologic therapies based on the anti-inflammatory cytoki

107 ents were ineligible for subsequent targeted biologic therapy based on LVEF decline post-ddAC.

108 a risk : benefit profile at least similar to biologic therapies, be more convenient for the patient a

109 Discontinuation of the first biologic therapy because of adverse events was associate

110 New drugs and biologic therapies being developed for RA may thus find

111 f tuberculosis (TB) in patients treated with biologic therapies (BioT), the role of the interferon-ga

112 infection who had started immunosuppressive biologic therapy both before and after 2009.

113 ic therapy (n = 183) and those who initiated biologic therapy but discontinued use (n = 42).

114 LRNC can decrease with biologic therapy, but how this occurs remains unknown.

115 logistic regression when predicting specific biologic therapy (by drug as well as target) leading to

116 Biologic therapies can be highly effective for the treat

117 sthma so more effective immunomodulators and biologic therapies can emerge.

118 Translational studies assessing how biologic therapies can modify inflammation in CRSwNP hav

119 technologies have led to the development of biologic therapies capable of directly targeting selecte

120 of patients with plaque psoriasis receiving biologic therapies compared with the general population.

121 With the advent of effective anti-type 2 biologic therapies, computed tomography and magnetic res

122 Combination biologic therapy consisting of lenalidomide plus rituxim

123 ational data about the risk of infection and biologic therapy continue to emerge, although there are

124 erbations and 56% higher odds of better post-biologic therapy control.

125 Before the advent of biologic therapies, conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMA

126 These findings are important because biologic therapies could target epithelial-fibroblast in

127 United States, including small-molecule and biologic therapies, devices and gene therapies.

128 findings suggest that eligibility for asthma biologic therapies differs across pediatric racial/ethni

129 Results from trials of other biologic therapies directed at tumor necrosis factor alp

130 more biologics at baseline and switching of biologic therapy during the study follow-up [(beta=-0.18

131 opic dermatitis was not associated with post-biologic therapy effect for any outcome assessed.

132 therapies have failed to halt PBC, including biologic therapies effective in other autoimmune disease

133 Breaking through the biologic therapy efficacy plateau for inflammatory bowel

134 Whether biologic therapies enhance the risk of coronavirus 2019

135 tially higher than cost estimates before the biologic therapy era, and costs are now driven predomina

136 ction and symptoms of subjects who initiated biologic therapy (etanercept or infliximab) and reported

137 nical remission; analyses were stratified by biologic therapy exposure status.

138 ients with a better prognosis should receive biologic therapies first, with transplant reserved until

139 eview analyzes and addresses the function of biologic therapies for AD from a fresh molecular perspec

140 arget the Th2 pathway, are the only approved biologic therapies for AD in the United States and Europ

141 ion and suicidal ideation in adolescents and biologic therapies for adolescent depression are reviewe

142 Newer biologic therapies for breast cancer such as trastuzumab

143 BACKGROUND/AIMS: The increasing use of biologic therapies for moderate to severe inflammatory b

144 veness studies can inform the positioning of biologic therapies for older patients with inflammatory

145 Biologic therapies for psoriasis can cause paradoxical e

146 known about the drug survival of second-line biologic therapies for psoriasis in routine clinical pra

147 Drug survival of biologic therapies for psoriasis is a proxy for longer-t

148 luation of the risk of serious infections in biologic therapies for psoriasis is lacking.

149 Makers of biologic therapies for psoriasis, whose products cost $1

150 As the array of biologic therapies for renal cancer expands with the app

151 Approved biologic therapies for severe asthma mainly benefit pati

152 er cancer chemotherapy, immunosuppressive or biologic therapies for the management of rheumatologic c

153 unacceptable side effects, the emergence of biologic therapies for the treatment of asthma has provi

154 r 25 ongoing clinical trials on intravitreal biologic therapy for AMD, enthusiasm for vanguard biolog

155 antibodies, can potentially constitute a new biologic therapy for cancer patients.

156 In addition, advances in biologic therapy for Crohn disease are beginning to be f

157 ts being treated with immunomodulator and/or biologic therapy for moderate to severe UC.

158 Identifying the optimal long-term biologic therapy for patients with psoriasis is often do

159 al decision making when choosing second-line biologic therapy for patients with psoriasis.

160 Biologic therapy for pediatric IBD is an increasingly em

161 ous infections in people taking any licensed biologic therapy for psoriasis compared with those takin

162 l aid clinical decision making when choosing biologic therapy for psoriasis patients.

163 ivity or remission since the introduction of biologic therapy for RA.

164 The choice of appropriate biologic therapy for severe asthma remains challenging.

165 in-2 pathways), and research on intravitreal biologic therapy for uveitis and AMD will continue to ex

166 </=90 kg or >90 kg) and previous exposure to biologics therapy for psoriasis.

167 Open-label extensions of biologic therapies found continued benefits extending se

168 At 1-year, participants receiving biologic therapy had a reduction in LRNC (mm(2); 3.12 [1

169 A surge in the development of targeted biologic therapies has led to durable remission and impr

170 concurrent rise of targeted therapeutics and biologic therapies has the potential to rapidly advance

171 The advent of biologic therapies has transformed care for severe atopi

172 Modern biologic therapy has improved outcomes for IBD, but litt

173 Since the 1990s, most biologic therapies have been developed for one or severa

174 Biologic therapies have increased the treatment options

175 Biologic therapies have revolutionized the definition of

176 Biologic therapies have shown high efficacy in psoriasis

177 In addition, targeted biologic therapies have shown promise, including teprotu

178 Biologic therapies have transformed the management of ps

179 and rheumatologic indications for long-term biologic therapies, HBV reactivation was not seen; this

180 .20-14.09; p<0.001)) and concurrent systemic biologic therapy (HR 28.57, 95% CI 6.90-111.11; p<0.001)

181 In general, pre- versus post-biologic therapy improvements were noted in all four ast

182 e mechanistic actions of frequently utilized biologic therapies in AERD.

183 Dose-optimization strategies for biologic therapies in Crohn's disease (CD) are not well

184 New biologic therapies in development, however, target diffe

185 Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) for biologic therapies in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) p

186 is review is to summarize the recent data on biologic therapies in juvenile rheumatoid arthritis.

187 raditional immunomodulating as well as newer biologic therapies in management are continuing to be de

188 examined population-specific eligibility for biologic therapies in minority pediatric populations.

189 ound that nonresponsiveness to anti-integrin biologic therapies in patients with ulcerative colitis w

190 The majority of reports of biologic therapies in posterior uveitis have been uncont

191 des a basis to study and predict outcomes to biologic therapies in psoriasis.

192 tis looks bright with newer, highly targeted biologic therapies in the pipeline.

193 framework for the understanding of potential biologic therapies in the treatment of degenerative join

194 s review summarizes the current evidence for biologic therapies in the treatment of uveitis.

195 However, the study of biologic therapies in the vasculitides must be approache

196 It has been combined with chemotherapy and biologic therapy in an attempt to improve on this respon

197 robiome is a key determinant of responses to biologic therapy in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

198 The possibility of biologic therapy in large vessel vasculitis has emerged.

199 ical eczema occurring as an adverse event of biologic therapy in patients with psoriasis.

200 ancer, but the optimal choice of the initial biologic therapy in previously untreated patients is unk

201 elationship between S100 proteins, LRNC, and biologic therapy in psoriasis.

202 Biologic therapy in RA has significantly changed the cou

203 e financial burden of the highly efficacious biologic therapy in retinal pathologies.

204 e utilization, for UC patients who initiated biologic therapies, in the 5 years prior to the initiati

205 hen needed, additional immunosuppressive and biologic therapies include azathioprine, mycophenolate m

206 dical therapy is highlighted and more recent biologic therapies including the use of anti-tumor necro

207 Biologic therapies, including anti-tumor necrosis factor

208 logy have led to the development of targeted biologic therapies, including dupilumab, tralokinumab, l

209 In recent years, systemic biologic therapies, including monoclonal antibodies that

210 y, the safety of different immunosuppressive biologic therapies, including rituximab, was assessed.

211 amples are indicative of patient response to biologic therapies, including signals in blood, which ha

212 Biologic therapies, including the antitumour necrosis fa

213 n requires the use of immunomodulator and/or biologic therapies, including thiopurines, methotrexate,

214 modulator (thiopurines, methotrexate) and/or biologic therapies, including tumor necrosis factor-a an

215 We aimed to assess whether biologic therapy increases CDI risk among IBD patients,

216 Biologic therapies inhibiting the IL-4 or IL-5 pathways

217 Antiandrogens and immunomodulatory biologic therapies initiated prior to ertapenem were mai

218 Persistence was defined as the time from biologic therapy initiation to discontinuation and was e

219 ecifically, the introduction of intravitreal biologic therapies into clinical practice for uveitis, A

220 PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Since the introduction of biologic therapies into the treatment paradigm of rheuma

221 ic anti-inflammatory medications to targeted biologic therapies is reviewed.

222 ients who have failed to respond to existing biologic therapies is unknown.

223 Biologic therapy is associated with increased risk for s

224 sease-modifying antirheumatic drugs or newer biologic therapy is more effective.

225 vent of newer and emerging forms of targeted biologic therapies, it has become important to understan

226 ytokines is responsive to corticosteroid and biologic therapies, many severe asthmatics exhibit corti

227 ly to be increasingly deployed, and targeted biologic therapies may reduce the need for vascular inte

228 nd years 1 and 2 of therapy to those with no biologic therapy (n = 183) and those who initiated biolo

229 ential role for cIL-10 administration in the biologic therapy of cancer and suggests a broader interp

230 tial of genetically engineered cells for the biologic therapy of cancer.

231 considers testing for immunogenicity and how biologic therapy of psoriasis may be tailored on the bas

232 nitial ileocolectomy to assess the effect of biologic therapy on time to recurrent surgery.

233 utic approach (prior use and switch/cycle of biologic therapies) on HRQoL.

234 hus, earlier, more aggressive treatment with biologic therapies or novel small molecules could profou

235 le side), use of long-term systemic therapy (biologic therapy or 3 consecutive months of oral cortico

236 e with sensitivity to specific chemotherapy, biologic therapy, or other cancer treatments.

237 ant signature with predictive performance to biologic therapy outcome.

238 With the introduction of biologic therapies over the last 2 decades, controversie

239 ]; P=0.028), while those who did not receive biologic therapy over 1 year demonstrated no significant

240 cid Bioimaging, Boston, MA) before and after biologic therapy over 1 year.

241 to-oral steroid course (P = .13) and time-to-biologic therapy (P = .43) were similar across clusters.

242 rticosteroids, immunosuppressive agents, and biologic therapies play roles in controlling inflammator

243 had not previously received methotrexate or biologic therapy received 50 mg of etanercept plus metho

244 tiple-dose study, patients who were naive to biologic therapy received infusions of tabalumab (30, 60

245 The advent of novel biologic therapies represents a giant leap forward for a

246 receiving topical, systemic nonbiologic, and biologic therapy, respectively.

247 ly assumed that the analgesic effect of this biologic therapy results from augmented concentrations o

248 tologous stem cell transplantation, although biologic therapies seem to be promising.

249 gic therapy for AMD, enthusiasm for vanguard biologic therapies should be tempered by judicious monit

250 s, and focused on the application of TDM for biologic therapy, specifically anti-tumor necrosis facto

251 ess RI in patients with psoriasis undergoing biologic therapy, specifically defined as high-sensitivi

252 chemical probes and optimize next-generation biologic therapies such as antibody-drug conjugates (ADC

253 However, biologic therapies such as the B cell-depleting agent ri

254 Both prednisone and targeted biologic therapies such as tumor necrosis factor antagon

255 is systemic therapy (cytotoxic chemotherapy, biologic therapy such as antibodies to cellular growth f

256 inase, inhibition of various chemokines, and biologic therapy such as hematopoietic stem cell transpl

257 The use of methotrexate and subsequently biologic therapies (such as TNF inhibitors, among others

258 In T2-mediated severe asthma, biologic therapies, such as mepolizumab, are increasingl

259 Current biologic therapies target allergic, eosinophilic or type

260 Biologic therapies target specific inflammatory pathways

261 tion in the airways of patients with asthma, biologic therapies targeted toward these type 2 pathways

262 AD has catalysed the development of numerous biologic therapies targeting a range of key molecules im

263 ion. We also observed divergent responses to biologic therapies targeting T(H)2 cytokines, which robu

264 Biologic therapies targeting the IL-23/IL-17 axis have t

265 these pathways has led to the development of biologic therapies targeting these T2 cytokines, which h

266 Biologic therapies targeting TNF, IL-17, IL-23 and IL-12

267 Biologic therapies targeting tumor necrosis factor have

268 Several biologic therapies targeting type 2 cytokine (IL-4 and I

269 s qualified for eosinophilic asthma-directed biologic therapy than African Americans.

270 dosing criteria for allergic asthma-directed biologic therapy than other groups.

271 erentiation and have led the way to targeted biologic therapies that are effective in a range of auto

272 anced disk imaging techniques, and the novel biologic therapies that presently have the most clinical

273 Allergen-specific immunotherapy and biologic therapies that target key molecules driving the

274 Newly developed biologic therapies that target prostate-cancer bone meta

275 Despite the enthusiasm in the field of biologic therapies, the majority of these new modalities

276 We used biologic therapies to avert potentially fatal acute resp

277 anisms of oral carcinogenesis and the use of biologic therapy to specifically target molecules altere

278 D], 28.6% ulcerative colitis [UC]) receiving biologic therapy underwent dose change (55.6%) or discon

279 outpatients between 2001 and 2012 and taking biologic therapies, underwent evaluation of anti-HCV and

280 cation by race of the effect of insurance on biologic therapy use in patients with asthma and related

281 Rituximab is one of the earliest biologic therapies used in SLE.

282 gous conditioned serum (ACS) is an effective biologic therapy used by intra-articular injection for p

283 Assessment of the risk of biologic therapy utilized conditional logistic regressio

284 ed asthma care, but the clinical response to biologic therapy varies between patients.

285 r therapeutic mechanisms, assess outcomes of biologic therapy versus endoscopic sinus surgery, and di

286 year, while the cost for those not receiving biologic therapy was 6,164 US dollars.

287 e of CDI compared to unexposed IBD patients, biologic therapy was not an independent risk factor for

288 verity Index at switching to the second-line biologic therapy were predictors of overall discontinuat

289 e psoriasis (phototherapy, oral systemic, or biologic therapies) were received by 27.3% of the total

290 compared with 28% in patients without use of biologic therapies, whereas inpatient costs didn't diffe

291 t methods for in vivo Treg expansion rely on biologic therapies, which are not Treg-specific and are

292 atoid arthritis do not respond to individual biologic therapies, while biomarkers predictive of treat

293 Bisphosphonate therapy implicating that the biologic therapy with an anti-TNF-alpha antibody might p

294 Depemokimab is an ultra-long-acting biologic therapy with enhanced binding affinity for inte

295 reated with intravenous steroids followed by biologic therapy with Infliximab.

296 Not all patients respond to conventional and biologic therapies, with chronic inflammation ensuing.

297 echniques will aid the target application of biologic therapy within the window of opportunity and ai

298 atoid arthritis (RA) receive highly targeted biologic therapies without previous knowledge of target

299 Initiating biologic therapy without trying triple therapy first inc