ライフサイエンスコーパス: dose-escalation

1 r 1000 mg methyldopa (a single dose, without dose escalation).

2 ody weight per day for 6 months, followed by dose escalation.

3 ontribute to both poorly controlled pain and dose escalation.

4 asma concentration occurred with each cohort dose escalation.

5 hould be started at a low dose, with gradual dose escalation.

6 0 and topotecan in 3-week cycles using 3 + 3 dose escalation.

7 nd OIH counteract opioid analgesia and drive dose escalation.

8 ch in targeting agents and radiation therapy dose escalation.

9 lled, and 22 were eligible and evaluable for dose escalation.

10 which could be restored with further Notch1 dose escalation.

11 o drug solubilization, biocompatibility, and dose escalation.

12 esistant HER2-mutant cancer cells by gradual dose escalation.

13 lf-regulatory capacity and exacerbate opioid dose escalation.

14 rmacokinetic, safety, and activity data from dose escalation.

15 tested durvalumab doublets in parallel 3 + 3 dose escalations.

16 parental reports, daily symptom diaries, and dose escalations.

17 Dose escalation (3 + 3 design) in all solid tumors was f

18 The phase 1b portion of this open-label, dose-escalation (3+3+3 design) study examined the maximu

19 enty-seven patients were enrolled: 11 during dose escalation (6 at 4.0 mg and 5 at 5.5 mg) and 16 dur

20 ; mean [+/-SD] age, 4.6+/-1.0 years) or with dose escalation (93 children; mean age, 4.8+/-0.9 years)

21 andomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-escalation, age-descending, phase 1/2 trial in Dhak

22 tially at trial entry according to the 3 + 3 dose-escalation algorithm and depending on the number of

23 th switching to nilotinib than with imatinib dose escalation, although the difference was not statist

24 non-randomised study composed of a phase 1b dose escalation and a phase 2 dose expansion at 11 hospi

25 RIPF remains a major limiting factor to dose escalation and an obstacle to applying more promisi

26 PPI dose escalation and continued chronic therapy in those u

27 Phase 1 study with dose escalation and dose expansion at the University of

28 CC-122-NHL-001 was a phase 1b dose escalation and expansion study at eight sites in Fr

29 1 was an open-label, multicentre, phase 1-2, dose escalation and expansion study done in the Netherla

30 onducted a multicenter, open-label, phase I, dose escalation and expansion study of ivosidenib in pat

31 id a phase 1/2, open-label, non-comparative, dose escalation and expansion trial (CheckMate 040) of n

32 mphocytic leukemia were treated on a phase 1 dose escalation and expansion trial (NCT03019055) to eva

33 Here, in a phase Ib, dose escalation and expansion, trial for patients with a

34 Results In the dose-escalation and -expansion cohorts, 33 and 18 patien

35 This phase 1, open-label, dose-escalation and -expansion study (NCT02027961) inves

36 We did a single-centre, open-label, phase 1 dose-escalation and basket dose-expansion study at the R

37 -05 was a single-arm, open-label, phase 1b-2 dose-escalation and cohort expansion study done at 11 ac

38 man, open-label, phase 1 clinical trial with dose-escalation and cohort-expansion parts in five acade

39 Radiation dose-escalation and consolidation chemotherapy have been

40 Dose-escalation and consolidation chemotherapy leads to

41 ant gastrointestinal stromal tumour from the dose-escalation and dose-expansion parts, all doses), tr

42 We did an open-label, dose-escalation and dose-expansion phase 1 trial at eigh

43 This was an open-label, dose-escalation and dose-expansion phase 1 trial done at

44 We did an open-label, phase 1 study with dose-escalation and dose-expansion phases, at five centr

45 The study was done in two parts, with dose-escalation and dose-expansion phases.

46 InnovaTV 201 is a phase 1-2, open-label, dose-escalation and dose-expansion study done at 21 cent

47 We did a phase 1 dose-escalation and dose-expansion study of rogaratinib

48 We did a phase 1 dose-escalation and dose-expansion study.

49 NAVIGATOR is a two-part, open-label, dose-escalation and dose-expansion, phase 1 study done a

50 Results The dose-escalation and expansion phases enrolled 26 and 25

51 relapsed or refractory AML, from the phase 1 dose-escalation and expansion phases of the study.

52 at the recommended dose of 750 mg/day in the dose-escalation and expansion phases.

53 ted myelodysplastic syndromes in the phase 1 dose-escalation and expansion portions of the trial.

54 This first-in-human, dose-escalation and expansion study evaluated the safety

55 We did a phase 1 dose-escalation and expansion study of ivosidenib monoth

56 citidine from a large, multicenter, phase 1b dose-escalation and expansion study.

57 acy of mavorixafor from a phase 2 open-label dose-escalation and extension study in 8 adult patients

58 city at target doses from 200 to 1,200 mg in dose-escalation and safety expansion cohorts.

59 mg per kilogram of body weight per day) with dose escalation (approximately 30 mg per kilogram per da

60 assigned to receive intravenous haloperidol dose escalation at 2 mg every 4 h, neuroleptic rotation

61 eby enhancing inhibitory control over opioid dose escalation behaviors.

62 n 66 AD patients, including 50 patients with dose escalation by post hoc analysis of the phase III tr

63 Dose escalation ceased at 160 mg per day given lack of M

64 the publication of a first-in-man phase I/II dose escalation clinical trial in patients with radiatio

65 This phase 1, open-label, dose-escalation clinical trial was done at the National

66 6, 2017, we enrolled 46 patients: 24 in the dose-escalation cohort (n=14 chronic lymphocytic leukaem

67 ents with solid tumours were included in the dose-escalation cohort and 29 patients with solid tumour

68 21, 2016, we enrolled 34 patients (28 in the dose-escalation cohort and six in the dose-expansion coh

69 The dose-escalation cohort comprised patients aged 18 years

70 two of three patients enrolled in the 450 mg dose-escalation cohort had two dose-limiting toxicities

71 ix in the dose-expansion cohort); two in the dose-escalation cohort were ineligible at the day of sch

72 In the dose-escalation cohort, patients treated with 12 mg/kg M

73 In the dose-escalation cohort, patients were treated in cycles

74 In this phase I, open-label, dose-escalation, cohort-expansion study, patients with r

75 Three BIIB092 dose escalation cohorts (150 mg, 700 mg, or 2100 mg; eig

76 in Germany; 27 patients were enrolled in the dose-escalation cohorts (0.125-1.75 mg/kg) and 31 patien

77 ve chemotherapy were allocated to venetoclax dose-escalation cohorts (range, 50-600 mg).

78 otal of 66 patients were enrolled (54 in the dose-escalation cohorts and 12 in the safety expansion).

79 ax was given at 300, 600, 900, or 1200 mg in dose-escalation cohorts and 1200 mg in the safety expans

80 eek dose ramp-up period for most patients in dose-escalation cohorts and for all patients in safety e

81 The phase 1 dose-escalation cohorts for each histology escalated ind

82 Ten dose-escalation cohorts of patients with advanced or met

83 Patients were enrolled into one of five dose-escalation cohorts, with dose-escalation done in a

84 ty-five patients were enrolled across the 10 dose-escalation cohorts.

85 Sixty-six patients were enrolled (30, dose-escalation cohorts; 36, safety expansion).

86 Furthermore, the feasibility of triazole dose escalation, combination therapy, and prophylaxis we

87 ven patients were enrolled in seven cohorts (dose-escalation component).

88 g part 1, patients received eltrombopag, and dose-escalation criteria for part 2 were determined.

89 Finally, in vitro dose-escalation cytotoxicity assays confirm the biocompa

90 After a 2-week lead-in with weekly dose escalation, daily venetoclax was given at 300, 600,

91 This phase I, nonrandomized, open-label, dose-escalation (DE), and extension-cohort (EC) trial in

92 r both (triplet therapy group) using a 3 + 3 dose escalation design with expansion cohorts.

93 Methods In a 3 + 3 dose-escalation design (n = 25), patients received a sin

94 Both trials followed a 3 + 3 dose-escalation design allowing for a dose expansion coh

95 elapsed or RRMM patients into an open-label, dose-escalation design to determine the maximum tolerate

96 se 1, patients were assigned following a 3+3 dose-escalation design to one of four cohorts to receive

97 A randomized, double-blind, dose-escalation design was employed.

98 ses of 100 to 1,800 mg, according to a 3 + 3 dose-escalation design, followed by an expansion phase a

99 open-label, phase 1b trial following a 3 + 3 dose-escalation design, we recruited patients aged 18 ye

100 to one of five dose-escalation cohorts, with dose-escalation done in a 3 + 3 design.

101 The dose-escalation dosing strategy represents an alternativ

102 Part 1 (dose escalation) evaluated 4 daratumumab doses plus lena

103 EV-101 is a phase I dose escalation/expansion study that enrolled patients w

104 tion (slow escalation; n = 70), 40-mg 2-week dose escalation (fast escalation, n = 70), oral placebo

105 Phase 1/2a, multicenter, open-label, dose-escalation, fellow-eye-controlled study.

106 ficacy of switching to nilotinib vs imatinib dose escalation for patients with suboptimal cytogenetic

107 immunosuppression (if possible): ganciclovir dose escalation, ganciclovir and foscarnet combination,

108 cancer treatment due to injection safety and dose escalation (Genexol-PM(R)) compared to Taxol(R).

109 During dose escalation, grade 2 dose-limiting toxic effects occ

110 l population consisted of 54 patients in the dose-escalation group and 62 in the standard-dose group.

111 d serious adverse event: six patients in the dose-escalation group and eight patients in the standard

112 Children in the dose-escalation group had fewer sickle cell-related adve

113 At trial closure, 86% of the children in the dose-escalation group had reached the primary-outcome th

114 23 (43%, 95% CI 29-56) of 54 patients in the dose-escalation group initiated cycle 3 versus 16 (26%,

115 ts were fatigue (seven [13%] patients in the dose-escalation group vs 11 [18%] in the standard-dose g

116 5, 32 patients received veliparib (22 in the dose-escalation group; ten in the safety expansion group

117 Baseline TPS of dose escalation groups, either after 2 weeks or after we

118 In the dose escalation, groups of 5 patients in 4 cohorts recei

119 Phase 1b dose escalation had a three-plus-three design and establ

120 Two patients in the once-every-3-weeks dose escalation had dose-limiting grade 3 transaminitis.

121 emia in sub-Saharan Africa, hydroxyurea with dose escalation had superior clinical efficacy to that o

122 daily, or equivalent placebo with mandatory dose escalation if no serious adverse effects were exper

123 Dose escalation in T3-T4 tumors did not increase local c

124 This study evaluated the effects of RT dose escalation in the treatment of IHCC.

125 A dose escalation is planned in a subsequent phase I/II st

126 During dose escalation, ivosidenib was administered orally at 2

127 oral gilteritinib once daily in one of seven dose-escalation (n=23) or dose-expansion (n=229) cohorts

128 During dose escalation, nivolumab showed a manageable safety pr

129 -to-severe AD were randomized to groups with dose escalation of ASN002 (20, 40, and 80 mg) and a plac

130 To determine whether dose escalation of carmustine in combination with dual-d

131 owed 40% VE against heterologous CHMI, while dose escalation of PfSPZ using single dose priming was n

132 Dose escalation of rifampicin achieves >90% Wolbachia de

133 re, we report a phase 1b study investigating dose escalation of the BCL2 inhibitor, venetoclax, in co

134 Conclusion Dose escalation of varlilumab to 10 mg/kg was well toler

135 ients with PD-L1-positive tumours in a 3 + 3 dose-escalation of intravenous pembrolizumab (2 mg/kg an

136 We conducted a phase 1, dose-escalation, open-label trial including 45 healthy a

137 We conducted a phase 1, dose-escalation, open-label trial of a messenger RNA vac

138 We conducted a phase 1, dose-escalation, open-label trial of cAd3-EBO.

139 id tumours (regardless of HER2 expression in dose escalation or HER2 expression or mutation in dose e

140 id tumours (regardless of HER2 expression in dose escalation or HER2 expression or mutation in dose e

141 operamide or oral placebo with the option of dose escalation or reduction.

142 Patients were enrolled into one of seven dose-escalation or dose-expansion cohorts assigned to re

143 We assigned patients to dose-escalation or expansion cohorts, ranging from 0.05

144 During dose escalation, oral venetoclax was administered at 400

145 EG-b-PLA micelles, as Genexol-PM(R), permits dose escalation over Taxol(R), enhancing antitumor effic

146 apritinib was administered once daily in the dose-escalation part (starting dose of 30 mg, with incre

147 Safety was assessed in all patients from the dose-escalation part and all patients with PDGFRA D842V-

148 The dose-escalation part of the study included patients with

149 The primary endpoints of the phase 1a dose-escalation part of the study were safety and tolera

150 Patient recruitment to the dose-escalation part reported here is closed.

151 g toxicity, and all patients enrolled in the dose-escalation part were assessed for the secondary end

152 dose was the maximum tolerated dose from the dose-escalation part).

153 In the dose-escalation part, 24 patients received MP0250 as a 3

154 recommended phase 2 dose, and safety in the dose-escalation part, and overall response and safety in

155 ta cutoff), 46 patients were enrolled in the dose-escalation part, including 20 patients with a PDGFR

156 In the dose-escalation part, no dose limiting toxicity was repo

157 The dose escalation (part 1) has previously been reported an

158 During dose escalation, participants received venetoclax orally

159 In the dose escalation phase (n = 31), duvelisib 8 to 100 mg tw

160 We first performed a dose escalation phase 1 study to determine the recommend

161 Methods: The initial dose escalation phase of this first-in-humans prospectiv

162 During the dose escalation phase, patients were enrolled sequential

163 d non-tolerated dose were not reached in the dose escalation phase.

164 One further death occurred in the dose-escalation phase (1.5 mg/kg cohort) due to disease

165 nivolumab 0.1-10 mg/kg every 2 weeks in the dose-escalation phase (3+3 design).

166 ients who received 500 mg twice a day in the dose-escalation phase (grade 3 acne [n=1] and intolerabl

167 In the initial dose-escalation phase 1 stage of the trial, patients rec

168 This was an open-label, dose-escalation phase 1 trial done at two study sites in

169 In this single-centre, open-label, dose-escalation phase 1 trial, we recruited adult patien

170 In this open-label, dose-escalation phase 1-2a study, we gave monthly intrat

171 in patients with advanced solid tumours in a dose-escalation phase 1a trial.

172 ted (23 FGFR mRNA-unselected patients in the dose-escalation phase and 103 patients with FGFR mRNA-ov

173 39 patients were enrolled and treated in the dose-escalation phase and 146 patients were enrolled and

174 800x10(6) CAR-positive (CAR+) T cells in the dose-escalation phase and 150x10(6) to 450x10(6) CAR+ T

175 (Dec 12, 2016), three (10%) patients in the dose-escalation phase and 20 (53%) in the dose-expansion

176 le patients were treated (48 patients in the dose-escalation phase and 214 in the dose-expansion phas

177 SCLC were enrolled into the study, 29 to the dose-escalation phase and 38 to the dose-expansion phase

178 es of 7 or less (Child-Pugh A or B7) for the dose-escalation phase and 6 or less (Child-Pugh A) for t

179 The open-label study consisted of a 6 week dose-escalation phase and a long-term maintenance phase

180 deaths across all study phases (three in the dose-escalation phase and six in the dose-expansion phas

181 30 (63%) of 48 patients in the dose-escalation phase died (not determined to be related

182 andomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-escalation Phase I trial.

183 A dose-escalation phase was conducted at seven hospitals o

184 A 3+3 dose-escalation phase was followed by 2 expansion cohort

185 The primary endpoint of the dose-escalation phase was to assess safety and ascertain

186 dverse events reported more than once in the dose-escalation phase were keratitis (n=3) and fatigue (

187 In the dose-escalation phase, 25 patients with heavily pretreat

188 In the dose-escalation phase, an MTD was not reached at doses r

189 During the cell dose-escalation phase, an objective complete response wa

190 For the dose-escalation phase, eligible patients had histologica

191 ecommended phase 2 dose, determined from the dose-escalation phase, in biomarker-selected patients.

192 cine and 12 to placebo) were enrolled in the dose-escalation phase, in which the 30 mug and 60 mug do

193 In the dose-escalation phase, nine patients were treated: three

194 In the dose-escalation phase, patients received 3 to 80 mg/m(2)

195 In the dose-escalation phase, patients were treated with tisotu

196 In the dose-escalation phase, patients who had progressed after

197 In the dose-escalation phase, trastuzumab duocarmazine was give

198 During the dose-escalation phase, we evaluated three intermittent o

199 expansion phase and 15% (95% CI 6-28) in the dose-escalation phase.

200 GIST) were enrolled, with 68 patients in the dose-escalation phase.

201 here were no dose-limiting toxicities in the dose-escalation phase.

202 highest administered dose (2.4 mg/kg) in the dose-escalation phase.

203 5, 27 eligible patients were enrolled to the dose-escalation phase.

204 the drug combination as determined from the dose-escalation phase.

205 In this dose-escalation, phase 1 study we recruited patients fro

206 going, placebo-controlled, observer-blinded, dose-escalation, phase 1 trial conducted in the United S

207 The open-label, parallel-cohort, dose-escalation, phase I CheckMate 016 study evaluated t

208 nsfer in humans, we conducted an open-label, dose-escalation, Phase I clinical trial in liver transpl

209 onocenter, placebo-controlled, single-blind, dose-escalation pilot study, 18 subjects with perennial

210 0 mg (micronized formulation) in the phase 1 dose escalation portion, and at 800 to 1200 mg in the ph

211 e-limiting toxic effects occurred during the dose-escalation portion of the study.

212 and Ad6-NSmut) encoding HCV NS proteins in a dose escalation, prime-boost regimen, with and without c

213 ticipants were enrolled sequentially using a dose-escalation protocol to receive 0.67 mg, 2 mg, or 6

214 s placed and adenosine was given following a dose-escalation protocol until atrioventricular block wa

215 We conducted an age de-escalation, dose-escalation randomized controlled trial in Siaya Cou

216 utide (doses reached after following a fixed dose-escalation regimen) or once-daily insulin glargine

217 During dose escalation, rogaratinib was administered orally twi

218 ed placebo once weekly for 30 weeks, after a dose-escalation schedule of 4 weeks of 0.25 mg semagluti

219 After adjustments to the dose-escalation schedule, clinical tumor lysis syndrome

220 We applied a two-stage dose-escalation scheme (single patient and traditional 3

221 Further dose escalation should be conducted with care, as the hi

222 mice exhibited reactions during 5-6 weeks of dose escalation single PN and TN challenges.

223 (standard escalation; n = 71), 40-mg 8-week dose escalation (slow escalation; n = 70), 40-mg 2-week

224 Reported here are results of the phase 1a dose-escalation stage of the trial.

225 -613 for the first cohort in the traditional dose-escalation stage was the same as that used in the l

226 The traditional 3+3 dose-escalation stage was triggered if toxic effects att

227 sed in the last cohort of the single-patient dose-escalation stage.

228 10 mg (n = 70), 20 mg (n = 70), 40-mg 4-week dose escalation (standard escalation; n = 71), 40-mg 8-w

229 Regorafenib dosing strategies were a dose-escalation strategy (starting dose 80 mg/day orally

230 polymorphisms (SNPs) from virus passaged in dose escalation studies in a nonhuman primate kidney epi

231 Compound 1 was tested in dose escalation studies in rats and dogs and was found t

232 Long term dose escalation studies showed that miR-30c mimic caused

233 ld increase in concentration was achieved in dose escalation studies.

234 In dose escalations studies in diabetic minipigs, a higher

235 We conducted a phase I dose escalation study in which 9 patients with relapsed/

236 Patients were enrolled in a 3 + 3 dose escalation study to evaluate DSTP3086S (0.3 to 2.8

237 ongoing placebo-controlled, observer-blinded dose-escalation study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT

238 In this phase 1, dose-escalation study (VRC 608), conducted at the US Nat

239 This phase 1b, open-label, dose-escalation study assessed the safety, efficacy, and

240 Phase 1, open-label, uncontrolled, dose-escalation study at 5 US retinal clinics between No

241 We did a phase 1, dose-escalation study at three research hospitals in the

242 In this open-label phase 1 dose-escalation study conducted at Baylor College of Med

243 This phase 1b dose-escalation study evaluated isatuximab plus pomalido

244 After an open-label dose-escalation study in a pilot safety cohort, we did a

245 ndomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded dose-escalation study in an HIV-negative adult South Afr

246 The dose-escalation study is the first part of a two-part st

247 The clinical activity observed in a phase I dose-escalation study of concurrent therapy with nivolum

248 rall safety and preliminary activity in this dose-escalation study of CUDC-907 monotherapy in patient

249 study was a phase 1, open-label, single-arm, dose-escalation study of GLS-5300 done at the Walter Ree

250 of leukemia relapse, we initiated a phase 1 dose-escalation study of membrane-bound interleukin 21 (

251 week, open-label, multisite, within-subject, dose-escalation study of oral leniolisib to assess safet

252 This was a single institution dose-escalation study of pralatrexate plus romidepsin de

253 This first-in-man dose-escalation study provides evidence of safety of int

254 We conducted a double-blind, randomized, dose-escalation study to assess the infectivity of the 7

255 Here, we describe a phase 1b, dose-escalation study to assess the safety and prelimina

256 This phase 1b, open-label, multicentre, dose-escalation study was done at six hospitals (one in

257 A phase 1 dose-escalation study was initiated to examine the safet

258 We conducted a phase I dose-escalation study with (89)Zr-desferrioxamine-IAB2M

259 open-label, single-arm, first-in-man phase 1 dose-escalation study, eligible patients had advanced AL

260 This dose-escalation study, guided by pharmacokinetic and pha

261 INTERPRETATION: In this phase 1, dose-escalation study, lorlatinib showed both systemic a

262 Patients and Methods Using a 3 + 3 + 3 dose-escalation study, nine chemotherapy-naive patients

263 In this 3 + 3 dose-escalation study, patients with metastatic breast c

264 In a phase 1 dose-escalation study, the clinical pharmacokinetics for

265 In this phase 1 dose-escalation study, we enrolled 4 healthy volunteers

266 luated for the appropriate dose in a phase I dose-escalation study.

267 heres has been shown to be safe in a phase 1 dose-escalation study.

268 x 10(7) cells, or 1.8-2.4 x 10(8) cells in a dose-escalation study.

269 Dose escalation to 22.5 mg/week was allowed after 8 week

270 llowed by the addition of venetoclax (weekly dose escalation to 400 mg once daily).

271 dard RT dose 68.0 Gy to the primary tumor or dose escalation to 73.1 Gy.

272 During phase 1a, TY014 dose escalation to a maximum of 20 mg per kilogram of bo

273 Dose escalation to rectal indometacin 200 mg did not con

274 nation was well tolerated, which allowed for dose escalation to the highest planned dose level (topot

275 vide heretofore unrealized opportunities for dose escalation to the tumor bed, capabilities that prom

276 new long acting opioid prescriptions, or new dose escalations to > 100 mg OME).

277 Lenalidomide dose escalation (to 5 mg or 10 mg per day) was permitted

278 te currently in a phase 1/2a first-in-humans dose escalation trial for patients with relapsed CD37-po

279 Phase 1 dose escalation trial.

280 This open-label, single-centre, phase 1a, dose-escalation trial (part of the JAVELIN Solid Tumor t

281 We conducted a first-in-human, phase 1 dose-escalation trial of autologous macrophage therapy i

282 tients enrolled on dose level 1 in a phase 1 dose-escalation trial of autologous NKT cells engineered

283 n the phase 1b, open-label and double-blind, dose-escalation trial of ChAd3-EBO-Z in Mali, we recruit

284 andomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-escalation trial of intravenous multipotent adult p

285 A phase 1, placebo-controlled, dose-escalation trial was conducted in 230 healthy adult

286 ouble-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, dose-escalation trial was done at a single research unit

287 nd, phase 1, randomised, placebo-controlled, dose-escalation trial was done at one clinical research

288 ic lymphoma were eligible for this phase 1b, dose-escalation trial.

289 e patients received CAR-BCMA T cells in this dose-escalation trial.

290 o phase 1, placebo-controlled, double-blind, dose-escalation trials of an rVSV-based vaccine candidat

291 ed at our institution on several prospective dose-escalation trials.

292 asol and compared the two dosing strategies (dose escalation vs standard dose).

293 A cell dose escalation was conducted, starting at 10(7) total c

294 Superiority for dose escalation was declared if the one-sided p value wi

295 Dose escalation was not permitted in either group.

296 Dose escalation was performed from 104 to 107 TCID50 (50

297 Phase 1 dose escalation was performed with a 3 + 3 design to est

298 The primary objective of part A (dose escalation) was to assess the safety of daily oral

299 applications of SIT require a long period of dose escalation with soluble antigen (Ag) and carry a si

300 36 of whom received combination therapy with dose escalation, with a median follow-up of 7.1 months (