ライフサイエンスコーパス: effective dose

1 t 60 mg/m(2) (designated as the biologically effective dose).

2 docetaxel, allowing a four-fold reduction in effective dose.

3 MBq for (64)CuCl2 translated into a 5.7-mSv effective dose.

4 mg once daily, the aim is to use the lowest effective dose.

5 ever, 11 induces hypertriglyceridemia at its effective dose.

6 at most 4% in both organ-absorbed doses and effective dose.

7 ng a reduction of the chemotherapeutic agent effective dose.

8 ses the focus should be on using the minimum effective dose.

9 ing technical dose descriptors and estimated effective dose.

10 ternal radiation dosimetry and the subjects' effective dose.

11 d regimens significantly reduced the overall effective dose.

12 should continue to receive it in the lowest effective dose.

13 e liver and bone marrow doses as well as the effective dose.

14 weighting factors were used to calculate the effective dose.

15 twice daily, which were earlier shown to be effective doses.

16 and derived dose equivalencies from the 95% effective doses.

17 ithout significant normal tissue toxicity at effective doses.

18 in mice with no apparent side effects at the effective doses.

19 re safe and associated with low absorbed and effective doses.

20 onfidence interval, 1.4-3.5) for patients on effective doses.

21 al dose-length product (DLP) was 746 mGy cm (effective dose, 11.2 mSv), with a range of 307-1497 mGy

22 P of 200 mGy cm or lower (a "reduced dose") (effective dose, 3 mSv), and only 10% of institutions kep

23 11.2 mSv), with a range of 307-1497 mGy cm (effective dose, 4.6-22.5 mSv) for mean DLPs.

24 Radiation dosimetry was favorable (effective dose, 5.2 muSv/MBq).

25 ed relative potency of 454 IU/mg and minimal effective dose 50% (MED50%) of 3.0 pM at a constant amou

26 10% of institutions kept DLP at 400 mGy cm (effective dose, 6 mSv) or less in at least 50% of patien

27 mum inhibitory concentration and the in vivo effective dose 99 in mice.

28 The wide range of effective dose, a broad treatment window and long-lastin

29 The mean effective doses (all subjects, men and women) were 34.1

30 ex (CTDIvol), dose-length product (DLP), and effective dose, along with the interquartile range (IQR)

31 IPV shows promise as a means to decrease the effective dose and cost of IPV, but prior studies, all u

32 by the absence of studies defining the most effective dose and dose-response latency for targeting t

33 indings provide initial evidence of the most effective dose and dose-test interval for future experim

34 Maternal effective dose and embryo/fetal dose from 256-slice CTPA

35 Estimated 2016 total collective effective dose and radiation dose per capita dose are lo

36 Both the effective dose and the bladder dose can be reduced by fr

37 PDD reduced the effective dose and toxicity of LAmB and resulted in elic

38 es the antidepressant action at behaviorally effective doses and suggest that the rapid change in cyc

39 The 95% effective doses and the doses equivalent to 1 mg of oral

40 on on the potential source of dermal NO, the effective doses and wavelengths, the responsiveness of d

41 , was 0.99 mSv (21% reduction) for patients (effective dose) and 0.015 uGy (97% reduction) for physic

42 rmine the maximum tolerated and biologically effective dose, and identify the recommended phase 2 dos

43 Distributions for DLP and effective dose are reported for single-phase examination

44 Measured absorbed doses and effective doses are comparable to other previously repor

45 Uncertainty values of effective doses are lower in comparison to absorbed dose

46 These effective doses are somewhat higher than earlier publish

47 s acceptable individual organ and whole-body effective doses, as well as modest tumor-to-background r

48 Effective dose at different anatomical levels with the d

49 performed in 69 patients, for whom radiation effective dose averaged 0.99 mSv and study duration, 117

50 The mean effective dose averaged over both men and women (+/- SD)

51 The effective dose equivalent and effective dose averages were lower in adolescents than y

52 The effective dose based on 150 MBq of (68)Ga-pentixafor was

53 The calculated effective dose, based on extrapolation of mouse data, wa

54 nd, second, a maximal tolerated biologically effective dose (BED(max)) for organs at risk (OARs) in t

55 on of the AAs and calculating tumor biologic effective dose (BED) along the normal-organ MTBED limits

56 BRT; 6 MV photons) were used in biologically effective dose (BED) calculations.

57 esion absorbed dose (AD) metrics, biological effective dose (BED) metrics, equivalent uniform dose, a

58 , liver, spleen, and red marrow biologically effective doses (BEDs) for a maximal kidney BED (20 Gy2.

59 The Biologically Effective Doses (BEDs) of nanoparticles, the dose entity

60 nt patient resulted in a 30% higher maternal effective dose but a 3.4-6 times lower embryo/fetal dose

61 values showed a deviation comparable to the effective dose calculated in this study.

62 Absorbed dose to the bladder and the effective dose can be reduced significantly by frequent

63 The effective dose can be reduced to 4.5 +/- 0.30 mSv (at 30

64 The average effective dose coefficient was 5.1 mSv.

65 However, maternal effective dose considerably increased with body size, wh

66 distribution, and elimination), whereas the effective dose delivered is dependent on the delivery sy

67 he liver results in highly variable biologic effective doses depending on the modality used: a biolog

68 The estimated radiation effective dose determined from whole-body studies was 0.

69 Administration at effective doses did not change plasma damage markers or

70 ed in severely affected animals, whereas all effective doses disrupted development of Shh-dependent t

71 The estimated human effective dose due to (124)I-BTT-1023 was 0.55 mSv/MBq,

72 The annual effective dose due to intake of (210)Po, (238)U, (232)Th

73 The committed effective doses due to (210)Po from ingestion of honey f

74 se per slice, dose-length product (DLP), and effective dose (E).

75 ells was activated by dopamine with a median effective dose (EC50 ) of 1.34 muM.

76 sed TMT-induced fear behaviors with a median effective dose (ED(50)) of 4 mg/kg.

77 The conventional calculation of effective dose (ED) for computed tomography (CT) is base

78 d to determine the organ doses (ODs) and the effective dose (ED) to humans.

79 quality, coronary segment interpretability, effective dose (ED), and diagnostic accuracy were assess

80 (CTDIv), dose length product (DLP), and the effective dose (ED), and image quality parameters includ

81 over the parent design in vivo with a median effective dose (ED50) of 1 mg/kg following a single dose

82 g efficiency in excess of 90%, with a median effective dose (ED50) of 1.5nM, whereas the maximum gene

83 The effective dose equivalent and effective dose averages we

84 ection of 555 MBq (15 mCi) will result in an effective dose equivalent of 5.9 mSv (0.59 rem) and a lu

85 (51)Mn in an adult human male would yield an effective dose equivalent of approximately 13.5 mSv, rou

86 Median effective dose equivalent of inhalational anesthetics du

87 tional badge doses (lens dose equivalent and effective dose equivalent values) for medical staff perf

88 ) (median [interquartile range])-fold median effective dose equivalent versus 0.57 (0.45-0.64)-fold m

89 The effective dose equivalent was 0.0106 mSv/MBq (0.0392 rem

90 and female phantoms, respectively), and the effective dose equivalent was 6.9 +/- 0.6 and 8.7 +/- 0.

91 uivalent versus 0.57 (0.45-0.64)-fold median effective dose equivalent was associated with lower odds

92 A whole-body effective dose estimate of 0.003 mSv/MBq was observed.

93 owed a favorable radiation dosimetry with an effective dose estimate of 0.0045 mSv/MBq, resulting in

94 The effective dose estimated for patient-specific (124)I-MIB

95 scans can be reduced to 3 without affecting effective dose estimates.

96 The authors identified 95% effective doses, explored whether higher or lower doses

97 The mean effective dose for (11)C-MK-8278 was 5.4 +/- 1.1 muSv/MB

98 The mean effective dose for (11)C-nicotine was 5.44 +/- 0.67 muSv

99 s depending on the modality used: a biologic effective dose for 50% (BED50) of 115, 93, and 250 Gy fo

100 was determined for each light level, and the effective dose for 50% suppression (ED(50)) was computed

101 Treatment by MEAN at an effective dose for 6 wk was well tolerated by animals.

102 e to model the equivalent organ dose and the effective dose for a 70-kg man.

103 The effective dose for a typical 100-MBq administration of (

104 The effective dose for a typical 200-MBq administration of (

105 Results: The mean total effective dose for adults was very low (0.71 +/- 0.07 mS

106 dose index volume, dose-length product, and effective dose for ASiR CT (3.0 +/- 2.0 mGy, 148 +/- 85

107 ch and show a significant improvement in the effective dose for both the Alexa fluorescence assay and

108 The average effective dose for coronary CTA was calculated as 1.11 m

109 unit exposure (0.04% versus 0.02% per 1-mSv effective dose for females versus males, respectively; P

110 c changes of the maternal body increases the effective dose for some radiotracers.

111 Results: The average whole-body effective dose for the experimental radiopharmaceutical

112 The median effective dose for the investigative protocol was 0.04 m

113 The estimated mean effective dose for whole-body PET/CT amounted to 17.6 +/

114 )Rb, (86)Y, and (124)I) and the absorbed and effective doses for 21 positron-emitting labeled radiotr

115 lating the uncertainty of absorbed doses and effective doses for 7 radiopharmaceuticals.

116 Dosimetry calculations found that effective doses for [(55)Co]Co-DOTATATE were comparable

117 rolled cortical impact injury, we determined effective doses for candesartan and telmisartan, their t

118 Median effective doses for single-phase, multiphase, and all ex

119 The effective doses for the standard male and female phantom

120 The estimated mean effective-dose for whole-body PET/CT amounted to 17.6+/-

121 rom 10 to 200 pmol drastically decreased the effective dose from 0.0908 to 0.0184 mSv/MBq and decreas

122 ion, the U.S. annual individual (per capita) effective dose from diagnostic and interventional medica

123 010 an average herder received an integrated effective dose from incorporated (137)Cs of about 18 mSv

124 The effective dose, from (210)Po ingested by total diet, acc

125 However, a protocol effective dose >20 mSv was proposed as a level requiring

126 apies, yet prominent side effects of BETi at effective doses have been reported in phase I clinical t

127 sociated with notable toxicity at clinically effective doses, highlighting the need for better unders

128 Volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) and effective dose in 274 124 head, chest, and abdominal CT

129 inhibitory concentration and the in vivo 99% effective dose in mice, establishing in vitro and in viv

130 rability and therefore the ability to attain effective doses in some patients.

131 The 90% effective doses in the in vivo efficacy models were 3.7

132 e associated with side effects that preclude effective dosing in many patients [8].

133 namic analyses to determine the biologically effective dose included all patients for whom samples we

134 Biodistribution and measured effective dose indicate that (11)C-laniquidar is a safe

135 s indicated its lower cytotoxicity and lower effective dose inducing maximal reactivation, might be a

136 t, albeit with 4-fold potency reduction (the effective dose inhibiting 50% of the Ang II-induced maxi

137 l to one where using the smallest clinically effective dose is best.

138 The (64)CuCl2 effective dose is like those of other established PET tr

139 In particular, the effective dose is not appreciably different from those o

140 e therapy in kidney transplant recipients is effective, dosing is conventionally adjusted empirically

141 Although method B increases the amount of effective dose, it provides high diagnostic quality imag

142 sure was defined as those procedures with an effective dose </=1 mSv.

143 An imaging protocol with effective dose </=3 mSv is considered very low risk, not

144 ations, doses higher than the identified 95% effective doses may on average not provide more efficacy

145 nteractions were found between assignment to effective dose medication and publication year (t260=-5.

146 9, r=0.52, P=.001), while the mean change in effective dose medication arms decreased significantly (

147 F) 2.5x above the in vitro IC(50) at minimum effective doses (MEDs) of 3 mg/kg in preclinical anxiety

148 dose (+/-SD) was 4.5 +/- 0.5 muSv.MBq(-1)The effective dose of (11)C-GMOM is at the lower end of the

149 inistration of (124)I-MIBG, we estimated the effective dose of (124)I-MIBG.

150 The effective dose of (18)F-LSN3316612 in humans was calcula

151 The effective dose of (18)F-PF-06684511 was 0.043 mSv/MBq fo

152 lin sensitivity in DIO mice with a minimally effective dose of 0.01 mg/kg.

153 Dosimetry calculations revealed a mean effective dose of 0.029 +/- 0.06 mSv/MBq, with the highe

154 exposure (inhalation) that would lead to an effective dose of 0.1 Sv in the first year.

155 Injection of (111)In-ABY-025 yielded a mean effective dose of 0.15 mSv/MBq and was safe, well tolera

156 This corresponded to an effective dose of 0.22 mSv and 0.1 mSv.

157 r, kidney, and marrow, respectively, with an effective dose of 0.41 mSv/MBq (1.5 rem/mCi).

158 all (1.22 +/- 0.16 mGy/MBq), with an average effective dose of 0.54 +/- 0.07 mSv/MBq.

159 ly answered the clinical question for a mean effective dose of 0.97+/-0.34 mSv.

160 6-slice CTPA exposure resulted in a maternal effective dose of 1 mSv and an embryo/fetal dose of 0.05

161 be safely administered and results in a mean effective dose of 12.8 +/- 0.6 muSv/MBq.

162 An effective dose of 20 mSv or higher was delivered by 14%

163 of 38.5%, and a suitable dosimetry profile (effective dose of 20.5-24.5 muSv/MBq).

164 of 150 MBq of (68)Ga-PSMA I&T resulted in an effective dose of 3.0 mSv.

165 Bq/m(2)/cycle with a maximal kidney biologic effective dose of 37 Gy.

166 (90)Y-DOTATOC with a maximal kidney biologic effective dose of 37 Gy.

167 The total examination had an average effective dose of 5.0 mSv.

168 exposure: median total fluoroscopy time and effective dose of 6.08 (1.51-12.36) minutes and 2.15 (0.

169 nificent antioxidant property with a minimum effective dose of 66 muM during the biochemical assessme

170 0-MBq injection of BAY 86-7548 results in an effective dose of 7.7 mSv, which could be reduced to 5.7

171 598+/-76 mGyxcm resulting in an approximate effective dose of 8.4+/-1.1 mSv.

172 not reduced by administration of a maximally effective dose of a TRPV1 antagonist.

173 teractive web-response system to receive the effective dose of apomorphine sublingual film or matchin

174 ses between 0.008 and 0.015 mSv/MBq, with an effective dose of approximately 0.014 mSv/MBq.

175 2013, would have received a total committed effective dose of approximately 0.95 mSv a(-1) from comb

176 d activity of 400 MBq corresponds to a total effective dose of approximately 1.5 mSv.

177 Identifying a lower effective dose of bevacizumab may reduce the risk for ne

178 Subsequently, a sub-effective dose of biperiden was able to facilitate the e

179 T/MRI including their clinical relevance and effective dose of both modalities were investigated.

180 /MRI, including their clinical relevance and effective dose of both modalities, were investigated.

181 rate, which determines both the duration and effective dose of factor release.

182 , the clock controls a rhythm in the minimum effective dose of glyphosate.

183 In summary, FUS was required to deliver an effective dose of IVIg to promote hippocampal neurogenes

184 trast, ascorbate supplementation lowered the effective dose of JQ1 needed to successfully inhibit mel

185 The dosimetry study provided an effective dose of less than 0.30 mSv/MBq, with the gallb

186 ty may be reduced to 50 MBq, resulting in an effective dose of less than 1 mSv for the PET examinatio

187 he pain and inhibited CPP induced both by an effective dose of morphine and by a sub-threshold dose o

188 and heart function were not observed at the effective dose of naproxcinod.

189 Effective dose of Pu were calculated using the data of P

190 We evaluated the cumulative effective dose of radiation from all radiation examinati

191 molecules and, as a consequence, lowers the effective dose of SSRIs.

192 gy should also contribute to determining the effective dose of tea polyphenols in achieving better bo

193 The mean daily effective dose of terlipressin was lower in the TERLI-IN

194 utic doxorubicin reduces the therapeutically effective dose of the drug by more than an order of magn

195 The effective dose of the PET scan was estimated by multiply

196 exposure of released TLZ from a single safe, effective dose of the prodrug exceeded that of oral TLZ

197 Conclusion: Effective doses of (99m)Tc-PSMA I&S were comparable to t

198 Radiation dosimetry was acceptable, with effective doses of 9.5 muSv/MBq (intravenous administrat

199 Because the effective doses of aspirin are consistent with the inhib

200 gies of ionic liquids, we report delivery of effective doses of siRNA into skin.

201 improve patient outcomes by increasing the "effective dose" of HSCs.

202 has been little investigation into the most effective dose or delivery form.

203 The calculated effective dose over all subjects (mean +/- SD) was 0.029

204 nt of ABSSSIs at the 200-mg dose, the lowest effective dose, over a mean of 6.4 days of therapy.

205 The effective dose per a 100-MBq administered activity of (1

206 The mean effective dose per patient was 0.9 mSv/MBq (SD, 0.3 mSv/

207 Effective doses predicted for LDCT may exceed those used

208 hievable in patients and provide a plausibly effective dose range for initial phase 2 clinical studie

209 Total body effective dose ranged between 3.33-4.42 and 3.11-4.23 mS

210 o setting is crucial to identify potentially effective dosing regimens of hydroxychloroquine.

211 The effective dose (+/-SD) was 4.5 +/- 0.5 muSv.MBq(-1)The e

212 The mean effective dose (+/-SD) was estimated to be 4.6 +/- 0.3 m

213 cts are dose related; therefore, the minimum effective dose should be used.

214 Ranolazine at therapeutically effective dose significantly recruited muscle microvascu

215 fIPV appears to be an effective dose-sparing strategy for routine immunisation

216 Mean effective dose (+/- standard deviation) was 0.16 +/- 0.0

217 ns were then performed to identify minimally effective dosing strategies to protect lower female geni

218 eroids should always aim to reach the lowest effective dose that gives the patient good asthma contro

219 ent toxicity, such that at a therapeutically effective dose there were no pathologic changes in the g

220 the specific absorbed dose (or biologically effective dose), they may also be related to discrete tu

221 Here, we characterized the effective dose, timing, and proximity of saliva and SGE

222 y/MBq (0.473 rad/mCi), respectively, and the effective dose to 0.0149 mSv/MBq (0.0551 rem/mCi) or 0.0

223 tepping down asthma treatment to the minimum effective dose to achieve symptom control, prevent adver

224 peutic small interfering RNAs (siRNAs) in an effective dose to articular cartilage is very challengin

225 function and serum ferritin, use the lowest effective dose to maintain acceptable body iron burden,

226 (0.4 g/kg), to the hippocampus and reach an effective dose to reduce amyloid plaque pathology and pr

227 re determined from time-activity curves, and effective doses to individual organs and the whole body

228 The committed effective doses to individuals of three population group

229 measure the radiation dose and estimate the effective doses to pediatric patients during CT for ches

230 d cumulated activity, and calculation of the effective dose using OLINDA (v1.1).

231 to estimate whole-body and individual organ effective dose, using OLINDA/EXM, version 1.0.

232 Effective dose values for procedures were obtained from

233 es ranged from 1003.7 to 1192.5 mGy, and the effective dose varied from 2.4 to 3.7 mSv.

234 Effective doses varied from 0.03 to 69.2 mSv per scan.

235 The average radiation effective dose was 0.0055 mSv/MBq with the RADAR manual

236 ased on estimations from rat data, the human effective dose was 0.0105 mSv/MBq.

237 The calculated effective dose was 0.0141 mSv/MBq when using a 3.5-h voi

238 The effective dose was 0.015 mSv/MBq, leading to a radiation

239 The effective dose was 0.021 mSv/MBq for males and 0.027 mSv

240 The mean effective dose was 0.022 mSv/MBq (range, 0.020-0.024 mSv

241 dy dose was 0.011 +/- 0.011 mGy/MBq, and the effective dose was 0.023 +/- 0.012 mSv/MBq.

242 ults: In cohort A (n = 5), the average total effective dose was 0.023 mSv/MBq.

243 The effective dose was 0.025 mSv/MBq (0.0922 rem/mCi).

244 The effective dose was 0.0258 mSv/MBq (SD, 0.0034 mSv/MBq).

245 The mean effective dose was 0.026 +/- 0.0012 mSv/MBq.

246 Total effective dose was 0.030 +/- 0.003 mSv/MBq for LD and 0.

247 The calculated effective dose was 0.032 +/- 0.0034 mSv/MBq.

248 The effective dose was 0.0326 +/- 0.0018 mSv/MBq.

249 The estimated effective dose was 0.035 mSv/MBq.

250 The effective dose was 0.043 mSv/MBq, resulting in an averag

251 The mean effective dose was 0.051 mSv/MBq.

252 The mean effective dose was 1.02 mSv +/- 0.51.

253 The calculated mean effective dose was 12.8 +/- 0.6 muSv/MBq.

254 The mean effective dose was 2.07E-02 mSv/MBq.

255 The estimated effective dose was 2.32 +/- 0.32 mSv for an injected dos

256 The calculated effective dose was 2.4E-02 +/- 0.2E-02 mSv/MBq, correspo

257 Overall median cumulative effective dose was 2.7 mSv (range, 0.1-76.9 mSv), and th

258 dose V(T) Results: The average (mean +/- SD) effective dose was 22.0 +/- 1.0 muSv/MBq.

259 The whole-body effective dose was 33.3 +/- 2.1 muSv/MBq for an adult fe

260 The calculated effective dose was 38 +/- 4 muSv/MBq, with the urinary b

261 Mean effective dose was 4.3 +/- 0.3 mSv/patient (range, 3.7-4

262 The mean effective dose was 75% and 108% higher (0.92 mSv +/- 0.3

263 Similar to other (18)F-labeled ligands, the effective dose was about 23 muSv/MBq.

264 The estimated whole-body radiation effective dose was approximately 0.023 mSv/MBq.

265 Radiation effective dose was calculated from administered and resi

266 g examinations was tabulated, and cumulative effective dose was calculated in millisieverts.

267 The mean effective dose was calculated using the male and female

268 e individual and mean organ residence times; effective dose was calculated with OLINDA 1.1.

269 Effective dose was calculated.

270 The whole-body effective dose was determined to be 33.3+/-2.1 muSv/MBq

271 The (18)F-MNI-659 effective dose was estimated at 0.024 mSv/MBq.

272 bsorbed body dose was low (<7 muSv/MBq); the effective dose was estimated at 17 muSv/MBq.

273 The effective dose was estimated at 6.9 mSv for a 370-MBq (1

274 The effective dose was estimated to be 0.017 mSv/MBq.

275 The patient effective dose was estimated to be 0.1-0.22 mSv dependin

276 For 99.815% 100Mo, the increase in effective dose was less than 2% at 6 h after the EOB and

277 w activity of (124)I-MIBG (1.05 MBq/kg), the effective dose was only approximately twice that of (123

278 s reduced to 0.10 +/- 0.012 mSv/MBq, and the effective dose was reduced to 0.015 +/- 0.0010 mSv/MBq.

279 +/- 14.3), and brain (29.4 +/- 5.1), and the effective dose was significantly higher (20%) than after

280 Effective dose was significantly reduced with protocol B

281 The effective dose was, 2.05, 1.8, 1.08 mSv for brain, abdom

282 The average radiation exposure (effective dose) was approximately 0.021 mSv/MBq.

283 BW, CT dose index, dose-length product, and effective dose were analyzed.

284 Organ doses and the whole-body effective dose were calculated using OLINDA 2.0.

285 dose index volume, dose-length product, and effective dose were compared.

286 Effective doses were 0.009 +/- 0.002 and 0.010 +/- 0.003

287 The whole-body and effective doses were 0.012 mGy/MBq and 0.016 mSv/MBq, re

288 Effective doses were 3.41 +/- 0.06 muSv/MBq for (11)C-el

289 Effective doses were above 1 mSv y(-1) in the CEZ, but m

290 The organs with the highest effective doses were bladder wall (2.41E-03 mSv/MBq), fo

291 Mean organ-absorbed doses and effective doses were calculated using OLINDA/EXM.

292 Mean organ-absorbed doses and effective doses were calculated via quantitative image a

293 and the uncertainties of absorbed doses and effective doses were calculated.

294 Mean organ-absorbed doses and effective doses were calculated.

295 Effective doses were estimated by conversion from dose-a

296 Organs with the highest effective doses were the bladder wall (2.41E-03 mSv/MBq)

297 nslope fields results in a more biologically effective dose, which may have the clinical potential to

298 ur dosimetric analysis demonstrated a (64)Cu effective dose within the acceptable range for clinical

299 nergic drug combinations at their respective effective doses without unwanted accumulative side effec

300 a typical injected activity of 555 MBq, the effective dose would be 21.1 +/- 2.2 mSv for the 4.8-h i