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 an potentially be applied to improve the AAV gene transfer efficiency.
2 h safer than viral vectors, suffers from low gene transfer efficiency.
3  transcription, cation channel activity, and gene transfer efficiency.
4 al of immunoglobulins in non-CF BAL restored gene transfer efficiency.
5 on the apical surface significantly increase gene transfer efficiency.
6 d via a non-CAR pathway, with enhancement of gene transfer efficiency.
7 e where fiber receptors are located increase gene transfer efficiency.
8 rowth factor combinations to further improve gene transfer efficiency.
9 e peptide dramatically influence the in vivo gene transfer efficiency.
10 hieved limited success partly because of low gene transfer efficiency.
11 g DNA or siRNA concentration in NPs improved gene transfer efficiency.
12 denoviral vectors because of their excellent gene-transfer efficiency.
13  For beta-thalassemic CD34(+) cells, similar gene transfer efficiencies achieved HbF production rangi
14                                   High-level gene transfer efficiency allowed insertion site analysis
15             The relevant contributions of Ad gene transfer efficiency and inherent 5-FU sensitivity i
16 chment characteristics significantly improve gene transfer efficiency and may expand the tissues amen
17 ation showed gene transfer but with distinct gene transfer efficiency and patterns when different del
18 mitations to gene therapy using HSCs are low gene transfer efficiency and the inability of most thera
19 e TIRFA mouse should allow prediction of AAV gene transfer efficiency and the study of AAV vector bio
20                      We examined the in vivo gene transfer efficiency and tissue or cell tropism of a
21 g reduced-intensity conditioning and varying gene transfer efficiency and vector copy number, we asse
22 lay tropism for human hepatocytes, increased gene transfer efficiency, and neutralizing antibody evas
23                         This report compares gene transfer efficiencies as well as durations and leve
24 conditions have resulted in stable long-term gene transfer efficiency as high as 15-20% to primitive
25 al surface did not significantly improve AdV gene transfer efficiency because the lumenal surface gly
26 n, our data show considerable differences in gene transfer efficiency between individual baboons, sug
27                         Attempts to increase gene transfer efficiency by increasing nonspecific attac
28 w PEG length, linkage and location influence gene transfer efficiency, detailed PK, biodistribution a
29     However, the inability to achieve a high gene transfer efficiency, even in mice with a deletion o
30                                         High gene transfer efficiencies have been difficult to achiev
31 ven in GPI-hCAR transgenic mice but that the gene transfer efficiency improved in the absence of Muc1
32  with the filovirus pseudotypes, we compared gene transfer efficiency in immortalized airway epitheli
33 ntibodies directed to human AAVs and because gene transfer efficiency in muscle was similar to that o
34                                              Gene transfer efficiency in primary T lymphocytes of up
35 understanding of what limits nonviral vector gene transfer efficiency in vivo has resulted in more so
36 s as templates, exemplified by improving CNS gene transfer efficiency in vivo.
37                However, currently attainable gene transfer efficiencies into human HSCs are unlikely
38                                              Gene transfer efficiency into hematopoietic repopulating
39                 In an attempt to improve our gene transfer efficiency into hematopoietic stem cells a
40 Vs) are relatively safe and demonstrate high gene transfer efficiency, low immunogenicity, stable lon
41 d in a Rev-independent packaging system, had gene transfer efficiencies nearly equivalent to those pr
42                                              Gene transfer efficiencies of >50% into primary lymphocy
43                                Nevertheless, gene transfer efficiencies of longer-shafted Ad vectors
44                                 Finally, the gene transfer efficiencies of RRV/FIV after direct appli
45 hern blot analysis in one animal confirmed a gene transfer efficiency of between 1% and 5%.
46 ral gene delivery methods are limited by low gene transfer efficiency, they benefit from relative saf
47  number and 3.5-fold and 3-fold increases in gene transfer efficiency to HeLa cells and J774 cells, r
48 ll gene therapy has long been limited by low gene transfer efficiency to hematopoietic stem cells.
49 MGMTP140K) has been proposed to overcome low gene transfer efficiency to HSCs.
50  study, we demonstrate that low AdV-mediated gene transfer efficiency to well-differentiated (WD) cul
51 tomatitis virus-G envelope produced the best gene transfer efficiency, transducing greater than 90% o
52 s infection and a dose-dependent decrease in gene transfer efficiency upon JNK inhibition.
53                                   High-level gene transfer efficiency was achieved in murine models i
54                                              Gene transfer efficiency was determined by flow cytometr
55                                      Overall gene transfer efficiency was higher with the GALVpseudot
56 ted intrathymically into wild-type mice, and gene transfer efficiency was monitored.
57                                              Gene transfer efficiency was several log orders greater
58  infected epithelial cell cultures with high gene transfer efficiency when applied to the apical surf
59 n preclinical models, significantly enhances gene transfer efficiency while retaining the safety adva
60                                   The higher gene transfer efficiency with the GALV-pseudotyped vecto
61 tment for cystic fibrosis is limited by poor gene transfer efficiency with vectors applied to the api