ライフサイエンスコーパス: long-term toxicity

1 GBCA administration, raising concerns about long term toxicity.

2 focus on striking a balance between cure and long term toxicity.

3 to increase the efficacy and reduce possible long-term toxicity.

4 ate cancer management but causes substantial long-term toxicity.

5 e and additional treatment without increased long-term toxicity.

6 ression-free survival, overall survival, and long-term toxicity.

7 benefit beyond the end of treatment, and low long-term toxicity.

8 aft acceptance without significant short- or long-term toxicity.

9 served breast-without increasing the risk of long-term toxicity.

10 eoadjuvant approach, without any increase in long-term toxicity.

11 ous administration of these drugs may elicit long-term toxicity.

12 preferred in patients with IGHV-UM, to limit long-term toxicity.

13 to control the inflammation while incurring long-term toxicity.

14 ted therapies with acceptable short-term and long-term toxicity.

15 s immunologic response did not result in any long-term toxicity.

16 phasing-out stavudine because of its risk of long-term toxicity.

17 ould be to minimize the risk for relapse and long-term toxicity.

18 as surrogate measures for treatment-related long-term toxicity.

19 Pb-L2 was also evaluated for dose-escalated, long-term toxicity.

20 ellent survival but often confer significant long-term toxicity.

21 resholds usually associated with significant long-term toxicity.

22 biodistribution in vital organs, or unknown long-term toxicity.

23 uses), and deliver immunosuppression without long-term toxicity.

24 s and may spontaneously reverse with minimal long-term toxicity.

25 before Gd can deposit in the body and cause long-term toxicity.

26 s in diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of long-term toxicity.

27 ce, survival (disease-free and overall), and long-term toxicity.

28 ials using cisplatin-based therapy with less long-term toxicity.

29 ce mortality, but have associated short- and long-term toxicities.

30 t-lived but also generally have only limited long-term toxicities.

31 racy of treatment delivery and reductions in long-term toxicities.

32 s is not optimal due to emerging evidence of long-term toxicities.

33 Survivors have significant long-term toxicities.

34 ssues and the corresponding lack of short or long-term toxicities.

35 adly, and the therapy carries short-term and long-term toxicities.

36 Available data on long-term toxicity after RT for cHL mostly refer to RT t

37 The continuous treatment leads to long-term toxicities and can profoundly suppress protect

38 mphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL), short-term and long-term toxicities and chemoresistance are shortcoming

39 owever, further studies are needed to assess long-term toxicity and clinical efficacy.

40 that exposure route significantly influences long-term toxicity and highlight the importance of consi

41 Significant short-term and long-term toxicity and increases in fluconazole-resistan

42 iation results in high cure rates but causes long-term toxicity and may represent overtreatment of so

43 rapy and radiation often come at the cost of long-term toxicity and morbidity.

44 ignancies, toxicities in cellular therapies, long-term toxicity and survivorship in haematological ma

45 with B cell malignancies, often with minimal long-term toxicities, and are probably curative for a su

46 on, residual concerns about costs, potential long-term toxicities, and behavioral disinhibition.

47 red to assess the character and frequency of long-term toxicities, and to provide insights into the b

48 ent efficacy and treatment-induced acute and long-term toxicity, and we discuss the complex and inter

49 heir susceptibilities to drug resistance and long term toxicity are serious impediments to their use,

50 Survival and long term toxicity are still being evaluated with longer

51 Acute and long-term toxicities are acceptable.

52 nt trials that attempt to decrease acute and long-term toxicity are reviewed.

53 ace of scarce organ supply, or prevention of long-term toxicity associated with immunosuppression.

54 s are cleared from body without any acute or long-term toxicity at a dose of 100 mg kg(-1) .

55 ntation in young adults means that issues of long-term toxicity become especially important in judgin

56 However, short- and long-term toxicities can make these interventions prohib

57 -Pro-labeled cells demonstrated no short- or long-term toxicity, changes in differentiation capacity

58 mproved DFS, but not OS, with no increase in long-term toxicity, compared with RT alone for resected,

59 nfavorable long-lasting metabolite with some long-term toxicity concerns) in rats.

60 oice for patients with CML in chronic phase; long-term toxicity continues to be assessed, and data su

61 The administered activities were high, and long-term toxicity effects (</=60 wk) were clear.

62 phasis on the need for more data to evaluate long-term toxicity effects, no suitable affinity reagent

63 ed 5-year follow-up sensitivity analysis and long-term toxicity findings.

64 were to: prioritise and define unacceptable long-term toxicity for patients with childhood acute lym

65 ty sparing surgery and decrease of acute and long-term toxicities from treatment were important crite

66 revention of chronic diseases, assessment of long-term toxicity from HAART, and surveillance for addi

67 We aimed to describe long-term toxicity from modern limited-field (LF)-RT aft

68 th-related risk is their cancer, rather than long-term toxicity from radiopharmaceutical therapies.

69 nal cancer, in an effort to reduce acute and long-term toxicity from radiotherapy.

70 nal radiation is associated with significant long-term toxicities has led to the development of novel

71 chieve stable therapeutic expression without long-term toxicity in adults with hemophilia.

72 iosafety profiles should be used to decrease long-term toxicity in cases where systemic exposure occu

73 fe-threatening acute toxicities, and serious long-term toxicities, including cardiomyopathy, pulmonar

74 e raised concerns about potential short- and long-term toxicities, including cardiovascular toxicitie

75 l ganglia-mediated learning and suggest that long-term toxicity induced by METH alters the cognitive

76 The major long-term toxicity is chronic graft-versus-host disease

77 imens devised for Hodgkin disease in adults, long-term toxicity is enhanced in the developing individ

78 There is no evidence that short- or long-term toxicity is increased among obese patients rec

79 erm safety profile but still require careful long-term toxicity monitoring.

80 ated into clinical use, their short-term and long-term toxicity must be thoroughly characterized, esp

81 therapy in patients with LPL, but short- and long-term toxicities need to be carefully weighed agains

82 are highly active in WM, although short- and long-term toxicities need to be carefully weighed agains

83 Long-term toxicities occurred in 2 patients: hypokalemia

84 ilure, and discusses emerging concerns about long term toxicity of these factors.

85 The long-term toxicities of chemotherapy and radiotherapy ca

86 Given the substantial long-term toxicities of current combination therapy regi

87 esulted largely from uncertainties about the long-term toxicities of such complexes, due in part to t

88 germ cell tumors need to be developed, while long-term toxicities of therapies need to be further mod

89 uidelines to reduce the risk of sex-specific long-term toxicities of therapy.

90 prove our ability to identify short-term and long-term toxicities of these new agents.

91 rrent progressive disease, and the acute and long-term toxicities of this option should be carefully

92 ion tomography may reduce the short-term and long-term toxicities of treatment of early-stage nonbulk

93 relapsed/refractory disease and considerable long-term toxicities of treatment.

94 ort a 15-month toxicity study that showed no long-term toxicity of AuNRs in vivo.

95 However, long-term toxicity of SiNPs remains unknown.

96 udies will help us understand the short- and long-term toxicity of targeted alpha-therapy and potenti

97 Long-term toxicity of therapy also remains significant.

98 iotherapy and to describe the short-term and long-term toxicity of therapy.

99 A major concern has been the long-term toxicity of treatment, most of which is attrib

100 No evidence of increased risk of long-term toxicity or long-term adverse consequences of

101 in cure but may increase risk for acute and long-term toxicities, particularly in children.

102 e field must address key concerns, including long-term toxicity, particularly the risk of secondary m

103 controlled drug delivery applications, their long-term toxicity profile following intravenous adminis

104 Study results show that TACE has a favorable long-term toxicity profile in patients with HCC.

105 has high efficacy and a favorable acute and long-term toxicity profile when administered to patients

106 ation is the treatment associated with worse long-term toxicity profile with a wide range of complica

107 ucing durable responses and with a favorable long-term toxicity profile.

108 effects and that CocH5-Fc(M6) itself has no long-term toxicity regarding behavioral activities such

109 tic leukemia (ALL) to 90%, but its impact on long-term toxicity remains unknown.

110 Minimizing long-term toxicity risks associated with additional radi

111 phrotoxicity, highlighting the importance of long-term toxicity studies and microscale dosimetry.

112 Long-term toxicity studies confirmed that the dose-limit

113 Long-term toxicity studies in healthy, immunocompetent C

114 A long-term toxicity study revealed severe kidney damage e

115 e exposure system development for short- and long-term toxicity tests for soil (Procedure 2) and aqua

116 inical toxicities, 1843U89 may present fewer long-term toxicities than D1694.

117 is combination treatment can cause acute and long term toxicity that can limit its use in older patie

118 DNA damage at low L1:iron ratios may lead to long-term toxicities that might preclude administration

119 de-effects often lead to secondary short and long-term toxicities that negatively impact patient's qu

120 To increase cure rates and decrease long-term toxicity, there is great interest in incorpora

121 oid non-specific background fluorescence and long-term toxicity, they need to be cleared from the bod

122 e optimized for efficacy and minimization of long-term toxicity, through dosimetry, and adapted to ea

123 Methamphetamine causes long-term toxicity to dopamine nerve endings of the stri

124 eptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT) may induce long-term toxicity to the bone marrow (BM).

125 all survival were calculated, and short- and long-term toxicity was assessed according to National Ca

126 Long-term toxicity was assessed in mice for 12 mo.

127 Short- and long-term toxicity was documented (Common Terminology Cr

128 Short-term and long-term toxicities were similar to historical control

129 lls along with cell viability and short- and long-term toxicity were evaluated.

130 r head and neck cancer (HNC) has significant long-term toxicity with elective neck irradiation (ENI)

131 However, immunogenic response and long-term toxicity with the use of viral vectors remain

132 uestion is whether the risk of immediate and long-term toxicity with use of busulfan is justified, pa

133 ensity for patients with p16+ OPC can reduce long-term toxicity without compromising survival is comp