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 sion-making about adjuvant therapies in this patient population.
2 nd provide recommended care options for this patient population.
3 ural variability in these metrics within our patient population.
4 oute for improving targeted therapy for this patient population.
5 nt a new potential treatment option for this patient population.
6 esses for improving care in this specialized patient population.
7 strategies to support ART adherence in this patient population.
8 lity and applicability to their practice and patient population.
9 ted T-cell immunotherapy for this vulnerable patient population.
10 red for the individual rather than the broad patient population.
11 despread application of NOAC therapy in this patient population.
12 timal mean arterial pressure-targets in this patient population.
13 ed with the annual influenza vaccine in this patient population.
14 titers with disease in an immunocompromised patient population.
15 ical mechanisms resulting in a heterogeneous patient population.
16 mbining platinum and PARP inhibitors in this patient population.
17 ens and validation has not been done in this patient population.
18 of studying hospital-based outcomes for this patient population.
19 for mitigating developmental delays in this patient population.
20 0 mg daily reduced the odds of MACEs in this patient population.
21 onal risk for poor hospital outcomes in this patient population.
22 roteomics, promises to broaden the responder patient population.
23 esponse to lenalidomide-based therapy in our patient population.
24 to improve the diagnostic strategies in this patient population.
25 nd paclitaxel is minimally effective in this patient population.
26 val CRS and HIPEC is cost effective for this patient population.
27 outcomes of the FANTOM scaffold in a larger patient population.
28 t algorithm for eyelid complications in this patient population.
29 ive LAMP-2B-mediated autophagy to treat this patient population.
30 fter surgery is an important outcome in this patient population.
31 rventions at an early phase in this specific patient population.
32 m 9% to 45% in observational studies in this patient population.
33 diseases are prevalent in this North African patient population.
34 fe and reduced mortality for this vulnerable patient population.
35 ished helping clinicians' management of this patient population.
36 ists and oncologists caring for this growing patient population.
37 ncrease hepcidin might be beneficial in this patient population.
38 manner that may be applied to a much broader patient population.
39 es some of the challenges with managing this patient population.
40 mal individuals, is abnormally large in this patient population.
41 nd provide recommended care options for this patient population.
42 urrent diagnostic practices utilized in this patient population.
43 ine the clinical relevance of change in this patient population.
44 best approach to treatment of this important patient population.
45 have been rarely reported in this important patient population.
46 of sudden cardiac death in the hemodialysis patient population.
47 the management of postoperative pain in this patient population.
48 tend differential outcomes in this important patient population.
49 ion of alternative analgesic methods in this patient population.
50 they also worsened during sleep in the human patient population.
51 ISA was well tolerated in our ill patient population.
52 recommended as first-line treatment for this patient population.
53 consistent with IV daratumumab in a similar patient population.
54 nation therapy may be effective in a broader patient population.
55 may not be necessary to achieve SVR in this patient population.
56 reatment regimen for eradicating HCV in this patient population.
57 as a less toxic alternative to WBRT for this patient population.
58 improve clinical outcomes in this vulnerable patient population.
59 ould be considered a promising agent in this patient population.
60 anti-CD20 antibody, ofatumumab, in a similar patient population.
61 or future studies in this difficult-to-treat patient population.
62 this differed depending on the genotype and patient population.
63 low for improved treatment tolerance in this patient population.
64 eed to be confirmed in studies with a larger patient population.
65 sponse status with an accuracy of 76% in the patient population.
66 oor, specific strategies are needed for this patient population.
67 second-line therapy in this post-hydroxyurea patient population.
68 ial experience with 63 to 69 Gy in a similar patient population.
69 r (SOF)/ledipasvir (LDV) without RBV in this patient population.
70 ical trials for this particularly vulnerable patient population.
71 nt option compared with chemotherapy in this patient population.
72 algorithm for clinicians to help manage this patient population.
73 nd provide recommended care options for this patient population.
74 lapses do occur, especially in the high-risk patient population.
75 round knowledge to understand and treat this patient population.
76 ity and mortality in the HBV/HIV co-infected patient population.
77 rd of care after nephroureterectomy for this patient population.
78 ity in patients of similar background to our patient population.
79 peutic alternative for this post-hydroxyurea patient population.
80 adjunct oral pharmacotherapy trials in this patient population.
81 zing invasive mechanical ventilation in this patient population.
82 ntigen (HLA) molecules, thus stratifying the patient population.
83 of symptoms and impaired functioning in this patient population.
84 immunopatterns in the general nonbiopsied MS patient population.
85 manner that may be applied to a much broader patient population.
86 icial effect of TCZ on cAMR observed in this patient population.
87 tive-pressure mechanical ventilation in this patient population.
88 t with expectations for ruxolitinib and this patient population.
89 meters remain poorly characterized in the US patient population.
90 rug combination maintenance therapy for this patient population.
91 d pathologic complete response (pCR) in this patient population.
92 s they manage bone-related risks within this patient population.
93 volumab monotherapy versus a placebo in this patient population.
94 to a proprioceptive stimulus in a paediatric patient population.
95 ve approaches that should be used in diverse patient populations.
96 of novel insights in alternative diseases or patient populations.
97 c gene mutations linked to cardiomyopathy in patient populations.
98 of MCT1 as a clinical biomarker in relevant patient populations.
99 pneumonias with high specificity in diverse patient populations.
100 phy (DMD), which should be applicable to all patient populations.
101 pecific resources and the needs of different patient populations.
102 osis and longitudinal monitoring of specific patient populations.
103 neuroimmune contributions to chronic pain in patient populations.
104 g-term safety of ubrogepant among unselected patient populations.
105 alidated in prospective studies using larger patient populations.
106 o-PET in animal models as well as in certain patient populations.
107 associated with aspergillosis in vulnerable patient populations.
108 s tested the impact at various scenarios and patient populations.
109 ng clinical phenotypes occurring in distinct patient populations.
110 deline recommendations to treat HCV in these patient populations.
111 ation and require large highly characterized patient populations.
112 terogeneity of IgE sensitization profiles in patient populations.
113 ntially normalizing executive dysfunction in patient populations.
114 monary vascular complications in susceptible patient populations.
115 low- and middle-income clinical settings and patient populations.
116 idity and mortality especially in vulnerable patient populations.
117 S-CoV-2 IgG antibodies by testing 3 distinct patient populations.
118 ange of clinical manifestations in different patient populations.
119 eD in patients with IBD, compared with other patient populations.
120 ciated pneumonia, are common in hospitalized patient populations.
121 o local resources, financial incentives, and patient populations.
122 lication across institutions and for broader patient populations.
123 uggested that it may be effective in certain patient populations.
124 nial response in cohort A in the all-treated-patients population.
125 courage future clinical research with larger patients' population.
126 al adjustment can be made for differences in patient populations across providers so that differences
128 specialist palliative care serve a different patient population along the disease continuum and compl
129 ect to nephrogenic systemic fibrosis in this patient population, although further studies are needed
130 00% clearance of infection, depending on the patient population analysed, the UTI entities included a
131 CLE to detect reactions to food in a larger patient population and analyzed duodenal biopsy samples
132 ble with an excellent safety profile in this patient population and appears to result in improved hep
134 gs, that influence exercise capacity in this patient population and may, ultimately, influence the pr
135 s to define pathophysiologically homogeneous patient populations and as target engagement biomarkers
136 ated with orthostatic intolerance in certain patient populations and can capture clinically significa
138 y, and efficacy of LAmB in a wide variety of patient populations and in different indications, and pr
139 of interventions conducted in heterogeneous patient populations and in real-life clinical practice s
140 revealed marked differences between these 2 patient populations and indicated that patients with rec
142 tation considerations, and data on impact on patient, population and health systems outcomes) are als
143 s 58.1 months (IQR 34.0-74.4) in the overall patient population, and 65.8 months (40.9-82.4) in cohor
144 on review of evidence, consideration of the patient population, and consultation with the research c
145 urrent EGFR-targeted agents in an unselected patient population, and highlight the need for predictiv
146 , reviews imaging protocols specific to this patient population, and illustrates some of the imaging
147 east reconstruction is safe in an irradiated patient population, and in fact compares favorably with
148 nt a new potential treatment option for this patient population, and is being investigated in a rando
149 of peri-implant diseases in a North African patient population, and to assess the concurrent associa
150 ty for overall quality and costs for defined patient populations, and episode-based payment models th
151 d of resistance mutations can vary widely in patient populations, and from the population average com
152 s across a wide range of tumor sites, sizes, patient populations, and imaging protocol variations.
153 of arrhythmia monitoring among a variety of patient populations, appropriate use of ischemia and QT-
156 ver, studies of large, broadly generalizable patient populations are lacking, and the effect of body
159 l and ventricular arrhythmias in this unique patient population, as well as procedural interventions
160 the evolution of a USA300 variant plaguing a patient population at increased risk of infection to und
161 sizes indicated substantial differences for patient populations between ZONDA and mepolizumab and du
162 World Health Organization regimen across the patient population but resulted in worse outcomes in a s
163 has demonstrated improved outcomes in these patient populations, but options are nonexistent or limi
164 ighly heterogenous disease progression among patient populations, cardiovascular diseases feature mul
165 AR T-cell therapy expands to include a wider patient population, careful patient selection, pre-treat
166 ifferences among the studies with regards to patient population, clinical settings, and outcomes exam
167 sment of health-related quality of life in a patient population confined to people with adenocarcinom
168 on with acute kidney injury in a replication patient population containing 206 cases with 1,406 contr
169 extensively evaluated in large, independent patient populations, correlates with and outperforms est
170 ge about patterns of recurrence in different patient populations could offer new therapeutic avenues.
171 of optimal transfusion strategies in various patient populations, coupled with the integration of nov
173 terogeneity in disease phenotypes within the patient population emphasize the need to better understa
174 stem can be used in rapid screening of large patient populations especially in the developing countri
175 to represent knowledge may remain intact in patient populations even when belief representation is d
176 st LTBI screening programs in this high-risk patient population, even in low TB prevalence settings.
177 st LTBI screening programs in this high-risk patient population, even in low-TB-prevalence settings.
178 in the expanded palate, more than 80% of the patient population experiences significant postexpansion
180 ination of recommended doses, schedules, and patient populations for anetumab ravtansine in phase II
181 Knowledge gained through the study of this patient population, for which the inciting event is know
183 microbial resistance pose serious dangers to patients, population health, food security, and economic
184 IAS rate in a more typical, contemporary ICD patient population implanted with the S-ICD using standa
185 considered to better reflect the real-world patient population, improve clinical trial participation
186 are clinic serving a low-income metropolitan patient population improved adherence to follow-up eye c
188 s sedation for cataract surgery in a diverse patient population in terms of patient satisfaction.
190 iratory virus testing in pediatric and adult patient populations, in emergency department, outpatient
191 D use may carry significant risks in certain patient populations, in which a short course of an aceta
194 ence includes all clinicians, and the target patient population includes adult men with age-related l
195 line includes all clinicians, and the target patient population includes adults with joint inflammati
197 dust mite SCIT, SLIT tablets and SLIT drops; patient populations) including a review of clinically re
198 ance, the resulting signature stratifies the patient population into "sensitive" and "relatively-resi
199 consider transcriptional data to segment the patient population into subsets relevant to a given phen
200 ing selection of the ideal clinical setting, patient population, iron chelating agent, and dosing reg
201 t audience is all clinicians, and the target patient population is adults at average risk for colorec
202 t audience is all clinicians, and the target patient population is adults with acute pain from non-lo
203 t audience is all clinicians, and the target patient population is all asymptomatic women with averag
206 ctions in morbidity and mortality, a growing patient population is resistant to these medications, wh
208 to identify responsive versus non-responsive patient populations is anticipated to dramatically impro
210 reening is frequently false-negative in this patient population, likely due to immunosuppressants imp
211 reening is frequently false-negative in this patient population, likely due to immunosuppressants imp
212 levels of endogenous HDL acceptors in target patient populations limit the clinical translation of LX
214 tumors and across a diverse immunocompetent patient population may provide a foundation from which t
218 e difficult to compare due to differences in patient populations, methods used and the choice of stud
221 dmiral(TM) Drug-Eluting Balloon in a Chinese Patient Population, NCT02118532; and IN.PACT Global Clin
224 provide a new oral treatment option for this patient population of which many are elderly and in need
225 cing from individual corneas of two distinct patient populations - one from the Middle East, as kerat
226 e cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) into this patient population over the past 20 years has made accur
227 allenging, and not readily scalable to large patient populations, particularly in underdeveloped part
228 rapy for IBD was discussed, with priority on patient populations, patient reported outcomes (PROs) an
229 teriuria is not recommended in the following patient populations: pediatric patients, healthy nonpreg
232 al degeneration and the heterogeneity of the patient population present massive challenges to the dev
233 n of coronary artery disease is high in this patient population, presumably causative in most patient
234 significant demographic differences between patient populations receiving either azole as their init
238 ata collected in clinical trials because the patient populations studied in registries have a broader
239 ents without diabetes, including in specific patient populations, such as children, pregnant women, a
240 below contemporary benchmarks in the WRAP-IT patient population, suggesting that the envelope provide
243 g of a higher proportion of men and an older patient population than previous screening interventions
244 hospitals having twice the relative minority patient population than the surrounding geographical mea
246 regulators of liver regeneration as well as patient populations that are likely to benefit from each
247 litate TB diagnosis in clinical settings and patient populations that are limited by the physical or
248 of vitamin C are promising to help identify patient populations that may benefit the most from high-
250 ese patients with breast cancer and identify patient populations that would benefit from macrophage-t
251 predictors of response to USP7 and potential patient populations that would benefit most from USP7-ta
254 requently altered in The Cancer Genome Atlas patient populations, then examined the effects of these
255 to examine the generalizability to different patient populations, these results suggest that methylat
256 SSA on tracer uptake was evaluated in 2 main patient populations: those undergoing (68)Ga-DOTATATE PE
257 mette-Guerin (BCG), constitute a challenging patient population to manage and many alternative therap
258 nt in clinical trial design to either enrich patient populations to be or as surrogate efficacy endpo
259 uld enable mechanism-based stratification of patient populations to increase the success of therapeut
260 olimus-eluting Orsiro stent in an all-comers patient population treated with percutaneous coronary in
262 st studies were small and varied in terms of patient population, treatment, and MRD assessment method
264 ally used as second-line treatments in these patient populations, typically in addition to metformin.
266 polymer everolimus-eluting stent in a broad patient population undergoing percutaneous coronary inte
267 E. faecium transmission in an entire sampled patient population using a sequence-driven approach.
268 age for future studies of mavacamten in this patient population using clinical parameters, including
269 tly small single arm trials in heterogeneous patient populations using different methods for response
270 xtracardiac pacing method in a heterogeneous patient population, using a minimally invasive, paraster
272 ey response rate was low, information on the patient population was limited, and the survey instrumen
275 Minority hospitals for Black and Hispanic patient populations were identified based on U.S. Census
278 umab significantly improved survival of this patient population when compared with standard single-ag
279 relevant for both prodromal and symptomatic patient populations where potential responses to therapi
280 nce across U.S. geographies and in different patient populations, where resistance rates may vary.
281 sease incidence and geographically dispersed patient populations, which has resulted in significant u
282 l additional biomarker to identify a broader patient population who could be eligible for FGFR inhibi
283 pread implications for exercise tolerance in patient populations who experience partial vascular occl
284 We investigated the prevalence of cCMV in a patient population with a high rate of HIV and antiretro
285 This treatment addresses a key outcome in a patient population with a high unmet need (GSK Study 204
289 is extremely difficult in this understudied patient population with high prevalence of neurological
291 f mutations, representing roughly 20% of the patient population with identified missense mutations, a
292 to reflect characteristics of the high-risk patient population with important unmet therapeutic need
293 therapy, because they represent a high-risk patient population with poor outcomes when treated with
294 mice and humans, we suggest that the 1-3% of patient population with single-allele DHCR7 mutations mi
295 nses are altered in the intestine of defined patient populations with chronic infectious, inflammator
297 e summarize the available literature in this patient population, with a focus on clinical application
298 n trials of varying sizes and with different patient populations, with inconsistent effects on cardio
299 for identifying sepsis may capture a larger patient population within administrative datasets that a
300 e intent of bringing novel therapies to this patient population years before PFS results are mature.