ライフサイエンスコーパス: patients with stage

1 urvival of 97.4% (95% CI, 96.0% to 98.8%) in patients with stage 0 or I, only 79.5% (95% CI, 74.2% to

2 A total of 316,114 patients with stage 0 to II breast cancer who underwent

3 For 494 patients with stage 0 to IIB melanoma (mean age, 55 year

4 The evaluable population included 494 patients with stage 0 to IIB melanoma and their skin che

5 Patients with stage 0 to IIB melanoma and their skin-che

6 erated partial breast irradiation (APBI) for patients with stage 0, I, and IIA breast cancer who unde

7 The 5-year event-free survival rates for patients with stages 0 to III breast cancer were 84.48%

8 Patients with stages 0 to III breast cancer were recruit

9 e risk stratification for severe outcomes in patients with stage 1 acute kidney injury by urine outpu

10 In the intention-to-treat analysis, 67 patients with stage 1 disease (30.7%) and 41 patients wi

11 esults (SEER)-Medicare and NLST datasets for patients with stage 1 disease aged 65 to 74 years.

12 A lower proportion of patients with stage 1 disease and an SVR died from HCC (

13 Patients with stage 1 disease and an SVR were less likel

14 regardless of SVR, were at greater risk than patients with stage 1 disease for liver decompensation (

15 double-blind, outpatient study randomized 54 patients with stage 1 hypertension to receive either chl

16 nsity of 10.3 (5.6) mm/mm2 in the corneas of patients with stage 1 or 2 keratoconus was reduced 51% (

17 Patients with stage 1 tumors had an excellent outcome (5

18 metabolomics in 2155 participants including patients with stage 1-5 CKD and healthy controls, we ide

19 %-92.3%) and 94.4% (95% CI, 83.4%-98.2%) for patients with stage 1A/B disease and 63.2% (95% CI, 36.6

20 r adjuvant chemotherapy improves survival in patients with stage 1B or higher cancers.

21 Patients with stage 2 CKD (estimated glomerular filtrati

22 In patients with stage 2 CKD, adjusted mean treatment diffe

23 In patients with stage 2 CKD, adverse events were reported

24 patients with stage 1 disease (30.7%) and 41 patients with stage 2 disease (18.1%) achieved an SVR (P

25 A lower proportion of patients with stage 2 disease and an SVR died from cause

26 However, SVR did not affect whether patients with stage 2 disease developed further EVs (HR,

27 nsation did not differ significantly between patients with stage 2 disease with or without an SVR (12

28 Patients with stage 2 disease, regardless of SVR, were a

29 al distribution in histologic sections of 10 patients with stage 2 invasive breast cancers.

30 Among all patients with stage 2 MHs, 30 of 38 patients (78.9%) had

31 In contrast, patients with stage 2 tumors had a reduced EFS in both a

32 C criteria were applied, 1281 (61%) of those patients with stage 2-3 AKI-UO were misclassified as eit

33 ria were amended on Feb 25, 2010, to include patients with stage 2-3 HER2-positive breast cancer who

34 The proportion of patients with stages 2-3 acute kidney injury at admissio

35 Patients with stage 3 CKD (eGFR >/=30 to <60 mL/min per

36 In patients with stage 3 CKD, adjusted mean treatment diffe

37 Patients with stage 3 DCMD (24 patients; 26%) generally

38 s associated with improvement in survival in patients with stage 3 fibrosis.

39 Among all patients with stage 3 or 4 MHs, 42 of 62 (67.7%) had at

40 )-6 and tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha in patients with Stage 3 periodontitis before and after non

41 lind, placebo-controlled trial involving 201 patients with stage 3, 4, or 5 non-dialysis-dependent CK

42 Thus, in nondiabetic patients with stage 3-4 CKD and vitamin D deficiency, vi

43 , double-blind trial, we randomized 42 adult patients with stage 3-4 CKD who were already receiving o

44 ure serum T50 in a prospective cohort of 184 patients with stages 3 and 4 CKD, with a median of 5.3 y

45 %-81.1%) and 78.1% (95% CI, 50.0%-91.5%) for patients with stage 3A disease.

46 The OS and MCCSS at 24 months for patients with stage 3B disease were both 50.0% (95% CI,

47 In patients with stage 3b/4 CKD, treatment with lanthanum o

48 In patients with stage 4 high-risk neuroblastoma who have r

49 The 5-year survival was similar for patients with stage 4 irrespective of the option of anti

50 without ribavirin) in a prospective study of patients with stage 4 or 5 chronic kidney disease (CKD).

51 high rate of sustained virologic response in patients with stage 4 or 5 chronic kidney disease and HC

52 our studies reporting 106 administrations in patients with stage 4 or 5 chronic kidney disease or und

53 Chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in patients with stage 4-5 chronic kidney disease increases

54 ement, a multidisciplinary model of care for patients with stage 5 CKD who want to avoid dialysis, is

55 MI are more favorable compared with those of patients with stage 5D CKD and approach those of the gen

56 differ among renal transplant recipients vs patients with stage 5D CKD or those without CKD has not

57 tion >50%, and diastolic dysfunction) and 60 patients with stage B HF (normal exercise tolerance with

58 Another independent group of 32 patients with stage C HF who recovered to New York Heart

59 nical outcomes and disease progression among patients with stage C HF) and prevention (an optional tr

60 n study enrolled 63 control subjects and 218 patients with stage C HF.

61 d to sunitinib or sorafenib vs placebo among patients with stages comparable to other high-risk adjuv

62 plantation is the most effective therapy for patients with Stage D heart failure with a median life e

63 coming an increasingly prevalent therapy for patients with Stage D heart failure with reduced ejectio

64 Last, we enrolled patients with stage D HF and sampled their blood before

65 mitochondrial respiration of 19 hospitalized patients with stage D HF with that of 19 healthy partici

66 For patients with stage D HF, moderate (delta, 0.40-0.60) an

67 The AUC for patients with stage F0 versus stage F1-F2 was 0.93 (95%

68 Between Dec 9, 2015, and Oct 26, 2018, 1968 patients with stage F1-F3 fibrosis were enrolled and rec

69 ed at least one dose of study treatment; 931 patients with stage F2-F3 fibrosis were included in the

70 , 1.09; 95% CI, 1.06-1.13; P < .001), and in patients with stage I (HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.08-1.18; P <

71 Middle-aged patients with stage I (odds ratio, 5.04; 95% CI, 2.30-11

72 OS was significantly inferior in patients with stage I (P < .0015) and stage IV disease (

73 s of abdominal CT images collected from 2019 patients with stage I - III colorectal cancer (CRC) usin

74 e, the model also predicted the prognosis of patients with stage I ADC in both the NLST (n = 123, pv

75 ll survival, local control, and fibrosis for patients with stage I and II breast cancer who underwent

76 Less than 10% of patients with stage I disease have a recurrence, and adj

77 d no significant differences in survival for patients with stage I disease in any of the four countri

78 e expected survival, the overall survival of patients with stage I disease paradoxically was signific

79 In patients with stage I disease treated with radiation the

80 R) status and grade significantly stratified patients with stage I disease with respect to RFS, DSS,

81 ng Borrelia-specific antibodies in sera from patients with stage I LD.

82 Data were pooled from 2,552 patients with stage I lung cancer, 6,386 with bladder ca

83 Recommendations For standard operative risk patients with stage I NSCLC, SBRT is not recommended out

84 , VATS lobectomy was used in the minority of patients with stage I NSCLC.

85 A surveillance policy for patients with stage I NSGCC is a safe approach associate

86 We recommend surveillance for patients with stage I NSGCC with immediate systemic trea

87 January 1, 1984, to December 31, 2007, 1,226 patients with stage I NSGCC, including high-risk patient

88 For patients with stage I or II bulky mediastinal HL, no sub

89 rt results of a planned subgroup analysis in patients with stage I or II bulky mediastinal Hodgkin ly

90 ival but enhances postoperative mortality in patients with stage I or II EC.

91 alternative to transabdominal resection for patients with stage I rectal cancer.

92 A total of 1901 patients with stage I to II breast cancer (mean [SD] age

93 Population-based data on patients with stage I to II PaC resected in 2003 to 2015

94 n of SNTI in sentinel lymph nodes and BMM in patients with stage I to III colon cancer and the progno

95 A total of 122 patients with stage I to III colon cancer were included.

96 on between the occurrence of SNTI and BMM in patients with stage I to III colon cancer.

97 prospective cohort of 2470 Kaiser Permanente patients with stage I to III CRC diagnosed from 2006 thr

98 In patients with stage I to III CRC, postoperative plasma v

99 In the KATHERINE trial, patients with stage I to III human epidermal growth fact

100 ancer Registry, we studied a total of 24 843 patients with stage I to III invasive breast cancer diag

101 Methods Forty-five patients with stage I to III SCCAC and HIV infection rec

102 Methods Sixty-one patients with stage I to III SCCAC received CRT includin

103 le regional or distant recurrence in 6.4% of patients with stage I, 18.5% of stage II, and 33.1% of s

104 Analysis of patients with stage I, II, and III cancer revealed that

105 atients with stage II-IV NSCLC and in 50% of patients with stage I, with 96% specificity for mutant a

106 is, we reviewed pretreatment PET-CT scans of patients with stage I-II HL treated at our institution b

107 refractory disease status in a cohort of 251 patients with stage I-II HL who were managed at a tertia

108 OS for patients with stage I-II NLPHL was excellent after all t

109 used a French prospective clinical cohort of patients with stage I-III breast cancer including 1,874

110 cross England in 2013-16, an average of 6281 patients with stage I-III cancer were diagnosed via the

111 anscription PCR, and clinical outcome in 942 patients with stage I-III clear cell renal cell carcinom

112 score as a predictor of clinical outcome in patients with stage I-III clear cell renal cell carcinom

113 ta on 15,803 index CRCs for analysis (89% of patients with stage I-III CRC).

114 Among patients with stage I-III CRC, baseline red and processe

115 We identified patients with stage I-III ER+/HER2- breast cancer.

116 Patients with stage I-III invasive CRC (2006-11) who had

117 Twenty patients with stage I-III NSCLC and candidates for radic

118 ar and every 6 months for the second year in patients with stage I-III small-cell lung cancer who hav

119 Approximately 40% of patients with stage I-III triple-negative breast cancer

120 The 4-year EFS for patients with stage I/II and stage III/IV disease with L

121 1p/16q was detected in 49 of 1,147 evaluable patients with stage I/II disease (4.27%) enrolled in ARE

122 h the NWTS-5 updated 4-year EFS of 68.8% for patients with stage I/II disease (P = .042), and 61.3% f

123 Patients with stage I/II disease received regimen DD4A (

124 um-cultured endothelial cells (ECs) than did patients with stage I/II OSCC or healthy controls.

125 section is the standard treatment option for patients with stage I/II pancreatic ductal adenocarcinom

126 ogy, and End Results) data were analyzed for patients with stage I/II pancreatic head cancers treated

127 result in an increase in average survival in patients with stage I/II PDA.

128 restricted loss in expectation of lifetime, patients with stages I to IIA disease had no noteworthy

129 Patients with stages I to III breast cancer who were see

130 rated tables to allocate interventions to 71 patients with stages I-IV head and neck cancers.

131 here were no significant differences between patients with stage IA and stage IB disease in 5- or 10-

132 on of an increased overall survival rate for patients with stage IA cancer treated via laparoscopy (l

133 Adjuvant chemotherapy is not recommended for patients with stage IA disease.

134 ease had five times the risk of death versus patients with stage IA disease.

135 Patients with stage IA LPHL in a single node that was co

136 esection has been increasingly used in older patients with stage IA lung cancer.

137 The long-term outcome of 256 patients with stage IA NLPHL was evaluated.

138 should be considered as standard of care for patients with stage IA NLPHL.

139 was used to compare the overall survival of patients with stage IA NSCLC in the National Cancer Data

140 In this national analysis, for patients with stage IA NSCLC, extended delay of surgery

141 Patients with stage IA to IIA HL and no mediastinal bulk

142 The performance of the panels in patients with stage IA-IIB pancreatic cancer was index I

143 gnatures remained predictive when applied to patients with stage Ia-IIc cancer and cancers lacking an

144 nd tumor response to HPE was evaluated in 63 patients with stage IE/IIE1 HP-positive gastric DLBCL wh

145 y was associated with adverse outcomes among patients with stage II (DRFS: hazard ratio [HR], 1.20; 9

146 th both disease-free and overall survival in patients with stage II and III disease.

147 value of both proteins was also validated in patients with stage II and III tumors (p = 0.017 and p =

148 l staging methods are inadequate to identify patients with stage II colon cancer (CC) who are at high

149 Decisions regarding adjuvant therapy in patients with stage II colorectal cancer (CRC) have been

150 A total of 1005 patients with stage II CRC were included in the 13 cohor

151 lapse-free survival and identify a subset of patients with stage II CRC who could gain substantial su

152 e validated in 11 independent cohorts of 767 patients with stage II CRC who did not receive adjuvant

153 Thirteen retrospective studies of patients with stage II CRC who had clinical follow-up an

154 In contrast, other patients with stage II disease and more than 45 y old ha

155 ithin the first 14 months post treatment for patients with stage II disease and within the first 4 ye

156 Patients with stage II disease receiving oxaliplatin did

157 ictions and facilitate the identification of patients with stage II disease who could gain survival b

158 etwork recommend against systemic staging in patients with stage II disease, our data suggest that PE

159 pectively, representing 60%, 28%, and 12% of patients with stage II disease.

160 of this study was to compare the survival of patients with stage II obstructing colon cancer (OCC) wh

161 Patients with stage II or III colorectal cancer (CRC) ex

162 the radiotherapy target volume suggest that patients with stage II or III non-small cell lung cancer

163 Patients with stage II or III rectal cancer were assigne

164 Among patients with stage II or III rectal cancer, the use of

165 sease severity, was confirmed at 10 years in patients with stage II to III colon cancer.

166 .41 (95% CI, 0.16 to 1.07), respectively, in patients with stage II to III dMMR and 0.50 (95% CI, 0.2

167 aterials Study eligibility criteria included patients with stage II to III NSCLC treated on one of fo

168 Data on 17600 patients with stage II to III rectal adenocarcinoma from

169 esigned to detect improvement in outcomes of patients with stage II to IV DAWT compared with historic

170 321 treatment seemed to improve outcomes for patients with stage II to IV DAWT compared with NWTS-5,

171 and 2009 were merged to create a data set of patients with stage II to IV disease treated with platin

172 A subset analysis was performed among patients with stage II to IV low-grade serous carcinoma

173 Patients with stage II-III cancer who received chemother

174 We screened 329 consecutive patients with stage II-III colorectal tumors with MSI wh

175 onsisting of four sequential study groups of patients with stage II-III locally advanced rectal cance

176 We detected ctDNA in 100% of patients with stage II-IV NSCLC and in 50% of patients w

177 About 25% of patients with stages II-III colorectal tumors with MSI h

178 emotherapy is recommended for routine use in patients with stage IIA, IIB, or IIIA disease who have u

179 est that PET/CT might be valuable in younger patients with stage IIB and III disease.

180 The median OS for patients with stage IIB disease was 68 months, but patie

181 had slightly improved survival compared with patients with stage IIB, although patients diagnosed wit

182 EFS24, whereas risk remained measurable for patients with stages IIB to IV cHL.

183 Forty two patients with stage III and IV GC were included in this

184 um hsCRP levels were significantly higher in patients with stage III and IV generalized periodontitis

185 Patients with stage III and stage IV melanoma remain at

186 In both patients with stage III and stage IV melanoma, male pati

187 This finding was particularly meaningful for patients with stage III BC, TNBC, and trastuzumab-treate

188 d using tumor samples from a separate set of patients with stage III cancer (n = 783).

189 hoc analysis of all pathologic reports from patients with stage III CC included in the IDEA France p

190 pact of DPYD variants on fluorouracil AEs in patients with stage III CC treated with a fluorouracil,

191 an independent prognostic factor for DFS in patients with stage III CC.

192 f six randomised phase 3 trials, we included patients with stage III colon cancer aged at least 18 ye

193 il, and leucovorin chemotherapy (FOLFOX4) in patients with stage III colon cancer improved disease-fr

194 One in 5 patients with stage III colon cancer initiates AC within

195 gnostic effect of BRAF and KRAS mutations in patients with stage III colon cancer treated with adjuva

196 versus 6 months of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with stage III colon cancer was not confirmed i

197 Observational cohort study of patients with stage III colon cancer younger than 80 yea

198 antly reduced cancer recurrence and death in patients with stage III colon cancer.

199 tly reduced the risk of tumour recurrence in patients with stage III colon cancer.

200 e use of 3 months of adjuvant CAPOX for most patients with stage III colon cancer.

201 versus 6 months of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with stage III colon cancer; non-inferiority wa

202 gene (KRAS) in the primary tumor with SAR in patients with stage III colon carcinomas treated with ad

203 c information was conferred by ALN status in patients with stage III CRC beyond that provided by TNM

204 , double-blind, randomised, phase 3 trial in patients with stage III cutaneous melanoma (excluding ly

205 We did a double-blind, phase 3 trial in patients with stage III cutaneous melanoma (excluding ly

206 o fluoropyrimidine-based adjuvant therapy in patients with stage III disease and underscore the need

207 Methods Patients with stage III disease at first melanoma diagno

208 h increasing stage (P for trend < .001), and patients with stage III disease had five times the risk

209 Studies that enrolled patients with stage III disease receiving radiotherapy (

210 Results A total of 535 patients with stage III disease were studied.

211 updated results support the use of FOLFOX in patients with stage III disease, including those with dM

212 Although universally recommended for patients with stage III disease, there is no consensus a

213 f death from 2 to 6 years post treatment for patients with stage III disease, with no differences in

214 II disease and within the first 4 years for patients with stage III disease.

215 ered a standard adjuvant treatment option in patients with stage III disease.

216 Conclusion Most patients with stage III FHWT had good EFS/overall surviv

217 88 prospectively treated, centrally reviewed patients with stage III FHWT were treated with Regimen D

218 valuated clinical and biologic variables for patients with stage III FHWT without combined loss of he

219 ncephalopathy mainly affects immunodepressed patients with stage III HIV infection, although in recen

220 sponse might be of relevance for identifying patients with stage III melanoma who might derive clinic

221 a significantly lower risk of recurrence in patients with stage III melanoma with BRAF V600E or V600

222 compared adjuvant ipilimumab with placebo in patients with stage III melanoma.

223 ets to clarify the survival probabilities of patients with stage III melanoma.

224 2 large, geographically distinct cohorts of patients with stage III melanoma.

225 In this prospective study, 36 patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancers (NSC

226 than 60 Gy plus concurrent chemotherapy for patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer, and

227 Patients and Methods From 1996 to 2009, 127 patients with stage III NSCLC (Eastern Cooperative Oncol

228 Of 424 eligible patients with stage III NSCLC randomized, 360 (85%) cons

229 The authors retrospectively identified 195 patients with stage III NSCLC treated definitively with

230 treatment computed tomography images for 107 patients with stage III NSCLC.

231 sting for conventional prognostic factors in patients with stage III NSCLC.

232 radiation improves overall survival (OS) of patients with stage III or IV head and neck carcinoma (H

233 ional experience on overall survival (OS) in patients with stage III or IV HNC was investigated withi

234 Eligible patients with stage III or IV HNC were randomly assigned

235 xamine the effects of neoantigen vaccines on patients with stage III or IV melanoma and demonstrate i

236 he FINDRISC questionnaire is appropriate for patients with Stage III or IV periodontitis and can be r

237 reening method for diabetes mellitus (DM) in patients with Stage III or IV periodontitis using the FI

238 Patients with Stage III or IV periodontitis who received

239 ta, treatment with interval CRS and HIPEC in patients with stage III ovarian cancer was accompanied b

240 oved recurrence-free and overall survival in patients with stage III ovarian cancer.

241 increase in resectional surgery would be for patients with stage III rectal cancer in England (increa

242 Patients with stage III resected lymph node or in-transi

243 We conducted a systematic review of patients with stage III to IV melanoma treated with immu

244 with concurrent definitive radiotherapy for patients with stage III unresectable NSCLC.

245 of olaparib to bevacizumab may be offered to patients with stage III-IV EOC with g/sBRCA1/2 and/or ge

246 Twenty patients with stage III-IVa HNSCC prospectively underwen

247 1p/16q was detected in 82 of 1,364 evaluable patients with stage III/IV disease (6.01%) in AREN03B2;

248 stage I/II disease (P = .042), and 61.3% for patients with stage III/IV disease (P = .001), with tren

249 Patients with stage III/IV disease received regimen M (v

250 icroscopy and flow cytometry, revealing that patients with stage III/IV OSCC exhibited higher frequen

251 lood cells, MPs, and serum-cultured ECs from patients with stage III/IV OSCC mediated more rapid coag

252 and postoperative samples were compared from patients with stage III/IV OSCC undergoing resective sur

253 from a randomized phase 3 clinical trial of patients with stage III/IV PDAC treated with 5-fluoroura

254 sease, MSS outcomes were similar to those of patients with stage IIIA disease after 3 and 5 years of

255 In patients with stage IIIA N2 disease, adjuvant radiation

256 In this international phase III trial, patients with stage IIIB or IV adenocarcinoma diagnosed

257 Treatment-naive patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC and a common EGFR m

258 T-VEC efficacy was most pronounced in patients with stage IIIB, IIIC, or IVM1a disease and in

259 ised, open-label, phase 3 study in untreated patients with stage IIIB/IV ALK-rearranged non-squamous

260 Patients with stage IIIB/IV nonsquamous NSCLC were rando

261 Methods Patients with stage IIIB/IV squamous (N = 272) or nonsqu

262 Patients with stages IIIC and IV disease who received NA

263 Most patients with staging information presented with Stage I

264 onal antibody against PD-1 and used to treat patients with stage IV and III melanoma.(1) Immune-relat

265 ies in early supportive medication use among patients with stage IV breast cancer.

266 accurately predicted 30-day mortality among patients with stage IV cancer.

267 ve, single-group, open-label, phase 2 trial, patients with stage IV chemotherapy-refractory, histolog

268 biologic agents, primary tumor resection for patients with stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC) may not b

269 The majority of patients with stage IV CRC had undergone primary tumor r

270 One-hundred eleven patients with Stage IV CRC who underwent primary tumor r

271 Of the 64,157 patients with stage IV CRC, 43,273 (67.4%) had undergone

272 We retrospectively included 79 patients with stage IV lung carcinomas (n=24), renal car

273 Patients with stage IV measurable disease were eligible

274 Of 14 patients with stage IV measurable disease who received V

275 se immune profiling of peripheral blood from patients with stage IV melanoma before and after treatme

276 In this first-in-human strategy, 10 patients with stage IV melanoma received the MART1-speci

277 This criterion, however, excludes patients with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of dise

278 vival significantly compared with placebo in patients with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of dise

279 lumab, an anti-PD-L1 monoclonal antibody, in patients with stage IV Merkel cell carcinoma that had pr

280 we enrolled previously treated and untreated patients with stage IV metastatic BRAF(V600E)-positive N

281 2015 ASCO guideline on systemic therapy for patients with stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC

282 2017 ASCO guideline on systemic therapy for patients with stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC

283 umab or placebo as second-line treatment for patients with stage IV non-small-cell-lung cancer (NSCLC

284 rsus chemotherapy as first-line treatment of patients with stage IV non-squamous non-small-cell lung

285 n increases survival of previously untreated patients with stage IV non-squamous NSCLC.

286 A guideline update for patients with stage IV NSCLC with driver alterations wil

287 tario) perspective and a lifetime horizon in patients with stage IV NSCLC with nonsquamous histology.

288 There is no cure for patients with stage IV NSCLC.

289 mproves survival as second-line treatment of patients with stage IV NSCLC.

290 We identified 627 patients with Stage IV renal cell carcinoma who underwen

291 The treatment of osteomyelitis in patients with stage IV sacral pressure ulcers is controv

292 atified analysis, the hazard ratio comparing patients with stage IV versus stage I LA LGE was 1.67 (9

293 iation {SD}]; 68 female patients and 77 male patients) with stage IV CRC who underwent molecular prof

294 The 3-year overall survival rates of the patients with stage IVAnon-n1, stage n1, and stage IVB w

295 lity rate was significantly increased in all patients with stage IVC disease.

296 ocal response) to planned neck dissection in patients with stage N2 or N3 disease.

297 Among the patients with stage T1 disease, the risk of distant recu

298 Patients with stage T2 multilesion angiosarcomas of the

299 nced computed tomographic (CT) studies in 36 patients with stage T2 or greater esophageal tumors who

300 ant chemoradiotherapy and local excision for patients with stage T2N0 rectal cancer.