ライフサイエンスコーパス: posttransplantation

1 in months 1-3; 1.13 visits/PY in months 3-12 posttransplantation).

2 M-MDSCs remained high for 1 y posttransplantation.

3 eveloped FSGS recurrence at 12 (1.5-27) days posttransplantation.

4 re than 50% of the patients survive 10 years posttransplantation.

5 recipients are readmitted in the first month posttransplantation.

6 ameliorate microvascular thrombotic sequelae posttransplantation.

7 Survival was assessed up to 100 days posttransplantation.

8 ameliorate microvascular thrombotic sequelae posttransplantation.

9 rating immune cells were measured at 2 weeks posttransplantation.

10 ients are at risk for developing skin cancer posttransplantation.

11 re found in the circulation as early as 8 wk posttransplantation.

12 essure (SBP) were recorded for years 1 and 3 posttransplantation.

13 nd received additional treatment with MR-409 posttransplantation.

14 then on five occasions during the first year posttransplantation.

15 provides a more accurate biomarker of cancer posttransplantation.

16 were profiled within the donor lung 24 hours posttransplantation.

17 and albuminuria were followed up to 5 years posttransplantation.

18 l assessments were performed 18 and 15 years posttransplantation.

19 providing protection to prevalent infections posttransplantation.

20 iferation and hindered B cell reconstitution posttransplantation.

21 according to rejection at 1, 5, and 10 years posttransplantation.

22 intain a low hemoglobin S fraction peri- and posttransplantation.

23 ffered 3520 infections during the first year posttransplantation.

24 ate of functional decline starting at 1 year posttransplantation.

25 A) versus 55% and 56% (group B) at 3 months posttransplantation.

26 nsulin and glucagon expression up to 80 days posttransplantation.

27 rom parenteral nutrition between 31 and 85 d posttransplantation.

28 l study enrolled 128 KTRs longer than 1 year posttransplantation.

29 GFR at different time-points, out to 5 years posttransplantation.

30 Ds) or Crigler-Najjar (CN) syndrome 6 months posttransplantation.

31 to IFITMs than variants that were eliminated posttransplantation.

32 y and liver transplant recipients, 12 months posttransplantation.

33 e third due to recurrent rejection 15 months posttransplantation.

34 int of treated AR or graft failure by 1-year posttransplantation.

35 loma at 30 months after HCT and died 4 years posttransplantation.

36 ulate risk-adjusted mortality after 6 months posttransplantation.

37 c damage affecting long-term kidney function posttransplantation.

38 of cancer diagnosed within the first 3 years posttransplantation.

39 in death from bleeding complications 18 days posttransplantation.

40 g patients for transplantation and treatment posttransplantation.

41 atients showed markedly elevated IL-7 levels posttransplantation.

42 pretransplantation, at +1, +2, and +3 months posttransplantation.

43 ccurring predominantly during the first year posttransplantation.

44 nt in the control of lower airway remodeling posttransplantation.

45 pletion of REGulatory T cells mice at day 80 posttransplantation.

46 NF-alpha, and IFN-gamma as assessed on day 3 posttransplantation.

47 esulted in hospitalization in the first year posttransplantation.

48 by highly inflammatory donor CD4(+) T cells posttransplantation.

49 ncidence of BK viremia during the first year posttransplantation.

50 s in 4 macaques observed for up to 49 months posttransplantation.

51 ansplantion are based on variables collected posttransplantation.

52 found between the model-predicted and actual posttransplantation 24 h-tacrolimus levels (14.6 vs. 17.

53 dy analyzed health services data to evaluate posttransplantation 3-year survival by SMI status in a n

54 tening PAs, particularly in those with early posttransplantation abdominal infections.

55 With effective agents available to prevent posttransplantation acute organ rejection, medication ad

56 outcomes, with grafts failing early (<4 days posttransplantation), acutely (6-24 days) or undergoing

57 ME independently predicts the development of posttransplantation aGVHD, even when controlling for don

58 eculizumab is highly effective in preventing posttransplantation aHUS recurrence, yet may not fully b

59 ed in patients without pretransplantation or posttransplantation airway colonization with Aspergillus

60 patients with IPA had pretransplantation or posttransplantation airway colonization with Aspergillus

61 The prevalence of renal posttransplantation amputation and its impact on allogra

62 reconstitution is completed within 6 months posttransplantation and appeared to be driven by IL-7-me

63 T cells were measured pretransplantation and posttransplantation and correlated to rejection.

64 Nfix is a novel regulator of HSPCs survival posttransplantation and establish a role for Nfi genes i

65 28 D+/R- LTRs for 1 (R+) or 2 (D+/R-) years posttransplantation and from 114 healthy control persons

66 ecruited at the time of routine bronchoscopy posttransplantation and included patients with and witho

67 ith increased risk of BPAR the first 90 days posttransplantation and may predict an increased risk of

68 M-MDSCs increased immediately posttransplantation and suppressed CD4 and CD8 T cells p

69 assessed correlates of cTnT levels pre- and posttransplantation and their relationship with recipien

70 uencing graft/patient survival up to 8 years posttransplantation, and graft/patient survival up to 4

71 function and anemia are strongly correlated, posttransplantation anemia (PTA) may have a different im

72 Posttransplantation anemia has no influence on graft sur

73 Posttransplantation anemia is associated with decreased

74 Posttransplantation anemia was a significant risk factor

75 demographic and laboratory data pertinent to posttransplantation anemia, were measured and collected.

76 Posttransplantation, animals transplanted with NEVKP ver

77 not have antibody before transplantation, no posttransplantation antibody to the tetramer antigen was

78 w data suggesting that CMV may contribute to posttransplantation atherosclerosis.

79 020 (94%) patients during the first 100 days posttransplantation; average antibiotic exposure was 41%

80 We hypothesized that posttransplantation B cell depletion could prevent the o

81 )-specific donor and recipient serostatus to posttransplantation BKV infection.

82 odels for risk assessment at 3 and 12 months posttransplantation by random survival forest analysis.

83 ngrafted successfully as shown by measurable posttransplantation C-peptide levels and histopathologic

84 primary nonfunction, as shown by measurable posttransplantation C-peptide levels and histopathologic

85 BD exacerbates posttransplantation cardiac ischemia/reperfusion injury

86 D, we investigated the effect of donor BD on posttransplantation cardiac ischemia/reperfusion injury.

87 otal-body skin examination should be part of posttransplantation care in all organ transplant recipie

88 suggest that removing financial barriers to posttransplantation care may positively impact transplan

89 oidism or its treatment influences long-term posttransplantation clinical outcomes.

90 Both pretransplantation CMV exposure and posttransplantation CMV replication contribute to the in

91 ression analysis revealed that patients with posttransplantation CMV replication had an increased ris

92 f subcutaneous HBIg administration by week 3 posttransplantation, combined with HBV virostatic prophy

93 lysaccharide vaccine was significantly lower posttransplantation compared to the pretransplantation r

94 inine was lower in TLR4 allografts at day 14 posttransplantation compared with WT allografts, but thi

95 needed to differentiate rejection from other posttransplantation complications using CEUS.

96 Only the year of transplantation and posttransplantation complications were significantly ass

97 elationship with patient characteristics and posttransplantation complications.

98 The patient's posttransplantation course was complicated by bronchioli

99 nges of the immune response along the entire posttransplantation course will improve our understandin

100 The 5-year posttransplantation cumulative incidence was 20%, with t

101 Posttransplantation cyclophosphamide (PTCy) can function

102 Posttransplantation cyclophosphamide (PTCy) is an effect

103 marrow transplantation (BMT) with high-dose posttransplantation cyclophosphamide (PTCy) is being inc

104 High-dose, posttransplantation cyclophosphamide (PTCy) reduces seve

105 osuppression strategies, including high-dose posttransplantation cyclophosphamide (PTCy), have been d

106 grafts in established chimeric recipients of posttransplantation cyclophosphamide after a chimerism-a

107 egies such as adoptive regulatory T cells or posttransplantation cyclophosphamide contributed to bett

108 dergoing haploidentical transplantation with posttransplantation cyclophosphamide in combination with

109 marrow, and splenocyte infusion followed by posttransplantation cyclophosphamide.

110 ed a haploidentical transplantation received posttransplantation cyclophosphamide.

111 HR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.05-2.30) in the first 90 posttransplantation days, and 3.5 times the relative ris

112 Up to 8-year posttransplantation, death-censored graft survival (DCGS

113 Therefore, early posttransplantation detection, monitoring, and removal o

114 ntervention resulted in reduced incidence of posttransplantation diabetes (7.6% versus 15.6%, respect

115 Previous reports indicate that posttransplantation diabetes mellitus (PTDM) is associat

116 el, 24-week study comparing the incidence of posttransplantation diabetes mellitus (PTDM) with 2 prol

117 new-onset diabetes after transplantation to posttransplantation diabetes mellitus (PTDM), exclusion

118 Taking into account the specific risk of posttransplantation diabetes mellitus and liver disorder

119 SKT, 50% of the HNF1B patients develop early posttransplantation diabetes mellitus, whereas 40% exper

120 Immunosuppressants are an important cause of posttransplantation diabetes mellitus.

121 n a sequential cohort of high-risk patients (posttransplantation dialysis, retransplantation, or reop

122 diac and renal dysfunction, higher perceived posttransplantation distress, lower physical HRQoL, and

123 Glomerulitis and detectable posttransplantation donor-specific antibodies were risk

124 limus in these patients was developed, and a posttransplantation dosing advice was established for ea

125 ey transplant recipients for the presence of posttransplantation DQ DSA.

126 potentially therapeutic molecular targets of posttransplantation events.

127 ere performed to determine whether the early posttransplantation factors predicted patient and graft

128 (QoL), and explore the underlying causes of posttransplantation fatigue.

129 Viral load decreased during posttransplantation follow-up.

130 Animals were also sacrificed 14 days posttransplantation for assessment of the acute allograf

131 central-memory cells predominated very early posttransplantation for both Vdelta1 and Vdelta2 subsets

132 nfidence interval [CI], 76.2-88.4) at 1 year posttransplantation for those with any IEp compared with

133 gative at transplant were switched by week 3 posttransplantation from intravenous to subcutaneous HBI

134 Moreover, posttransplantation FSGS recurrence is a major problem,

135 py of the donor was associated with improved posttransplantation graft survival or no difference in s

136 Posttransplantation graft survival was assessed with Kap

137 transplantable organs, with no detriment to posttransplantation graft survival.

138 Posttransplantation Group: (a) High-risk patients (i.e.,

139 of pretransplantation TME is associated with posttransplantation GVHD in patients with SCID.

140 host disease (GVHD); no patient received any posttransplantation GVHD prophylaxis.

141 n-Barr virus (EBV) DNAemia in the first year posttransplantation has been studied extensively.

142 e at an increased risk of developing a tumor posttransplantation has not been adequately quantified a

143 er significantly pretransplantation, whereas posttransplantation higher MI scores developed more anti

144 -specific T cells from pretransplantation to posttransplantation, however, showed low risk of CMV rep

145 the importance of close monitoring of early posttransplantation HRQoL along with kidney function and

146 ransplantation hypertension and diabetes and posttransplantation hypertension compared to Non-SRL Con

147 specific T cells from pretransplantation and posttransplantation identified those R+ KTRs at increase

148 on Act (BIPA) expanded Medicare coverage for posttransplantation immunosuppresants for elderly patien

149 The ability to limit posttransplantation immunosuppression makes PTCy a promi

150 from the pretransplant period until 6 months posttransplantation in 241 allo-HCT recipients with posi

151 Therefore, to prevent overexposure directly posttransplantation in HIV-infected patients on ritonavi

152 ith anti-HLA-C2 reactivity were also present posttransplantation in HLA-C2 positive recipients of hem

153 s and immature KIR(-) NK cells arising early posttransplantation in humanized NSG mice exerted substa

154 mising tool to prevent overexposure directly posttransplantation in patients on ritonavir-containing

155 dent cytotoxicity became detectable 3 months posttransplantation in these, with higher ADCC observed

156 ment battery pretransplantation and 6 months posttransplantation, including assessments of the domain

157 us can be used to risk stratify patients for posttransplantation infection.

158 lantation and are related to higher rates of posttransplantation infections.

159 ances in immunosuppression and prevention of posttransplantation infectious episodes (IEps).

160 ing COX inhibitors, a sequential increase of posttransplantation intestinal integrity could be shown,

161 Both in vitro and posttransplantation into the rodent cortex, the MGE-like

162 ssessing the risk of tuberculosis-associated posttransplantation IRS.

163 e intervention to improve glucose metabolism posttransplantation is unproven.

164 Sixty-five posttransplantation kidney biopsy samples covering 41 ca

165 Posttransplantation kidney function is comparable betwee

166 mechanisms of T-cell repopulation and their posttransplantation kinetics are not fully understood.

167 Posttransplantation lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD) i

168 Posttransplantation lymphoproliferative diseases (PTLD)

169 oma, and also distinguished untreated, EBV(+)posttransplantation lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD)

170 terature describing the relationship between posttransplantation lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD)

171 nce of (18)F-FDG PET/CT for the detection of posttransplantation lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD)

172 Posttransplantation lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD),

173 Posttransplantation lymphoproliferative disorders (PTLD)

174 EBV(-) posttransplantation lymphoproliferative disorders (PTLDs

175 Posttransplantation maintenance therapy should be invest

176 patients at particular risk of developing a posttransplantation malignancy are imperative to ensure

177 ifferential effects of immunosuppressants in posttransplantation malignancy.

178 er properties potentially useful in reducing posttransplantation malignancy.

179 risk assessment for transplantation but also posttransplantation monitoring are important application

180 ing the technical and pretransplantation and posttransplantation monitoring of HLA antibodies in soli

181 t from more intensive pretransplantation and posttransplantation monitoring.

182 tation and achieved higher graft function at posttransplantation month 6 under similar dose of IS.

183 rior LVRS to assess the influence of LVRS on posttransplantation morbidity and mortality.

184 r pretransplant NT-proBNP is associated with posttransplantation mortality and if it explains the ass

185 o estimate hazard ratios (HRs) that compared posttransplantation mortality in different epochs of fol

186 ins the association of dialysis vintage with posttransplantation mortality in kidney transplant recip

187 nclear to what extent cancer history affects posttransplantation mortality in solid organ transplant

188 confers a significantly higher risk of early posttransplantation mortality.

189 Posttransplantation neutrophil activity in the recipient

190 As early as 5 days posttransplantation, newly acquired peanut-specific IgE

191 Posttransplantation organ graft survival at 1 and 12 mon

192 this patient were gradually lost after 14 y posttransplantation, our findings provide the first repo

193 de novo AML) was an independent predictor of posttransplantation outcome (P = .013).

194 fferentiate between kidneys yielding extreme posttransplantation outcome differences.

195 elding opposing extremes of the continuum of posttransplantation outcomes by several common kidney bi

196 Excellent posttransplantation outcomes for NASH and AC are encoura

197 , little empirical evidence exists regarding posttransplantation outcomes for patients with SMI.

198 Few studies have assessed waitlist and posttransplantation outcomes in patients with metastatic

199 We sought to evaluate posttransplantation outcomes in persons with SSc-LD with

200 evaluated liver transplantation waitlist and posttransplantation outcomes in those aged 18 to 24 year

201 s, but the effect of surgical weight loss on posttransplantation outcomes is unknown.

202 Waiting list and posttransplantation outcomes were evaluated and compared

203 rove transplant candidacy, achieve excellent posttransplantation outcomes.

204 sociation between exception point status and posttransplantation outcomes.

205 tric-acid aspiration is associated with poor posttransplantation outcomes.

206 e was used to compare pretransplantation and posttransplantation outcomes.

207 ul tool with which to counsel patients about posttransplantation outcomes.

208 ring hemodialysis is associated with adverse posttransplantation outcomes.

209 s of kidney biopsies were not predictive for posttransplantation outcomes.

210 microbial drugs, and its potential impact on posttransplantation outcomes.

211 proportional hazard regressions to evaluate posttransplantation outcomes: 3,318 pediatric donor live

212 c T cell kinetics from pretransplantation to posttransplantation, particularly directed to CMV-IE1, o

213 At 1 month posttransplantation, patients completed a Reflux Symptom

214 After a median of 4.4 years posttransplantation, patients were revaccinated with 23v

215 Posttransplantation peak forced expiratory volume in 1 s

216 Low Hb levels in the early posttransplantation period (1 month) seem to be an indep

217 te immunity to fungi is altered in the early posttransplantation period (between recovery from neutro

218 ow vitamin D levels, especially in the early posttransplantation period, but the association between

219 Its promising impact on the posttransplantation period, duration of hospitalization,

220 who developed hyperammonemia syndrome in the posttransplantation period, which was defined as symptom

221 MV-seropositive patients and expanded in the posttransplantation period.

222 of PTLD histology, particularly in the late posttransplantation period.

223 The incidence of PTLD is highest in the late posttransplantation period.

224 No patient received any posttransplantation pharmacologic prophylaxis for graft-

225 During the first 2 years posttransplantation, primary use of mTORIs without CNIs

226 Posttransplantation proteinuria is associated with reduc

227 lass II and to evaluate the role of specific posttransplantation protocols for LTx candidates who req

228 nancies, currently there is no consensus for posttransplantation RCC or UC screening as supporting da

229 The risk for posttransplantation recurrence correlated with higher le

230 The posttransplantation recurrence rate of AAGN was 2.8% per

231 liver transplantation, a validated model of posttransplantation recurrence risk was produced with a

232 ce an optimized pretransplantation model for posttransplantation recurrence risk.

233 Imaging responses and posttransplantation recurrence were compared with demogr

234 patients with advanced cirrhosis and 53 with posttransplantation recurrence were enrolled; HCV genoty

235 with tumor biology and patients at risk for posttransplantation recurrence, and it may be associated

236 ither compensated/decompensated cirrhosis or posttransplantation recurrence.

237 otic events in CMV-positive patients without posttransplantation replication (HR, 1.62 [95% CI, .91-3

238 gher but come at high pretransplantation and posttransplantation resource utilization.

239 In 2 of 6 patients with posttransplantation retina diseases and 6 of 22 patients

240 Pretransplantation and posttransplantation sera were tested for the detection o

241 ) the application of antibody testing in the posttransplantation setting.

242 biliary glands, and cholangiography 6 months posttransplantation showed no evidence of cholangiopathy

243 ndance of Proteobacteria was observed in the posttransplantation specimens compared to pretransplanta

244 Short-term posttransplantation survival and health-related quality

245 tance of pretransplantation outcomes, 1-year posttransplantation survival is typically considered the

246 The median center-level 1-year posttransplantation survival rate was 84.1%, and the med

247 es that were significantly lower than 1-year posttransplantation survival rates.

248 mance metric that incorporates both pre- and posttransplantation survival time.

249 Posttransplantation survival was assessed with the Kapla

250 mpact of ASXL1, RUNX1, and TP53 mutations on posttransplantation survival was independent of the revi

251 In multivariable models, posttransplantation survival was not associated with rec

252 etwork for Organ Sharing registry data about posttransplantation survival with pretransplantation fun

253 splant-free survival [TFS], 45.1% vs. 56.2%; posttransplantation survival, 88.3% vs. 96.3% [P < 0.010

254 e to evaluate the impact of BTT with LVAD on posttransplantation survival, to describe differences in

255 firmed that FM100 was associated with better posttransplantation survival, whereas no significant dif

256 ional status was an independent predictor of posttransplantation survival.

257 The primary outcome was posttransplantation survival.

258 ed for height was a significant predictor of posttransplantation survival.

259 Donor/recipient sex matching predicted posttransplantation survival.

260 l was therefore examined in a pilot study of posttransplantation survivors.

261 B-specific AB levels developed within 1 year posttransplantation than in controls (immunoglobulin [Ig

262 Posttransplantation, the marrows of HSCs plus CD4(+) cel

263 After the first year posttransplantation, there is a gradual increase of all

264 ese assays are valuable tools for monitoring posttransplantation thymic recovery, but more importantl

265 Furthermore, posttransplantation time may modulate the occurrence of

266 s in allogeneic HSCT recipients at different posttransplantation time points.

267 atients were randomly assigned 1:1 on day 28 posttransplantation to mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) or Ev

268 allografts were rejected acutely (6-16 days posttransplantation), untreated outbred mice had heterog

269 Strategies are needed to prevent and treat posttransplantation use of alcohol.

270 A predictive model based on the variation of posttransplantation variables during the course of follo

271 with costs in both groups when both pre- and posttransplantation variables were considered.

272 Despite a higher incidence of posttransplantation vascular and urological complication

273 Posttransplantation viral reactivation, grade II to IV a

274 Allograft and patient survival at 1-year posttransplantation was 100%.

275 Mean time posttransplantation was 5.5 years (range, 0.25-14 years)

276 Graft function posttransplantation was defined as immediate good functi

277 Graft loss at 6 months posttransplantation was higher in group 1 (18% vs 7.2%;

278 ven acute rejection (BPAR) the first 90 days posttransplantation was investigated.

279 Interestingly, cold ischemia-induced CAV posttransplantation was not seen in T/B/NK cell-deficien

280 ar cells before transplantation and serially posttransplantation was undertaken.

281 nction, defined as dialysis during the first posttransplantation week, and death-censored graft survi

282 Patient and graft survival at 3 years posttransplantation were 74% (95% CI, 65%-84%) and 68% (

283 -IE1-specific T cells pretransplantation and posttransplantation were at greatest risk of CMV replica

284 ly and late ACR; 370 patients without biopsy posttransplantation were recruited in the control group.

285 ce, age at time of transplantation, and time posttransplantation were significantly associated with f

286 esterol, and serum creatinine values 3 years posttransplantation were used when applying the calculat

287 ney transplant recipients (median, 6.3 years posttransplantation) were subjected to a systematical cr

288 transplantation had worse functional status posttransplantation when compared to their counterparts,

289 perative years were sustained up to 18 years posttransplantation, while both patients have discontinu

290 y transplant recipients (median of 4.3 years posttransplantation) with late active ABMR and features

291 erally well tolerated pretransplantation and posttransplantation, with a low rate of serious adverse

292 rden of infections throughout the first year posttransplantation, with rare opportunistic pathogens a

293 on of patients developing dnDSA in the first posttransplantation year (11%).

294 e a high frequency of ED visits in the first posttransplantation year and high rates of subsequent ho

295 nclude that dnDSA occurring during the first posttransplantation year may be transient, and the risk

296 In the first posttransplantation year, AMR immunopathologic and histo

297 Fifteen patients were diagnosed in the first posttransplantation year, and three patients, beyond 1 y

298 ensity of immunosuppression during the first posttransplantation year, we investigated the incidence

299 pients were graded for pAMR during the first posttransplantation year.

300 of PTLD was highest during the 10th to 14th posttransplantation years.