ライフサイエンスコーパス: standard therapy

1 cancer (PCa) with androgen deprivation being standard therapy.

2 o receive standard therapy or rituximab with standard therapy.

3 tified based on kill slopes in comparison to standard therapy.

4 hen combined and the regimen was compared to standard therapy.

5 a higher risk of relapse than non-TNBCs with standard therapy.

6 gimens that have better performance than the standard therapy.

7 lear cell renal cell carcinomas that have no standard therapy.

8 icant benefit for either the experimental or standard therapy.

9 naive CHC G4 patients treated with low cost standard therapy.

10 tle cell lymphoma (MCL), there is no defined standard therapy.

11 zogamicin and in 1 patient (1%) who received standard therapy.

12 riority of bendamustine and rituximab to the standard therapy.

13 severely active UC who had not responded to standard therapy.

14 ctory acute lymphoblastic leukemia than does standard therapy.

15 placebo every 8 hours for up to 6 doses plus standard therapy.

16 ng ruxolitinib and in six patients receiving standard therapy.

17 irst presentation of AD and after 6 weeks of standard therapy.

18 re rates were 88% for telavancin and 89% for standard therapy.

19 All late recurrences were cured with standard therapy.

20 tion may lead to improvements in the current standard therapy.

21 8 patients were randomly assigned to TAVR or standard therapy.

22 ol-based EGDT was superior to protocol-based standard therapy.

23 s occurred after TAVR versus surgical AVR or standard therapy.

24 the addition of infliximab (5 mg per kg) to standard therapy.

25 central nervous system and respond poorly to standard therapy.

26 gnificant survival benefit in the context of standard therapy.

27 r T. trichiura infection than the rates with standard therapy.

28 ase with widely disparate outcomes following standard therapy.

29 y useful to treat APS patients refractory to standard therapy.

30 ncy characterized by drug resistance, has no standard therapy.

31 nt tumors and convey them with resistance to standard therapy.

32 iceosome mutations relapsed or refractory to standard therapy.

33 e of PPI, they can be a valuable addition to standard therapy.

34 with very good outcome with continuation of standard therapy.

35 iogenesis) and differential sensitivities to standard therapy.

36 heezing that is not relieved or prevented by standard therapies.

37 associated with benefits comparable to some standard therapies.

38 hese lymphomas remain largely incurable with standard therapies.

39 CTH appeared to be more effective than other standard therapies.

40 ogic malignancies that are not responsive to standard therapies.

41 ith peritoneal carcinomatosis who had failed standard therapies.

42 and C-reactive protein >=0.6 mg/dL) despite standard therapies.

43 disorder (OCD) fail to respond adequately to standard therapies.

44 and C-reactive protein >=0.3 mg/dL) despite standard therapies.

45 es of treatment after becoming refractory to standard therapies.

46 odgkin lymphoma (NHL) that is incurable with standard therapies.

47 ncogenesis and render tumors unresponsive to standard therapies.

48 with protocol-based EGDT vs. protocol-based standard therapy, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.51; P=0.31).

49 io, to receive ruxolitinib (110 patients) or standard therapy (112 patients).

50 ving rivaroxaban than in the group receiving standard therapy (16.8% in group 1, 18.0% in group 2, an

51 d a lower rate of treatment failure than the standard therapy (18% vs. 51%; P = 0.001).

52 gnificantly shorter with icatibant than with standard therapy (2.0 hours vs. 11.7 hours, P=0.03).

53 nts with intervention vs 13 [24%] of 54 with standard therapy; 3.02, 1.31-7.00) populations.

54 iving ruxolitinib and 20% of those receiving standard therapy; 38% and 1% of patients in the two grou

55 es was significantly lower after TAVR versus standard therapy (57.4% versus 80.9%, P<0.001; hazard ra

56 ) with combination therapy and 68 (39%) with standard therapy (absolute difference, -4.2%; 95% CI, -1

57 activity criteria not met) or standard care (standard therapy according to the treating clinician, wi

58 nts with intervention vs 13 [25%] of 51 with standard therapy; adjusted OR 2.90, 95% CI 1.20-7.03) an

59 lin, cloxacillin, or cefazolin) (n = 174) or standard therapy alone (n = 178).

60 efficacious and cost-effective compared with standard therapy alone at helping treatment-resistant pa

61 rity of combination therapy in comparison to standard therapy alone could be demonstrated.

62 rates of pathological complete response than standard therapy alone specifically in triple-negative b

63 As compared with standard therapy alone, evolocumab reduced the level of

64 umab plus standard therapy, as compared with standard therapy alone, significantly reduced LDL choles

65 uncontrolled persistent asthma compared with standard therapy alone.

66 6 months in addition to standard therapy or standard therapy alone.

67 t prolongs remission in IBD in comparison to standard therapy alone.

68 or 420 mg monthly) plus standard therapy or standard therapy alone.

69 acterised by aggressive progression, lack of standard therapies and poorer overall survival rates for

70 s, including 17 long-term responders, during standard therapy and after treatment with PD-1 inhibitor

71 dgkin's lymphomas (iNHLs) are incurable with standard therapy and are poorly responsive to checkpoint

72 postoperative goal-directed therapy and best standard therapy and described as cost/hospital survivor

73 e, I discuss currently available options for standard therapy and existing clinical data.

74 t CLD, TAVR is better in these patients than standard therapy and is similar to SAVR.

75 risk of recurrent thrombotic events despite standard therapy and may derive particular benefit from

76 ression of disease in individual patients on standard therapy and measurement variability.

77 ho were null responders to prior peg-IFN/RBV standard therapy and on a raltegravir-based regimen with

78 TAVR performed better in these patients than standard therapy and was similar to SAVR.

79 patients have to have exhausted or declined standard therapies, and have malignancies with potential

80 o protocol-based EGDT, 446 to protocol-based standard therapy, and 456 to usual care.

81 higher with inotuzumab ozogamicin than with standard therapy, and a higher percentage of patients in

82 eria included measurable disease, failure of standard therapy, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group

83 CL) is plagued by heterogeneous responses to standard therapy, and molecular mechanisms underlying un

84 ess than 25% of DL cases will be cured after standard therapy, and the majority of cases will require

85 Yet, no standard therapies are available targeting reperfusion i

86 group of uncommon malignancies in which the standard therapies are minimally effective and evolve sl

87 CC) is a severe malignant tumor in which the standard therapies are mostly ineffective.

88 ICC) is asevere malignant tumor in which the standard therapies are mostly ineffective.

89 H/MMR-D tumors, for which pembrolizumab is a standard therapy, are more common in ACC than has been r

90 year of therapy, the use of evolocumab plus standard therapy, as compared with standard therapy alon

91 Compared with standard therapy, BMC transplantation improved LV ejecti

92 hed results with melphalan and dexamethasone standard therapy, bortezomib is less beneficial to patie

93 per 1000 person-years than those assigned to standard therapy, but no improvement was seen in the rat

94 prostate androgens below that achieved with standard therapy, but significant AR signaling remains.

95 While standard therapies can lead to an initial remission of a

96 t in cancer, enabling tumor cells to survive standard therapies-chemotherapy and radiotherapy.

97 r characterization indicates that CXL146 and standard therapies complementarily target different popu

98 Current standard therapy comprises surgery and radiation, but no

99 umor-propagating cells that are resistant to standard therapies consisting of radiation and temozolom

100 ptor antagonist, or to the current off-label standard therapy consisting of intravenous prednisolone

101 tal seizures in the first trial to include a standard-therapy control group.

102 nsent-before randomization to BMMC, PBMC, or standard therapy (control group)-and repeated at 4-month

103 Combining an NF-kappaB inhibitor with standard therapy could improve antitumor immunity in GBM

104 to investigate whether adding bortezomib to standard therapy could improve outcomes in patients with

105 We assessed whether adding simvastatin to standard therapy could reduce rebleeding and death after

106 early administration of erythropoietin plus standard therapy did not confer a benefit, and was assoc

107 controlled trial, addition of simvastatin to standard therapy did not reduce rebleeding, but was asso

108 minal protein inhibitor apabetalone added to standard therapy did not significantly reduce the risk o

109 intensive glucose lowering, as compared with standard therapy, did not significantly reduce the rate

110 tive colitis (UC) is difficult to treat, and standard therapy does not always induce remission.

111 synergistic effects of I-CBP112 and current standard therapy (doxorubicin) as well as emerging treat

112 nical outcomes is the suboptimal efficacy of standard therapies due to dose limiting toxicities and o

113 We propose that this could be coupled with standard therapies during combating tumor eradication.

114 or 21 days, followed by 20 mg once daily) or standard therapy (enoxaparin 1.0 mg/kg twice daily and w

115 standard therapy (or for which no effective standard therapy existed), who had at least one measurab

116 However, no standard therapy exists for the remaining 50% of patient

117 Although current standard therapy extends median survival to ~15 months,

118 Despite this classification, standard therapies for all subgroups often leave childre

119 Standard therapies for localized inoperable intrahepatic

120 o trials have directly compared Tai Chi with standard therapies for osteoarthritis.

121 This review highlights standard therapies for primary focal hyperhidrosis as we

122 Sorafenib--a broad kinase inhibitor--is a standard therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (

123 Standard therapy for advanced soft-tissue sarcoma has no

124 ry steroids and bronchodilators are the gold-standard therapy for asthma.

125 Standard therapy for CDI involves administration of anti

126 Standard therapy for children newly diagnosed with Crohn

127 Although standard therapy for drug-sensitive tuberculosis is high

128 hat represent the development of the current standard therapy for estrogen receptor-positive advanced

129 sphamide (FC), and rituximab (R) remains the standard therapy for fit patients with untreated chronic

130 tients and has been approved by the FDA as a standard therapy for late-stage melanoma.

131 arbazine (ABVD) with or without radiation is standard therapy for limited-stage Hodgkin lymphoma (HL)

132 Mitral valve (MV) repair has become the standard therapy for mitral regurgitation (MR) due to de

133 Radiotherapy is the standard therapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC); how

134 , lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRd) is a standard therapy for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.

135 dnisone, and thalidomide (MPT) is considered standard therapy for newly diagnosed patients with multi

136 ver transplantation has, thereby, become the standard therapy for patients with "early-stage" HCC on

137 Androgen deprivation is the standard therapy for patients with advanced or recurrent

138 FOLFIRINOX has become a standard therapy for patients with advanced PDAC and can

139 prednisone-thalidomide (MPT) is considered a standard therapy for patients with myeloma who are ineli

140 scatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is standard therapy for patients with severe aortic stenosi

141 es support chemoimmunotherapy as the initial standard therapy for patients without del(17)(p13.1).

142 enograft tumors more susceptible to GEM, the standard therapy for PC.

143 bine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab is the standard therapy for physically fit patients with advanc

144 Chronic oral anticoagulation therapy is the standard therapy for preventing thromboembolic events in

145 Standard therapy for secondary prevention of strokes and

146 y artery bypass grafting (CABG) has been the standard therapy for several decades.

147 isease, and mitral valve surgery is the gold standard therapy for severe MR.

148 Currently, no standard therapy for such patients exists.

149 , randomized trial comparing telavancin with standard therapy for the treatment of patients with comp

150 Adenosine, the standard therapy for treating supraventricular tachycard

151 The standard therapy for women with unexplained infertility

152 espectively) and esophageal AVB who received standard therapy from 2007 through 2010.

153 evelopment of chemoresistance to the current standard therapy, gemcitabine.

154 were significantly lower than the rates with standard therapy (gonadotropin or clomiphene) (P=0.003)

155 group (92.9% [95% CI 89.8-96.0]) than in the standard therapy group (88.9% [85.0-92.8]; OR 0.67 [95%

156 duration of bacteremia was 3.00 days in the standard therapy group and 1.94 days in the combination

157 s less frequent in the intensive than in the standard therapy group during active treatment (hazard r

158 combination group) or no additional therapy (standard therapy group).

159 nce interval, 41%-102%; P = .06) that in the standard therapy group.

160 varoxaban group vs four [2%] patients in the standard therapy group; HR 0.23, 95% CI 0.03-2.06) was s

161 rivaroxaban group vs five [2%] of 236 in the standard therapy group; HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.28-3.43) was s

162 EGDT group (21.0%), 81 in the protocol-based standard-therapy group (18.2%), and 86 in the usual-care

163 the inotuzumab ozogamicin group than in the standard-therapy group (80.7% [95% confidence interval {

164 ive-therapy group (892 participants) and the standard-therapy group (899 participants) averaged 1.5 p

165 the ruxolitinib group and 0% of those in the standard-therapy group (grade 1 or 2 in all cases).

166 r in the intensive-therapy group than in the standard-therapy group (hazard ratio for primary outcome

167 wer risk of the primary outcome than did the standard-therapy group (hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% confiden

168 ruxolitinib group versus 1% of those in the standard-therapy group (P<0.001).

169 the ruxolitinib group and 9% of those in the standard-therapy group (P=0.003); 49% versus 5% had at l

170 between the intensive-therapy group and the standard-therapy group averaged 1.5 percentage points du

171 we pooled data, excluding the protocol-based standard-therapy group from the ProCESS trial, and resol

172 patients in the icatibant group than in the standard-therapy group had complete resolution of edema

173 ents at 1 year was reduced from 2.18% in the standard-therapy group to 0.95% in the evolocumab group

174 in 5%; the corresponding percentages in the standard-therapy group were 0% and 4%.

175 n group) or standard intensive chemotherapy (standard-therapy group).

176 The 3-year mortality rate in the TAVR and standard therapy groups was 54.1% and 80.9%, respectivel

177 For the combination therapy vs standard therapy groups, all-cause 90-day mortality occu

178 3% and 0.2% of patients in the treatment and standard therapy groups, respectively (p < 0.0001).

179 tially whether protocol-based care (EGDT and standard-therapy groups combined) was superior to usual

180 on on or intolerance to one or more lines of standard therapy, had measurable disease per Response Ev

181 injury at a time when N-acetylcysteine, the standard therapy, has no efficacy.

182 r initiation, propagation, and resistance to standard therapies have been isolated from human solid t

183 Standard therapies have high failure rates and little is

184 Babesiosis treatment failures with standard therapy have been reported, but the molecular m

185 patients versus 5.5% in patients undergoing standard therapy (hazard ratio, 2.81; 95% confidence int

186 ban and in 15 (5%) of 298 patients receiving standard therapy (HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.99).

187 an and in 49 (16%) of 298 patients receiving standard therapy (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.20).

188 ity (BCVA) within 12 months in comparison to standard therapy, i.e. intravitreal injection of ranibiz

189 FDs based on 4 factors: (1) host fitness for standard therapy (ie, fit, unfit, or frail); (2) leukemi

190 Adding imatinib to standard therapy improves CR rate and long-term OS for a

191 umab as monotherapy or combined with current standard therapies in first-line advanced NSCLC.

192 The failure of most standard therapies in PDA, as well as promising immune t

193 e impact of ESR1 mutations on sensitivity to standard therapies in two phase III randomized trials th

194 substantial survival benefits compared with standard therapy in both inoperable cohorts.

195 mprovement in patient survival compared with standard therapy in BRAF V600-mutant metastatic melanoma

196 rom hydroxyurea, ruxolitinib was superior to standard therapy in controlling the hematocrit, reducing

197 ever, in low-risk patients, SAVR remains the standard therapy in current clinical practice.

198 Bortezomib is a standard therapy in light-chain amyloidosis (AL), but li

199 Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are standard therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC

200 re effective than beta-blockers, the current standard therapy in most centers.

201 the benefit of early MRA use in addition to standard therapy in patients admitted for MI.

202 an-Akt inhibitor MK-2206 in combination with standard therapy in patients with high-risk early-stage

203 he efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib versus standard therapy in patients with polycythemia vera who

204 cal Trial Comparing Cangrelor to Clopidogrel Standard Therapy in Subjects Who Require Percutaneous Co

205 cal Trial Comparing Cangrelor to Clopidogrel Standard Therapy in Subjects Who Require Percutaneous Co

206 cal Trial Comparing Cangrelor to Clopidogrel Standard Therapy in Subjects Who Require Percutaneous Co

207 nated after receiving trastuzumab as part of standard therapy in the per treatment analyses conducted

208 tment with SNF472 or placebo, in addition to standard therapy, in adult patients with end-stage kidne

209 Standard therapies include the hypomethylating agents az

210 on or rectum that was refractory to previous standard therapy, including EGFR inhibitors if KRAS wild

211 Compared with standard therapy, intensive therapy was associated with

212 Participants were randomized to standard therapy (intravenous vancomycin or daptomycin)

213 Standard therapy involves the use of systemic corticoste

214 ng Lopinavir/r and Lamivudine vs LPV/r based standard therapy) is a 48 week, phase 3, randomised, con

215 rcoma proliferation and, in combination with standard therapy, is effective for reducing the size of

216 To make focal therapy an accepted segment of standard therapy, it needs to proceed toward phase II an

217 led randomly assigned patients (TAVR, n=220; standard therapy, n=229) demonstrated significant improv

218 ychiatric illnesses remaining refractory to 'standard' therapies, neurosurgical procedures may be con

219 gh flow nasal cannulae, in comparison to the standard therapy of continuous positive airway pressure

220 reating B. melitensis infected mice with the standard therapy of daily 0.5 mg doxycycline dose or sin

221 Drug-resistant micrometastases that escape standard therapies often go undetected until the emergen

222 The impact of standard therapies on the response to immunotherapy is n

223 operable) treated by either TAVR (n = 72) or standard therapy only (n = 95).

224 ardiovascular events than those who received standard therapy only during the prolonged period in whi

225 was lower after TAVR (52.0% vs. 69.6% after standard therapy only, p = 0.04).

226 clinical splenomegaly poorly controlled with standard therapies or were newly diagnosed with intermed

227 statistically significant result in favor of standard therapy or a null result with no statistically

228 Standard therapy or aggressive therapy (targets: glycate

229 ment with BMP7v alone or in combination with standard therapy or PI3K inhibitors.

230 and eGFR<90 ml/min per 1.73 m(2), to receive standard therapy or rituximab with standard therapy.

231 5 mg once daily) for 6 months in addition to standard therapy or standard therapy alone.

232 140 mg every 2 weeks or 420 mg monthly) plus standard therapy or standard therapy alone.

233 etastatic cancer that had progressed despite standard therapy (or for which no effective standard the

234 urs (interquartile range, 20.3 to 48.0) with standard therapy (P=0.002).

235 acement (TAVR) versus AVR (PARTNER-A arm) or standard therapy (PARTNER-B arm).

236 -B arm included 179 TF-TAVR patients and 179 standard therapy patients.

237 orvastatin-based standard medical therapy or standard therapy plus STS injection (80 mg, once daily f

238 sion-positive solid tumour, who had received standard therapy previously if available.

239 s both significantly improve efficacy versus standard therapy, primarily in terms of progression-free

240 or conjunctival malignancies are needed when standard therapy provides limited benefits or fails.

241 ant prostate cancer who had progressed after standard therapies received up to 4 cycles of (177)Lu-PS

242 ith PSMA-avid mCRPC who had progressed after standard therapies received up to 4 cycles of LuPSMA eve

243 gastro-oesophageal carcinomas refractory to standard therapy regardless of HER2 status.

244 ignificantly higher in patients treated with standard-therapy regimens (P < .05).

245 Three patients receiving standard therapy required rescue intervention with icati

246 tilineage cytopenias are often refractory to standard therapies requiring chronic immunosuppression w

247 s with reduced EZH2 levels at progression to standard therapy responded to the combination of bortezo

248 Overall, 46% of children receiving standard therapy responded, compared to only 9% who resp

249 l showed that veliparib-carboplatin added to standard therapy resulted in higher rates of pathologica

250 of these drugs, CMV can become resistant to standard therapy, resulting in increased morbidity and m

251 nds use of immunosuppressive agents added to standard therapy, several recent studies have questioned

252 Standard therapies should be considered as initial treat

253 ious MI and DM, the addition of vorapaxar to standard therapy significantly reduced the risk of major

254 Standard therapies such as gemcitabine, 5-fluorouracil (

255 ain respiratory conditions not controlled by standard therapies such as severe allergic and refractor

256 Participants were assigned to intensive or standard therapy (target HbA1c less than 42 or 53-63 mmo

257 itation: protocol-based EGDT; protocol-based standard therapy that did not require the placement of a

258 ed tumor kill by a factor of 2 to 4 over the standard therapy that the patients actually received.

259 Compared with standard therapy, the augmented treatment regimen (regim

260 Although some lymphomas are curable with standard therapy, the majority of the affected patients

261 l therapeutic strategies combining HAPs with standard therapies to achieve long-term tumor control or

262 has adverse effects on the effectiveness of standard therapies to eradicate Helicobacter pylori infe

263 the CHAMPION PHOENIX trial (Cangrelor versus Standard Therapy to Achieve Optimal Management of Platel

264 The Cangrelor Versus Standard Therapy to Achieve Optimal Management of Platel

265 The Cangrelor versus Standard Therapy to Achieve Optimal Management of Platel

266 ngrelor [PCI]: NCT00305162; Cangrelor Versus Standard Therapy to Achieve Optimal Management of Platel

267 t-level data from the 3 phase 3 Cangrelor vs Standard Therapy to Achieve Optimal Management of Platel

268 analysis of the 3 CHAMPION (Cangrelor versus Standard Therapy to Achieve Optimal Management of Platel

269 METHODS AND CHAMPION (cangrelor versus standard therapy to achieve optimal management of platel

270 grelor), CHAMPION PLATFORM (Cangrelor Versus Standard Therapy to Achieve Optimal Management of Platel

271 rate-control medications and not regarded as standard therapy to improve prognosis in patients with c

272 able cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is the standard therapy to prevent sudden cardiac death in pati

273 nts with moderate to severe COPD (already on standard therapy) to daily MK-7123 at 10, 30, or 50 mg o

274 itivity zone vs 0.083 +/- 0.011 per day with standard therapy, translating to a bacterial burden half

275 D high risk) were randomly assigned (1:1) to standard therapy (treatment regimens A and B) or augment

276 on Outcome Study Using Dronedarone On Top Of Standard Therapy Trial (PALLAS), dronedarone was associa

277 In the PARTNER-B arm, risk with standard therapy was 60% per year; TF-TAVR reduced risk

278 of $137 526/QALY; for femoral-popliteal DVT, standard therapy was an economically dominant strategy.

279 Veliparib-carboplatin plus standard therapy was considered for HER2-negative tumors

280 sed psychosocial intervention in addition to standard therapy was efficacious and cost-effective comp

281 Neratinib added to standard therapy was highly likely to result in higher r

282 certain bacteria can enhance the efficacy of standard therapies, we orally administered the lysis str

283 malignancies who had disease progression on standard therapies were eligible to participate.

284 who had failed or had a contraindication to standard therapies were eligible to participate.

285 ediatric low-grade glioma after at least one standard therapy were eligible for inclusion.

286 with pericarditis recurrence while receiving standard therapy were enrolled in a 12-week run-in perio

287 uced irAEs that were readily manageable with standard therapies when started in a timely fashion.

288 CALGB 49907 showed the superiority of standard therapy, which included either cyclophosphamide

289 acute myeloid leukemia (AML) ineligible for standard therapy who received 500 mg ivosidenib daily.

290 ants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive standard therapy with 7-14 days of intravenous amphoteri

291 Combining standard therapy with a beta-lactam antibiotic has been

292 us DAPT for 1, 6, or 12 months (group 2), or standard therapy with a dose-adjusted vitamin K antagoni

293 y compared the efficacy and tolerance of the standard therapy with a potentially less toxic combinati

294 of clinically significant bleeding than was standard therapy with a vitamin K antagonist plus DAPT f

295 etinal artery occlusion (CRAO) after current standard therapy with and without paracentesis.

296 Current standard therapy with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhi

297 nths) FLT3-ITD acute myeloid leukaemia after standard therapy with or without allogeneic haemopoietic

298 (1:1) to either eosinophil-guided therapy or standard therapy with systemic corticosteroids.

299 d 18 years or older, and were ineligible for standard therapy, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology G

300 V-EoE responds to standard therapy without early evidence for complication