ライフサイエンスコーパス: IIP

1 IIP has significant advantages in reducing glycemic vari

2 IIP in thick biotype and with immediate provisionalizati

3 IIP patients had shorter leukocyte telomeres than age-ma

4 IIP provides a more accurate measure of antiviral activi

5 IIP reduced blood glucose fluctuations compared with MDI

6 mild clinical hypoglycemia by 68% (P<.001); IIP also eliminated the weight gain associated with MDI

7 In a subset (10%), IIP patients had telomere lengths below the first percen

8 update is a supplement to the previous 2002 IIP classification document.

9 146 EIP observations from 8 studies and 204 IIP observations from 35 studies.

10 ans of 7.54%+/-0.83% (MDI) vs 7.34%+/-0.79% (IIP).

11 ications have provided new information about IIPs.

12 Although IIP showed favorable outcomes for CBL changes, these res

13 or replace it with an implant with either an IIP or delayed protocol.

14 to determine the frequency of sites where an IIP protocol presented a high risk for inferior alveolar

15 study of patients with CTD-ILD (n = 46) and IIP controls (n = 51), seen at the University of Michiga

16 ic and intrinsic incubation periods (EIP and IIP), in the mosquito and human, respectively.

17 Meta-analyses showed less CBL loss around IIP compared with implant placement in healed bone.

18 demonstrated better CBL preservation around IIP compared with implant placement in healed/native bon

19 Similarly, platform switching around IIP showed better results compared with non-platform swi

20 ces among HRCT diagnostic categories between IIP and CTD-ILD.

21 rties of human lung fibroblasts from certain IIP patient groups can be modulated in a manner that is

22 ation and, hence, the progression of certain IIPs.

23 placement or use of immediate versus delayed IIP loading.

24 l categories as transcripts that distinguish IIP from normal samples.

25 patients with sporadic IIP, 10 with familial IIP, and 9 normal control subjects on a whole human geno

26 atistically significant differences favoring IIP, the small differences may not be clinically relevan

27 , bosentan, in patients with PH and fibrotic IIP.

28 -controlled study, 60 patients with fibrotic IIP and right heart catheter confirmed PH were randomize

29 nd DNA repair contribute to risk of fibrotic IIPs.

30 nt predictors of mortality when adjusted for IIP versus CTD-ILD diagnosis, sex, and interstitial scor

31 econd molars had <6 mm of bone available for IIP, presenting high risk for inferior alveolar nerve in

32 eolar canal did not limit available bone for IIP, 7% of the second premolars, 9% of the first molars,

33 rve injury and lingual plate perforation for IIP in the posterior mandible.

34 econd molar teeth that present high risk for IIP using a preextraction CT scan to assess the availabl

35 mol/L (149.6+/-27.4 mg/dL) (mean +/- SD) for IIP and MDI, respectively (P=.57).

36 wn out of surgical lung biopsies (SLBs) from IIP patients based on their expression of interleukin-4

37 Zn (II) IIP was prepared by copolymerisation of methyl methacryl

38 50), does not correlate well with changes in IIP when mutations alter slope.

39 chemokine receptor 7 (CCR7) is expressed in IIP biopsies and primary fibroblast lines, but its role

40 ficantly better PH maintenance were found in IIP with immediate provisionalization versus conventiona

41 MFR was slightly less in IIP with thick versus thin biotypes, but not statistical

42 cantly less MFR and better PH maintenance in IIP with thick biotype (MFR: MD -0.478, P <0.001; cumula

43 conventional implant placement (CIP) than in IIP, but the result was not statistically significant (m

44 Substantial progress has been made in IIPs since the previous classification.

45 Short telomeres are thus a signature in IIPs and likely play a role in their age-related onset.

46 The unleached and leached IIP particles were characterised by X-ray diffraction, F

47 as studied during rebinding with the leached IIP particles as a function of pH, the weight of the pol

48 The mean IIP estimate was 5.9 days, with 95% expected between day

49 ultures of IIP fibroblasts compared with non-IIP fibroblasts, and CCL5, a CCR5 agonist, significantly

50 r levels of CCL7 were present in cultures of IIP fibroblasts compared with non-IIP fibroblasts, and C

51 systematic review is: What is the effect of IIP on crestal bone level (CBL) changes after at least 1

52 ystematic review is to examine the effect of IIP on MFR and PH after at least 12 months of functional

53 ured from patients with the severest form of IIP, namely usual interstitial pneumonia, exhibited the

54 erapeutic effect in an experimental model of IIP, namely the bleomycin-induced model of pulmonary fib

55 de clues to the etiology and pathogenesis of IIP.

56 IL13-PE-mediated targeting of IIP fibroblasts was dependent on their expression of IL-

57 -17SCID/bg mice that received either type of IIP fibroblasts.

58 Both the genetics and the histologic type of IIP play a role in the etiology and pathogenesis of inte

59 to update the 2002 ATS/ERS classification of IIPs.

60 lmonary fibrosis (IPF) is the most common of IIPs and shares with IIPs an increased incidence with ag

61 Acute exacerbation of IIPs is now well defined.

62 pulmonary fibroblast lines grown from other IIP SLBs and normal SLBs.

63 nts with UIP relative to patients with other IIP and patients without IIP, and that this CC chemokine

64 Immediate implant placement (IIP) is a successful treatment and has the advantages of

65 Immediate implant placement (IIP) is predictable but can lead to esthetic challenges,

66 a high risk for immediate implant placement (IIP).

67 Idiopathic interstitial pneumonia (IIP) and its familial variants are progressive and large

68 s such as idiopathic interstitial pneumonia (IIP), but it is not presently clear how this proliferati

69 forms of idiopathic interstitial pneumonia (IIP), such as usual interstitial pneumonia, can be imper

70 ents with idiopathic interstitial pneumonia (IIP).

71 ng events in idiopathic pulmonary pneumonia (IIP).

72 Idiopathic interstitial pneumonias (IIPs) are a collection of pulmonary fibrotic diseases of

73 The idiopathic interstitial pneumonias (IIPs) are a seemingly disconnected collection of disease

74 ation of idiopathic interstitial pneumonias (IIPs) defined seven specific entities, and provided stan

75 Idiopathic interstitial pneumonias (IIPs) have a progressive and often fatal course, and the

76 fibrotic idiopathic interstitial pneumonias (IIPs; n = 1,616) and controls (n = 4,683), with follow-u

77 In this work a novel ion imprinted polymer (IIP) based on N-(pyridin-2-ylmethyl)ethenamine (V-Pic) w

78 method using antimony ion imprinted polymer (IIP) sorbent combined with electrothermal atomic absorpt

79 A new Zinc (II) ion-imprinted polymer (IIPs) nanoparticles was synthesised for the separation a

80 Instantaneous inhibitory potential (IIP), the log inhibition of single-round infectivity at

81 Instantaneous inhibitory potential (IIP), the log reduction in single-round infectivity at c

82 ecent initiation/inactivation/proliferation (IIP) model characterized quantitatively the observed occ

83 The standard Internet Imaging Protocol (IIP) has been extended to enable arbitrary 2D sectioning

84 a magnetic ion-imprinted polymer (Fe3O4@SiO2@IIP) as a novel and selective nanosorbent for selective

85 from the lungs of 16 patients with sporadic IIP, 10 with familial IIP, and 9 normal control subjects

86 ssion profiles between familial and sporadic IIPs may provide clues to the etiology and pathogenesis

87 ferences exist between familial and sporadic IIPs, we identified only minor gene expression changes b

88 l differences exist in familial and sporadic IIPs.

89 meres contribute to disease risk in sporadic IIPs, we recruited patients who have no family history a

90 hanges with regard to one-stage or two-stage IIP protocol (-0.017 [95% CI, -0.249 to 0.216; P = 0.85]

91 The stochastic IIP analysis, unlike the deterministic one, indicates: (

92 ionalization had less MFR and better PH than IIP in thin biotype or with delayed restoration.

93 Five-year survival in the IIP group was 51.9% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 30

94 The maximum sorption capacity of the IIP for Sb(III) ions was found to be 6.7 mg g(-1).

95 orption and desorption of Pb(II) ions on the IIP particles were quite fast and achieved fully over 5

96 Categorization of the IIPs continues to be problematic despite recent attempts

97 itiating injury or injuries are unknown, the IIPs share a restricted number of final common abnormal

98 Intensive therapy (IIP or MDI) for 1 year.

99 role in the progression of fibrosis in this IIP patient group.

100 r, we here give a stochastic version of this IIP model.

101 Type IIP restriction endonuclease AgeI recognizes a palindrom

102 R.SwaI, a Type IIP restriction endonuclease, recognizes a palindromic e

103 TaqI is a 263-amino acid (aa) Type IIP restriction enzyme that recognizes and cleaves withi

104 eavage mechanism of AgeI is novel among Type IIP restriction endonucleases.

105 rastically different from the canonical Type IIP mechanisms, and has allowed researchers to engineer

106 It is also the first type IIP methyltransferase whose catalytic activity is strong

107 double strand (ds) cleavage activity of Type IIP REases, which recognize 4-8 bp palindromic sequences

108 II, HinfI and TaqI), exclusively of the Type IIP class that recognize palindromic or interrupted-pali

109 ntrary to expectation, CTD-ILD compared with IIP appears to be associated with a worse prognosis when

110 A substantial percentage of patients with IIP are difficult to classify, often due to mixed patter

111 gic variability is frequent in patients with IIP, patients with a histologic pattern of UIP in any lo

112 ecimens from multiple lobes in patients with IIP.

113 achieving predictable esthetic results with IIP presents a challenge because of naturally occurring

114 Intensive insulin therapy with IIP and MDI is effective in controlling non-insulin-depe

115 ) is the most common of IIPs and shares with IIPs an increased incidence with age and unexplained sca

116 patients with other IIP and patients without IIP, and that this CC chemokine may have a major role in

117 itial lung disease, but not patients without IIP, exhibited CCL7 gene expression.

118 tial lung disease, and from patients without IIP.