ライフサイエンスコーパス: R0

1 R0 and SIG were calculated for each grid cell in Canada

2 R0 for the Pacific ZIKV epidemics is estimated between 1

3 R0 rates were significantly higher in LAP cancer than in

4 R0 resection of the pelvic recurrence is the most signif

5 R0 resection rate was 87% (21/24).

6 R0 resection remains the best chance for long-term survi

7 R0 resection was achieved in 53 patients (94.6%).

8 R0 resection was further divided into 3 groups: 0.1 to 0

9 R0 resection was reported in 60 (74%) of 81 patients.

10 R0 resections have an improved survival compared with R1

11 R0 resections were achieved in 158 patients, 17 of whom

12 R0, in contrast, increases monotonically and is the majo

13 R0, R1, and R2 resections were achieved in 78, 15, and 7

14 R0-resection rates decreased from 75% to 35% when changi

15 R0/R1 resection rates and associated survival vary signi

16 athCR (P = .02), pathCR + pathPR (P = .006), R0 resection (P < .001), and postsurgery T and N stages

17 We analysed 603 R0 resected patients to assess whether NLR, PLR and PC c

18 In total, there were 9 R0 and 10 R1 resections.

19 tic cancer surgery with the aim to achieve a R0 resection.

20 th a median of 27 resected lymph nodes and a R0-resection rate of 92%.

21 n a country can be known with some accuracy, R0 varies between settings and can be difficult to measu

22 ion (FS) and re-resection results to achieve R0 status are associated with different long-term outcom

23 After R0-resection of the primary tumor, we were able to prolo

24 estimate 2-year survival (overall and after R0 or R1 resection), pattern of relapse, and toxicity in

25 Adjuvant gemcitabine chemotherapy after R0-resection significantly improved median survival of t

26 s to prevent recurrence and metastasis after R0-resection.

27 lymph node (LN) metastases on outcome after R0 resection of gallbladder cancer (GBCA).

28 eviews of adjuvant therapy in patients after R0 resection of carcinoma of the pancreas.

29 atients with primarily resectable PDAC after R0 resection.

30 Median survival after R0 resection was similar in the extended resection and s

31 ant imatinib versus no further therapy after R0-R1 surgery patients with localized, high- or intermed

32 An R0 margin was achieved in 36 (74%) patients.

33 ascular resection is indicated to achieve an R0 (no residual disease) resection for prolongation of s

34 additional pancreas is removed to achieve an R0 margin.

35 After an R0 resection, overexpression of Mdm2 (P = .0062) and abs

36 en bloc partial hepatectomy (n = 87) and an R0 resection (n = 82) were independent predictors of fav

37 e analysis, adjuvant HAI chemotherapy and an R0 resection margin status were the only independent pre

38 present in 18 (62%) patients, and all had an R0 resection (100%).

39 (y)pTNM stage II or III disease, who had an R0 resection, had a low anterior resection or an abdomin

40 esting continued unresectability, 92% had an R0 resection.

41 2, with 90% of countries expected to have an R0 between 4.0 and 6.7.

42 f histone and NCP structure; and (2) have an R0 of 20 A, which is much less than the dimensions of th

43 h more than one-fourth of patients having an R0 resection.

44 rative chemotherapy is administered, only an R0 resection results in substantial long-term survival.

45 l response and the possibility to perform an R0 resection (P < 0.018; receiver operating characterist

46 esponse to CRT and the ability to perform an R0 resection are associated with significantly improved

47 Additionally, the ability to perform an R0 resection was a significant factor for OS and DFS (n

48 Patients undergoing less than an R0 resection had an ominous prognosis; 32% of patients w

49 Patients who undergo an R0 resection of their pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (

50 with pancreatic cancer who have undergone an R0 or R1 resection of their primary tumor?

51 ith 27.8 months in patients who underwent an R0 resection.

52 be effective for containing strains with an R0 as high as 2.1.

53 n (n = 242) were compared with those with an R0 margin (n = 2573) in terms of short- and long-term ou

54 rty-seven patients were included, 33 with an R0 resection and 14 with positive margins (ie, R1) or no

55 specific survival for those patients with an R0 resection.

56 populations bounded by: pC, 0.0133-0.150 and R0, 1.09-2.16.

57 d reporting rate is generally under 20%, and R0 is generally under 1.5, there is a strong negative co

58 ing if 2-year survival 95% CI were > 45% and R0 and R1 survival estimates were >/= 65% and 45%, respe

59 Postsurgery pathologic findings and R0 resection were correlated with OS and DFS.

60 py, surgical resection after FOLFIRINOX, and R0 resection.

61 onsistent with observed epidemic growth, and R0 was negatively correlated with long-term intervention

62 he total number of resected lymph nodes, and R0 resection rates was evaluated with multivariable logi

63 y, total number of resected lymph nodes, and R0 resection rates.

64 The pathCR and R0 resection rates were 26% and 77%, respectively.

65 ther disentangle the true reporting rate and R0.

66 between estimates of the reporting rate and R0.

67 Estimating pathogen transmission rates and R0 from natural systems can be challenging.

68 go projectors on bX0, bX1, respectively, and R0(eo), R1(eo), the subelliptic boundary conditions they

69 Secondary endpoints are R0-resection rate, perceived burden and quality of life,

70 nts with adenocarcinoma of the GEJ should be R0 resection including at least 15 lymph nodes, preferab

71 can be high, but eradication is easy because R0 is low.

72 Comparison between R0 and R1 resections showed a trend toward worse OS in R

73 This result implies that bringing R0 to less than one is not enough for malaria eliminatio

74 of the extremity and trunk can be treated by R0 surgery alone with acceptable local control and excel

75 sessed using a stochastic model to calculate R0 and the latter was assessed by deriving a suitability

76 have recently been developed for calculating R0 for diseases with seasonally varying transmission.

77 10%] vs 28 [22%], P = 0.03), with comparable R0-resection rates (4/7 [57%] vs 19/28 [68%], P = 0.67).

78 eriod, 954 patients (61%) underwent complete R0 resection with a 5-year survival of 47%.

79 identify patients who underwent a complete (R0) resection for GBCA.

80 cific survival for patients with a complete (R0) resection is 44%, which was achieved in 59% of patie

81 Even after potentially curative R0 resection, patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarci

82 survival rates of patients after a curative (R0) resection.

83 ection was possible in 55% and the curative (R0) resection rate was 63%.

84 OPE leaflets having a spontaneous curvature, R0 = -26 A (experimentally ~ -29.2 A) and DOPC leaflets

85 Decreasing R0 while augmenting cross-sectional collection area with

86 d a significant prognostic indicator despite R0.

87 survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), R0 resection rates, sphincter preservations, and wound/a

88 the longer interval group, and the OS, DFS, R0 resection rates, sphincter preservation, and complica

89 bility (R*) and potential to spread disease (R0 ) can produce three qualitatively disparate outcomes

90 and the reproduction number of the disease (R0).

91 Forster critical distance (R0) calculations determine that the nucleodyes make good

92 ing fluorophore spacing by Forster distance (R0).

93 We developed a climate-driven R0 mathematical model for the transmission risk of Zika

94 nteration involving sacrectomy has excellent R0 margins and survival rates for recurrent rectal cance

95 y components in a single measure of fitness, R0 .

96 eaflets preferring to be approximately flat (R0= -65 A, experimentally ~ -87.3 A).

97 e most important prognostic factor following R0 resection.

98 For R0 resections only, DFS in LAP cancer was 76% and 57% in

99 h 3-year survival rates of 54% +/- 7.05% for R0-resected cases and 0% for patients with incomplete re

100 The definitions for R0 and R1 margin status after resection for pancreatic c

101 Three-year DFS for R0, R1, and R2 resections was 67%, 49%, and 0%, respecti

102 Three-year LRFS for R0 resection was 86% for LAP cancer and 84% for RRC (P =

103 The median survivals for R0-resected intrahepatic, perihilar, and distal tumors w

104 nce imaging) showed a chance of margin-free (R0) resection of the primary tumor and at least a macros

105 inciple does exist, although it differs from R0 maximization.

106 stratified by resection margin (group I: FS-R0 --> PS-R0; group II: FS-R1 --> PS-R0; group III: FS-R

107 nal 51 patients (3.6%) had false-negative FS-R0 margins.

108 es of a 400-nucleotide region of the genome (R0) from nucleotides 889 to 1289 encompassing the 3' end

109 ere observed for AMA1, MSP2-3D7, MSP3, GLURP-R0, and GLURP-R2 but not for MSP119 and MSP2-FC27.

110 dian survival for patients undergoing R1 --> R0 resections was 11 months, 16 +/- 17.3, (P = 0.001).

111 sitive intraoperative frozen section (R1 --> R0).

112 patients included, 112 patients (20.0%) had R0 and 449 patients (80.0%) had R1 resections, including

113 2008, 32 (100%) of 32 study participants had R0 resections.

114 amous) from 9 international centers that had R0 esophagectomy prior to 2002 and were followed at regu

115 The proportion of patients who had R0 resection of those who underwent resection ranged fro

116 The pooled proportion of patients who had R0 resection was 78.4% (95% CI 60.2-92.2, I(2) 64%).

117 At others FET is lower, but a high R0 makes eradication impossible and control ineffective.

118 ars of 25% with a low R0 and 29% with a high R0.

119 uld rise from 6% to 16% from the low to high R0 settings, whereas asymptomatic infection prevalence w

120 sharply from 3% to 48% from the low to high R0 settings.

121 roup) mixing tended to give rise to a higher R0 and increased the likelihood that an epidemic would o

122 liver resection was associated with a higher R0 resection rate (P = 0.006) and improved DSS and DFS (

123 new strains if and only if they have higher R0 values than the resident.

124 ria related to the presence of complete (ie, R0) resection were assessed by using logistic regression

125 US population and supports performing BCS if R0 resection can be achieved, with radiation if tumor si

126 k has significant community structure, or if R0 is high or unknown.

127 Postoperative radiation was planned if R0 resection was not achieved.

128 cisplatin plus fluorouracil does not improve R0 resection rate or survival but enhances postoperative

129 In R0-resected patients, lymph node status (P < 0.001), but

130 erved in 11 patients (13%; 6 in R1 arm, 5 in R0 arm).

131 (95% CI, 53% to 74%); it was 67% and 60% in R0 and R1 patients, respectively.

132 The relative change in R0 due to an intervention is referred to as the effect s

133 an change dramatically with small changes in R0.

134 es in the face of substantial uncertainty in R0.

135 etrimental to malaria control, by increasing R0 and increasing the likelihood of malaria persistence

136 Transmission indices (R0) are higher in all 3 countries than in 1976.

137 eters (i.e. mean duration of infectiousness, R0, and Reff) and can provide an accurate estimate of th

138 For strains with very large R0, we derive an expression for this local fitness funct

139 l after resections with 1-mm margin or less (R0-close) were similar to R1 resections: both groups had

140 in children aged 0-4 years of 25% with a low R0 and 29% with a high R0.

141 For diseases with a low R0, the most connected individuals provide the earliest

142 of MERS-CoV are identified and suggest lower R0 values.

143 calculating the human component of malarial R0 .

144 al benefit associated with negative margins (R0 vs R1 resection) was greater in patients with subopti

145 Achievement of clear operative margins (R0) conferred a large and significant benefit for diseas

146 tumor within 1 mm of the resection margins (R0) was achieved in 92% of patients in the chemoradiothe

147 e does not differ significantly from matched R0 resections.

148 The median R0 of rubella in the African region is 5.2, with 90% of

149 p between the degree of within-group mixing, R0 and equilibrium HIV prevalence under different mixing

150 patients with a margin of greater than 1 mm (R0-wide) (16 vs 14 vs 35 months, respectively; P < 0.001

151 Median overall survival was 35 months (R0, 34 months; R1, 35 months).

152 toperative morbidity, in-hospital mortality, R0 resection rate, and prognostic factor identification.

153 ered undertreated, including 3 node-negative R0 microinvasive intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm

154 lassified by neck margin status as negative (R0) or microscopically positive (R1) on the basis of FS

155 Patients who underwent a margin-negative (R0) resection, and who had previously undergone patholog

156 ent resection with microscopically negative (R0) final margins did not receive radiotherapy.

157 codified as macro/microscopically negative (R0) or macroscopically negative/microscopically positive

158 The resection margins were negative (R0) in 300 patients (83.3%) and positive (R1) in 60 (16.

159 , expressed by the basic reproduction number R0 (defined as the number of secondary cases produced by

160 yses show that the basic reproduction number R0, and the infectious human population are most sensiti

161 median within-host basic reproductive number R0 is 10.7, the rate of viral production is rapid (>25,0

162 n (measured by the basic reproductive number R0) and its individual-level severity.

163 rs associated with basic reproductive number R0, we extend the branching process model to infer trans

164 ons (FET) and the basic reproduction number (R0) and consequently causes UT8T to vary from easily eli

165 cal analyses gave basic reproduction number (R0) estimates in the range of 1.4 to 1.6, whereas a gene

166 Typically, if the basic reproduction number (R0) for malaria is greater than unity, the disease will

167 The basic reproduction number (R0) is an important quantity summarising the dynamics of

168 gs by varying the basic reproduction number (R0).

169 sion, such as the basic reproduction number (R0).

170 The estimated mean reproductive number (R0 = approximately 1.01) from global and Ontario sequenc

171 er values for the basic reproductive number (R0) are consistent with observed epidemic growth, and R0

172 n increase in the basic reproductive number (R0) in response to increasing population density; (2) a

173 for values of the basic reproductive number (R0) less than one within which the invasion and persiste

174 of origin and the basic reproductive number (R0) of clusters were estimated by Bayesian methods.

175 pulation size the basic reproductive number (R0) ranging from 1.24 to 1.34.

176 If the basic reproductive number (R0) was below 1.60, our simulations showed that a prepar

177 missibilities and basic reproductive number (R0).

178 l estimate of the basic reproduction number, R0, weighted by provincial population size, was 26.63 fo

179 te in a country and the reproductive number, R0, a measure of how efficiently a disease transmits.

180 The basic reproductive number, R0, is estimated at 3.0 (standard deviation 0.6) across

181 The basic reproductive number, R0, ranges from 5 to 8, which is slightly above estimate

182 We estimated the basic reproductive number, R0, to range from 1.3 to 1.7 and the generation interval

183 capacity and the basic reproductive number, R0.

184 ment that all the local reproduction numbers R0 be larger than unity is neither necessary nor suffici

185 h, the estimated basic reproduction numbers (R0 ) are 1.71 (95% CI, 1.44 to 2.01) for Guinea, 1.83 (9

186 (lambda(t)) and basic reproductive numbers (R0) of dengue were estimated for the periods 1969-1980 a

187 An international, multicenter cohort of R0 resected HCC patients were categorized by MC status a

188 The strict definition of R0 requiring a 1 mm tumor-free margin is not commonly ac

189 We estimated the distribution of R0 in African countries based on the age distribution of

190 flu, and comparable with lower estimates of R0 obtained from previous influenza pandemics.

191 for epidemic dynamics and for estimation of R0, both by a priori model formulas and by inference of

192 rubella transmission to predict the level of R0 that would result in an increase in CRS burden for sp

193 py strategies may increase the likelihood of R0 resection and remain an area of active investigation.

194 c resections have enhanced the likelihood of R0 resection.

195 to lower patients burden, a higher number of R0-resections and lower recurrence rates with less need

196 Percentages of R0 resections (93%) did not differ between groups.

197 ics, operative procedures, and proportion of R0 resections.

198 This relatively low range of R0 suggests that intervention strategies developed for o

199 The rate of R0 resection was 95.7% in group L and 92.7% in group O (

200 TTE achieved a higher rate of R0 resections (86.2% vs 73.2%; P = 0.001) and a higher m

201 Extended TTE achieved a higher rate of R0 resections, a higher lymph node yield, and resulted i

202 39.1% (95% CI, 26.9%-52.8%), and the rate of R0 surgical conversions was 28.1% (95% CI, 18.1%-40.8%).

203 The rates of R0 (>/=1 mm margin), R1 (<1 mm clearance), and R1 (direc

204 Comparable rates of R0 resection (88% vs 88%, P = 0.999), median recurrence-

205 rvival, overall response rates, and rates of R0 surgical conversions and overall surgical conversions

206 relationship was maintained in the subset of R0 patients with PFS (18.3 v 33.2 months; DS moderate or

207 n zone" can exist for even smaller values of R0.

208 ma of the uncinate process should be offered R0 or R1 resection whenever technically feasible.

209 rsistence thresholds are solely dependent on R0.

210 ng a 20% contribution of uDNA to the overall R0, our calculations suggest that R0=1.6 in the absence

211 n for ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreas (R0 or R1 resection).

212 A total of 79 eligible patients (R0, n = 54; R1, n = 25; EHCC, 68%; GBCA, 32%) were treat

213 Such findings transform a planned R0 resection to R1.

214 In 379 pN + R0 patients, the median number of positive lymph nodes w

215 had passed in the first affected population, R0 and pC could be well estimated.

216 s, 1639 adenocarcinoma patients with primary R0-resection were withheld after excluding 90-day mortal

217 PS-R0-neck was achieved in 1196 patients (85.5%), 131 patie

218 S of converting an FS-R1-neck margin to a PS-R0-neck margin by additional resection was assessed.

219 Median OS for PS-R0-neck patients was 21.1 months versus 13.7 months for

220 d by resection margin (group I: FS-R0 --> PS-R0; group II: FS-R1 --> PS-R0; group III: FS-R1 --> PS-R

221 p I: FS-R0 --> PS-R0; group II: FS-R1 --> PS-R0; group III: FS-R1 --> PS-R1).

222 and more node positivity (P = 0.08) than PS-R0-neck patients.

223 Both FS-R1-to-PS-R0 and PS-R1-neck patients had larger tumors (P = 0.001)

224 ients (5.1%) were converted from FS-R1-to-PS-R0 by additional resection.

225 for adverse pathologic factors, FS-R1-to-PS-R0 conversion remained associated with significantly wor

226 (P < 0.001) and 11.9 months for FS-R1-to-PS-R0 patients (P < 0.001).

227 with significantly worse OS compared with PS-R0-neck patients (hazard ratio: 1.55; P = 0.009).

228 rge invasive colloid adenocarcinoma (pT3N0M0 R0) derived from an intestinal subtype GNAS-mutated IPMN

229 fashion resulting in relatively low radical (R0)-resection rates and high recurrence rates.

230 The net reproductive rate (R0) and intrinsic rate of increase (r) of the T. ni stra

231 g of the pathogen's basic reproductive rate (R0), is epidemiologically more important than vector com

232 Overall survival (OS), response rate, R0 resection rate, and safety were secondary end points.

233 as measured by blood loss, transfusion rate, R0 negative margin rate, postoperative peak bilirubin, p

234 dically change the basic reproductive ratio (R0) of an infection and additionally the impact of vecto

235 e epidemiology the basic reproductive ratio, R0, is defined as the average number of new infections c

236 s, 3D7 and FC27), MSP3, GLURP (both regions, R0 and R2), and AMA1 antigens of Plasmodium falciparum.

237 Reported R0/R1 rates and associated survival are highly heterogen

238 inomas, were completely surgically resected (R0), and patients received neither neoadjuvant nor adjuv

239 We randomly assigned patients with resected (R0) stage III disease (1:1) to receive 12 cycles of FOLF

240 ntified with macroscopic complete resection (R0, R1) of abdominal and retroperitoneal soft-tissue sar

241 5 patients who underwent curative resection (R0) for colon cancer stage II in Munich.

242 carcinoma (PA), a margin negative resection (R0) is critical for long-term survival.

243 Outcome based on the type of resection (R0, R1, R2, or no resection) was evaluated.

244 66 patients who underwent radical resection (R0), survival was significantly shorter in patients with

245 Complete surgical tumor resection (R0) for treatment of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (IC

246 eters for patients with complete resections (R0) following neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy for esophage

247 Complete resections (R0) were performed in 66 of 74 (89%) patients with 3-yea

248 ients undergoing curative intent resections (R0) for GC (1995-2005) were evaluated in 2 independent,

249 For group CRT compared with group S, R0 resection rate was 93.8% versus 92.1% (P = .749), wit

250 We have developed a murine model of single, R0-resectable ICC with favorable characteristics for the

251 iently ( approximately 50%) than the smaller R0 isoform ( approximately 20%), suggesting that CD45 is

252 We also identified a repeat, termed R0, that can function as a DNA enhancer element within t

253 e, patients with MR had worse prognosis than R0 patients (PFS, 15 v 29 months; P < .01; OS, 41 v 77 m

254 he overall R0, our calculations suggest that R0=1.6 in the absence of virus integration.

255 ssessment of circumferential margins and the R0 definition with a 1 mm free margin were introduced in

256 han in the standard resection group, but the R0 resection rate was comparable.

257 In the R0 surgery-alone arm, the cumulative incidence rates of

258 operative chemoradiotherapy may increase the R0 (curative) resection rate, overall survival (OS) dura

259 to determine its feasibility, impact on the R0 resection rate, type of pathologic response, OS, and

260 Overall, the R0 is estimated to be 0.44 (95%-confidence interval 0.42

261 dels may be dramatically underestimating the R0 of contagions.

262 had preoperative chemoradiotherapy and then R0 resections.

263 values, uDNA can maximally contribute 20% to R0 in this case.

264 ynaptic transmission, uDNA can contribute to R0 regardless of the number of uDNA copies required for

265 for replication, uDNA does not contribute to R0.

266 wever, the lower the contribution of uDNA to R0 because this increases the chances that at least one

267 uDNA might contribute about 20% to the total R0.

268 Conclusion Patients with NSCLC who undergo R0 resection and are found to have pN2 disease have impr

269 In patients undergoing R0 resection, the median survival was prolonged (65 mont

270 Median survival for patients undergoing R0 resections was 21 months, 26 +/- 23.4 months versus 1

271 Most patients (77.7% [115 of 148]) underwent R0 resection, and 8.8% (13 of 148) of the patients had N

272 In arm B, 81% underwent R0 resection.

273 postoperative radiation; 74 (84%) underwent R0 resection and were treated by surgery alone.

274 Most patients underwent R0 resection (75%) and 9% had N1 disease.

275 Most patients underwent R0 resection (87.9%), and 35.7% of patients had N1 disea

276 chemotherapy plus surgery patients underwent R0 resections (P = .5137).

277 om 1985 through 2003, 505 patients underwent R0/R1 gastrectomy (n = 153) or esophagectomy (n = 352) w

278 inoma, 353 squamous carcinoma) who underwent R0 esophagectomy with > or =15 lymph nodes resected at 9

279 or the entire cohort, patients who underwent R0 resection and were classified as N0, based on total l

280 ivariable analysis in patients who underwent R0 resection with >or=15 lymph nodes examined (n = 275)

281 al vaccination fractions, estimated by using R0, have not accompanied the increase in age at exposure

282 o the basic reproductive ratio of the virus, R0, and the models are parameterized with preliminary da

283 The primary outcome was R0 resection rate.

284 Three-year survival by type of resection was R0 42.4%, R1 was 18.0%, and R2 was 8.6%.

285 Fifty-eight of these were R0 resections, of which five were amputations.

286 l setting under which prevalence decays when R0<1, and a setting in which subthreshold endemic equili

287 likelihood of malaria persistence even when R0<1.

288 While R0 resection remains the mainstay of curative treatment

289 With R0, R1 (<1 mm), and R1 (direct) status the median surviv

290 pancreatic vascular axis was associated with R0 resection in 91% of cases (20 of 22 patients, positiv

291 portal vein was associated in all cases with R0 resection (10 of 10 patients, positive predictive val

292 of resected lymph nodes (P > 0.05), nor with R0 resection rates (P > 0.05).

293 The 5-year OS rates for patients with R0 resection (margin >/=1 mm) and R1 resection were 55%

294 From the patients with R0 resection and M0 category, 3 groups with significantl

295 iotherapy; cohort one included patients with R0 resection and pN2 disease, whereas cohort two include

296 Patients were matched with 80 patients with R0 resections according to age, body mass index, gender,

297 Patients with R0 resections had a favorable survival compared with tho

298 d an ominous prognosis; 32% of patients with R0 resections were alive and free of disease at 5 years,

299 served across subdistricts and schools, with R0 ranging between 1.7 and 6.8.

300 in lambda(t) from 0.038/year to 0.019/year, R0 changed only from 3.3 to 3.2.