コーパス検索結果 (right1)
通し番号をクリックするとPubMedの該当ページを表示します
1 entify predictors for discontinuation due to inefficacy and adverse events.
2 cent of patients (n = 5) had treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events.
3 least one dose of study drug in terms of treatment-emergent adverse events.
4 ID-19, and safety, as measured by the occurrence of serious adverse events.
5 ost frequently occurring, yet preventable hospital-acquired adverse events.
6 re were no significant between-group differences in serious adverse events.
7 ys of patient's ICU discharge date to identify and classify adverse events.
8 als with major decreases in LOS had a higher risk of severe adverse events [1.22 (1.11-1.34)] and death [1.17 (1.04-1.32)
9 At a median follow-up of 6.6 years, there were 8 major adverse events: 6 relapses, 1 treatment-related death (from s
11 Detailed study of ophthalmic immune-related adverse events (AEs), including determination of incidence an
12 t-reported local reactions (LRs) and systemic events (SEs), adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, newly diagnosed chronic me
14 ntermediate-risk PE, there were no deaths or device-related adverse events and a significant reduction in right ventricul
15 lular carcinoma (HCC) because of the potential for profound adverse events and large variations in survival outcome.
16 Six subjects tolerated a total of 17 FUS treatments with no adverse events and neither cognitive nor neurological worseni
18 served 6 of 28 patients (21%) with grade >=3 immune-related adverse events, consisting of asymptomatic laboratory abnorma
19 al toxicity tables that include the incidence of high-grade adverse events, defined by the Common Terminology Criteria fo
22 .17-24.65), any adverse event (OR 1.55, 95% CI: 1.03-2.33), adverse events due to decreased appetite (OR 3.56, 95% CI: 1.
24 t clinical efficacy, there is also the potential for severe adverse events, including cytokine release syndrome (CRS).
26 protocols and/or trial registration, and poor reporting of adverse events, methods of sequence generation and allocation
29 ts, do not provide information on the time profile of these adverse events or reflect the continuous, lower grade symptom
30 rawal for any reason (OR 2.61, 95% CI: 1.38-4.96) or due to adverse events (OR 2.65, 95% CI: 1.04-6.80), any serious adve
31 al selinexor induced durable responses and had a manageable adverse events profile in patients with relapsed or refractor
32 d on median pure tone averages (PTA), and procedure-related adverse events rated by the Common Terminology Criteria for A
33 serious adverse event (OR 2.30, 95% CI: 1.18-4.48), serious adverse events related to abnormal liver function tests (OR 1
35 ment (TPVR) is associated with a risk of procedural serious adverse events (SAE) and exposure to ionizing radiation.
36 f-treatment outcomes, culture-conversion rates, and serious adverse events (SAEs) during treatment.
37 to immunotherapy and simultaneously identify immune-related adverse events, there are several challenges in interpreting
38 The percentage of participants with local or systemic adverse events was similar in the two groups.
39 By a stepwise method to capture all available adverse events, we first extracted data on myelodysplastic sy
41 contrast sensitivity, endothelial cell count, and possible adverse events were assessed at least 12 months postoperative
50 There were decreased Optimizer-related adverse events with the 2-lead system compared with the 3-lea