戻る
「早戻しボタン」を押すと検索画面に戻ります。

今後説明を表示しない

[OK]

コーパス検索結果 (1語後でソート)

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 ipheral transplantation tolerance induced by costimulation blockade.
2 tion of transplantation tolerance induced by costimulation blockade.
3 ss resist prolongation of skin allografts by costimulation blockade.
4  allograft survival was readily prolonged by costimulation blockade.
5  of sublethally irradiated mice treated with costimulation blockade.
6 es some of the survival advantage induced by costimulation blockade.
7  T cell apoptotic pathway, on the effects of costimulation blockade.
8 l for the induction of hyporesponsiveness by costimulation blockade.
9 opoietic chimerism, lymphocyte depletion and costimulation blockade.
10 lanted tissues when induced by coreceptor or costimulation blockade.
11 r saturation as a pharmacodynamic measure of costimulation blockade.
12 partial regimens, or a full regimen based on costimulation blockade.
13 tic and skin allografts in mice treated with costimulation blockade.
14  dramatically prolonged graft survival under costimulation blockade.
15 slet allograft survival in mice treated with costimulation blockade.
16 deficient mice show early graft loss despite costimulation blockade.
17  for long-term allograft survival induced by costimulation blockade.
18 skin allograft survival in mice treated with costimulation blockade.
19 ection driven by CD8(+) T cells resistant to costimulation blockade.
20 llograft survival in recipients treated with costimulation blockade.
21 graft survival was compared in untreated and costimulation blockade (500 microg anti-CD40L and 500 mi
22 - mice than in IFN-gamma+/+ mice, and T-cell costimulation blockade abrogated alloantigen-induced T-c
23  by treating mice with either B7-CD28 T-cell costimulation blockade alone or B7-CD28 T-cell costimula
24 -/-) mice treated with either B7-CD28 T-cell costimulation blockade alone or B7-CD28 T-cell costimula
25  we find that the full tolerance regimen, or costimulation blockade alone, specifically inhibits alre
26 graft survival beyond that in mice receiving costimulation blockade alone.
27                                         Late costimulation blockade also reduced virus-specific T-cel
28  neutralizing IL-4 in addition to CD40-CD154 costimulation blockade and CD8+ T-cell depletion prevent
29 ng protocol with ABT-737 in combination with costimulation blockade and low-dose cyclosporine A resul
30 cy may be a valid pharmacodynamic measure of costimulation blockade and provide the first direct clin
31                              Combined use of costimulation blockade and rapamycin may provide a means
32                                              Costimulation Blockade and Sirolimus (CoBS) resulted in
33 etermined the effect that CD28/CD40-directed costimulation blockade and sirolimus have on this diseas
34 ce immunosuppression with CD28/CD40-directed costimulation blockade and sirolimus.
35 gate the role of innate immunity, mice given costimulation blockade and skin allografts were coinject
36 te induction of transplantation tolerance by costimulation blockade and that IL-2/Idd3 is a critical
37 stem cell transplantation protocols based on costimulation blockade and tolerance induction may requi
38           We took cell/complement depletion, costimulation blockade, and serum transfer approaches to
39 ed strategy using a single dose of busulfan, costimulation blockade, and T cell-depleted donor bone m
40                    C57BL/6 mice treated with costimulation blockade are able to generate allospecific
41 s, rather than exerting immune modulation by costimulation blockade as currently postulated.
42 t a donor-specific CD8 T cell response under costimulation blockade as well as for the graft to survi
43 ansion and combinatorial therapy with novel, costimulation blockade-based immunosuppression strategie
44 ed-efficacy as in young recipients employing costimulation blockade-based or T-cell depletion-based c
45 urmount these impediments, we have adapted a costimulation blockade-based protocol developed for soli
46 gents currently available, in particular, by costimulation blockade-based regimens.
47 roduction may represent an important part of costimulation blockade-based strategies to promote allog
48                                     However, costimulation blockade-based tolerance protocols have fa
49  an attractive substitute in mouse models of costimulation blockade-based tolerance regimens.
50        In contrast, following treatment with costimulation blockade, busulfan, and bone marrow, heart
51 bed a nonirradiation-based regimen combining costimulation blockade, busulfan, and donor bone marrow
52 in chemically diabetic NOD mice treated with costimulation blockade but is prolonged further in NOD I
53 previously reported that continuous 24-month costimulation blockade by abatacept significantly slows
54  that TLR signaling abrogates the effects of costimulation blockade by preventing alloreactive CD8+ T
55               These results demonstrate that costimulation blockade can induce hyporesponsiveness of
56                      Rapamycin together with costimulation blockade can induce tolerance in organ all
57                    It has been reported that costimulation blockade can result in T cell anergy.
58 d depletion of CD4 and/or CD8 pos T cells or costimulation blockade can substitute for ALS and preser
59 ells (Tmem), particularly those resistant to costimulation blockade (CB), are a major barrier to tran
60 c process dependent on the level of residual costimulation blockade, CD4+ regulatory cells, and activ
61             In synchimeric mice treated with costimulation blockade, coadministration of all four TLR
62        Belatacept, a B7-specific mediator of costimulation blockade (CoB), is clinically indicated as
63 stimulation blockade alone or B7-CD28 T-cell costimulation blockade combined with donor splenocyte tr
64 stimulation blockade alone or B7-CD28 T-cell costimulation blockade combined with donor splenocyte tr
65 th on IFN-gamma-deficient recipients despite costimulation blockade could be explained by the lack of
66 ly tolerized by either rapamycin or combined costimulation blockade (CTLA-4Ig plus anti-CD40L mAb).
67                               Mice receiving costimulation blockade (CTLA4-Ig and anti-CD40 ligand) a
68 tive preconditioning (low-dose busulfan) and costimulation blockade (CTLA4-Ig and anti-CD40L) to prod
69                NOD.B6 Idd3 mice treated with costimulation blockade deleted alloreactive CD8 T-cells
70 ntribution of Tregs to immune suppression by costimulation blockade depends on the concentration of C
71  from diabetes by a short course of combined costimulation blockade, despite the continued diabetogen
72  mice with very severe diabetes treated with costimulation blockade did not reverse diabetes, showing
73 llograft-protective effects of CD40-directed costimulation blockade do not require sCD154 blockade, c
74                                      Because costimulation blockade does not result in universal tole
75                               CD28 and CD40L costimulation blockade during acute infection also dimin
76  monoclonal antibody-mediated coreceptor and costimulation blockade enables long-term engraftment and
77 N-gamma+/+ and IFN-gamma-/- mice, and T-cell costimulation blockade enhanced alloantigen-induced T-ce
78                        gld mice treated with costimulation blockade enjoy a significantly greater inc
79    The data also suggest that B7-CD28 T-cell costimulation blockade exerts immunosuppressive actions
80 e almost completely protected from diabetes, costimulation blockade failed to prolong skin allograft
81                                              Costimulation blockade fails to prolong skin allograft s
82 cy of Th17 cells and conferred resistance to costimulation blockade following transplantation.
83                                              Costimulation blockade has been shown to be effective in
84                                       T cell costimulation blockade has shown promise as an alternati
85 ne or rapamycin were compared as adjuncts to costimulation blockade in the murine BALB/c to C3H/He he
86 intenance of allograft protection induced by costimulation blockade in this model.
87 d transplantation, where treatments based on costimulation blockade, in particular CD40 ligand (CD40L
88 linated neoantigens and clinical efficacy of costimulation blockade indicate a general defect in main
89 asL is not required for the establishment of costimulation blockade induced hyporesponsiveness, but r
90                                Surprisingly, costimulation blockade induced permanent islet allograft
91         Deletion of CD4 or CD25 cells during costimulation blockade induced rapid rejection of skin b
92  human autoimmune diabetes, are resistant to costimulation blockade-induced allograft tolerance.
93      This study demonstrated that short-term costimulation blockade-induced dominant tolerance and th
94 e role of Foxp3 regulatory T (Treg) cells in costimulation blockade-induced dominant tolerance to por
95                        Strain differences in costimulation blockade-induced hyporesponsiveness persis
96 sis that NOD mice would also be resistant to costimulation blockade-induced rat xenograft tolerance.
97 nity and that autoimmunity and resistance to costimulation blockade-induced transplantation tolerance
98                                              Costimulation blockade induces prolonged rat islet and s
99 e and rapamycin may provide a means to bring costimulation blockade into the clinic.
100 closporine and rapamycin upon the outcome of costimulation blockade is forwarded.
101                                 In contrast, costimulation blockade is ineffective in this clinically
102 of NOD mice to resist tolerance induction by costimulation blockade is mediated by both CD4+ and CD8+
103 hematopoietic chimerism in mice treated with costimulation blockade is not known.
104 ft survival in NOD.B6 Idd3 mice treated with costimulation blockade is prolonged compared with NOD mi
105               The alloresponse suppressed by costimulation blockade is restored by LCMV infection and
106 vival in (NOD x C57BL/6)F1 mice treated with costimulation blockade is short, suggesting a strong gen
107 cipients with anti-CD40 ligand and CTLA-4Ig (costimulation blockade) is a powerful promising albeit n
108                                        After costimulation blockade, islet allograft survival was pro
109                         Moreover, short-term costimulation blockade led to robust immune tolerance th
110 er the diagnosis of type 1 diabetes and that costimulation blockade may exert its beneficial therapeu
111                     Here we demonstrate that costimulation blockade-mediated tolerance after lung tra
112 hypothesize that CD8(+) T cell "escape" from costimulation blockade might be a IL-15/IL-15R dependent
113 olerance, we hypothesized that "escape" from costimulation blockade might represent a CD8(+) and IL-1
114 s with conventional agents (n=3) or based on costimulation blockade (n=7).
115                     In murine models, T-cell costimulation blockade of the CD28:B7 and CD154:CD40 pat
116                                              Costimulation blockade of the CD40/CD154 pathway has bee
117 erefore, besides direct inhibition of T-cell costimulation, blockade of B7/CD28 may facilitate induct
118                                              Costimulation blockade or gene knockout of either CD28 o
119 depleting mechanism of action and not merely costimulation blockade plays a substantial role in the t
120 .TNFR2-/- and B6.IL-12R-/- mice treated with costimulation blockade plus LPS also exhibited short ski
121 oncytotoxic, irradiation-free approach using costimulation blockade plus rapamycin treatment.
122 ovide insight into potential risks following costimulation blockade posed by chronic or latent viral
123                                 Importantly, costimulation blockade prevented the rejection of alloge
124 lycytidylic acid (TLR3) to mice treated with costimulation blockade prevents alloreactive CD8(+) T ce
125                                              Costimulation blockade prolonged skin allograft survival
126                               Although CD154 costimulation blockade prolongs allograft survival in mu
127                                      Using a costimulation blockade protocol based on a donor-specifi
128                                    We used a costimulation blockade protocol consisting of a donor-sp
129                                              Costimulation blockade protocols are effective in prolon
130 ection, recipients treated with a CD28-CD154 costimulation blockade regimen achieved sustained insuli
131           Fas expression is not critical for costimulation blockade resistant rejection, suggesting t
132 but rather appears to be required for normal costimulation blockade resistant rejection.
133 resents a new and potent strategy to prevent costimulation blockade-resistant CD8(+) T cell-driven re
134  IL-6 ablated the Th17 response and reversed costimulation blockade-resistant graft rejection.
135            We have previously shown that the costimulation blockade-resistant phenotype can be attrib
136  in cells of hemopoietic origin and that the costimulation blockade-resistant phenotype is dominant.
137 A-1-specific induction therapy to neutralize costimulation blockade-resistant populations of T cells
138                                              Costimulation blockade-resistant rejection (CoBRR) is as
139 nfection, but, strikingly, failed to mediate costimulation blockade-resistant rejection after challen
140               To elucidate the mechanisms of costimulation blockade-resistant rejection and to improv
141 he ability of donor-reactive Tmem to mediate costimulation blockade-resistant rejection during a reca
142 is study, we report that CD8(+) Th17 mediate costimulation blockade-resistant rejection in T-bet(-/-)
143                      We hypothesize that the costimulation blockade-resistant rejection mediated by L
144 jection, these approaches fail, resulting in costimulation blockade-resistant rejection.
145 ng rejection and suggest a strategy to avoid costimulation blockade-resistant rejection.
146 +) CD8(+) cells play a critical role in this costimulation blockade-resistant rejection.
147 gesting a link between CD28-negative Tem and costimulation blockade-resistant rejection.
148 kthrough response temporally correlated with costimulation blockade-resistant rejection.
149                CD8 T cells are necessary for costimulation blockade-resistant rejection.
150  memory T (TM) cells have been implicated in costimulation blockade-resistant transplant rejection, d
151                     To determine whether the costimulation blockade resulted in tolerance, adult-thym
152                  When mice were treated with costimulation blockade, reversal of diabetes was observe
153 r of NF-kappa B translocation, together with costimulation blockade, synergistically impairs memory T
154 y) total body irradiation and treatment with costimulation blockade, T-cell depletion, or rapamycin.
155 nd support further investigation of combined costimulation blockade targeting the CD28 and CD40 pathw
156 ration occurred in protected recipients, yet costimulation blockade temporarily blunted early T-cell
157 ival of skin allografts in mice treated with costimulation blockade through a CD8 T cell-dependent, M
158  treatment drastically blunts the ability of costimulation blockade to produce long-term engraftment.
159 cyclosporine therapy blocked the capacity of costimulation blockade to produce permanent engraftment,
160 rlying mechanisms, we studied the ability of costimulation blockade to prolong islet allograft surviv
161 ermanent engraftment, combined rapamycin and costimulation blockade treatment produced permanent engr
162 strain combination known to be refractory to costimulation blockade treatment, combined treatment wit
163 vented in the early posttransplant period by costimulation blockade using CD154 or anti-inducible cos
164 aft tolerance in mice induced through either costimulation blockade using CD154-specific antibody the
165 ipheral transplantation tolerance induced by costimulation blockade using donor-specific transfusion
166 depletion in (NOD x CBA)F1 mice treated with costimulation blockade was impaired compared with simila
167       In this model, donor cell infusion and costimulation blockade without busulfan were insufficien
168 cluding short-term depleting anti-CD4 mAb or costimulation blockade, would affect the disease progres

WebLSDに未収録の専門用語(用法)は "新規対訳" から投稿できます。
 
Page Top