1 Eighty-five patients remained
evaluable.
2 ven patients were enrolled, 295 of whom were
evaluable.
3 83 eligible patients were enrolled; 178 were
evaluable.
4 total patients with 704 patients clinically
evaluable.
5 red thirty-six of the enrolled patients were
evaluable.
6 Fourteen patients were
evaluable.
7 hundred and two samples of 149 patients were
evaluable.
8 10% CR and 14% CRi, including 4 patients not
evaluable.
9 5%) of the 5522 patients were not clinically
evaluable.
10 of 298 patients received treatment and were
evaluable.
11 181, 13 months; N3: 5, 7 months; Nx: 1, not
evaluable.
12 e patients were treated, one of whom was not
evaluable.
13 One hundred eighty-nine of 208 patients were
evaluable.
14 thods Of the 534 enrolled patients, 504 were
evaluable.
15 HCs in the survivors who were not clinically
evaluable.
16 Results Of the 90 patients enrolled, 80 were
evaluable.
17 the interim analysis, 142 participants were
evaluable.
18 limus, and 25 (21 men, 4 women) provided two
evaluable 12-hr PK profiles.
19 od samples from 161 men with mCRPC, 191 were
evaluable (
128 pre-ARS inhibitor and 63 pretaxane).
20 s participated in our study of whom 190 were
evaluable,
162 had an MRI.
21 even subjects were enrolled, 72 (67.3%) were
evaluable (
36/group).
22 Eighty-three patients were
evaluable:
44 with HCC, 37 with ICC, and two with mixed
23 Eighty-seven participants were
evaluable:
54% were female, and the median age was 35 ye
24 84.9% (-2.4%; -6.90 to 2.10); and clinically
evaluable,
91.7% and 92.5% (-0.8%; -4.61 to 2.89).
25 Ten (77%) of 13 patients
evaluable after cross-over had stable disease on sunitin
26 ealing rate at 30 days was 66% (33/50; 3 not
evaluable)
after primary closure, which did not signific
27 cy analyses were carried out on the efficacy
evaluable and intention-to-treat populations.
28 re present: coronary anatomy at CTCA was not
evaluable and presence of significant CAD at CTCA.
29 Of 573 enrolled patients, 537 were eligible,
evaluable,
and randomly assigned to an arm with or witho
30 In all, 186 patients were
evaluable,
and the primary end point of an 8-week diseas
31 Of 382 children with
evaluable AVT, 212 had idiopathic/familial PAH (IPAH/FPA
32 We analyzed those children with
evaluable AVT.
33 al of 45 patients were enrolled; 18 were not
evaluable (
because of disease progression before radiati
34 One patient was deemed ineligible, and not
evaluable,
before treatment initiation owing to having n
35 posed and 69 tenofovir-unexposed infants had
evaluable BMC measurements.
36 Of patients
evaluable by imaging, 13 out of 16 (81%) had decreases i
37 llow-up images that were subsequently deemed
evaluable by the teledermatologist.
38 nase demonstrated its phosphorylation in the
evaluable cases and revealed a good correlation with the
39 ospitals in the database that had 20 or more
evaluable cases for the study period.
40 ospitals in the database that had 20 or more
evaluable cases for the study period.
41 Of all
evaluable cases, there was no increased risk of systemic
42 ) and a non-IG gene (MYC-non-IG) in 26 of 50
evaluable cases.
43 None of the 83
evaluable cerebellar samples showed frequent diffuse Abe
44 Only 4% of
evaluable cerebrospinal fluid samples had pleocytosis, b
45 treated with daptomycin for VRE-BSI and with
evaluable clinical outcomes.
46 604 were retrieved for review, 344 reported
evaluable data for 586 individual patients, 43 reported
47 mean age 48.4 +/- 10.7 years) with complete,
evaluable data from both normal and tumor-containing bre
48 ata for 586 individual patients, 43 reported
evaluable data on 46 patient groups.
49 Of the 193 patients with
evaluable data, 35% had an identifiable hereditary cance
50 pulmonary function completed the study with
evaluable data.
51 [range, 22-74 years]; 15 [75%] female) with
evaluable data.
52 am from January 2008 through the most recent
evaluable date prior to July 2013 were included.
53 ess frequent lambda light chain isotype, and
evaluable difference between involved and uninvolved fre
54 Key eligibility criteria included
evaluable disease, Eastern Cooperative Group performance
55 e staining of >/=1+ staining intensity), and
evaluable disease, who had not received previous systemi
56 2 of 5 recipients of Treg cell BMT that were
evaluable displayed chimerism in all lineages, including
57 MYC-R was observed in 51/574 (8.9%)
evaluable DLBCL cases.
58 All nine
evaluable during-treatment biopsies had reduced levels o
59 n predict long-term clinical outcome and are
evaluable early on, such as the pathologic complete resp
60 A total of 984 participants with
evaluable echocardiograms and baseline LF AS (LVSVI </=3
61 et for the EIG proved more difficult (42% of
evaluable EIG participants).
62 ent was observed in 37% of participants with
evaluable endoscopy results at week 12.
63 cal failure occurred in 58 of 177 (32.8%) of
evaluable episodes.
64 ed >/=18 years) with recurrent measurable or
evaluable epithelial ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fal
65 ethod, with 86% categorical agreement, 91.1%
evaluable essential agreement, and no major or very majo
66 All
evaluable explanted grafts experienced antibody-mediated
67 Two hundred forty-eight of 393 patients were
evaluable for a retrospective analysis.
68 Of the 29 patients
evaluable for activity, 19 (66%) achieved an objective r
69 of 101 patients (66.3%; 95% CI, 56.2%-75.4%)
evaluable for alopecia in the scalp cooling group vs 0 o
70 c resection and 222 with open resection were
evaluable for analysis of the 486 enrolled.
71 he 11 included studies, 16,178 patients were
evaluable for antibiotic administration from emergency d
72 A total of 11,017 patients were
evaluable for antibiotic administration from severe seps
73 Among the 27 patients who were
evaluable for antitumor activity, the overall response r
74 on-free survival (PFS), and 29 patients were
evaluable for best response.
75 patients enrolled, and 22 were eligible and
evaluable for dose escalation.
76 Of 24 patients enrolled, 21 patients were
evaluable for efficacy end points.
77 ghty-seven patients were registered (85 were
evaluable for efficacy).
78 d Oct 8, 2015, we enrolled 92 women; 85 were
evaluable for efficacy.
79 randomly assigned; 246 had HA data; 231 were
evaluable for efficacy; 84 (34%) had HA-high tumors (ie,
80 Among 194 eyes
evaluable for growth, the rate was 0.43 mm/yr (standard
81 met eligibility criteria, and 570 (86%) were
evaluable for health-related quality of life.
82 Results Of 41 enrolled patients, 38 were
evaluable for MTD determination.
83 CI, 3.9 to 8.2 months), and 62 patients were
evaluable for objective response rate (ORR; 15%; 95% CI,
84 hundred one patients (66 SR and 35 HR) were
evaluable for outcome.
85 d 889 patients, with 877 patients clinically
evaluable for overall response rates.
86 Sixty-three patients with ccRCC were
evaluable for overall survival (median, 28.9 months; 95%
87 les (range, <one to 56 cycles), and 96% were
evaluable for primary end points.
88 Thirty patients were
evaluable for progression-free survival (PFS), and 29 pa
89 least one further follow-up assessment were
evaluable for quality-of-life outcomes.
90 st one further assessment and were therefore
evaluable for quality-of-life outcomes.
91 in each disease cohort) and 80 of whom were
evaluable for response (40 in each disease cohort).
92 In 32 relapsed treatment courses
evaluable for response after one cycle of chemotherapy,
93 Response endpoints were assessed in the
evaluable for response analysis set (ie, all patients wh
94 27, 2014; 11 patients were excluded from the
evaluable for response analysis set (n=199) due to absen
95 atients with relapsed or refractory CLL were
evaluable for response at 24 weeks.
96 36 were
evaluable for response by central assessment.
97 Among 82 patients
evaluable for response to first-line therapy, 31 patient
98 Results Of 263 patients
evaluable for response to induction, 127 (100%) of 127 p
99 dFLC level <50 mg/L are currently deemed not
evaluable for response to therapy.
100 ong 850 randomly assigned patients, 528 were
evaluable for response using the ICE and 605 using the B
101 Of the 52 patients
evaluable for response, none experienced an objective re
102 Among 157 patients
evaluable for response, one complete and six partial res
103 In patients
evaluable for response, the objective response rates wer
104 Of 30 patients
evaluable for response, two showed partial response, and
105 ompleting at least one cycle of therapy were
evaluable for response.
106 Thirty-five patients were
evaluable for response.
107 s, one had stable lymphoma, and two were not
evaluable for response.
108 tients with DLBCL were enrolled, and 60 were
evaluable for response.
109 ated at maximum-tolerated dose (n = 25) were
evaluable for response.
110 Twenty-three patients were
evaluable for response.
111 Sixteen patients (94%) were
evaluable for response; five (29%) experienced a confirm
112 adverse events in the remaining 16 patients
evaluable for safety were pain (seven [44%] of 16), hypo
113 ne and 47 assigned placebo, all of whom were
evaluable for safety.
114 nts had an hemoglobin A1c and medical record
evaluable for the history of diabetes, and 5,635 patient
115 duloxetine and 128 who received placebo were
evaluable for the primary analysis.
116 e, 46.8 Gy; range, 28.8 to 50.4 Gy) and were
evaluable for the primary end point (median follow-up, 2
117 ty-eight and 77 patients, respectively, were
evaluable for the primary end point, 1-month overall res
118 ples from 678 (84%) of 808 participants were
evaluable for TILs, including 519 (77%) archival samples
119 ceiving at least one dose of study drug were
evaluable for toxicity and all patients completing at le
120 Results Among the 17 patients who were
evaluable for toxicity, three were treated at 30 mg/m(2)
121 Twenty-nine patients were enrolled and
evaluable for toxicity.
122 e most common reasons that patients were not
evaluable for treatment included insufficient tissue, de
123 623 (270, 89, and 264, respectively) were
evaluable for week 52 efficacy.
124 ories, 95 (83%) responded or had information
evaluable from public records.
125 POD24 occurred in 17% and 23% of
evaluable GLSG and BCCA patients, with 5-year OS rates o
126 In 46
evaluable HL patients treated with (90)Y-daclizumab ther
127 Pooled data extracted from 63,740
evaluable ICU patients provided an estimated prevalence
128 Of 176 patients with
evaluable images, 68 patients (38%) died during the stud
129 LDL-C level, 92.5 mg/dL [SD, 27.2]), 846 had
evaluable imaging at follow-up.
130 In the
evaluable immunogenicity population (N = 216; mean age,
131 Mutation status was
evaluable in 430 (64.6%) of 666 patients with KRAS exon
132 Outcomes were
evaluable in 444 failure occurred in 187 (42.1%; 95% con
133 ll survival was 47.6 months (95% CI 42.5-not
evaluable)
in the carfilzomib group versus 40.0 months (
134 acebo group and not reached (95% CI 32.3-not
evaluable)
in the lenalidomide group.
135 teen studies (1830 PEP initiations) provided
evaluable information on 2-drug regimens (zidovudine [ZD
136 , and 10 studies (1755 initiations) provided
evaluable information on the third drug, which was usual
137 indings and electroretinography (ERG) on 244
evaluable injections in 63 patients using 30-Hz flicker
138 The ORR was 52% in 42
evaluable lenalidomide-refractory patients.
139 seen in 83% and phosphorylated S6 in 86% of
evaluable lesions (phospho-AKT staining was technically
140 23.4% compared with baseline was found in 70
evaluable lesions of 10 patients, with a median SUVmax o
141 ntion to treat (patients needed at least one
evaluable lung density measurement).
142 A total of 206 participants were
evaluable (
mean age, 49 years; age range, 25-69 years) 1
143 lantation had either no response or were not
evaluable,
meaning 14 (74% [49-91]) of the 19 patients w
144 Of the 4721 participants, 2715 had an
evaluable MRI.
145 hs (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.6 to not
evaluable [
NE]).
146 parent surveys in a per protocol analysis of
evaluable parents.
147 51 (27%) of the 190
evaluable participants had acute leukoencephalopathy.
148 With median follow-up of 34 months, 15 of 84
evaluable patients (17.9%) progressed.
149 Forty-eight
evaluable patients (22 women and 26 men; median age, 59.
150 Up to week 24, 8 of 26
evaluable patients (31%) achieved a >/=35% decrease in s
151 lapsed, and refractory patients, seven of 15
evaluable patients (47%) achieved complete response or c
152 Twenty of 33
evaluable patients (61%) had clinical responses at multi
153 Of 16
evaluable patients (9 adults and 7 children), 1 had a pa
154 Four DLTs occurred in three of 40 DLT-
evaluable patients (diarrhoea and hyperglycaemia in one
155 duration of objective response for efficacy-
evaluable patients (N = 26) was 9.1 months (range, 2.8 t
156 (n = 7), and the phase II study enrolled 106
evaluable patients (n = 53 in each arm).
157 was 3.1+/-0.2 g/dl over 12 weeks in efficacy-
evaluable patients (n=55).
158 % confidence interval [CI], 73-94) among all
evaluable patients (stringent complete response, 12%; co
159 Thirty-eight (68%) of 56
evaluable patients achieved a CR and seven (13%) achieve
160 Overall, 14% of the 81
evaluable patients achieved an objective response (OR) a
161 Five (14%) of 37 response-
evaluable patients achieved an objective response (two c
162 ith CD79B and/or MYD88 mutations, and 86% of
evaluable patients achieved complete remission with DA-T
163 Three of 26
evaluable patients achieved partial remission (11.5%) an
164 hieving a complete response and two of three
evaluable patients achieving a partial response had PIK3
165 In 297
evaluable patients age ranged from 17 to 88 years (media
166 than those who received WBRT (28 [52%] of 54
evaluable patients assigned to SRS vs 41 [85%] of 48 eva
167 e patients assigned to SRS vs 41 [85%] of 48
evaluable patients assigned to WBRT; difference -33.6% [
168 In clinically
evaluable patients enrolled in a pilot study of uncompli
169 The 12-month EFS for the 42
evaluable patients enrolled in AOST0221 was 20% (95% CI,
170 Twelve of 13
evaluable patients experienced hyperamylasemia higher th
171 d PD, the RP2D was established at 400 mg (15
evaluable patients experienced two DLTs).
172 ups in the IC2/3 population: 26 (23%) of 113
evaluable patients had an objective response in the atez
173 this study, if at least five of 25 response-
evaluable patients had an objective response, cabozantin
174 Twenty-two (31%) of the 70
evaluable patients had an objective responses, including
175 Four (9%) of 45
evaluable patients had grade 3-4 ototoxicity according t
176 Twenty-three of 66 (34.8%)
evaluable patients had neutrophil autoantibodies, and 6
177 Seven (35%, 95% CI 16-59) of 20
evaluable patients had objective tumour regression.
178 21 (57%) of 37 response-
evaluable patients had stable disease, including those w
179 The number of
evaluable patients in each subgroup is small, particular
180 ry endpoint was objective tumour response in
evaluable patients per protocol using Response to Evalua
181 ation of follicular lymphoma (FL) among 2652
evaluable patients prospectively enrolled in the Nationa
182 ant transformation; of these, 16 of 17 (94%)
evaluable patients showed (18)F-FET uptake at the time o
183 We randomized 402 and 393
evaluable patients to the control or clofarabine inducti
184 Among 50 efficacy-
evaluable patients treated at the MTD, the ORR was 90%.
185 All
evaluable patients underwent (18)F-FLT PET/CT at baselin
186 rved in 91 (n =48 budesonide, n =43 placebo)
evaluable patients was 12.5% (95% CI 3-22%) under treatm
187 Overall response rate in the 120
evaluable patients was 25.8% (31 of 120), including 13 c
188 Median age of the 138
evaluable patients was 58.5 years with a WHO performance
189 g ASS deficiency, the best response among 21
evaluable patients was complete response (CR) in 2 (9.5%
190 Overall, 27
evaluable patients were accrued; the median number of pr
191 five maintenance randomized trials in 3,837
evaluable patients were analyzed.
192 From November 2006 to June 2010, 85
evaluable patients were enrolled (male, n = 61; female,
193 Twenty-eight
evaluable patients were included in the analysis.
194 In all, 103 of the 512
evaluable patients were PET2 positive.
195 4 months (4 to >/= 8 months) were seen in 12
evaluable patients who received durvalumab plus cedirani
196 ed for at least 6 weeks in seven of the nine
evaluable patients who received greater than 1 x 10(6)/m
197 CRs were obtained by four of seven
evaluable patients with chemotherapy-refractory DLBCL; t
198 stable disease, including seven (47%) of 15
evaluable patients with dedifferentiated liposarcoma.
199 8 (84.5% vs 85.1%), and day 14 in clinically
evaluable patients with MRSA in a baseline culture (92.9
200 ve responses were noted in 23 of 42 activity-
evaluable patients with NHL given single-agent polatuzum
201 e patient with uveal melanoma and four of 15
evaluable patients with RCC treated at 20 mug/kg (overal
202 aper and pulse treatment on 100 consecutive,
evaluable patients with recurrent Clostridium difficile
203 citabine with gemcitabine monotherapy in 730
evaluable patients with resected pancreatic ductal adeno
204 Clinically
evaluable patients with S. aureus as the sole pathogen o
205 Among 23 response-
evaluable patients with tumor FGFR pathway alterations,
206 plete remission was achieved in 40% (6/15 of
evaluable patients) and median event-free survival was 1
207 R4 cohort (three [2%; 90% CI 0.2-4.8] of 121
evaluable patients) than in the MMR cohort (nine [19%; 9
208 Furthermore, among 19
evaluable patients, 14 (74%) were off CSs.
209 Results: Of 541
evaluable patients, 156 (28.8%) had ESR1 mutation D538G
210 n patients were ineligible, resulting in 328
evaluable patients, 159 in the experimental arm and 169
211 Of the first 41
evaluable patients, 28 (68%) achieved a CR, meeting the
212 31.0% (95% CI, 17.6 to 47.1) in 42 response-
evaluable patients, 46.4% (95% CI, 27.5 to 66.1) in the
213 Of the 2309
evaluable patients, 578 received HF.
214 Of 3756
evaluable patients, 591 (16%) received E-CPR and 3165 (8
215 Of 173
evaluable patients, 67 (39%; 95% CI, 31% to 46%) regaine
216 Among 47
evaluable patients, an objective response rate of 32% wa
217 ells were successfully harvested in 55 of 57
evaluable patients, and 43 of 49 responding patients und
218 In the ATG group, on 64
evaluable patients, ATG was discontinued 1 (n = 27), 2 (
219 In the 13
evaluable patients, correlation (R(2) ) between semiquan
220 Of 14 cardiac-
evaluable patients, eight (57%) met the criteria for car
221 trol were achieved in >/= 21 of the first 41
evaluable patients, everolimus could be recommended for
222 Of 17
evaluable patients, four had stable disease for 12 weeks
223 Overall, in 23
evaluable patients, including six patients with low HER2
224 For 34
evaluable patients, median PFS, overall survival, and ob
225 In 17,738
evaluable patients, methicillin-resistant S. aureus infe
226 Of 15 renal-
evaluable patients, nine (60%) met the criteria for rena
227 Of the 21
evaluable patients, one (5%) patient had a partial respo
228 Results Among the 29
evaluable patients, only 31% met Response Evaluation Cri
229 In 60
evaluable patients, ORR was 48% (95% confidence interval
230 With 80
evaluable patients, results would be promising if 2-year
231 In 26 CTC-
evaluable patients, taxane-induced decrease in %ARNL (cy
232 For all
evaluable patients, the confirmed objective response rat
233 Among
evaluable patients, the confirmed ORR was 10%; disease c
234 Among 336 eligible and
evaluable patients, the median age was 32 years (range,
235 For
evaluable patients, the most common grade 3 to 4 adverse
236 Among 21
evaluable patients, the overall response rate after 1 bl
237 Among 38
evaluable patients, the overall response rate was 36.8%:
238 f the interim PET2 scan was performed in 331
evaluable patients, with 271 (82%) PET2-negative and 60
239 Hypoxia was detected in 15 of 20
evaluable patients, with the hypoxic fraction ranging fr
240 ete responses and 8 partial responses) in 30
evaluable patients.
241 all, hematologic response (HR) was 50% in 24
evaluable patients.
242 ution was 213 LR, 138 IR, and 129 HR for 480
evaluable patients.
243 tis), fatigue, and hyponatraemia in 11 of 18
evaluable patients.
244 mates were calculated based on the number of
evaluable patients.
245 s, totaling 1047 randomized patients and 856
evaluable patients.
246 om baseline) was achieved in 96% of efficacy-
evaluable patients.
247 all response to treatment at 24 weeks in all
evaluable patients.
248 response (three categories; P = .036) in 39
evaluable patients.
249 assessments were excluded, resulting in 452
evaluable patients.
250 tumor marker decline was observed in 9 of 11
evaluable patients.
251 MR cohort (nine [19%; 90% CI 9.5-28.0] of 48
evaluable patients; hazard ratio 0.12, 90% CI 0.04-0.37;
252 Results Of 451 patients with
evaluable PD-L1 expression, 344 (76%) had PD-L1-positive
253 l of intention-to-treat (full analysis set),
evaluable (
per protocol), and safety populations.
254 ipoproteins at baseline (11918 patients with
evaluable plasma samples) and 12 months after randomizat
255 Analysis was done on the predefined
evaluable population (all randomised patients who did no
256 onse endpoints were assessed in the response-
evaluable population (ie, patients with measurable disea
257 Primary analysis of the
evaluable population (n = 39) found that the optimal dos
258 In the clinically
evaluable population (n=498) 217 (84%) of 258 patients i
259 nrollment was initiated in January 2012, and
evaluable population analyses for this study were conduc
260 tive brain imaging data and were included in
evaluable population analyses.
261 hese children, who therefore constituted the
evaluable population and in whom we diagnosed 4091 malar
262 tive, randomized clinical trial featuring an
evaluable population conducted at 75 clinical sites.
263 The
evaluable population included 494 patients with stage 0
264 The safety
evaluable population included all patients who received
265 A per-protocol analysis of the
evaluable population was conducted on clinical outcome d
266 An analysis of the
evaluable population was performed.
267 Data of the
evaluable population were analyzed February 4, 2004, thr
268 Data from the
evaluable population were analyzed from July 31, 2013, t
269 In the clinically
evaluable population, 199 (77.4%) of 257 participants we
270 In the efficacy-
evaluable population, the overall response rate (ORR) wa
271 r last dose of study drug) in the clinically
evaluable population.
272 Analysis was based on the
evaluable population.
273 ion, and 527 were included in the clinically
evaluable population.
274 e modified intention-to-treat and clinically
evaluable populations (European Medicines Agency guidanc
275 Analyses were done in intent-to-treat and
evaluable populations.
276 y modified intention-to-treat and clinically
evaluable populations.
277 Of 12
evaluable radiological signs, five were found to be sign
278 ed the e-questionnaire of which 692 provided
evaluable responses.
279 Of 992 participants enrolled with
evaluable results, 22% had culture-confirmed tuberculosi
280 ent-to-treat (primary) and microbiologically
evaluable (
secondary) populations using a noninferiority
281 In 19,630
evaluable serial pairs from 16,076 healthcare workers, t
282 h no major protocol deviations, and provided
evaluable serum samples at day 1 and the scheduled timep
283 Over 2 years, 406 MSM provided
evaluable specimens every 6 months for >/=2 visits.
284 myosin receptor kinase A was found in all 36
evaluable specimens on the tumor cells; 34 (94%) showed
285 Evaluable specimens were collected from 564 MSM and 3029
286 was expressed on MCC tumor cells in 100% of
evaluable specimens.
287 ic cellular response in four of six efficacy-
evaluable study subjects, providing a base for its furth
288 ected for radioactive decay in all dosimetry-
evaluable subjects at 15 min and 4 h were 1.9% and 1.2%
289 tively collected incidence of gasping on all
evaluable subjects in a multicenter, randomized, control
290 arly in the lungs, the %ID for all dosimetry-
evaluable subjects was 4.9% at 15 min after injection.
291 Of
evaluable surviving patients, 70% are visually impaired;
292 Two hundred forty-five patients had
evaluable T2* data (mean+/-age, 58 [11] years; 76% men).
293 ignificant resources, limiting the number of
evaluable therapies.
294 (89)Zr-bevacizumab PET scans visualized 125
evaluable tumor lesions in 22 patients, with a median SU
295 genic RAS mutations were found in 58% of the
evaluable tumor samples (38/66) and 49% of the control t
296 Evaluable tumors were analyzed for WT1mutation, 1p and 1
297 t reached in the ibrutinib group (95% CI not
evaluable)
vs 13.3 months (11.3-13.9) in the placebo gro
298 ne and rituximab and 55.2 months (95% CI not
evaluable)
with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and ritux
299 Among 262 patients registered, 249 were
evaluable,
with 122 women in the O3-FA arm and 127 in th
300 artifacts, only 28 of 30 image datasets were
evaluable,
with a total of 29 regions of suspected spond