ライフサイエンスコーパス: high-risk patient

1 l means to reduce the incidence of CMV-dz in high risk patients.

2 on postoperative day 1 (POD 1) for moderate/high risk patients.

3 ss lenalidomide maintenance therapy in these high-risk patients.

4 geons in delivering goal-concordant care for high-risk patients.

5 on Index were more frequently observed among high-risk patients.

6 hould be considered in clinical practice for high-risk patients.

7 an potentially reduce HIV and STI risk among high-risk patients.

8 our progression or recurrence, especially in high-risk patients.

9 and to prioritize alternative approaches in high-risk patients.

10 ing the cascade of multiple complications in high-risk patients.

11 risk cytogenetics was equivalent to clinical high-risk patients.

12 hemorrhage was 0.9% with both treatments in high-risk patients.

13 ase (ASCVD) and to define high-risk and very high-risk patients.

14 ultidisciplinary environment, often treating high-risk patients.

15 adjuvant new systemic treatment options for high-risk patients.

16 nd enhances detection of new bone disease in high-risk patients.

17 ropriate medications and close follow-up for high-risk patients.

18 subgroups, including among intermediate- and high-risk patients.

19 ibed, which may allow targeting treatment to high-risk patients.

20 decreasing acute kidney injury prevalence in high-risk patients.

21 e a useful tool for timely identification of high-risk patients.

22 geneity is observed in the survival of these high-risk patients.

23 nd 0% in intermediate-, and 4.3% and 3.1% in high-risk patients.

24 g the incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis in high-risk patients.

25 lanoma skin cancers and actinic keratoses in high-risk patients.

26 support for limiting prolonged treatment to high-risk patients.

27 y practices that serve socially or medically high-risk patients.

28 ylactic anticoagulation may be considered in high-risk patients.

29 hts but is invasive and therefore limited to high-risk patients.

30 ars (range 16-77; IQR 33-58) and included 57 high-risk patients.

31 nin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) in high-risk patients.

32 a method of screening for anal dysplasia in high-risk patients.

33 y ECLS provides the best prognosis for these high-risk patients.

34 nct tool for monitoring VZV reactivations in high-risk patients.

35 It may be considered for selected high-risk patients.

36 of therapies that still consistently benefit high-risk patients.

37 to a routine procedure with good outcomes in high-risk patients.

38 ic targets for treating or preventing AMC in high-risk patients.

39 incing accuracy for identifying low-risk and high-risk patients.

40 Trials of systemic therapy are warranted in high-risk patients.

41 andidate biomarker for the identification of high-risk patients.

42 ed enhanced discrimination for both low- and high-risk patients.

43 a cardioverter-defibrillator in appropriate high-risk patients.

44 ng and more aggressive preventive efforts on high-risk patients.

45 , if treatment with ezetimibe is targeted to high-risk patients.

46 maging in the characterization of nodules in high-risk patients.

47 Hg, that lower BP targets are beneficial for high-risk patients.

48 l infarction may help increase statin use in high-risk patients.

49 nity to improve the quality of care in these high-risk patients.

50 %; and partial response, 36%) and 100% among high-risk patients.

51 eived experimental approaches to treat these high-risk patients.

52 metastatic infectious foci in 73.7% of these high-risk patients.

53 men with added gemtuzumab ozogamicin (GO) in high-risk patients.

54 stigations and lacks CMR imaging to identify high-risk patients.

55 ted costs, with the greatest cost offsets in high-risk patients.

56 d as an alternative to surgical treatment in high-risk patients.

57 or duration of AKI after cardiac surgery in high-risk patients.

58 d to diagnose invasive aspergillosis (IA) in high-risk patients.

59 n cardiovascular outcomes in statin-treated, high-risk patients.

60 there is a great need to accurately identify high-risk patients.

61 life-threatening events occurred in 63 other high-risk patients (13%) with implantable cardioverter-d

62 l complications compared with placebo in the high-risk patients (18% vs 41%; P < 0.05; Clavien-Dindo

63 High-risk patients (20.6%) developed IH compared with 0.

64 In contrast, 56 other high-risk patients (5.6%) survived life-threatening even

65 Among the high-risk patients, 6/9 patients with residual tumour re

66 nts, 5.5% in moderate-risk patients, 6.6% in high-risk patients, 8.6% in highest-risk patients, and 1

67 sulted in significantly higher MACE rates in high-risk patients (9.0% versus 2.2%; P=0.001).

68 ntestinal healing and disease progression in high-risk patients, a treat-to-target strategy (based on

69 Twenty percent of high-risk patients account for 90% of failure to rescue

70 d for secondary prevention in all or in only high-risk patients after an acute myocardial infarction

71 safety and efficacy of this new approach in high-risk patients after ST-segment-elevation myocardial

72 ed the previously reported outcome data from high-risk patients aged 55 years or older with a history

73 le is not necessarily the optimal target for high-risk patients, although it is not possible to rule

74 agents to prevent C. difficile infection in high-risk patients, although not sanctioned by Infectiou

75 This study, which is the largest series of high-risk patients analyzed with the most modern genomic

76 rative risk assessment is needed to identify high-risk patients and anticipate postoperative adverse

77 ns should be thoughtfully employed to target high-risk patients and avoid this potentially fatal comp

78 rement of EBV-DNA load, have helped identify high-risk patients and diagnose early lymphoproliferatio

79 e in areas such as management of the care of high-risk patients and enhanced access to care.

80 can serve as a powerful tool for identifying high-risk patients and for assessing the potential of ne

81 The exclusion of high-risk patients and insufficient power might be respo

82 AVI) has evolved to a treatment of choice in high-risk patients and is therefore ideal for patients w

83 and late mortality rates in extreme-risk and high-risk patients and may assist in selecting appropria

84 e and a lack of both adequate treatments for high-risk patients and noninvasive biomarkers of disease

85 m with rFVIII, which was 6.3 for genetically high-risk patients and only 2.3 for low-risk patients.

86 seizure prophylaxis should be considered in high-risk patients and patient stratification for prospe

87 requiring coronary angiogram would identify high-risk patients and predict long-term clinical outcom

88 have been recognized, but tools to identify high-risk patients and preventive interventions are miss

89 n accurately rule in diabetic foot OM in the high-risk patients and rule out OM in low-risk patients.

90 eview of the literature on identification of high-risk patients and the treatment of this life-threat

91 ological, and imaging biomarkers to identify high-risk patients, and clinical trials evaluating novel

92 tial effects when examining only inpatients, high-risk patients, and emergent/urgent cases.

93 er exposure to the aerodigestive tract among high-risk patients, and the incidence rate decreased to

94 icated major bleeding events in low-risk and high-risk patients appropriately, whilst ORBIT and ATRIA

95 ure is expected to significantly rise unless high-risk patients are effectively screened and appropri

96 ions among low-risk patients and ensure that high-risk patients are promptly treated.

97 Challenges remain in management of high-risk patients as well as patients with recurrent or

98 main, including a better ability to identify high-risk patients at diagnosis, the development of pred

99 n amylase analysis identifies which moderate/high risk patients benefit from early drain removal.

100 analyses revealed that low-risk, rather than high-risk, patients benefited most from sirolimus; furth

101 arts initiative emphasizes ABCS (aspirin for high-risk patients, blood pressure [BP] control, cholest

102 creaticoduodenectomy complications (PPDC) in high-risk patients can be reduced with hydrocortisone.

103 0%) without major adverse effects in various high-risk patient categories, including those with stati

104 ssion analysis showed no correlation between high-risk patient characteristics and composite complica

105 as used to compare the incidence of specific high-risk patient characteristics in each group.

106 In this prospective study of a high-risk patient cohort, 54.2% of primary melanomas wer

107 n or combination therapy with biologicals in high-risk patients, combined with a tight and frequent c

108 at least 3 years vs less than 3 years among high-risk patients conferred a lower hazard of recurrenc

109 Two independent samples of clinical high-risk patients converge to validate the NAPLS-2 psyc

110 High-risk patients could be identified before weaning to

111 Early prognostic markers that identify high-risk patients could lead to increased surveillance,

112 may be cost effective in very high-risk and high-risk patients, depending on baseline LDL-C levels.

113 both PV and ET by low-dose aspirin therapy; high-risk patients derive additional antithrombotic bene

114 rgery, and 346 ( approximately 25%) of these high-risk patients developed a severe complication withi

115 rs after contrast media (CM) exposure in 458 high-risk patients (development set).

116 The risk among low- and high-risk patients did not differ much when they were tr

117 In high-risk patients, discussions regarding extended stays

118 Nevertheless, mortality of high-risk patients, disease recurrence, lack of robustly

119 uracy and aid preoperative identification of high-risk patients, enabling restriction of lymphadenect

120 say, we tested 200 stored serum samples from high-risk patients enrolled in a longitudinal study on H

121 ion for increasing hemodialysis adherence in high-risk patients, especially at centers caring for vul

122 warfarin treatment after PVI is not safe in high-risk patients, especially those who have previously

123 uded mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency, ColDx high-risk patients exhibited significantly worse RFI (mu

124 However, traditional high-risk patient features did not increase the risk (HR

125 They may be used to identify high-risk patients for closer monitoring and second-line

126 assist primary care physicians in referring high-risk patients for comprehensive ophthalmologic exam

127 y warning system to help clinicians identify high-risk patients for further screening.

128 When screening high-risk patients for IA with GM and PCR tests, the abs

129 hese predictors can help identify and target high-risk patients for interventions to reduce readmissi

130 Screening of high-risk patients for invasive aspergillosis (IA) has t

131 yps >/=3 mm with timely referral of selected high-risk patients for prophylactic surgery prevents dev

132 tal Hip Replacement Risk Scale, can identify high-risk patients for readmission and permit implementa

133 pper gastrointestinal bleeding and to survey high-risk patients for rebleeding.

134 ncope predictors may aid in the selection of high-risk patients for treatments such as pacemakers.

135 udies have shown that active surveillance of high-risk patients for VRE colonization can aid in reduc

136 y evaluates (1) whether exclusion of certain high-risk patients from public reporting of PCI outcomes

137 DWI/ADC is useful in differentiating high-risk patients from those at low and intermediate ri

138 mponent-resolved approaches to diagnose this high-risk patient group.

139 et for a rational treatment strategy in this high-risk patient group.

140 hylactic antibiotics should be considered in high-risk patient groups and during periods of increased

141 ectiveness, and reduced risk of mortality in high-risk patient groups.

142 High-risk patients (>/=3 risk indicators; 20% of populat

143 rred in those with low genetic risk, whereas high-risk patients had a cumulative incidence of 31%.

144 ts, and practices that served more medically high-risk patients had lower quality and higher costs.

145 hysician practices that served more socially high-risk patients had lower quality and lower costs, an

146 Although we found evidence that high-risk patients had more to gain from treatment, we w

147 open transapical approach to PVL closure in high-risk patients has a high procedural success rate wi

148 Identification of high-risk patients has important implications for future

149 High-risk patients have an increased screening failure r

150 In high-risk patients identified with the PYMS, 22% of them

151 ge pharmacoprophylaxis can be considered for high-risk patients (ie, VTE risk >0.4%).

152 ss of this therapy in appropriately selected high-risk patients in a commercial setting.

153 There is a major unmet need to identify high-risk patients in myocarditis.

154 s in the universal group and 35 (12%) of 281 high-risk patients in the risk-stratified group (p=0.005

155 A smaller proportion of high-risk patients in the underestimated vs not-underest

156 ERCP pancreatitis occurred in 18 (6%) of 305 high-risk patients in the universal group and 35 (12%) o

157 d be effective in improving the prognosis of high-risk patients in this population.

158 nt (SAVR), particularly in intermediate- and high-risk patients, in a nationally representative real-

159 "low-risk" patients; (2) Mono-HCV infected "high-risk" patients (injecting drug users or prisoners);

160 lecular prognostic testing and enrollment of high-risk patients into clinical trials of targeted mole

161 or violent ideation and behavior in clinical high-risk patients is essential, as these have predictiv

162 catheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in high-risk patients is leading to the expansion of its in

163 However, the outcome of these high-risk patients is not absolutely uniform, with some

164 Preoperative identification of high-risk patients is potentially one of the rare avenue

165 (DFS), the appropriate strategy for treating high-risk patients is unclear.

166 79% versus 73%; among 336 centrally reviewed high-risk patients, it was 77% versus 73%, respectively.

167 rtension or a MELD score greater than 9; and high-risk patients (LD rate, 60.0% [12 of 20]) underwent

168 Select high-risk patients may benefit from consideration of del

169 ensure bioequivalence between generics, and high-risk patients may have specific bioequivalence conc

170 Identification of high-risk patients may provide insight into factors that

171 CI, 76-82%], respectively, P < 0.001) and in high-risk patients (medians, 77% [95% CI, 71-80%] vs 59%

172 Among these high-risk patients, molecular adsorbent recirculating sy

173 6.2% in intermediate-, and 32.5% and 36% in high-risk patients; mortality rates within each class we

174 High-risk patients (n = 4,393; 25%), defined by >/=3 ris

175 For the 14 studies of HCV monoinfected "high-risk" patients (n = 771) the pooled recurrence rate

176 associated with an improved outcome in these high-risk patients needs further study.

177 How these recommendations are implemented in high-risk patients or according to setting of drug initi

178 he transcatheter approach is established for high-risk patients or poor candidates for surgery.

179 ngenital heart defects (CHD) have focused on high-risk patients or used specialized, resource-intensi

180 se associated with lower chemotherapy use in high-risk patients (OR, 0.36 [99% CI, 0.26-0.50]) and gr

181 Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score to identify high-risk patients outside the intensive care unit (ICU)

182 urce of clinical evidence-conducted in these high-risk patients over recent years are largely unknown

183 This RCT shows that in high-risk patients, overall PPDC can be significantly re

184 e may be useful to allocate resources toward high-risk patients, particularly in resource-poor settin

185 nstruction, and mitral valve surgery in this high-risk patient population.

186 tients, relapses do occur, especially in the high-risk patient population.

187 low-up and dermatologic surveillance in this high-risk patient population.

188 ate a screening of this genetic mutation for high-risk patients potentially suitable for target thera

189 Among 91155 high-risk patients (prestroke CHA2DS2-VASc score >/=2),

190 luate DFS and overall survival (OS) in ccRCC high-risk patients randomized to sunitinib or sorafenib

191 ription was observed, with less than half of high-risk patients receiving an OAC prescription.

192 In very high-risk patients receiving combination haploidentical

193 arin 100 IE/mL on CRBSI occurrence.Forty-one high-risk patients receiving HPS followed in a tertiary

194 Twenty-three out of 37 high-risk patients recurred during follow-up, but in nin

195 iction tools have been developed to identify high-risk patients requiring follow-up.

196 in the hazard of death for intermediate- and high-risk patients, respectively.

197 ol/l and >211.3 pmol/l detected low-risk and high-risk patients, respectively.

198 y and stem cell transplantation in MRD-based high-risk patients resulted in a significantly better 5-

199 tary and lifestyle management strategies for high-risk patients should be employed and antiosteoporos

200 visual and phonological impairments, whereas high-risk patients showed isolated visual impairments.

201 ic or acute renal failure were identified as high-risk patient subgroups for nephrotoxicity.

202 risk for hHF in T2DM, both overall and among high-risk patient subgroups.

203 High-risk patients, such as infants younger than 6 month

204 ndations for lower blood pressure targets in high-risk patients, such as those with cardiovascular di

205 first year after PVR are rare, and in select high-risk patients, surgical cryoablation does not seem

206 Palliative care in high-risk patients targeted by an Early Warning System.

207 Among unselected intermediate- and high-risk patients, TAVR and SAVR resulted in similar ra

208 In high-risk patients, TAVR for bioprosthetic aortic valve

209 and standard-risk cytogenetics subgroups: in high-risk patients, the hazard ratio (HR) was 0.543 (95%

210 However, in non-high-risk patients, the restricted mean survival time di

211 In high-risk patients, there are additional benefits from m

212 High-risk patients (those presenting with a white blood

213 We simulated active triage of high-risk patients to designated referral centers using

214 e effective than post-procedural use in only high-risk patients to prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis.

215 acteristics should be considered to identify high-risk patients to prioritize the use of new antivira

216 al triage of the critically ill can allocate high-risk patients to referral hospitals without adverse

217 Among high-risk patients undergoing cardiac surgery, remote is

218 fusion reduced 30-day major complications in high-risk patients undergoing cardiac surgery.

219 ry drug, is given to prevent pancreatitis in high-risk patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde chol

220 placement (TA-TAVR) for many clinical sites, high-risk patients undergoing TA-TAVR derived similar he

221 s for individualizing outcome predictions in high-risk patients undergoing TAVR.

222 day and 1-year outcomes in a large cohort of high-risk patients undergoing VIV TAVR.

223 (GVNPs) for the treatment of endotoxemia in high-risk patients, using a murine model of D-galactosam

224 groups of low-risk (volume </= cutoff) from high-risk patients (volume > cutoff), with similar 2-y p

225 B aortic dissection in low-, moderate-, and high-risk patients was 6%, 19%, and 34%, respectively.

226 tions for intensive surveillance of these 70 high-risk patients were comorbidities, patient choice, a

227 Some high-risk patients were not included.

228 All 40 D/R high-risk patients were prospectively followed for at le

229 Rectal swabs from high-risk patients were screened for carbapenem-resistan

230 s, or ethiodized oil emulsions, including in high-risk patients, when performed superselectively with

231 Cost savings was more prominent amongst high-risk patients where the difference of total episode

232 h a dose of GO (9 mg/m(2) on day 1) added to high-risk patients (white blood cell count, >10 x 10(9)/

233 ical circulatory support, may be required in high-risk patients who are reasonable candidates for the

234 argely because of reliable identification of high-risk patients who benefited from implantable cardio

235 ication using the TRS 2 degrees P identifies high-risk patients who derive greatest benefit from the

236 s in US and Canadian cooperative groups with high-risk patients who had ccRCC histology and pT3, pT4,

237 splatin-based chemotherapy may be offered to high-risk patients who have not received neoadjuvant the

238 ic risk assessment may be useful to identify high-risk patients who have the greatest potential to be

239 ue instability may enhance identification of high-risk patients who may benefit from closer follow-up

240 A risk-adapted strategy could help identify high-risk patients who may benefit from more intensive a

241 ion (PCI), can influence physicians to avoid high-risk patients who may benefit from treatment.

242 obstruction at the time of PPCI may identify high-risk patients who might benefit from further adjuva

243 High risk patients with a score of 3 are candidates for

244 Comparison of Transcatheter Heart Valves in High Risk Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis: Medtroni

245 scatheter Mitral Valve Replacement System in High Risk Patients with Severe, Symptomatic Mitral Regur

246 As planned, only the high-risk patients with >40% acini (n = 62) continued in

247 and Methods From June 2005 to June 2011, 246 high-risk patients with a high-intermediate (56%) or hig

248 abiraterone acetate with prednisone in these high-risk patients with a suboptimal response to hormona

249 assessment of prognosis in myeloma, and some high-risk patients with a traditional evaluation could i

250 In the 792 (44%) high-risk patients with ACS, primary and secondary endpo

251 xide is a feasible treatment in low-risk and high-risk patients with acute promyelocytic leukaemia, w

252 From B cells of high-risk patients with AML with potent and lasting GVL

253 /dl, and an NNT </=30 for very high-risk and high-risk patients with an LDL-C >/=130 mg/dl.

254 concomitant treatment of TR in operable but high-risk patients with aortic stenosis is warranted.

255 Treatment of high-risk patients with aortic stenosis using a self-exp

256 Previous trials have shown that among high-risk patients with aortic stenosis, survival rates

257 dvancing mode of treatment for inoperable or high-risk patients with aortic stenosis.

258 surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for high-risk patients with aortic stenosis.

259 s) vs warfarin largely focused on recruiting high-risk patients with atrial fibrillation with more th

260 ICD therapy is an effective therapy in high-risk patients with BrS.

261 ion CD19 CAR-T cells are highly effective in high-risk patients with CLL after they experience treatm

262 n coronary artery (LM) is frequently used in high-risk patients with coexisting aortic stenosis and L

263 VR procedure provided acceptable outcomes in high-risk patients with degenerated bioprostheses or fai

264 apy with ASCT did not improve the outcome of high-risk patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphomas.

265 of immunomodulatory drugs as maintenance in high-risk patients with DLBCL.

266 t of the highest-level exposure group (those high-risk patients with DME who received 2 years of mont

267 In high-risk patients with elevated sBT levels and/or masto

268 e implantation is an established therapy for high-risk patients with failed surgical aortic bioprosth

269 improves clinical outcomes vs usual care in high-risk patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction

270 In high-risk patients with HFrEF, a strategy of NT-proBNP-g

271 Importance: Among high-risk patients with hypertension, targeting a systol

272 apse specimens, which identified a subset of high-risk patients with inferior post-ASCT outcomes in t

273 0% would provide a 5-year NNT </=50 for very high-risk patients with LDL-C >/=130 mg/dl or for high-r

274 DL-C >/=190 mg/dl, and an NNT </=30 for very high-risk patients with LDL-C >/=160 mg/dl.

275 risk patients with LDL-C >/=130 mg/dl or for high-risk patients with LDL-C >/=190 mg/dl, and an NNT <

276 provide an NNT </=50 for very high-risk and high-risk patients with LDL-C >/=70 mg/dl, and an NNT </

277 Erlotinib did not, however, improve CFS in high-risk patients with LOH-positive or high-EGFR-gene-c

278 onstrated improved LC mortality by screening high-risk patients with low-dose computed tomography (LD

279 blinatumomab showed antileukemia activity in high-risk patients with Ph(+) ALL who had relapsed or we

280 telet and anticoagulant therapies, for these high-risk patients with practice guidelines, thus, provi

281 To compare overall survival in high-risk patients with primary uveal melanoma who recei

282 ant, the use of observation for low-risk and high-risk patients with prostate cancer is correlated at

283 is prognosticator improved identification of high-risk patients with regard to cause-specific, overal

284 In the other three high-risk patients with residual tumour who did not rece

285 High-risk patients with rheumatic heart disease (RHD) wh

286 study was an investigator-initiated trial in high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis and an an

287 ed randomisation sequence to randomly assign high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis to either

288 ment (TAVR) has revolutionized management of high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis.

289 Seven high-risk patients with severe TR and clinical signs of

290 panding TAVR compares favorably with SAVR in high-risk patients with STS PROM scores traditionally co

291 alve replacement (TAVR) enables treatment of high-risk patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis with

292 investigator-initiated trial randomized 241 high-risk patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenos

293 c opportunities to improve the prognosis for high-risk patients with TNBC.

294 ad a 3-year EFS of 69% (95% CI, 52% to 82%); high-risk patients with two or more risk factors had a 3

295 cine is effective in a real-world setting of high-risk patients with variable HPV vaccination pattern

296 1,226 patients with stage I NSGCC, including high-risk patients with vascular invasion, were observed

297 ssibility of achieving arrhythmia control in high-risk patients with VT that is otherwise uncontrolla

298 tacin or post-procedural indometacin in only high-risk patients, with stratification by trial centres

299 a to exclude tumor recurrence, especially in high-risk patients within the critical first 2 years aft

300 atin was enhanced in patients with DM and in high-risk patients without DM.