ライフサイエンスコーパス: immune monitoring

1 ollective responses and can be leveraged for immune monitoring.

2 t patients and may be a potential marker for immune monitoring.

3 ll be dependent on developing strategies for immune monitoring.

4 provide valuable tools for immunotherapy and immune monitoring.

5 nical practice, but no regulations exist for immune monitoring.

6 ogeneity for more comprehensive and accurate immune monitoring.

7 rm represents a new and informative tool for immune monitoring and clinical assessment.

8 dynamic properties of T cells should improve immune monitoring and inform strategies for therapeutic

9 betes (T1D) immunopathogenesis and to design immune monitoring and intervention strategies in relatio

10 e data support the use of [(18)F]FAC PET for immune monitoring and suggest a wide range of clinical a

11 mulation blockade, providing new targets for immune monitoring and therapeutic intervention.

12 dies with personalized drug dosing, improved immune monitoring, and better patient selection should b

13 ng-term transplant outcomes, optimization of immune monitoring, and quality-of-life outcomes were rev

14 ntial to serve as these sorts of markers for immune monitoring, and thereby assist with patient manag

15 in late-phase response (LPR) and exploratory immune monitoring as surrogate markers of therapeutic re

16 itopes should be of considerable utility for immune monitoring, as they cannot reflect an immune reac

17 ImmuKnow is a general immune-monitoring assay that may help guide therapy.

18 across individuals, raising the prospect of immune monitoring before intervention.

19 Emerging results indicate that T-cell immune monitoring by cytokine enzyme-linked immunosorben

20 PBMCs were taken weekly for immune monitoring by tetramer analysis and functional as

21 Immune monitoring during therapy showed that autoimmunit

22 tory brain lesions throughout the 2 years of immune monitoring following treatment was associated wit

23 elate that may guide immunogen selection and immune monitoring for clinical efficacy trials.

24 lly anti-inflammatory, with implications for immune monitoring, immune interventions (including vacci

25 tional and developmental analyses as well as immune monitoring in health and disease.

26 These data underscore a role for immune monitoring in patients with HER2-positive IBC to

27 emand that quality regulations be applied to immune monitoring in the future.

28 and/or therapeutic vaccine construction and immune monitoring in the TRAMP mouse model that may prov

29 end point was PSA response at 6 months, and immune monitoring included measurements of anti-PSA and

30 Immune monitoring is experimental in nature, usually per

31 tied into the development and performance of immune monitoring methods.

32 Immune monitoring models integrating multiple functions

33 KEY POINTS: Immune monitoring models integrating multiple functions

34 Currently, the immune monitoring necessary for predicting the presence

35 The results suggest that serial immune monitoring of alloreactivity might be beneficial

36 These techniques will be useful not only for immune monitoring of cancer vaccine trials, but also for

37 d by HLA-DQ2/8 heterozygosity and may assist immune monitoring of disease progression and therapeutic

38 ications in predictive model development and immune monitoring of HIV-1 vaccine trials.

39 The immune monitoring of islet transplant recipients include

40 nd IFN-gamma- and IL-2-producing T cells for immune monitoring of kidney transplant recipients before

41 tal components by dedicated receptors allows immune monitoring of loss of cellular integrity.

42 Immune monitoring of otherwise healthy infants with RSV

43 itro stimulation improved the sensitivity of immune monitoring of patients immunized with synthetic p

44 These findings provide a basis for immune monitoring of patients with MS and suggest that t

45 immunotherapies and strategies for clinical immune monitoring of their effectiveness.

46 These results suggest an approach for immune monitoring participants undergoing immunotherapy

47 Immune monitoring posttreatment showed an increase in ef

48 As an example of the "Treg MLR" immune monitoring potential, addition of third component

49 tissue samples for cancer immunotherapy and immune-monitoring purposes.

50 Immune monitoring showed that there were no changes in t

51 mise toward the goal of in vivo, noninvasive immune monitoring strategies for evaluating cancer immun

52 point, patient responses were established by immune monitoring strategies to detect subtle changes in

53 lysis of 130 patients who had enrolled in an immune monitoring study, we correlated acute rejection r

54 Recipients in the immune-monitoring study (n=10) displayed>80% depression

55 Immune monitoring suggested that these antitumor T-cell

56 rovide unique, time-dependent signatures for immune monitoring that are less compromised by the timin

57 ents in various clinical trials will require immune monitoring that is reliable and comparable so tha

58 During cycle 1, patients underwent immune monitoring to assess the effect of IL-2 on lympho

59 Immune monitoring to predict long-term outcome should in

60 PBMCs by ELISPOT has potential utility as an immune monitoring tool.

61 induction that will be guided by innovative immune monitoring tools.

62 and look forward to the role that vaccines, immune monitoring, viral kinetics and new antiherpesviru

63 inating preanalytical errors associated with immune monitoring, we have defined the protein signature

64 c disease and recent initiatives to optimize immune monitoring will facilitate rational design, monit