ライフサイエンスコーパス: intrapatient

1 Intrapatient absorbed doses were significantly correlate

2 Whether this intrapatient accumulation of escape mutations translates

3 to these questions showed that there was low intrapatient agreement for uncomfortable experiences (ka

4 ally, the study of CTCs has exposed dramatic intrapatient and interpatient heterogeneity and their ev

5 s of the scale of microevolution both at the intrapatient and interpatient scenarios.

6 In patients administered monthly HBIg, intrapatient and interpatient variability in trough anti

7 JCV VP1 substitutions are acquired intrapatient and might favor JCV brain invasion through

8 rose significantly; in IM there was a median intrapatient change from baseline of +7.6 ng/mL (-0.6 to

9 outh and throat pain reduction with doxepin (intrapatient changes of 4.1 for doxepin-placebo arm and

10 ter adjustments were made for correlation of intrapatient clonal variation, mixed-model analysis indi

11 When intrapatient clustering effects were considered, (18)F-D

12 CE MR imaging enhancement fraction (baseline intrapatient coefficient of variation [CV]=8.6%), volume

13 nt from the others in a given individual) in intrapatient comparative analysis (IPCA) of nevi may hel

14 Intrapatient comparative analysis is of major importance

15 Although work is ongoing, recently published intrapatient comparisons of (18)F-fluciclovine with (11)

16 Intrapatient comparisons showed similar horizontal furca

17 ralateral areas of unaffected skin served as intrapatient controls, and differences in blood flow and

18 Intrapatient CV of Tac AUC0-24 improved after converting

19 Intrapatient CV of Tac AUC0-24 improved after converting

20 The average intrapatient distance per individual variable site, 27%,

21 Intrapatient diversity and divergence over time was dete

22 0) copy/ml of plasma increase in viral load, intrapatient diversity increased by 1.4% (P = 0.028).

23 Intrapatient diversity was found both at the extrapulmon

24 The greater intrapatient diversity, divergence, and diversification

25 ek and then further to 320 mg/week during an intrapatient dosage-escalation phase.

26 Intrapatient dose escalation from 0.025 mg to 0.2 mg was

27 A phase I/II trial, using an intrapatient dose escalation of arginine butyrate combin

28 he initial dose level was 100 mg/m(2)/d with intrapatient dose escalation to a maximum dose of 300 mg

29 nts started at a dose of 300 mg/m(2)/d, with intrapatient dose escalation to a maximum dose of 500 mg

30 was performed in cohorts of three patients; intrapatient dose escalation was also permitted.

31 relapsed or refractory CLL or NHL underwent intrapatient dose escalation with each agent.

32 as administered by continuous infusion in an intrapatient dose escalation, from 500 mg/(kg/day) escal

33 PET data were obtained for 13 patients with intrapatient dose escalation.

34 ion for 3 weeks followed by a week gap, with intrapatient dose escalation.

35 Intrapatient dose escalations were allowed to a maximum

36 weekly for 4 weeks; in all other cohorts, an intrapatient dose-escalation schedule was used with incr

37 In AR and BKVN, the intrapatient drift was highly significant versus STA or

38 40 microg/m2/h every 3 weeks with subsequent intrapatient escalations or reductions in 10-microg/m2/h

39 V-1 infection, prospective studies examining intrapatient evolution during HIV-2 infection have been

40 ough numerous studies have characterized the intrapatient evolution of viral sequences during HIV-1 i

41 interpatient exposure was more variable than intrapatient exposure, and variability of exposure did n

42 is value was equivalent to that reported for intrapatient full-length env variation.

43 To evaluate intrapatient full-length gag variability, we derived the

44 Mean values of intrapatient gag nucleotide variation obtained by pairwi

45 diverse clinical isolates, and investigated intrapatient genomic diversity and evolution.

46 f preclinical models in capturing inter- and intrapatient genomic heterogeneity.

47 d and expanded our understanding of LSCs and intrapatient heterogeneity in AML using improved xenotra

48 gh in mRCC, with remarkable interpatient and intrapatient heterogeneity.

49 cated at different sites show a considerable intrapatient heterogeneity.

50 ow-frequency drug resistance mutations in an intrapatient HIV-1 population.

51 Intrapatient HIV-1 recombinants comprising sequences tha

52 quences made it possible to document complex intrapatient HIV-1 recombinants that were composed of al

53 The greatest range of intrapatient mean nucleotide variation for individual pr

54 individual patients, which suggested minimal intrapatient molecular heterogeneity.

55 sive disease showed a higher variance of the intrapatient mutational spectrum and a higher frequency

56 We sought to compare clinically derived, intrapatient paired models of initial platinum response

57 ed in HBV-reactivated patients with a median intrapatient prevalence of 73.3% (range, 27.6%-100%) sup

58 e mutation was detected in 8.1% of patients (intrapatient prevalence range, 0.11%-47.5% for primary m

59 ape mutation was found in 53.2% of patients (intrapatient prevalence range, 0.16%-100%).

60 p codons were detected in 19.3% of patients (intrapatient prevalence range, 1.6%-47.5%) and occurred

61 tients carrying such mutations, their median intrapatient prevalence was 4.6% (range, 2.5%-11.3%; P<0

62 show an exponential distribution pattern of intrapatient QS diversity in this study population in wh

63 aim of this study was to document the normal intrapatient range of scan-to-scan variation in blood-po

64 Furthermore, although there is evidence that intrapatient recombination may occur frequently, recombi

65 We assessed intrapatient reliability of LV mass measurements in 183

66 ess of (i) interpatient microevolution, (ii) intrapatient respiratory variation, and (iii) isolation

67 or mTOR was significantly higher in matched (intrapatient) samples and in unmatched (interpatient) sa

68 were isolated from individuals with greater intrapatient sequence diversity and were associated with

69 Phylogenetic analysis of intrapatient sequence sets showed distinct clustering of

70 stematic analysis of pairwise comparisons of intrapatient sequences, both within and between each sam

71 APK1/3 and other activities while exhibiting intrapatient similarity and interpatient heterogeneity.

72 inent lesions was measured as SUVmax Average intrapatient SUVmax (<SUVmax>pt) was compared between HE

73 Overall, intrapatient tacrolimus CV was higher in AAs versus non-

74 A) with 39 521 concentrations used to assess intrapatient tacrolimus CV.

75 transplant recipients; little is known about intrapatient tacrolimus variabilities impact on racial d

76 High intrapatient tacrolimus variability has been associated

77 These data demonstrate that intrapatient tacrolimus variability is strongly associat

78 Intrapatient tacrolimus variability was assessed using t

79 to assess changes in molecular signatures of intrapatient target lesions treated with topical therape

80 Intrapatient TF variance with altered loading (> 20% var

81 creasingly used to evaluate interpatient and intrapatient tumor heterogeneity.

82 Interpatient and intrapatient variabilities in apparent clearance were su

83 There was considerable intrapatient variability for both agents.

84 treated with Gengraf had a higher degree of intrapatient variability for cyclosporine trough concent

85 The inter- and intrapatient variability in cyclosporine (CsA) pharmacok

86 variability in community structure exceeded intrapatient variability in serial samples.

87 potentially influential factors: inter- and intrapatient variability of attenuation coefficients and

88 The main outcome measure is the change in intrapatient variability of AUC0-24 expressed as coeffic

89 The main outcome measure is the change in intrapatient variability of AUC0-24 expressed as coeffic

90 Thus, strategies that reduce intrapatient variability of CsA exposure over time may l

91 The intrapatient variability of dose calculations was less t

92 Intrapatient variability of PK parameters was significan

93 this study was to investigate the change in intrapatient variability of Tac AUC0-24 after converting

94 this study was to investigate the change in intrapatient variability of Tac AUC0-24 after converting

95 A reduced intrapatient variability of Tac Cmin, a surrogate marker

96 A reduced intrapatient variability of Tac Cmin, a surrogate marker

97 High intrapatient variability of tacrolimus relates to a wors

98 Inter- and intrapatient variability of the bias was assessed for ea

99 in the form of Neoral showed less inter- and intrapatient variability than tacrolimus, although this

100 xhibited significantly less interpatient and intrapatient variability than tacrolimus, for area under

101 functional role during the life cycle, NS5B intrapatient variability was low.

102 Interpatient and intrapatient variability was similar (intraclass correla

103 l thresholds show significant interassay and intrapatient variability.

104 PK studies showed wide interpatient and intrapatient variability.

105 Visit-to-visit intrapatient variation in blood-pool and liver SUVs had

106 our patient cohort, the reference range for intrapatient variation in blood-pool and liver SUVs is -

107 Although intrapatient variation of segments of gag have been dete

108 eference range in our patient population for intrapatient variation was -0.8 to 0.9 for blood pool SU

109 For the lungs, in which intrapatient variation was higher for the pediatric coll

110 were identified as systematically affecting intrapatient variation, and no factors were identified a

111 t body compartments and to better understand intrapatient viral dissemination.

112 r previous study that prospectively examined intrapatient viral evolution in HIV-1-infected individua