ライフサイエンスコーパス: liability

1 s partially attributable to shared polygenic liability.

2 for increasing ethanol intake and addiction liability.

3 encourage quality of care through threat of liability.

4 ly mediated through the individual's genetic liability.

5 ve relatives acted additively on adoptee AUD liability.

6 ed (with other antiplatelet agents) bleeding liability.

7 try efforts were directed at addressing this liability.

8 variation explained directly by variation in liability.

9 al stimuli on the expression of that genetic liability.

10 ed in sludge becoming an economic and social liability.

11 n drugs for QT prolonging and arrhythmogenic liability.

12 ust pharmacokinetic profile without any PDE6 liability.

13 es and accounting for 23% of the variance in liability.

14 to predict QT prolonging and arrhythmogenic liability.

15 availability and reduced cardiac ion channel liability.

16 lite, and hence presented a potential safety liability.

17 es not reflect a single dimension of genetic liability.

18 for CD do not reflect a single dimension of liability.

19 P2Y1 has the potential for reduced bleeding liability.

20 account for at least 32% of the variance in liability.

21 eptance are hindered by their own high-abuse liability.

22 physiological traits of heightened addiction liability.

23 ht represent early manifestations of genetic liability.

24 ope of care, quality, and responsibility and liability.

25 etabolite levels are associated with illness liability.

26 that lacks tolerance, dependence, and abuse liability.

27 how the chemical modifications affect abuse liability.

28 ld contribute to altered gene expression and liability.

29 ume and cortical thickness, to schizophrenia liability.

30 hared with genetic variance in schizophrenia liability.

31 phrenia and FTND/CPD/COT shared some genetic liability.

32 ht represent early manifestations of genetic liability.

33 twins (24 pairs) informative for depression liability.

34 al factors on brain connectivity and disease liability.

35 ic-like effects with reduced sedative/ataxic liabilities.

36 ger than the correlations of overall disease liabilities.

37 ating evidence indicates some shared genetic liabilities.

38 ofiles and were devoid of the aforementioned liabilities.

39 of these compounds exhibited potential hERG liabilities.

40 lated behavior without sedative or addictive liabilities.

41 of long half-life, however, carries with it liabilities.

42 n exposure, and CYP inhibition and induction liabilities.

43 smodial agents but present several stability liabilities.

44 Y12 antagonists in terms of reduced bleeding liabilities.

45 ut means to reveal gross in vivo proteolytic liabilities.

46 h comparable PDE10A potency devoid of efflux liabilities.

47 d rational engineering to reduce hydrophobic liabilities.

48 es concerns about potential cross-resistance liabilities.

49 selectivity as well as a reduction in safety liabilities.

50 could offer equivalent efficacy with reduced liabilities.

51 ility, yet their contribution to variance in liability, 2.6%, is modest compared to that for heritabl

52 haracterized by partially distinct polygenic liabilities and may represent more homogeneous phenotype

53 fy potential chemical targets, toxicological liabilities and mechanisms useful for elucidating advers

54 lar statement about the relationship between liability and BV.

55 s as well as twin studies suggest a familial liability and consequently different genes were investig

56 ecular basis of this sex-based difference in liability and demonstrated an excess of deleterious auto

57 hose predisposing factors, including genetic liability and early family environment, that are shared

58 to test for the presence of a shared genetic liability and examined potential differences between low

59 and allosteric agonism to the adverse effect liability and neurotoxicity associated with this class o

60 s improvement of N-glucuronidation metabolic liability and off-target pharmacology.

61 PK1 inhibitor 32, which does not have a hERG liability and possesses a favorable pharmacokinetic prof

62 of both the complex genetic architecture of liability and the influences of environmental stimuli on

63 s between inflammatory pain and opioid abuse liability, and should help to facilitate the development

64 - specifically, the heritability of disease liability, approximate heritability, sibling recurrence

65 e more effective, safer, and devoid of abuse liabilities are desperately needed.

66 cetyltransferase (HAT) inhibitors with these liabilities are now routinely used to probe epigenetic p

67 Vasoactive liabilities are typically assayed using wire myography,

68 because of parental divorce or high genetic liability are more sensitive to the pathogenic effects o

69 of the RNA interference (RNAi) pathway, but liabilities arising from the native RNA structure necess

70 h in turn moderates the emergence of general liability as individual risk for mental illness.

71 possess the same epileptiform adverse effect liability as mGlu5 ago-PAMs/PAMs and maintain temporal a

72 tive does not display the same level of hERG liability as observed with 1 and represents a promising

73 g good functional activity but displayed new liabilities associated with metabolism and hERG inhibiti

74 r cathepsin G and that mitigated a number of liabilities associated with poor physicochemical propert

75 s conducted to address a potential genotoxic liability associated with an aniline-derived scaffold in

76 ardiovascular drug but lacking its metabolic liability associated with CYP2D6 metabolism.

77 rties with their EPS and prolactin-elevating liabilities at therapeutic doses.

78 dence that volatile solvents have high abuse liability because of their selective effects on critical

79 direction of causation between schizophrenia liability, brain structure and cognition in a pan-Europe

80 as cocaine and amphetamine have a high abuse liability, but not everyone who uses them develops depen

81 is often not desirable and can create safety liabilities by activating native host immune defenses ag

82 ay also serve as a metabolic and therapeutic liability by indicating cancer cell susceptibility to FA

83 tive antitubercular agents, if the metabolic liability can be solved.

84 Although the effect of our PD measure on DA liability cannot be explained by standard measures of co

85 50 value of ca. 2 muM) and limited cytotoxic liability (CC50 > 100 muM) therefore furnishing a select

86 solates but also exhibited limited cytotoxic liability (CC50 > 100 muM).

87 activity (EC50 = 0.8 muM), limited cytotoxic liability (CC50 > 50 muM), and modest in vitro efficacy

88 model to screen for the cardiovascular (CV) liabilities (changes to HR and SNRT) that were responsib

89 nt of dental implants (DIs) and resulting in liability claims (LCs).

90 we review recent national trends in medical liability claims and costs, which indicate a sharp reduc

91 Number of medical professional liability claims involving Mohs surgery for factors incl

92 We tested the hypothesis that shared genetic liability contributes to the high rates of comorbidity b

93 In some settings, medical liability costs are enormous, human resource shortages a

94 g RRD risk since 27.4% of the underlying RRD liability could be explained by the collective additive

95 tional benefits of Aprokam include increased liability coverage and possible reduction in dilution er

96 GDH2 may be essential to mitigate metabolic liabilities created by IDH1 mutations in glioma, with po

97 s can be exploited or considered a potential liability depending on their intended application and ha

98 This may reflect a specific genetic liability, distinct from that which contributes to basel

99 ict the putative off-targets and address the liability during lead design and optimization phases.

100 Is as anti-HIV-1 agents with fewer long-term liabilities, efficacy on new drug-resistant HIV-1 strain

101 forces likely to shape change in the medical liability environment over the next decade.

102 We show that genetic liability estimates are primarily driven by SNPs identif

103 ficantly increased the amount of variance in liability explained by GRPS.

104 proposed to estimate the variance in disease liability explained by large sets of genetic markers.

105 mechanisms that may contribute to drug-abuse liability, exploring evidence from opioids, alcohol, and

106 umentation, quality assessment, professional liability, facility safety, patient health information,

107 ft, recent studies have identified a general liability factor for psychopathology-sometimes called th

108 s of DILI than drugs that only have a single liability factor.

109 tinct liability factors rather than a single liability factor.

110 hese were mostly influenced by environmental liability factors (heritability, 29.3% and 2.2%).

111 ed disorders may be influenced by 2 distinct liability factors rather than a single liability factor.

112 t it has been difficult to identify specific liability factors, in part because of both the complex g

113 cence, and to examine whether higher genetic liability for ADHD is correlated with total number of ad

114 ligands as effective analgesics with reduced liability for adverse effects.

115 dings suggest that in healthy young adults a liability for alcohol-induced aggression in a non-provok

116 asting epigenetic signatures associated with liability for attention and cognition, and limited poten

117 he transmission of the general externalizing liability for biological parents (r = 0.27-0.30) but not

118 These effects were specific to liability for bipolar disorder and did not apply to schi

119 dhood adversities and adulthood stressors in liability for bipolar disorder using data from the Natio

120 and neurocognition, in individuals carrying liability for bipolar disorder.

121 nd verbal functioning may be associated with liability for bipolar disorder.

122 e for mechanistic interpretations of genetic liability for brain diseases.

123 siological conditions represents a potential liability for clinical applications.

124 deletions of loop-bound sequences conferred liability for cognitive performance and decreased GRIN2B

125 g of information may contribute to a general liability for common mental disorders.

126 ditive contributions of these factors to the liability for depression, supporting the multiplicative

127 tolerance and mature in the periphery are a liability for developing autoimmunity.

128 abnormalities are influenced by the genetic liability for developing the disease.

129 , suggesting that this region is a potential liability for drug discovery.

130 The genetic contribution to liability for opioid dependence is well established; ide

131 Network analysis revealed that genetic liability for schizophrenia is primarily associated with

132 ntermediate phenotype related to the genetic liability for schizophrenia that manifests as altered re

133 Cognitive deficits lie upstream of the liability for schizophrenia with about a quarter of the

134 r deficient contour perception marks genetic liability for schizophrenia, or is strictly associated w

135 prefrontal cortical surfaces associated with liability for schizophrenia.

136 alities may not be associated with a genetic liability for schizophrenia.

137 of familial coaggregation suggests familial liability for the association between eating disorders a

138 e study was underpowered to explore familial liability for this association.

139 e hERG potassium channel was identified as a liability for this series.

140 reduced host cell uptake and is a worrisome liability for water-soluble antimalarial drugs.

141 tion DPP1 inhibitors free from aorta binding liabilities found for earlier compound series was discov

142 e extent to which IKr blockers with known QT liability generate arrhythmias through this pathway.

143 ewiring, little is known about the metabolic liabilities generated by this reprogramming.

144 A shared genetic liability has been proposed as one possible mechanism.

145 d suggest a general strategy for identifying liabilities in cancer cells.

146 ssentiality that may aid to unveil metabolic liabilities in cancer.

147 nal gene interactions and genotype-dependent liabilities in cancer.

148 tabolism, and its use for exposing metabolic liabilities in ccRCC, whose emergent metabolic network e

149 ext specificity of metabolic preferences and liabilities in malignant cells.

150 tivation capacity in mice, leading to safety liabilities in murine studies.

151 y the early childhood manifestations of this liability in a UK population-based cohort.

152 ntiated safe opioid analgesics without abuse liability in primates.

153 steroidogenesis, and interference can pose a liability in terms of side effects.

154 of ischemic events with no apparent bleeding liability in this high-risk group.

155 ERG activity and frequencies of other safety liabilities included those that investigated mammalian c

156 1.7 leads that address a number of metabolic liabilities including bioactivation, PXR activation, as

157 our strategies were pursued to address these liabilities including the synthesis of prodrugs, increas

158 eclining levels in compensation payments and liability insurance costs over the last 7 to 10 years.

159 to the job, 15 (21%) had purchased personal liability insurance, and 20 (28%) have defended a lawsui

160 The IQ-genetic liability interaction arose largely from IQ differences

161 ion to compounds with reduced cardiovascular liabilities is described.

162 ion of these synonymous mutations to disease liability is comparable to de novo protein-truncating mu

163 irst study to demonstrate that schizophrenia liability is expressed partially through cognitive defic

164 This shared liability is most consistent with a general risk for sub

165 hat BV changes lie downstream of the disease liability is that the risk loci that influence schizophr

166 ated variants, yet how these variants confer liability is uncertain.

167 er these childhood antecedents index genetic liability is unknown.

168 Although docking retains important liabilities (it cannot calculate affinities accurately n

169 res identified strategies to obviate the DDI liability, leading to compound 16, which exhibits robust

170 activity and, thus, potential cardiovascular liability, LY2119620 surpassed previous congeners in pot

171 ity estimate of 17.4% (s.e. 1.7%) based on a liability model.

172 e the in vivo profile and address off-target liabilities of a series of BACE1 inhibitors represented

173 d pharmacodynamic features that overcome the liabilities of artemisinin derivatives.

174 into the therapeutic potential and possible liabilities of GluN2B antagonists.

175 It also lacks some of the pharmacokinetic liabilities of the clinical agents and appears to have a

176 However, concerns about the pharmacokinetic liabilities of the hydroxamic acid moiety have stimulate

177 utics and in toxicology assays for potential liabilities of therapeutic agents.

178 The merits and liabilities of these approaches will be discussed in the

179 hold potential as new analgesics with fewer liabilities of use.

180 advances have greatly mitigated any inherent liabilities of yeasts.

181 e long-standing concerns regarding the abuse liability of benzodiazepines, the mechanisms underlying

182 A common liability of cancer drugs is toxicity to noncancerous ce

183 thodologies employed to assess proarrhythmia liability of drugs, discuss the challenges involved in t

184 We discovered a potential off-target liability of fenofibrate-related compounds, and in a com

185 -directed T3 action offsets the diabetogenic liability of glucagon, and glucagon-mediated delivery sp

186 ng series is devoid of the CYP2C9 inhibition liability of MRK-560.

187 e, novel strategies to predict the potential liability of new entities toward the AOX enzyme are urge

188 gs demonstrate that ACC mediates a metabolic liability of NSCLC and that ACC inhibition by ND-646 is

189 effects have a considerable influence on the liability of postterm birth.

190 emains unknown how pain influences the abuse liability of prescription opioids.

191 iscovery sample as indicators of the genetic liability of schizophrenia.

192 n slice assay was used to assess the seizure liability of subsequent compounds, leading to the identi

193 activity at DAT and NET, and decreases abuse liability of the compounds.

194 The kinetic liability of the conformational breadth is minimized by

195 The addiction liability of these drugs has led to the current epidemic

196 amine the interaction between IQ and genetic liability on risk for schizophrenia.

197 bstantially attenuates the impact of genetic liability on the risk for schizophrenia.

198 ch case it is an environmental and financial liability, or it is used in relatively low value applica

199 umerated compounds, biological activity, and liabilities, over 17 years.

200 OPS (Copy-number alterations Yielding Cancer Liabilities Owing to Partial losS) genes, and spliceosom

201 ntly correlated with increased schizophrenia liability (phenotypic correlation, -0.25; 95% CI, -0.38

202 TMLM, LT-Fam is computed from posterior mean liabilities (PML) under a liability threshold model; how

203 score statistic computed from posterior mean liabilities (PMLs) under the liability-threshold model.

204 riable IKr-blocking potencies and arrhythmia liability produced a range of effects on INa-L, from mar

205 4775) was discovered with an improved PK and liability profile over 1.

206 Odds ratios (ORs), attributable risks, liability R2 values, and proportions mediated.

207 -modifying benefit and could cause cognitive liabilities rather than symptomatic benefit in AD mouse

208 ormance, has been demonstrated as a critical liability region in schizophrenia.

209 rmen, 30 (42%) were concerned about personal liability related to the job, 15 (21%) had purchased per

210 The VCPs cite liability risk (for reporting [24.2%] and for not report

211 This article discusses liability risks associated with the disclosure of signif

212 gher proportion of variance explained on the liability scale (improvementtarget= 50%; improvementrepl

213 component and non-additive residuals on the liability scale and (2) the Levene's test to assess equa

214 non-additive environmental residuals on the liability scale and secondly using the Levene's (Brown-F

215 ke pseudo-R(2) and variance explained on the liability scale were calculated.

216 Firstly, we show that on the liability scale, common variants collectively explain at

217 ntrol phenotypes and then transformed to the liability scale.

218 ng multiplicative interactive effects on the liability scale.

219 mated with a multivariate Gibbs sampler; the liability-scale phenotypic covariance matrix is based on

220 stemizole competitive binding assay for hERG liability screening.

221 psychotics devoid of extrapyramidal symptoms liability, sedation, and catalepsy.

222 (4.2 log at 10 muM), and marginal cytotoxic liability (selectivity index, SI approximately 24).

223 Exposure to drugs with high metabolic liability should be minimised, and both psychiatric prov

224 erties such as enumerated compounds, but not liabilities, show statistically significant increasing t

225 mmarize the structure-activity and structure-liability studies leading to the discovery of 31 and the

226 ntal influences on the general externalizing liability than previously detected in twin studies and i

227 r improved mode of action, but also revealed liabilities that allowed us to discern two properties of

228 ing and its potential to induce biosynthetic liabilities that can be exploited for glioma therapy.

229 f these adaptations might reveal cancer cell liabilities that can be exploited for therapeutic benefi

230 for desirable ADMET properties or suspected liabilities that may require significant optimization.

231 compounds that, like 2, were free of the CV liabilities that resulted in the discontinuation of BMS-

232 M1 activation contributes to the cholinergic liabilities that were previously attributed to activatio

233 Tourette syndrome (rather than OCD) genetic liability that is not captured by traditional DSM-based

234 ck the kinase-independent function of AKT, a liability that limits their effectiveness compared to al

235 de attempt through a general psychopathology liability, this dimension should be considered as an imp

236 We performed joint continuous-ordinal liability threshold model fitting using the full informa

237 A liability threshold model that contemplates misclassific

238 rom posterior mean liabilities (PML) under a liability threshold model; however, LT-Fam uses publishe

239 The data were analyzed using univariate liability threshold modeling, stratified by sex and age,

240 Liability threshold models adjusting for censoring with

241 luding univariate and bivariate twin models, liability threshold models, DeFries-Fulker extremes anal

242 Previously, we introduced a liability threshold-based mixed model association statis

243 We introduce a liability-threshold mixed linear model (LTMLM) associati

244 posterior mean liabilities (PMLs) under the liability-threshold model.

245 hanced by the elimination of pharmacological liabilities through medicinal chemistry efforts.

246 lity to limit IDH1(R132H)-mediated metabolic liabilities, thus promoting glioma growth in this contex

247 With growing awareness of the liabilities to maintaining the food system of today, eff

248 considerably by the assignment of unlimited liabilities to the shareholders.

249 counted for by the transmission of a general liability to a spectrum of externalizing disorders.

250 due to the genetic transmission of a general liability to a spectrum of externalizing disorders.

251 bjects with schizophrenia might increase the liability to adverse outcomes with cannabis use is consi

252 The liability to ASD and a more broadly defined high-level a

253 discover common genetic variants conferring liability to ASD.

254 enetic risk for AUD reflects both a specific liability to AUD and to other externalizing disorders.

255 the importance of genetic influences on the liability to autism and related traits.

256 signature of reduced penetrance of inherited liability to autism spectrum disorder among females.

257 as been proposed whereby factors influencing liability to bipolar disorder confer certain traits with

258 test may be used as a method to predict the liability to deamidation of therapeutic antibodies in vi

259 Together, these loci explain 9% of the liability to developing this condition.

260 strong, accounting for 4% of the variance in liability to diabetes.

261 substance dependence, including extension of liability to illicit drug dependence.

262 the first genetic factor reflected a general liability to internalizing disorders, while the third ge

263 ors differed across sexes in their impact on liability to major depression.

264 ing the symptoms, which show gender-specific liability to mutational burden.

265 athies, including hereditary neuropathy with liability to pressure palsies (HNPP) caused by PMP22 def

266 opathies, such as hereditary neuropathy with liability to pressure palsies or demyelinating forms of

267 22 (PMP22) causes hereditary neuropathy with liability to pressure palsies, a peripheral nerve lesion

268 MPZ mutation, and hereditary neuropathy with liability to pressure palsy/PMP22 deletion.

269 Genetic risk for liability to recurrent MDD was partitioned using sparse

270 robust interaction was seen between genetic liability to schizophrenia and IQ in predicting schizoph

271 enia with about a quarter of the variance in liability to schizophrenia explained by variation in cog

272 mediating the link between cannabis use and liability to schizophrenia.

273 of nonshared environment than those for the liability to schizophrenia.

274 n within MYO16 may contribute to the genetic liability to schizophrenia.

275 arge effects are superimposed on a polygenic liability to schizophrenia.

276 CpG sites were significantly associated with liability to T2D, fasting blood glucose and insulin resi

277 t up-to-date computational method to predict liability toward human AOX (hAOX), for applications in d

278 gy of schizophrenia; however, shared genetic liability toward infections and schizophrenia could infl

279 ment practice must shift from treatment of a liability toward recovery of the embedded energy and che

280 ons of their therapeutic potential and abuse liability, two specific areas that are of significant pu

281 Mitigation of a potential Ames and hERG liability ultimately led to two promising compounds, one

282 The proportion of liability variance explained by GPRSs for each MDD subgr

283 n a chemotype class lacking overt structural liabilities was a critical milestone in the effort to re

284 new round of optimization addressing the key liabilities was performed and led to discovery of compou

285 nship between BV deviation and schizophrenia liability was more limited.

286 Bleeding liability was reduced in the rat wire coil model, more r

287 in a series of HCV NS5B inhibitors, the hERG liability was reduced.

288 nitive impairment is causal to schizophrenia liability, we are not in a position to make a similar st

289 Based on this shared liability, we identified multiple long non-coding RNAs a

290 understand the neurobiology underlying such liability, we investigate how early adolescent cocaine e

291 To overcome this potential liability, we investigated two prodrug strategies, 1,4,2

292 This scaffold suffers from hERG liabilities which were not remedied through this round o

293 pes of opioid medication, their benefits and liabilities will ultimately need to be determined by the

294 t the risk loci that influence schizophrenia liability will thereafter influence BV and to a lesser e

295 In contrast to the off-target liabilities with 1, no blood pressure increase was obser

296 Furthermore, they display fewer liabilities with CYP-metabolizing enzymes and hERG compa

297 airments in 4 domains known to share genetic liability with ADHD: IQ, social communication, pragmatic

298 BV changes lay downstream of schizophrenia liability, with 4% of BV variation explained directly by

299 dentifying neural correlates of this general liability would substantiate its importance in character

300 tions contribute substantially to individual liability, yet their contribution to variance in liabili