ライフサイエンスコーパス: low-dose group

1 0.05), and was similar to CHF values in the Low Dose group.

2 d from the high dose group compared with the low dose group.

3 2) in the high-dose subgroup relative to the low-dose group.

4 up and 48% (95% CI, 28%-69%; P = .20) in the low-dose group.

5 s; patients on <50% or no drug comprised the low-dose group.

6 the high-dose group and 75.5% (4.2) for the low-dose group.

7 bined and 39% and 20%, respectively, for the low-dose group.

8 8.0% in the high-dose group and 18.6% in the low-dose group.

9 amples in weeks 3 and 4 as compared with the low-dose group.

10 consistent differences between the high- and low-dose groups.

11 topenia, schistocytosis, anemia, and melena (low-dose group, 0.05 to 0.2 microg/kg; n = 8).

12 ted control group to 0.3 in the sulforaphane low-dose group, 0.3 and 0.4 in the two sulforaphane-N-ac

13 bitor dose, this effect was primarily in the low-dose group (1-year percent event-free survival: II/I

14 atment with placebo, 6.25 mg BID carvedilol (low-dose group), 12.5 mg BID carvedilol (medium-dose gro

15 rs included 28 of 74 patients (37.8%) in the low-dose group, 17 of 52 patients (32.7%) in the high-do

16 ull-dose group; 13.7% (14/102) in the 14-day low-dose group; 20.8% (22/106) in the 6-day full-dose gr

17 .05) and increased in the CHF/ET(A) High and Low Dose groups (23+/-3 and 25+/-1%, p < 0.05).

18 an additive antitumorigenic response for the low dose group (25 + 25 microg/kg) and additive interact

19 no significant difference between high- and low-dose groups (36/93 [38.7%] vs 27/95 [28.4%]; P = .07

20 ht participants (8%) received placebo in the low-dose groups; 39 participants (41%) received high-dos

21 y index in 25 percent of the patients in the low-dose group, 44 percent of those in the medium-dose g

22 e treated i.v. with 50 U/kg of human AT-III (low dose group), 500 U/kg of human AT-III (high dose gro

23 Altogether, in the low-dose group, 51 participants received rVSV-ZEBOV and

24 For the low-dose group, 6 of 55 base substitutions were at GC ba

25 ts transfused was significantly lower in the low-dose group (9.25x10(11)) than in the medium-dose gro

26 ith seroconversion rates of 44% (n=4) in the low-dose group, 92% (n=11) in the medium-dose group, and

27 Fewer patients in the low-dose group abandoned IFN for reasons other than tran

28 6 to -0.85] x 10(3) muU/mL; P = .01) and the low-dose group (adjusted mean difference, -2.96 [95% CI,

29 0.11 nmol of 99mTc-labeled Cy7 tilmanocept (low-dose group); an additional six mice were injected wi

30 n increase in SC of 0.08 mg/dl per yr in the low-dose group and 0.10 mg/dl per yr in the high-dose gr

31 in only ten (25%) of 40 participants in the low-dose group and 13 (33%) of 39 participants in the hi

32 .045), with reduction rates of 18.95% in the low-dose group and 33.62% in the high-dose group.

33 evels, with reduction rates of 40.18% in the low-dose group and 52.6% in the high-dose group.

34 d, and 18 patients developed ESRD: 10 in the low-dose group and 8 in the high-dose group (P: = 0.56).

35 glaucoma surgery at month 36 was 4.8% in the low-dose group and 8.1% in the high-dose insert group.

36 d a 16% lower risk of death (P =.001) in the low-dose group and a nonsignificantly lower risk in the

37 lacebo group, 12 (6%) of 201 patients in the low-dose group, and 17 (8%) of 211 patients in the high-

38 bo group, four (2%) patients enrolled in the low-dose group, and 17 (8%) patients in the high-dose gr

39 [18%] in the placebo group, 17 [30%] in the low-dose group, and 20 [34%] in the high-dose group).

40 h-dose group, 22.1 mug/mL (19.3-28.6) in the low-dose group, and 3.2 mug/mL (2.4-4.9) in the placebo

41 h-dose group, 44.9 mug/mL (25.8-56.3) in the low-dose group, and 5.2 mug/mL (3.5-7.6) in the placebo

42 (33%) to the placebo group, 57 (33%) to the low-dose group, and 58 (34%) to the high-dose group.

43 se group, 33 (79%) of 42 participants in the low-dose group, and five (25%) of 20 participants in the

44 igh-dose group, 25 (60%) participants in the low-dose group, and five (25%) participants in the place

45 ient in the placebo group, three (5%) in the low-dose group, and two (3%) in the high-dose group; onl

46 RD positivity of the high-dose group and the low-dose group at day 22 of induction 1.

47 ity in the high-dose group compared with the low-dose group at the end of study was observed (p = 0.0

48 ontamination was seen less frequently in the low-dose group, but the difference did not achieve signi

49 L greater in the high-dose group than in the low-dose group, but there was no treatment effect on any

50 these patients, 8 and 4 in the high-dose and low-dose groups, but none in the placebo group, met crit

51 s: BSJYD high dose group, middle dose group, low dose group, captopril group, and control group.

52 Combined analysis for high- and low-dose groups demonstrated increased efficacy of CMRIT

53 High- vs low-dose group effects were similar for these outcomes.

54 Although the majority of subjects in the low-dose group eventually acquired the task, their acqui

55 usions given was significantly higher in the low-dose group (five, vs. three in the medium-dose and t

56 ith the (-)-B[c]PhDE, both the high- and the low-dose groups for (+)-B[c]PhDE gave a 50:50 distributi

57 lizing Abs in one of five individuals in the low-dose group, four of five in the intermediate-dose gr

58 By comparison, the low-dose group had a similar mean injury score of 1.79+/

59 The low-dose group had an adverse event (AE) profile similar

60 - and intermediate-dose groups; however, the low-dose group had significantly better vessel definitio

61 of 1350 and in 1320 of 1350 segments in the low-dose group (kappa= 0.66), respectively.

62 For the low-dose group, mean sensitivity was 93+/-0%, mean speci

63 warfarin dose requirement of 1.5 mg or less (low-dose group, n=36), randomly selected patients with a

64 In the low-dose group, no significant effect of dutasteride on

65 roup, and fell by 43% from CHF values in the Low Dose group (p < 0.05).

66 SNRs and CNRs were lower in the low-dose group (P < .01).

67 first 24 hours by 23 patients (31.1%) in the low-dose group (P = 0.027 versus placebo), 18 patients (

68 ealed significantly lower CMV disease in the low-dose group (P = 0.02; odds ratio, 0.432, 95% confide

69 e high-dose group and 6.9+/-8.4 units in the low-dose group (P = 0.384 by t-test; favoring low-dose D

70 gh-dose group (P=0.008) and 2.8+/-0.1 in the low-dose group (P=0.005), as compared with 3.8+/-0.1 in

71 n both the high-dose group (P=0.048) and the low-dose group (P=0.14), as compared with 2.9+/-0.1 in t

72 When compared with the low-dose group, patients in the high-dose group had a no

73 n the weight-based group and 10 (40%) in the low-dose group relapsed after treatment completion leadi

74 d 233 +/- 87 SFC/10(6) PBMC, in the high and low dose groups, respectively.

75 98 segments in the high-, intermediate-, and low-dose groups, respectively.

76 nd 100 segments in high-, intermediate-, and low-dose groups, respectively.

77 ggregation in vitro, whereas plasma from the low-dose group resulted in only partial inhibition.

78 was 9.2% for the high-dose and 8.8% for the low-dose groups (risk ratio, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.8-1.3) (P =.

79 ina frequency was significantly lower in the low-dose group than in placebo-treated patients at both

80 ited higher values (P=.005 to P=.042) in the low-dose group than in the high-dose group; this finding

81 in 71%, 69%, and 70% of the patients in the low-dose group, the medium-dose group, and the high-dose

82 Two hundred thirty-seven high-risk RTR (low-dose group = valganciclovir 450 mg/day [n = 130]; hi

83 patients with adverse events were 21% in the low-dose group versus 33% in the high-dose group (P=0.00

84 -dose group and 11 (26%) participants in the low-dose group versus one (5%) participant in the placeb

85 Effects in the high- and low-dose groups vs control were similar for fitness (adj

86 one (an acute allergic skin reaction in the low-dose group) was assessed to be causally related.

87 patients in the high-dose group than in the low-dose group were hospitalized for at least 3 days (36

88 Patients in the low-dose group were more likely to have difficulties at

89 High-dose and low-dose groups were combined as a single dexmedetomidin

90 Participants from the low-dose group with no plans to deploy to Ebola-aff5cted