ライフサイエンスコーパス: oncologic

1 Only 25.2% of respondents considered the oncologic (18)F-FDG PET/CT indications to be well establ

2 Oncologic (18)F-FDG PET/CT is rapidly gaining acceptance

3 essential elements of a concise and complete oncologic (18)F-FDG PET/CT report and illustrates these

4 pretation rather than underinterpretation of oncologic (18)F-FDG PET/CT studies prevails in clinical

5 to reduce the rates of misinterpretation of oncologic (18)F-FDG PET/CT studies.

6 their experience with the interpretation of oncologic (18)F-FDG PET/CT studies.

7 ation from physicians referring patients for oncologic (18)F-FDG PET/CT.

8 tion survey focused on their experience with oncologic (18)F-FDG PET/CT.

9 from a patient population (total n = 20, all oncologic (18)F-FDG PET/MR) were selected, and the impac

10 of less perioperative blood transfusions for oncologic abdominal surgery was observed.

11 cer patients confers virologic, hepatic, and oncologic advantages.

12 K) possess much promise for the treatment of oncologic and autoimmune indications.

13 apeutic approach with broad applicability in oncologic and fibrotic diseases.

14 on of the rectal specimen did not compromise oncologic and functional outcome after laparoscopic surg

15 Oncologic and functional outcomes were compared between

16 The oncologic and functional results are excellent with acce

17 ion of PVE and chemotherapy may enhance both oncologic and operative safety.

18 It is crucial to fully explain the range of oncologic and QoL implications when counseling patients

19 ance (MR) imaging has been evaluated in many oncologic and rheumatologic indications and is emerging

20 Therapies targeting oncologic and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)

21 tential targets for metabolic, inflammatory, oncologic, and neurodegenerative disorders.

22 Oncologic anthropology represents a transdisciplinary fi

23 Pan-HDAC inhibitors developed for oncologic applications enhance Treg production and Treg

24 Further, these findings rationalize oncologic applications for this agent by providing a com

25 Although the initial oncologic applications for tumor detection and character

26 to outline the potential value of PET/MRI in oncologic applications for which data on PET/MRI are sti

27 (TOF) PET has great potential in whole-body oncologic applications, and recent work has demonstrated

28 ta provide guidance with response-stratified oncologic benchmarks for comparisons of novel treatment

29 h intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC), the oncologic benefit of surgery and perioperative outcomes

30 It is unclear whether PSH confers an oncologic benefit through increased salvageability or is

31 Purpose Despite documented oncologic benefit, use of postoperative adjuvant radioth

32 ces (e.g. viral infection, overnutrition, or oncologic burden) is a global health problem.

33 this novel technology; and present potential oncologic, cardiac, and neuropsychiatric applications.

34 ted with standard oncologic care or standard oncologic care alone.

35 ered concurrent palliative care and standard oncologic care at initial diagnosis.

36 Systemic oncologic care can continue without interruption.

37 ral barriers prevent the optimal delivery of oncologic care in this subpopulation.

38 rly palliative care integrated with standard oncologic care or standard oncologic care alone.

39 n=222) were collected from all head and neck oncologic centers in the Netherlands and analyzed with t

40 ers within the bone marrow remains a crucial oncologic challenge due to issues of drug availability a

41 to those in adults they represent a complex oncologic challenge.

42 ients who presented to an integrated dermato-oncologic clinic in a tertiary referral medical center w

43 al of 310 consecutive patients who underwent oncologic colorectal surgery were included in a prospect

44 diation-induced, toxic cardiac and secondary oncologic complications occurring in succeeding decades

45 and 17 years and were diagnosed as having an oncologic condition 1 month to 1 year before enrollment.

46 ortive therapy in patients being treated for oncologic conditions.

47 he 'trifecta' of prostate cancer management: oncologic, continence, and potency outcomes.

48 Thirty-two patients with different oncologic diagnoses underwent a single-injection, dual-i

49 hospitalized children with critical illness, oncologic diagnoses, or transplants.

50 s suspicious for malignancy in patients with oncologic diagnoses.

51 rity of illness at ICU admission, and active oncologic diagnosis were the other independent predictor

52 ventional PET/CT and PET/MR in patients with oncologic diseases.

53 licated in a broad range of inflammatory and oncologic diseases.

54 say has also emerged as an important tool in oncologic drug design programs for targeting RAD51.

55 n tumor cell lines, RI-1 holds promise as an oncologic drug.

56 aging phase II results, the vast minority of oncologic drugs in development receive regulatory approv

57 tic susceptibility for an important class of oncologic drugs.

58 eetings at which votes were cast relating to oncologic drugs.

59 omplexity and technique on early and midterm oncologic efficacy and rate of complications for 100 con

60 erm follow-up is needed to establish durable oncologic efficacy and survival relative to competing ab

61 tion (RFA) and cryoablation confirming their oncologic efficacy emerge, ongoing research aims at impr

62 The oncologic efficacy of MRI-guided FLA is currently being

63 for the treatment of invasive BCa before the oncologic efficacy of these techniques can be adequately

64 s to mature, longer-term data addressing the oncologic efficacy of this ablative modality are now ava

65 herapy for low-risk prostate cancer, and the oncologic efficacy of this treatment modality is current

66 nd efficiently, without negatively affecting oncologic efficacy or long-term survival, when compared

67 Long-term data regarding oncologic efficacy remain lacking but perioperative outc

68 r clinical trials are necessary to establish oncologic efficacy.

69 ded to other contemporary work that suggests oncologic equivalence and renal functional benefit compa

70 ents derive benefit from LH and to determine oncologic equivalence to OH.

71 eal lymph node dissection carries safety and oncologic equivalence to the open technique only in limi

72 ing surgery over radical nephrectomy and its oncologic equivalency confirmed, there is an increased p

73 Extensive oncologic experience argues that the most efficacious ap

74 igh number of ongoing RCTs of PET in several oncologic fields are expected to produce robust results

75 s (M/F: 1.4; mean age 63 years) attended the oncologic follow-up (mean 24 months) and were found dise

76 Long-term oncologic follow-up and, ideally, randomized prospective

77 Life-long oncologic follow-up is crucial for all retinoblastoma su

78 Metabolic and oncologic follow-up is presented.

79 Oncologic follow-up of patients in group B is in progres

80 Despite close oncologic follow-up, a biopsy, positron emission tomogra

81 e surgery for a potential application in the oncologic follow-up.

82 performed using what we called a peri-rectal oncologic gateway for retroperitoneal endoscopic single

83 retrieval rate that met or exceeded current oncologic guidelines and published benchmarks, and a fav

84 PET/CT has become the reference standard in oncologic imaging against which the performance of other

85 tastases and should be considered for future oncologic imaging clinical trials.

86 scope of DWI has since broadened to include oncologic imaging of the prostate gland, breast, and liv

87 agents and highlights the current status of oncologic imaging with radiolabeled AAs in terms of trac

88 nical work flow in the form of (18)F-FDG for oncologic imaging, with reliable daily production and di

89 al respiratory gating (ORG)-as developed for oncologic imaging-using a narrow range of breathing ampl

90 ransport, a relatively unexplored target for oncologic imaging.

91 We set out to determine the long-term oncologic impact of resection margins in patients with l

92 ed for sphincter preservation, the long-term oncologic impact of this approach is unclear.

93 gents that are clinically approved for other oncologic indications, agents in active clinical develop

94 Group 1 included oncologic indications, and groups 2 and 3 infection or i

95 PET imaging has been primarily utilized for oncologic indications, but also holds considerable poten

96 een implicated in mediating inflammatory and oncologic indications, their roles in lung fibrosis have

97 warranted to evaluate its clinical value in oncologic indications.

98 The oncologic inferiority of the APE technique in comparison

99 astases may be conceptualized as progressive oncologic injury to the nervous system.

100 carcinoma (RCC) has been at the forefront of oncologic innovation.

101 ies to evaluate the safety, feasibility, and oncologic integrity of laparoscopic liver resection for

102 zed controlled trials that compared a psycho-oncologic intervention delivered face-to face with a con

103 Various types of psycho-oncologic interventions are associated with significant,

104 tudy aimed to evaluate the effects of psycho-oncologic interventions on emotional distress and qualit

105 eaningful insight into the perioperative and oncologic issues related to the procedure.

106 provide a uniform clinical diagnosis in most oncologic lesion detection tasks.

107 ificantly improve neurosurgical resection of oncologic lesions through improved differentiation betwe

108 tients) referred for staging or restaging of oncologic malignancies underwent whole-body imaging with

109 or ARGX-111 clinical testing in MET-positive oncologic malignancies.

110 Somatostatin analogues are the mainstay of oncologic management of bowel NETs; everolimus, streptoz

111 a patient's spine disease: NOMS (neurologic, oncologic, mechanical instability, and systemic disease)

112 lly in presentation and behavior, reflecting oncologic mechanisms unique to each.

113 uded electronic databases and proceedings of oncologic meetings.

114 eed to develop and apply clinically relevant oncologic models that are amenable to available patient

115 The patients were referred for oncologic (n = 10), infectious/inflammatory (n = 5), and

116 th important implications in cardiovascular, oncologic, neurologic, and metabolic diseases.

117 atient cohort had a nosocomial source and an oncologic or hematologic comorbidity.

118 Studies of critically ill, oncologic or stem cell transplant, and solid organ trans

119 pressive treatment has not led to metabolic, oncologic, or infectious complications.

120 However, the oncologic outcome appears equivalent to cases without ma

121 roves tumor staging and leads to a favorable oncologic outcome in patients with localized ACC.

122 The aim of this study was to evaluate oncologic outcome in patients with locally advanced dist

123 intraoperative estimated blood loss (EBL) on oncologic outcome is unclear.

124 The association between classification and oncologic outcome was determined using an additional, in

125 clinical leakage but not with difference in oncologic outcome.

126 ecovery in patients without compromising the oncologic outcome.

127 lection, the intermediate-term and long-term oncologic outcomes after cryoablation for kidney tumors

128 aim of developing a method to assess risk of oncologic outcomes and guide management decisions for bo

129 e therapies continue to seek to improve both oncologic outcomes and quality of life for patients with

130 rovide a summary of contemporary longer-term oncologic outcomes and review the impact of RFA on renal

131 dies of cost, quality of life, and long-term oncologic outcomes are needed.

132 , their surgical outcomes reported but their oncologic outcomes are still pending.

133 erative morbidity with equivalent short-term oncologic outcomes as compared with open radical cystect

134 pose of this study was to assess and compare oncologic outcomes associated with the degree of patholo

135 lent renal functional outcomes and promising oncologic outcomes at intermediate follow-up.

136 randomized studies, this study compared the oncologic outcomes between patients treated with RC or T

137 We compared short-term oncologic outcomes between rectal cancer patients underg

138 hands, offers perioperative, functional and oncologic outcomes comparable to open partial nephrectom

139 robotic LAR is not associated with superior oncologic outcomes compared to laparoscopic LAR.

140 hown that partial nephrectomy has equivalent oncologic outcomes compared to radical nephrectomy.

141 erall survival; short-term perioperative and oncologic outcomes encompassing margin positivity, perma

142 hemoradiation for esophageal cancer improves oncologic outcomes for a broad group of patients with lo

143 Improved oncologic outcomes for esophageal cancer have resulted i

144 nd advanced cancer stage are associated with oncologic outcomes for numerous common cancers.

145 mmunosuppressive therapy (CIST) on long-term oncologic outcomes for patients who undergo surgery for

146 ss assessed by CT imaging or BMI can predict oncologic outcomes for patients with HNSCC, whereas weig

147 combining IMI with PET may provide superior oncologic outcomes for patients with resectable lung can

148 Mid-term oncologic outcomes have also been reported; further subs

149 logical principles and acceptable short-term oncologic outcomes have been reported.

150 With improved oncologic outcomes in esophageal cancer, there is an inc

151 s 30-day mortality, and short- and long-term oncologic outcomes in esophageal cancer.

152 at have been shown to improve functional and oncologic outcomes in randomized clinical trials.

153 Short-term oncologic outcomes in the absence of patient selection a

154 eatment modalities hold promise of improving oncologic outcomes in the future.

155 Short and long-term oncologic outcomes must be followed carefully.

156 ong men with very low-risk PCa, we evaluated oncologic outcomes of AA men with very low-risk PCa who

157 The long-term oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic gastrectomy for patie

158 e study was to compare the postoperative and oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery f

159 The oncologic outcomes of laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy f

160 urgical complications and the functional and oncologic outcomes of reoperative nephron-sparing surger

161 coma surgery; however, the perioperative and oncologic outcomes of this strategy are not well describ

162 Consequently, differences in oncologic outcomes that were observed in population-base

163 able approach for CRLM patients with similar oncologic outcomes to anatomical resections, this may no

164 in most academic institutions, with similar oncologic outcomes to radical nephrectomy.

165 act on in-hospital mortality and longer-term oncologic outcomes were analyzed in retrospective cohort

166 Early postoperative and oncologic outcomes were evaluated.

167 haracteristics, perioperative morbidity, and oncologic outcomes were tabulated.

168 In order to achieve excellent functional and oncologic outcomes with minimal perioperative complicati

169 ted results comparable to open techniques in oncologic outcomes with regard to the number of lymph no

170 However, the apparently better oncologic outcomes with TEMS can be partly explained by

171 atory state is thought to be associated with oncologic outcomes, and NLR has been used as a simple an

172 Oncologic outcomes, specifically low positive margin rat

173 Pending clinical oncologic outcomes, the findings do not support the use

174 sess its independent impact on operative and oncologic outcomes.

175 For most, it resolves, with no impact on oncologic outcomes.

176 t the time of radical cystectomy to optimize oncologic outcomes.

177 ss of visualization leading to compromise in oncologic outcomes.

178 adverse pathologic features at RP and poorer oncologic outcomes.

179 nephrectomy to date have revealed equivalent oncologic outcomes.

180 ificant differences were found in short-term oncologic outcomes.

181 s an early surrogate marker and correlate to oncologic outcomes.

182 l ureter has been extirpated with successful oncologic outcomes.

183 regarding perioperative morbidity and early oncologic outcomes.

184 es are necessary, particularly in regards to oncologic outcomes.

185 tive morbidity and possibly poorer long-term oncologic outcomes.

186 pendent predictors of LTP and yield the best oncologic outcomes.

187 hologic Gleason score seem to present better oncologic outcomes.

188 re is equivalent to open resection regarding oncologic outcomes.

189 ction but have significantly worse long-term oncologic outcomes.These findings need careful considera

190 urgical infection is associated with adverse oncologic outcomes; however, the mechanisms underlying t

191 The new oncologic paradigm of precision medicine is focused on i

192 us in cancer surgery represents an important oncologic parameter affecting overall prognosis.

193 ent study results involving cytogenetics and oncologic pathways of HCCs, novel drugs that act against

194 and molecular events that determine specific oncologic pathways used by these neoplasms.

195 Sixty-four oncologic patients (14 men and 50 women; mean age, 65.3

196 Fifty-one oncologic patients (mean age +/- SD, 56.6 +/- 14.0 y; 29

197 PET/CT, qualitatively and quantitatively, in oncologic patients and assess the confidence and degree

198 mprove diagnostic performance, especially in oncologic patients in certain indications.

199 Thirty-eight oncologic patients who underwent FDG PET/unenhanced mult

200 iological appearance of accessory spleens in oncologic patients who underwent splenectomy can be misi

201 Computed DW MR imaging was evaluated in 10 oncologic patients who underwent whole-body DW MR imagin

202 In 121 oncologic patients with 241 lung lesions, PET/MRI was pe

203 After ethics approval, in 8 oncologic patients with dental implants data were acquir

204 r, lung metastases are a frequent finding in oncologic patients, and for imaging of the lung CT is st

205 Twenty-one oncologic patients, mean age 58 y, first underwent clini

206 In a series of oncologic patients, vascular uptake of (68)Ga-DOTATOC an

207 pplication is likely to be PET evaluation of oncologic patients-especially those with brain, breast,

208 with FDG PET/unenhanced multidetector CT in oncologic patients.

209 detecting and characterizing lung lesions in oncologic patients.

210 The National Oncologic PET Registry (NOPR) collected data on intended

211 The National Oncologic PET Registry (NOPR) developed a NaF PET regist

212 beneficiaries participating in the National Oncologic PET Registry (NOPR).

213 For all years, we assessed National Oncologic PET Registry data for bladder, kidney, pancrea

214 evaluate a sample of reports in the National Oncologic PET Registry database.

215 Since 2006, the National Oncologic PET Registry has collected prospective data on

216 ked post-NaF PET data of consenting National Oncologic PET Registry participants age 65 y or older fr

217 The National Oncologic PET Registry prospectively assessed the impact

218 ypes of cancer participating in the National Oncologic PET Registry.

219 s to identify core elements for inclusion in oncologic PET reports and to evaluate a sample of report

220 The main indications in the oncologic PET studies were staging in published studies

221 ol values from sites that conduct whole-body oncologic PET/CT examinations and participated in the sc

222 rrent perspective of referring physicians on oncologic PET/CT.

223 ble uncertainty about the appropriate use of oncologic PET/CT.

224 Pediatric oncologic PET/MR is technically feasible, showing satisf

225 nce is recommended as a routine protocol for oncologic PET/MR.

226 n influencing immunologic, inflammatory, and oncologic phenotypes, or PDHX, a subunit of the pyruvate

227 pecific information relevant to surgical and oncologic planning.

228 eillance, particularly for tumors of limited oncologic potential, in patients with other significant

229 in less-selected patients treated in general oncologic practice.

230 cular ligation (CVL) are both based on sound oncologic principles.

231 ion even for larger tumors, combining a safe oncologic procedure with excellent cosmesis.

232 h reduction mammoplasty could provide a safe oncologic procedure with immediate breast reconstruction

233 k stratification, functional assessment, and oncologic prognostication, elderly patients with cancer

234 tion of somatostatin receptor subtype 2, for oncologic purposes, is frequently made using the DOTA-de

235 e relationship for morbidity, mortality, and oncologic quality has been reported for OPD, comparative

236 Oncologic reading was performed first according to PERCI

237 ctive and subjective image parameters and on oncologic readings in whole-body (18)F-FDG PET/MRI.

238 ization of minimally invasive techniques for oncologic rectal resections.

239 PET/CT systems, especially in neurologic and oncologic research.

240 chyma, possibly forming the equivalent of an oncologic resection margin.

241 view to ascertain the operative strategy for oncologic resection of malignant tumors of the liver and

242 hort does not experience poor outcomes after oncologic resection.

243 suring both parenchymal sparing and suitable oncologic resection.

244 least 18 months after esophageal or gastric oncologic resections represented the study cohort.

245 d with worse short-term outcomes after major oncologic resections.

246 after T-NACT is, in part, unrelated to their oncologic response.

247 t-term outcomes and pathologic surrogates of oncologic results among patients undergoing robotic vers

248 and associated functional outcomes, mid-term oncologic results and patient perception and satisfactio

249 The oncologic results are promising, with low positive margi

250 Time is still needed to determine long-term oncologic results, but initial findings are promising.

251 mph node yield and short-term to medium-term oncologic results.

252 ble short-term outcomes without compromising oncologic results.

253 agents to the therapeutic armamentarium for oncologic, rheumatologic, and neurologic disorders has r

254 risk PCa should be counseled about increased oncologic risk when deciding among their disease managem

255 was designed using evidence-based facts and oncologic rules: laparoscopy with pneumoperitoneum, low

256 er, its impact on outcomes, particularly its oncologic safety for tumors greater than 5 cm, remains u

257 of more than 10 years confirms the long-term oncologic safety of laparoscopic surgery for rectal canc

258 These findings question the oncologic safety of laparoscopy for the treatment of rec

259 aoperative outcomes, postoperative recovery, oncologic safety, and postoperative complications were e

260 is of the ability to provide a wide range of oncologic services and specialists.

261 gh few have been explicitly validated in the oncologic setting.

262 omagenesis and its optimal management in the oncologic setting.

263 for clinical evaluation in a broad number of oncologic settings where mTOR signaling has a pathogenic

264 ted theranostics in preclinical and clinical oncologic settings.

265 regulatory approvals are expected across the oncologic spectrum for a variety of other agents that ta

266 ation of patient residence, comorbidity, and oncologic stage.

267 With oncologic studies being the primary application of PET,

268 Initial oncologic studies show that the aptamer inhibits cell in

269 ism (VTE) prophylaxis in patients undergoing oncologic surgery and examined the influence of surgeon

270 Patients undergoing oncologic surgery from 2003 to 2007 and recorded in the

271 Achieving cancer-free surgical margins in oncologic surgery is critical to reduce the need for add

272 Use of robotics in oncologic surgery is increasing; however, reports of saf

273 assess surgical margins in real-time during oncologic surgery leads to incomplete tumor removal, inc

274 r conversions to open, surrogates for proper oncologic surgery were nearly identical between the 2 ap

275 r conversions to open, surrogates for proper oncologic surgery were nearly identical between the 2 ap

276 nge, 34-95 years), underwent major abdominal oncologic surgery with an indwelling EC.

277 ty of venous thromboembolism (VTE) following oncologic surgery.

278 axis is underutilized in patients undergoing oncologic surgery.

279 ks of postoperative mortality and suboptimal oncologic surgical quality following PD are higher in lo

280 Therefore, a variety of interventional oncologic techniques have been developed for treating se

281 ngle- and multiple-center clinical trials of oncologic therapies by providing acceptable (minimum), t

282 s prevalence has increased as more effective oncologic therapies have improved patient survival, but

283 erapeutic regimen, type of disease, previous oncologic therapies, clinical morphology of cutaneous le

284 R to CRT and could be used to select optimal oncologic therapy in rectal cancer patients.

285 promising first-in-class compound to attempt oncologic therapy without cardiotoxicity, based on targe

286 ncreasing the effectiveness of a mainstay of oncologic therapy.

287 field of angiogenesis inhibitors for future oncologic therapy.

288 and chemotherapy) are the mainstay of modern oncologic therapy.

289 f robotic lymph node dissections surpass the oncologic threshold of 10-14 lymph nodes compared with o

290 nt TC was tracked for 6 or more months after oncologic thyroidectomy.

291 Over all contrasts and body mass indexes, oncologic TOF PET yielded a significant improvement in l

292 h the diseases' longevity and an increase in oncologic transformation suggest a rising disease burden

293 Oncologic treatment and outcomes as well as clinical gen

294 Success with oncologic treatment has allowed cancer patients to exper

295 and costly and, if unplanned, may interrupt oncologic treatment.

296 The impact of oncologic treatments on fertility and menopausal symptom

297 gate for overall survival (OS) in trials for oncologic treatments.

298 Oncologic variables, including number of resected lymph

299 /MRI might be possible down to 2 MBq/kgBW in oncologic whole-body examinations.

300 These range from the inflammatory to the oncologic with an undisputed link to hepatitis, liver ci