ライフサイエンスコーパス: patient selection

1 ng immunotherapy would significantly improve patient selection.

2 pathway, providing a potential strategy for patient selection.

3 id not improve PFS, despite biomarker-driven patient selection.

4 rapy with cetuximab, indicating the need for patient selection.

5 ents, highlights the need for more strategic patient selection.

6 hich can be reduced with training and proper patient selection.

7 herapy in time and the resulting advances in patient selection.

8 perative stroke with CAS and CEA to improved patient selection.

9 sistance all showed this signature of within-patient selection.

10 luation and the specific issues addressed in patient selection.

11 potential to improve risk stratification and patient selection.

12 tor of HE recurrence with a cutoff of 11 for patient selection.

13 spontaneous awakening trial performance and patient selection.

14 iffered and might allow future refinement in patient selection.

15 ify risk factors for mortality to facilitate patient selection.

16 d therapies will most likely require careful patient selection.

17 uld aid clinical decision making and improve patient selection.

18 ariable outcomes might be improved by better patient selection.

19 rategies and results on the basis of uniform patient selection.

20 ilty will help to guide the most appropriate patient selection.

21 y is the integral role of imaging in optimal patient selection.

22 ion, use of such measures may help in better patient selection.

23 ectomy in experienced hands and with careful patient selection.

24 n repair, which may have been exaggerated by patient selection.

25 e antibodies for HLA-DR to improve anti-PD-1 patient selection.

26 all-cause mortality after TEVAR to aid with patient selection.

27 ching was used to account for differences in patient selection.

28 reimbursement of DBT and facilitate improved patient selection.

29 Surgical experience significantly impacts patient selection.

30 during, and after TAVR may lead to improved patient selection, accelerated development of TAVR prost

31 d the risk may be mitigated with appropriate patient selection, accurate and rapid diagnosis, and agg

32 s a structured process to ensure appropriate patient selection, accurate and reproducible data acquis

33 With careful patient selection, advanced interventional techniques, a

34 ocused on lessons learned regarding adequate patient selection, along with current and future perspec

35 ety of EVAR vs OAR may depend on appropriate patient selection and adequate access to multidisciplina

36 toring in patients with acute liver failure, patient selection and ancillary assessments of cerebral

37 We highlight the importance of patient selection and appropriate statistical analytical

38 sion of imaging techniques as biomarkers for patient selection and assessment of outcome is expected

39 ify predictive biomarkers that could improve patient selection and circumvent these types of drug res

40 We argue for careful patient selection and close longitudinal follow-up of re

41 The available data suggest that patient selection and comprehensive cardiopulmonary scre

42 This information can guide the physician in patient selection and determining the intensity of care

43 o reduce the risk of recurrence, but optimal patient selection and dose are unclear.

44 entosa, as well as for establishing accurate patient selection and efficacy monitoring in therapeutic

45 ypothesis that penumbral imaging can enhance patient selection and extend the therapeutic time window

46 etic acid) ((68)Ga-PSMA) PET/CT was used for patient selection and follow-up after PSMA RLT.

47 Meticulous patient selection and follow-up, in the setting of well

48 Patient selection and geriatric evaluation are critical

49 reventing post-ERCP pancreatitis are careful patient selection and identification of risk factors pri

50 esults could have important implications for patient selection and improved communication of risks be

51 e biopsies and multiparametric MRI, both for patient selection and in identifying triggers for interv

52 Ms in particular, may pave the way to better patient selection and innovative combinations of convent

53 imal time interval for re-resection for both patient selection and long-term survival is not known.

54 oke is likely to be a critical factor aiding patient selection and management as TAVR use becomes wid

55 Based on these data, appropriate patient selection and medical optimization appear to be

56 hortcomings comparative studies with uniform patient selection and monitoring are lacking.

57 ms of action, and the role of biomarkers for patient selection and monitoring are still unknown.

58 emains a potential concern demanding careful patient selection and monitoring.

59 Improved patient selection and more active systemic regimens are

60 lung cancer when coupled to genomics-guided patient selection and observation.

61 r patients remains fractured, with imperfect patient selection and ongoing bias in referral patterns

62 eatment prognostic indicators is crucial for patient selection and optimal individual therapy.

63 icular they provide the potential to improve patient selection and optimisation of cardiovascular int

64 anted to attempt to improve outcomes through patient selection and optimization of transplantation pr

65 nce of analytically validated biomarkers for patient selection and pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (P

66 Patient selection and prediction of prognosis is crucial

67 Therapy Risk Score may provide guidance for patient selection and preoperative optimization therapy,

68 Continued efforts are needed to improve patient selection and procedural/postprocedural care to

69 anatomy and geometry, supporting appropriate patient selection and prosthesis sizing.

70 vival among clinical trials are explained by patient selection and quality of supportive care.

71 Recent research has focused on better patient selection and reduced radioiodine doses for remn

72 isk of bias was identified in the domains of patient selection and reference standard.

73 or, with several implications for predicting patient selection and response rates to this therapy and

74 Our results provide useful data for proper patient selection and sample size calculations in the de

75 of anti-myostatin approaches and may inform patient selection and stratification for future trials.

76 IRT in metastatic colorectal cancer, careful patient selection and studies investigating the role of

77 s with any heart valve-preserving procedure, patient selection and surgical expertise are keys to suc

78 Proper patient selection and technique are critical for ensurin

79 Therefore, adjustments in patient selection and technique have been performed but

80 Risk adjustment of patient selection and technique in ALPPS resulted in a c

81 ention (PCI) assess quality as it relates to patient selection and the decision to perform PCI.

82 These data provide rationales for patient selection and the development of next-generation

83 t profile for these procedures could enhance patient selection and the overall use of surgery for the

84 istant childhood epilepsy, with attention to patient selection and the potential risks and benefits.

85 These results may inform patient selection and the use of targeted interventions

86 These results may inform patient selection and the use of targeted interventions

87 ther high-quality evidence regarding optimal patient selection and timing of initiation of noninvasiv

88 override a loss in Lrp5 has implications for patient selection and timing of Wnt pathway inhibitors i

89 ccessful transplant outcomes require optimal patient selection and timing.

90 istration of these agents, including optimal patient selection and toxicity associated with their use

91 t can be integrated into clinical trials for patient selection and treatment evaluation, and implicat

92 This makes it an excellent technology for patient selection and treatment planning and follow-up.

93 Variations in patient selection and treatment were compared across cou

94 ents are occurring at a high pace, affecting patient selection and treatment.

95 te markers of therapeutic success, to aid in patient selection and/or modification of interventions i

96 he principles of surgical revascularization, patient selection, and expected outcomes, while highligh

97 inding may be biased as a result of targeted patient selection, and further, high-quality long-term c

98 r better biomarkers to detect disease, guide patient selection, and monitor for response.

99 and are also highly relevant in the design, patient selection, and monitoring of potential therapeut

100 TAVR with improvements in valve technology, patient selection, and operator experience.

101 aphic and computed tomographic screening and patient selection, and percutaneous vascular repair tech

102 tive experience, preoperative assessment and patient selection, and postoperative continuity of care.

103 ay be a reference for prognostic prediction, patient selection, and radiation dose adjustment for HCC

104 2), continued changes to device technology, patient selection, and surgical techniques will undoubte

105 ncluding the rationale for the intervention, patient selection, and the treatments available.

106 Biomarkers for patient selection are essential for the successful and r

107 es of advanced MRI and CT imaging to enhance patient selection are investigating alteplase, other thr

108 assess its safety and the optimal method for patient selection are scarce.

109 These findings will facilitate patient selection as development of this drug class cont

110 ssential in improving current techniques and patient selection, as well as evaluating new technologie

111 Prospective cohort study with random patient selection at 7 sites and 8 children's hospitals

112 surgical team, and appropriate preoperative patient selection augmented with proper port placement t

113 Patient selection based on the aforementioned predictors

114 Accuracy for QCT patient selection based on these primary predictors was

115 pecific preoperative variables may help with patient selection before elective splenectomy for certai

116 In the context of limited evidence in older patients, selection between these two regimens on the ba

117 Most studies were at high or unclear risk of patient selection bias (74%) or index test bias (67%).

118 dinal tracking; continued close attention to patient selection by balancing the benefit of cardiovasc

119 The quiet art of informed patient selection by careful assessment of patient basel

120 se therapies and how an important bottleneck-patient selection-can be approached.

121 Interest has focused on patient selection, comorbidities, prediction of risk, an

122 including the most up-to-date information on patient selection, comparison of techniques, efficacy, a

123 es of multiple arterial grafting in terms of patient selection, conduit choice, and technical conside

124 Poor patient selection contributes to a high alarm volume wit

125 llenges of implementing this therapy include patient selection, cost, and risk of side effects includ

126 A predictive test enabling better patient selection could avoid unneccessary radiation exp

127 eatment of prostate cancer, but personalised patient selection could improve outcomes and spare unnec

128 activity against HCV still requires careful patient selection, counseling, and decision making befor

129 However, important issues remain: uncertain patient selection criteria (anatomically solitary versus

130 ween Jan 1, 1995, and Aug 30, 2016, in which patient selection criteria and geographical setting were

131 ne, surgeons should carefully consider their patient selection criteria and surgical plans when trans

132 this article, we review the indications and patient selection criteria for lung transplantation in p

133 is study was to investigate the evolution of patient selection criteria for transcatheter aortic valv

134 Patient selection criteria included age greater than or

135 Patient selection criteria included diagnosis of uveal m

136 Patient selection criteria included diagnosis of uveal m

137 Careful analyses of the effect of these patient selection criteria on outcomes in prior trials p

138 coming more common, results vary widely, and patient selection criteria remain poorly defined.

139 Patient selection criteria that predict outcomes after M

140 of the techniques and challenges, rationale, patient selection criteria, complications, postintervent

141 udies to randomized clinical trials based on patient selection criteria, interventions, and outcomes.

142 Further investigation is needed to refine patient selection criteria, minimize complications, and

143 Unresolved issues include optimal patient selection criteria, the role of devices in patie

144 Key questions remain including patient selection criteria, use of optimal brain and vas

145 and were transparent about their methods and patient selection criteria.

146 time, operative technique, meshes used, and patient selection criteria.

147 ts success has led over the years to relaxed patient selection criteria; for example, it is now not u

148 ant clinical implications in optimizing best patients selection criteria for LTx.

149 hniques and technologies and improvements in patient selection, current percutaneous coronary interve

150 Considerable challenges remain in patient selection, deciding on the most appropriate orde

151 Registry has important information regarding patient selection, delivery of care, science, education,

152 investigation should include exploration of patient selection, dosing, and supportive care.

153 This could be potentially attributed to patient selection due to the lack of validated predictiv

154 ary care interpretation of guidelines to aid patient selection, establishment of disease management p

155 lity comparative effectiveness data to guide patient selection, existing evidence suggests that outco

156 o successful outcomes begin with appropriate patient selection, expectation counseling, and preoperat

157 consider how recent advances have influenced patient selection for active surveillance and review the

158 ung volume reduction and provide guidance on patient selection for available therapies.

159 ovement in medical management, or a shift in patient selection for CABG.

160 We tested the hypothesis that patient selection for cardiac resynchronization therapy

161 Refining the criteria for patient selection for cardiac resynchronization therapy

162 on, further emphasizing the need for optimal patient selection for cardiac testing.

163 very, and has significant potential to guide patient selection for cardioverter-defibrillator implant

164 -procedural risks with patients, and improve patient selection for CAS.

165 provements in therapy may stem from improved patient selection for combinations of standard cytotoxic

166 the corneal hydration state, the EV improves patient selection for combined cataract surgery and EK.

167 Careful patient selection for defunctioning stoma helps reduce r

168 nary rates suggests opportunities to improve patient selection for diagnostic coronary angiography.

169 ermining ERG rearrangement status may aid in patient selection for docetaxel or cabazitaxel therapy a

170 his simple risk score may be used to improve patient selection for emergent coronary angiography amon

171 hmatic patients and has potential utility in patient selection for emerging asthma therapeutics targe

172 with abdominal discomfort is challenging and patient selection for endoscopy based on symptoms is not

173 ADPKD based on HtTKV and age should optimize patient selection for enrollment into clinical trials an

174 idney disease (ADPKD), necessitating optimal patient selection for enrollment into clinical trials.

175 These data underscore the utility of patient selection for EVT on the basis of collateral ves

176 rmine whether this technique can be used for patient selection for HER2-targeted therapy.

177 abeled Affibody molecules have potential for patient selection for HER2-targeted therapy.

178 ransformation holds promise for more precise patient selection for HSCT.

179 and prognostic information that can improve patient selection for IDH-targeted therapies.

180 Superior prognostic factors may improve patient selection for implantable cardioverter-defibrill

181 targets for new HF therapies and facilitate patient selection for improved application of existing a

182 Tumor genetics guides patient selection for many new therapies, and cell cultu

183 will have a poor outcome, as well as inform patient selection for more invasive treatments, is parti

184 hma phenotyping, which might prove useful in patient selection for novel therapies.

185 CCL26 and CCL17) in combination might allow patient selection for novel type 2 therapeutics.

186 These findings may help inform patient selection for PA stenting.

187 The association between patient selection for PCI and processes of care and post

188 This technique may enable patient selection for PD-1 and PD-L1-targeted therapy.

189 developed to critically evaluate and improve patient selection for percutaneous coronary intervention

190 ve underscored the importance of appropriate patient selection for potentially life-saving venom immu

191 Future studies should focus on optimum patient selection for prolonged mechanical ventilation a

192 Further research is needed to inform optimal patient selection for prolonged mechanical ventilation.

193 improve sudden death risk stratification and patient selection for prophylactic ICD therapy.

194 offers potential to provide improvements in patient selection for prostate cancer screening; PSA int

195 TATE are suited equally well for staging and patient selection for PRRT with (177)Lu-DOTATATE.

196 No guidelines exist for patient selection for RCC germline mutation testing.

197 tology can identify abnormal nodes and guide patient selection for SLN surgery.

198 ions for future research focusing on optimal patient selection for surgery.

199 ccessible biospecimens, could greatly enable patient selection for targeted therapy.

200 Anecdotal evidence suggests that patient selection for TAVI is shifting toward lower surg

201 ese findings have important implications for patient selection for TAVR when transfemoral access is n

202 Better patient selection for the "resection first" approach and

203 Given these data, sex should not influence patient selection for the administration of potent P2Y12

204 on-making techniques is warranted to improve patient selection for the appropriate intervention to tr

205 This should be taken into account during patient selection for this procedure.

206 Patient selection for transcatheter aortic valve replace

207 onds to these therapies, and optimization of patient selection for treatment is imperative to avoid a

208 iffusion/perfusion MRI or CT perfusion-based patient selection for treatment with intravenous tPA and

209 ion in relation to the onset of SBS, optimal patient selection for use, duration of treatment and cos

210 To optimally facilitate patient selection for Wee1 inhibition and uncover potent

211 In addition, we discuss how patient selection from differing phases of HBV impacts t

212 Weights accounted for patient selection from the five PLCO screening centers.

213 To date, patient selection has not been performed using the local

214 Imaging characteristics that may improve patient selection have been proposed.

215 ng experience and a standardized approach to patient selection, impacted outcomes.

216 Advances in patient selection, improved LVAD technology, and optimiz

217 A survey indicated risk adjustment of patient selection in all centers and ALPPS technique in

218 atients; this may be attributable to careful patient selection in case of ALF, though improvement of

219 These findings may inform patient selection in future trials of IGF1R inhibitors i

220 TK2 expression may be a useful biomarker for patient selection in future trials.

221 patients and may become a useful marker for patient selection in HCC management.

222 fit, PD-L1 testing alone is insufficient for patient selection in most malignancies.

223 I3R could serve as a potential biomarker for patient selection in SMO antagonist clinical trials.

224 However, the role of patient selection in these findings and their implicatio

225 This tool comprises 4 domains: patient selection, index test, reference standard, and f

226 23, 2014 and structured into 5 sessions: (1) patient selection, indications, and timing; (2) technica

227 PAT bundle and the evidence supporting each: patient selection, infectious disease consultation, pati

228 Patient selection is critical--outcomes with percutaneou

229 n, research into optimal surgical timing and patient selection is critical.

230 Risk stratification for patient selection is crucial to optimize survival outcom

231 Furthermore, preoperative patient selection is crucial, because unexpected corneal

232 on of prognostic indicators enabling precise patient selection is mandatory for neoadjuvant or adjuva

233 Careful patient selection is necessary to achieve optimal postsu

234 onal outcomes are reported; however, careful patient selection is needed to achieve best possible res

235 dvantage of a strong genetic anchor to drive patient selection (isocitrate dehydrogenase 1/2, Enolase

236 oronary venous pacing depends on appropriate patient selection, lead implantation, and device program

237 lexity over time, suggesting that changes in patient selection may account for some of these observed

238 pancreatic cancers and the optimal assay for patient selection may inform clinical trial design for i

239 ent selection perspective and appraise trial patient selection methodologies in relation to outcomes.

240 Appropriate patient selection, modification of conditioning regimes

241 Although this may be related to patient selection, NPWT may leave patients with abdomina

242 cal pathway was introduced, which focused on patient selection, nutrition, renal protection, pain man

243 owever, little is known about differences in patients' selection of surgeons and hospitals.

244 Further study is required to determine if patient selection on the basis of objective criteria der

245 xposure definitions, analytical methods, and patient selection on the estimated effect size of metfor

246 ecade likely attributable to improvements in patient selection, operator skills, and technological ad

247 umor burden and has the potential to improve patient selection, optimize the dose and schedule, and r

248 power and value of early trials by improving patient selection, optimizing dose and schedule, and rat

249 rker for it would be clinically valuable for patient selection or choice of drug combinations.

250 ave addressed geriatric issues in transplant patient selection or management, or the implications on

251 s no 'one size fits all' set of criteria for patient selection or triggers for intervention but decis

252 ndently associated with a risk adjustment in patient selection (P < 0.001; OR: 1.62; 95% CI: 1.36-1.9

253 at our center suggests that with appropriate patient selection, PE revision may delay the need for li

254 ent and ongoing HFpEF clinical trials from a patient selection perspective and appraise trial patient

255 el practices identified included appropriate patient selection, pharmacist-driven patient education,

256 e current literature on the topic, including patient selection, preliminary toxicity, and outcome dat

257 unch of a LAA occlusion program and optimize patient selection, procedural performance, and outcome.

258 ing a multidisciplinary heart team approach, patient selection, procedural planning, and device impla

259 ng traditional practice models is to improve patient selection, procedural planning, and management o

260 We anticipate that the patient selection process outlined in the present review

261 s and may serve as an additional tool in the patient selection process.

262 A rigorous patient-selection process is necessary to maximize patie

263 Patient selection, prosthesis sizing, and access strateg

264 These data support a similar approach to ICD patient selection, regardless of race or ethnicity.

265 ge), dosing, number of high-dose cycles, and patient selection remain to be defined.

266 Appropriate patient selection (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.05-1.25), and pro

267 ss different studies, despite differences in patient selection, sample handling, and microarray platf

268 Patient selection should be a focus for continuing medic

269 sing, improved immune monitoring, and better patient selection should be performed.

270 cular trial and underscore the importance of patient selection, specifically avoidance of patients wi

271 linical trials for a variety of cancers, but patient selection strategies remain limited.

272 hs of each doctrine in the context of modern patient selection strategies, fresh biological insights

273 underlie heterogeneous patient responses for patient-selection strategies.

274 is study, we report the discovery of a novel patient selection strategy for the p53-HDM2 inhibitor NV

275 ce to MCL1 repression, thereby identifying a patient-selection strategy for the clinical development

276 could be used as a predictive biomarker for patient selection supporting the clinical development of

277 udies highlight important considerations for patient selection, SWL technique and follow-up for patie

278 transcatheter valve systems, techniques, and patient selection TAVR is becoming an increasingly appea

279 Appropriate patient selection, team training, and stepwise applicati

280 dysphotopsias will allow for IOL design and patient selection that maximize satisfaction after catar

281 this FNR threshold, changes in approach and patient selection that result in greater sensitivity wou

282 nsensus, supported by grade A-C evidence, on patient selection, the safety of short-term nonoperative

283 nsensus, supported by grade A-C evidence, on patient selection, the safety of short-term nonoperative

284 With ideal patient selection, this finding could potentially increa

285 f action, they all face the same challenges: patient selection, timing of therapy and the cost/benefi

286 Here we examine recent data on patient selection, timing, and outcomes of HSCT in myelo

287 Guidelines are needed for patient selection to list for and receipt of simultaneou

288 embolization will be discussed, ranging from patient selection to treatment response and future appli

289 sis and direction of care and as a potential patient selection tool for clinical trials.

290 gs support the use of NAT, particularly as a patient selection tool, in the management of resectable

291 lineation of appropriate clinical scenarios, patient selection, training, IT support and robust infor

292 In patient selection, treatment guidance, and follow-up, di

293 improvement may also have been due to better patient selection, use of high-resolution HLA typing for

294 Patient selection using any of these prognostic scores w

295 nce with high operator volumes; 2) improving patient selection using multidisciplinary heart teams; 3

296 The purpose of this study is to determine if patient selection varies based on years of surgical prac

297 Patient selection was based on the concurrent availabili

298 Patient selection was not based on PD-L1 expression or e

299 Patient selection was not based on PD-L1 expression or M

300 participating sites showed that appropriate patient selection was performed at 31 sites, pharmacist-