コーパス検索結果 (１語後でソート)
通し番号をクリックするとPubMedの該当ページを表示します
1 location, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status).
2 -score matching (including T stage, age, and performance status).
3 on of response to previous chemotherapy, and performance status).
4 lysis was performed to examine the impact of performance status.
5 alyses and was robust to the effects of poor performance status.
6 ho are not surgical candidates but have good performance status.
7 atus and worsened QOD for patients with good performance status.
8 lock size of two, by age, disease stage, and performance status.
9 ntrolling for clinical setting and patients' performance status.
10 y use near death, even in patients with good performance status.
11 rent chemoradiotherapy in patients with good performance status.
12 nd Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status.
13 omorbidities, while clinical trials reported performance status.
14 rapy only for solid tumor patients with good performance status.
15 olling for age, sex, cancer site, stage, and performance status.
16 uration of first-line therapy, and Karnofsky performance status.
17 noma, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status.
18 , planned number of chemotherapy cycles, and performance status.
19 ality of life for elderly patients with good performance status.
20 on was stratified by disease extent and ECOG performance status.
21 She has remained active with an excellent performance status.
22 d at randomisation by disease stage and ECOG performance status.
23 class A, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 91.7%, and Barcelona Clinic Liver C
24 ont) with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 or 1 and a favorable comorbidity pr
25 ients with metastatic colorectal cancer (WHO performance status 0 or 1) with liver metastases not sui
28 eria were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 or 1, measurable disease by Respons
30 toid MPM (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 to 1), stratified by histology (epi
32 rmed SCLC (limited or extensive disease) and performance status 0 to 3 were randomly assigned to rece
34 l status, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1, measurable disease or bone disea
35 or older, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1, metastatic or locally advanced p
36 n >/=50%, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2) with progressive HER2-positive a
37 ysphagia, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2, and adequate haematological and
38 ients were endocrine therapy-naive, with WHO performance status 0-2, and at least one measurable or n
39 myeloma, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2, and one to three previous therap
40 had progressed after chemotherapy, with WHO performance status 0-2, and with measurable or evaluable
41 lder with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2, documented diagnosis of aggressi
42 At multivariable analysis, age (< 60 years), performance status (0 v >/= 1), size of the largest lesi
44 r stratified by Eastern Cooperative Oncology performance status (0 vs 1) were randomly assigned with
46 was stratified by World Health Organization performance status (0 vs 1-2), previous neoadjuvant or a
47 sian vs non-Asian and Indian sub-continent), performance status (0-1 vs 2), and smoking status (never
48 Patients at HLACs versus HHACs had better performance status (0: 62% v 52%; P = .04) and lower T s
49 king [block size of four]; stratified by WHO performance status [0 vs 1-2] and presence or absence of
50 II NSCLC (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, 0 to 1) received dose-escalated RT t
51 he high-risk population (Child-Pugh class B, performance status 1, bilobar disease, and/or post-resec
52 y hospital site, site of primary tumour, WHO performance status, 16-week CT scan result, number of me
53 d for patients with worse general wellbeing (performance status 2-4) versus those who were generally
54 =0.0188), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 3-4 (2.92 [2.13-3.93]; p<0.0001) and
56 IB histologically confirmed NSCLC, Karnofsky performance status 70 to 100, and 6-month prediagnosis w
59 g for DS, RD, an interaction term for DS/CS, performance status, age, and cell type, CS was not an in
61 tified by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, alkaline phosphatase concentration,
62 There was no association between Karnofsky Performance Status and chemotherapy toxicity (P = .25).
66 provement in favor of stem cell treatment in performance status and exercise capacity, left ventricul
68 d within specific cancers, stages, ages, and performance status and in an independent validation samp
70 te (40 mg/m(2) per week), stratified by ECOG performance status and previous EGFR-targeted antibody t
72 prove QOD for patients with moderate or poor performance status and worsened QOD for patients with go
76 al computer minimisation, stratified by age, performance status, and de-novo versus secondary disease
81 ology, positron emission tomography staging, performance status, and irradiation technique (3-dimensi
84 Patients were stratified by tumour origin, performance status, and previous somatostatin analogue t
85 e, with stratification by tumour origin, WHO performance status, and previous somatostatin analogue t
86 ed irrespective of older age, comorbidities, performance status, and progression from a lower IPSS ri
87 y, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, and surgical approach, and computeri
88 xtraperitoneal metastasis, lymph node stage, performance status, and tumor histology, is validated by
89 arcinoma, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, and use of one or more oral antihype
90 revious chemotherapy; previous radiotherapy; performance status; and previous health-related quality
92 isk HER2-negative populations with excellent performance status, anthracycline- and taxane-containing
95 r with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status at baseline of 0-1 and histologically
96 disease, limited treatment options, and poor performance status, best supportive care may be appropri
97 patients with good (ECOG score = 1) baseline performance status, chemotherapy use compared with nonus
99 e, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, Child-Pugh score (CPS), and alpha-fe
102 ex, self-reported race (white vs. nonwhite), performance status, degree of donor-recipient HLA matchi
103 tion was stratified by smoking history, ECOG performance status, disease histology, and geographical
104 included Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, disease site, lactate dehydrogenase,
105 of an unobserved confounder, such as limited performance status (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 1
106 marrow, liver and kidney function, and good performance status (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group [
107 ranodal nonbone marrow involvement, and poor performance status (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group s
108 ents with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) 0 to 1 based on patient pre
109 -reported Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) and the European Organisati
110 baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) of 0 (median NA, 17 months-
111 versus EGFR-TKI, WBRT versus EGFR-TKI, age, performance status, EGFR exon 19 mutation, and absence o
112 the same clinical variables (age, Karnofsky Performance Status, extent of resection, and neurologic
113 ther with clinical variables (age, Karnofsky Performance Status, extent of resection, and neurologica
114 etween 1985 and 2005: patient age, Karnofsky Performance Status, extracranial metastases, and number
116 ed on tumor number, size, vascular invasion, performance status, functional liver reserve, and the pr
117 tified by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, geographic region, and type of disea
118 ty rates for the low, intermediate, and high performance status groups were 23% (36/159), 11% (55/489
119 2.5), and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status >/= 2 (HR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.0 to 3.0) w
120 ween groups: median age, 71 years; Karnofsky performance status >/= 90%, 77.3%; and visceral metastas
121 65 years, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status >/=1, beta2-microglobulin >/=3.5 mg/L
124 er harbouring a RET rearrangement, Karnofsky performance status higher than 70, and measurable diseas
127 the presence of comorbid conditions and poor performance status in the typical older patient with MDS
129 Reasonable options for patients with poor performance status include hypofractionated radiotherapy
130 advanced age, lower body mass index, poorer performance status, increased number of metastatic sites
131 For overall survival, surgery after CCRT, performance status, initial stage, and CTC number were s
133 survival were the Ki-67 index, the patient's performance status (Karnofsky performance scale score),
134 Among clinical prognostic factors, only performance status, KIT mutation, and size of largest le
135 functional status, as measured by Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS), and liver transplant (LT) cost
136 ment and stratification by centre, Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS), gender, status of brain metast
138 mia, thrombocytosis, neutrophilia, Karnofsky performance status [KPS] <80, and <1 year from diagnosis
139 ents (frail = age >/= 50 years and Karnofsky performance status [KPS] of 50% to 70%; elderly and frai
141 characteristics constituting the MIPI, age, performance status, lactate dehydrogenase level, and WBC
142 (HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.18 to 1.61), Karnofsky performance status less than 90% (HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.06
144 o with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status </= 2 and an adequate comorbidity pro
145 ents with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status </= 2 and two or more prior systemic
146 ears, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status </= 3 were enrolled and treated with
147 l region, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, macrovascular invasion, extrahepatic
148 that it was independent of stage, grade, and performance status (multivariate Cox model P < .05, log-
150 lder with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 and measurable disease as d
151 ) with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 and who had completely rese
152 , with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1) were randomly assigned (1:
153 , with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and adequate end-organ fun
154 an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, and adequate haematologica
155 an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, and at least one measurabl
156 y, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and had measurable disease
157 an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, at least one measurable le
158 , with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, from four randomised contr
159 , had an Eastern Coooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, had measurable disease acc
160 sease, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, had previously received so
161 ction, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, life expectancy of at leas
163 ment were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, measurable disease defined
164 an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, MET-positive tumours (>/=2
165 a were an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, progressive metastatic dis
166 an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, who had not received previ
173 an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1; (B) BRAF(V600E)-positive,
174 th previous local brain therapy, and an ECOG performance status of 0 or 1; (C) BRAF(V600D/K/R)-positi
175 ut previous local brain therapy, and an ECOG performance status of 0 or 1; and (D) BRAF(V600D/E/K/R)-
176 C (one line of platinum-based chemotherapy), performance status of 0 to 1, adequate organ function, t
177 mRCC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 2 and were intermediate or po
178 mCRPC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 2 were randomly assigned 1:1:
179 on after one line of platinum-based therapy, performance status of 0 to 2, and normal organ function
181 ld-Turcotte-Pugh score (CTP) of A or B, ECOG performance status of 0 to 2, no extrahepatic disease, a
182 evaluable patients was 58.5 years with a WHO performance status of 0, 1, or 2 in 56%, 36%, or 8% of t
184 (72%) had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0, 178 patients (48%) had visceral
185 ibited an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0, normal blood cell counts, and a
186 Patients were eligible if they had an ECOG performance status of 0-1 and an estimated life expectan
188 l) and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1 were randomly assigned (2:3) b
189 l) and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1 were randomly assigned (2:3) b
190 age III non-small-cell lung cancer, a Zubrod performance status of 0-1, adequate pulmonary function,
191 size), an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and a baseline left ventricul
192 r status, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and adequate bone marrow, hep
193 an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-1, and adequate bone marrow, liv
194 f less than the upper limit of normal, had a performance status of 0-1, and had adequate organ functi
195 lable, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and measurable disease by Res
196 th Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-1, who had not received previous
199 an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-2 and adequate organ function an
200 an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-2 and adequate organ function, w
201 ho had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 and adequate renal and hepatic
204 an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-2, and adequate organ function.
205 g cancer, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, and adequate pulmonary functi
206 an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-2, and available tumour tissue t
207 tic, with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, and did not have high-risk le
208 ent, with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, and had not previously been t
209 y, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-2, and presence of measurable di
210 comas, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, and who had previously receiv
211 imes, had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, at least one measurable lesio
213 o have an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, left ventricular ejection fra
214 , with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, were enrolled and randomly as
219 a; had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2; had an International Prognost
220 ma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-3 were randomly assigned to rece
221 ), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-3, haemoglobin concentration 9 g
223 ears, had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1 or less, and had Child-Pugh A li
224 r, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1 or less, had adequate organ func
225 rgery, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1 or less, measurable disease acco
226 inoma, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1 or less, measurable disease as d
228 he had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1, International Staging System (I
230 patients vs 5603 [66%]; p<0.0001), and have performance status of 2 (136 [10%] vs 521 [6%]; p<0.0001
231 , with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or less who had previously recei
232 evaluable disease, Eastern Cooperative Group performance status of 2 or less, an estimated life expec
233 margin), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or less, and life expectancy of
234 s, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or less, and received at least o
235 , have an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or less, have normal cardiac fun
236 phoma, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or lower, HIV negativity, and ab
237 dehydrogenase, or World Health Organization performance status of 2) were treated with CHOP on days
238 ays was 2.17 (95% CI, 0.84-5.62) for an ECOG performance status of 3-4 vs 0-2 and 5.20 (95% CI, 2.70-
239 d with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of at least 2 were included in the st
240 d after docetaxel treatment with a Karnofsky performance status of more than 70% and who were fit for
241 erapy, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of two or lower, measurable disease,
242 ), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of two or more, increased white blood
243 rs v1.1), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance statuses of 0 or 1, and available tumour sam
244 ymphoma; Eastern Co-operative Oncology Group performance statuses of 0-2; bidimensionally measurable
245 group had a higher proportion of women with performance statuses of 1 to 2 compared with those who u
246 s patients with renal insufficiency but good performance status on the basis of concern of excessive
247 igational treatment or local treatment, poor performance status or other reasons for trial ineligibil
248 ents with moderate (ECOG score = 2) baseline performance status (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.51-2.21; P = .87
249 ; P = .87) or poor (ECOG score = 3) baseline performance status (OR, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.46-3.89; P = .59
251 Results Both models included age, Zubrod performance status, pack-years, education, p16 status, a
253 first-line chemotherapy, stratified by ECOG performance status, previous bevacizumab treatment, hist
254 ed with respect to age, histologic findings, performance status, previous use or nonuse of a radiosen
255 60% with hepatitis C, 51% Child-Pugh A, 83% performance status (PS) >/=1, 41% with macroscopic vascu
257 y of chemotherapy allocation on the basis of performance status (PS) and age with an experimental str
258 e the nomogram from tumor burden, cirrhosis, performance status (PS) and primary anti-cancer treatmen
259 1% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (PS) of 0, 1, and >/= 2, respectively
260 nt had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (PS) of 1, no stigmata of chronic liv
261 y age effects and interactions with age,sex, performance status (PS), and metastatic site were modele
262 tionship between quality of life parameters, performance status (PS), and the systemic inflammatory r
264 ore frequent constitutional symptoms, poorer performance status (PS), lower hemoglobin and platelets,
266 se pain), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (range, 0-4; higher scores indicate w
267 lysis, extranodal nonbone marrow disease and performance status remained significant for both PFS and
268 disease, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score 1 or 2, systemic inflammation,
269 d with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1, were enrolled from 3
270 a were an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1; a normal left ventri
272 d, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 2 or less were enrolled in t
273 erapy, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 2 or less, had received stan
274 Inclusion criteria included a Karnofsky Performance Status score of at least 70, measureable dis
276 y endpoint was overall survival adjusted for performance status score, age, 1p loss of heterozygosity
277 isease stage, lymph node sampling procedure, performance status score, and lifetime smoking status.
278 rding to age, histologic findings, Karnofsky performance-status score, and presence or absence of con
279 ted patients aged 18 years or older with WHO performance status scores of 0 or 1 who had undergone po
283 orithm by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, smoking history, centre, and masked
284 eeded to help older adults maintain adequate performance status to reduce these risks and maintain in
285 atients were stratified according to centre, performance status, tobacco use, best response to previo
286 erall survival, including age, tumor origin, performance status, tumor burden, plasma chromogranin A
287 factors including histology, race/ethnicity, performance status, tumor size, International Federation
288 stratified by radiotherapy technique, Zubrod performance status, use of PET during staging, and histo
289 6; 95% CI, 1.23-2.80; P = .003), independent performance status (vs dependent) (OR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.0
295 e (median, 60 years; range, 17 to 85 years), performance status, WBC count, and mutation status of NP
296 nd Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status were assessed at baseline (median = 3
297 previous health-related quality of life and performance status were associated with the health-relat
298 sites of involvement, Ann Arbor stage, ECOG performance status) were identified and a maximum of 8 p
299 ; stratified by geographical region and ECOG performance status, with a permuted block method) to rec
300 t and Outcome Study (EUTOS) score, Karnofsky performance status, year of diagnosis, and experience wi
WebLSDに未収録の専門用語（用法）は "新規対訳" から投稿できます。