ライフサイエンスコーパス: post-transplant

1 seline to 60 at 6 months and 59 at 24 months post-transplant).

2 compromise or graft dysfunction at 18 months post transplant.

3 s noninferior to EMB between 6 and 60 months post transplant.

4 on; i) DSA levels and ii) rejection episode post transplant.

5 EF] score) and urine flow rates at 24 months post transplant.

6 d) and estimated quality-adjusted life-years post-transplant.

7 essed patients with ABMR in the first 1 year post-transplant.

8 ransplantation grade 3 PGD at 48 or 72 hours post-transplant.

9 transplantation or treated in the recipient post-transplant.

10 gle dose of 2 x 10(7)cells/m(2) after day 28 post-transplant.

11 emained rejection-free during the first year post-transplant.

12 and declined gradually during the first year post-transplant.

13 e intimal hyperplasia and vasculopathy early post-transplant.

14 RV systolic function remains abnormal 1 year-post-transplant.

15 z score -1.2+/-1.1) remained impaired 1-year post-transplant.

16 Median follow-up was 8 yr post-transplant.

17 FBC-007, can improve in vivo islet function post-transplant.

18 of dentate gyrus (SGZ) were counted 60 days post-transplant.

19 e blood, lymphoid, and brain tissues 4 years post-transplant.

20 rmed pre-listing, 29 on the waitlist, and 87 post-transplant.

21 e split liver graft were functioning at 1 yr post-transplant.

22 T-IIbeta failed to engraft for up to 5 weeks post-transplant.

23 and the recovery was sustained out to 1 year post-transplant.

24 e of the traditional model at transplant and post-transplant.

25 in depression and PTSD symptoms at 6 months post-transplant.

26 s disorder (PTSD) symptoms, and QOL 6 months post-transplant.

27 antibodies (DSA) detected in the first year post-transplant.

28 ervention on depression and PTSD at 6 months post-transplant.

29 Early AR occurred within six months post-transplant.

30 be re-evaluated at one, three and six months post- transplant.

31 mg/dL increase in albumin concentration, the post-transplant 1-year mortality rate decreased by 54%.

32 ratio, 1.26; P=0.0002) were associated with post-transplant 1-year mortality.

33 ween pretransplant albumin concentration and post-transplant 1-year survival was analyzed.

34 At 1-year post-transplant, 10.5% of patients demonstrated ASP prog

35 At a median of 40 months post-transplant, 13 of 16 patients (81%) in this high-ri

36 novo DM; this was observed starting 6 months post-transplant: 22.9% vs. 16.7% (relative risk 1.38).

37 By 5 years post-transplant, 39.8% NASH vs. 27.0% controls developed

38 MR had the poorest graft survival at 8 years post-transplant (56%) compared with subclinical TCMR (88

39 (Expanded Disability Status Scale score < 7) post-transplant (78% versus 0%; P = 0.021).

40 ntation and continuing weekly until 100 days post-transplant, a total of 694 observations in HCT reci

41 te the effect of these TLR4 polymorphisms on post-transplant acute rejection beyond the first 6 month

42 t admission strongly predicted more frequent post-transplant admission.

43 hanced spleen colony forming units at day 12 post transplant and increased the frequency of long-term

44 one-third of patients develop CAV by 5 years post-transplant and 1 in 8 deaths beyond a year are due

45 included readmissions within the first-year post-transplant and 3-year graft and patient survival.

46 common in biopsy specimens obtained >1 year post-transplant and continued to appear in all subsequen

47 c islets exhibited improved glycemic control post-transplant and demonstrated a delay in allograft re

48 function (defined as dialysis in first week post-transplant), and recipient 6-month eGFR.

49 ted with prolonged recipient hospitalization post-transplant, and only donor diabetes mellitus was pr

50 creened for DSA at transplant, 1 and 2 years post-transplant, and the time of post-transplant clinica

51 might progress more rapidly in patients with post-transplant anemia, but whether correction of anemia

52 ransplantation, coupled with better pre- and post-transplant antiviral therapy, are needed to improve

53 re not different for PRE (n=9) versus NORMAL POST-transplant BAL specimens (n=22) (204+/-180 vs. 82+/

54 FVC decline from its post-transplant baseline provides valuable prognostic in

55 Decline in FEV1 or FVC from their respective post-transplant baselines occurred in 85 patients (41%).

56 d was measured at 28,000 copies/mL on day 13 post-transplant before rapid decay to <50 copies/mL in 2

57 of organ transplantation, is associated with post-transplant beta-cell failure.

58 ferences in actuarial graft survival at 8 yr post-transplant between the groups.

59 Matched pre- and post-transplant biopsies from donation after circulatory

60 , because donor kidneys should not have CKD, post-transplant biopsies occur relatively frequently, an

61 the development of CAI (P<0.01) on protocol post-transplant biopsies, with enrichment of their corre

62 In 2008, we initiated routine post-transplant BK viremia and DSA screening at our cent

63 costimulated autologous T cells followed by post-transplant booster immunizations improved the sever

64 y diffuse panbronchiolitis, cystic fibrosis, post-transplant bronchiolitis obliterans and more recent

65 nged QTc interval and Q wave were related to post-transplant cardiac events (p < 0.05 for all).

66 Post-transplant cardiac events are more common than in t

67 these patients and data on the occurrence of post-transplant cardiac events in comparison with the ge

68 Standardized incidence ratios for post-transplant cardiac events were calculated.

69 nt in immunosuppression and other aspects of post-transplant care.

70 CI, 0.49 to 1.36; P<0.001, respectively) and post-transplant (category-free net reclassification inde

71 Secondary hyperparathyroidism contributes to post-transplant CKD mineral and bone disorder.

72 and 2 years post-transplant, and the time of post-transplant clinical events.

73 identifying and managing important pre- and post-transplant clinical outcomes.

74 says of anti-CMV cellular immunity predicted post-transplant CMV replication less accurately in D+R+

75 ion and to define the risk of cardiac events post-transplant compared to the general population.

76 e in patients with ASP progression at 1-year post-transplant compared with those without.

77 ndary study endpoints were the occurrence of post-transplant complications, the necessity of operativ

78 ces in surgical techniques and management of post-transplant complications.

79 equity in organ allocation and management of post-transplant complications.

80 ameters, time on transplant waiting list and post-transplant complications.

81 In post-transplant conditions, sulfur may be protective by

82 tients bridged with VAD and compared them to post transplant coronary angiograms of a non-VAD cohort.

83 G associated with both immune activation and post-transplant CVEs in this cohort.

84 for haploidentical transplantation with the post-transplant cyclophosphamide approach but with diffe

85 al donor hematopoietic transplantation using post-transplant cyclophosphamide was originally describe

86 Anti-GvHD prophylaxis of tacrolimus, post-transplant cyclophosphamide, and CD28 blockade indu

87 ted, and 326 provided both pretransplant and post-transplant data.

88 On post-transplant days 3-5, the treatment group had lower

89 preadmission was the strongest predictor of post-transplant death, and had a dose-dependent effect o

90 The identification of pathways that regulate post-transplant detrimental inflammatory events would im

91 Post-transplant, development of de novo donor-specific H

92 lid organ transplantation, susceptibility to post-transplant diabetes and cardiovascular disease has

93 en combined with immunosuppressant toxicity, post-transplant diabetes and hypertension, and recurrent

94 t which is most important and to what extent post-transplant diabetes is a distinct entity or simply

95 od and timing for detection and diagnosis of post-transplant diabetes remains an area of uncertainty.

96 ntribute to development and manifestation of post-transplant diabetes, but controversy continues abou

97 y reduce incidence and improve management of post-transplant diabetes.

98 ic therapies in prevention and management of post-transplant diabetes.

99 idence and clinical outcomes associated with post-transplant diabetes; establish the role of glycaemi

100 ary graft failure up to 30 days of follow-up post transplant did not differ between the 3 donor tropo

101 sociated with immune-mediated complications, post-transplant disease or alterations in drug-metaboliz

102 steroid sensitivity is highly predictive of post-transplant disease recurrence in this pediatric pat

103 ents with NASH have a higher risk of de novo post-transplant DM.

104 ently associated with development of de novo post-transplant DM: adjusted hazard ratio (95% CI) = 1.2

105 ansplant sera, and they were associated with post-transplant donor-specific HLA antibodies, antibody-

106 Thus, pre- and post-transplant DSA monitoring and characterization may

107 Post-transplant DSA monitoring improved the prediction o

108 c from 2003 to 2013 and who had baseline and post-transplant echocardiograms; patients with simultane

109 on practice had a positive effect on average post-transplant eGFR and balanced out the negative effec

110 iod and the 2011-2013 period, average 1-year post-transplant eGFR remained essentially unchanged, wit

111 In conclusion, average 1-year post-transplant eGFR remained stable, despite increasing

112 effects of practice changes on the national post-transplant eGFR trend.

113 nued organ shortage, preservation of average post-transplant eGFR will require sustained improvement

114 ds unmasked a larger temporal improvement in post-transplant eGFR.

115 examined the association between the AMS and post-transplant estimated glomerular filtration rate (eG

116 almar tactile stimulation delivered 4 months post-transplant evoked contralateral S1 responses that w

117 -/-) liver mDCs, to donor livers immediately post-transplant exerted a protective effect against graf

118 The reason is that extensive post-transplant expansion is needed to establish and sus

119 l prevent cortical and trabecular losses and post-transplant fractures.

120 unselected biopsies taken 3 days to 35 years post-transplant from North American and European centers

121 ) and CD4(+) T cells were isolated 8-10 days post-transplant from the spleens, intestines and livers

122 By contrast, post-transplant gain of private insurance among patients

123 lity (or becoming too sick to transplant) or post-transplant graft loss (death/re-HT).

124 tio 1.3, 95% confidence interval 0.9-1.9) or post-transplant graft loss (hazard ratio 1.3, 95% confid

125 and showed a trend toward increased risk of post-transplant graft loss (hazard ratio 1.4; 95% confid

126 rsus 69.2%) and 10-year (54.4% versus 49.8%) post-transplant graft survival (GS) (hazard ratio [HR],

127 d association of picobirnaviruses with early post-transplant GVHD.

128 rin before liver transplantation can prevent post-transplant HCV recurrence.

129 irin (Peg-IFN-alpha2b/RBV) for prevention of post-transplant HCV recurrence.

130 arkov models to the distribution of discrete post-transplant health states (HRQL better than pretrans

131 physiology, and management considerations of post-transplant hypertension.

132 each explain some of the pathophysiology of post-transplant hypertension.

133 Several studies suggest a link between post-transplant hypomagnesemia and new-onset diabetes af

134 treatment with mycophenolate mofetil affect post-transplant IgG levels.

135 Post-transplant immune complications include graft rejec

136 Post-transplant immune reactions are the major cause of

137 examine the role of the host and graft DC in post-transplant immune responses.

138 l applications in the tailored management of post-transplant immunosuppression and, more broadly, as

139 e the number of patients requiring long-term post-transplant immunosuppression.

140 In contrast, TCMR disappears by 10 years post-transplant, implying that a state of partial adapti

141 Increases in the DSA post transplant in comparison to pre-treatment are stron

142 ng a Y chromosome were present up to 6 years post-transplant in all three patients.

143 dataset showed lower survival rate at 1-year post-transplant in patients with albumin levels </= 3.5

144 Post-transplant in-hospital mortality (6.3% versus 5.4%;

145 In the setting of post-transplant inflammation, pneumocyte-specific reprog

146 n immunotherapy consisting of a single early post-transplant infusion of in vivo vaccine-primed and e

147 We have previously shown that pre- and post-transplant infusions of donor splenocytes treated w

148 d organ is a powerful approach to monitoring post-transplant injury.

149 At 6 months post-transplant, intervention participants reported lowe

150 lant recipients, serial (baseline and 1-year post-transplant) intravascular ultrasound was performed

151 iew how this remarkable ability to integrate post-transplant is being applied to the development of c

152 MM demonstrating that CR or maximal response post-transplant is significantly associated with prolong

153 e-blood gene expression datasets from stable post-transplant kidney transplant recipients and those e

154 l likely increase and with that the risk for post-transplant KS.

155 Post-transplant length of stay was also similar between

156 C virus-related cirrhosis, immunostaining of post-transplant liver biopsies for alpha-smooth muscle a

157 ary NHL (1/10 of Burkitt's lymphoma, 1/12 of post-transplant lymphoma, 1/12 diffuse large B-cell lymp

158 HR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.03-3.10; P = 0.038) and post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease (adjusted HR

159 encouraging response rates in patients with post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease as well as E

160 ss of adoptive T cell therapy for EBV-driven post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease is stimulati

161 ients with highly immunogenic tumors such as post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease, although re

162 gnancies such as Epstein-Barr virus-positive post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease.

163 motherapy as a standard in the management of post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD) and

164 Post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD) is a

165 nd colleagues describe a form of plasmacytic post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD) that

166 ival signaling in EBV+ B cell lymphomas from post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD) to d

167 ns of long-term immunosuppression, including post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD).

168 ding the details of chronic organ rejection, post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder and graft-v

169 Post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorders (PTLD) are

170 llance biopsies have been the cornerstone of post-transplant management, as signs or symptoms of reje

171 Post-transplant medical treatment of HCV may result in b

172 rtant determinants of long-term survival and post-transplant morbidity.

173 or nondonors; P<0.001) and experienced lower post-transplant mortality (hazard ratio, 0.19; 95% confi

174 ically unacceptable rates of postimplant and post-transplant mortality as well as perceived barriers

175 ransplantation (HT) may be at higher risk of post-transplant mortality compared with children who are

176 transplant mortality to estimate the risk of post-transplant mortality for children in each risk grou

177 centers, ECMO was associated with increased post-transplant mortality hazard (hazard ratio, 1.968; 9

178 jection was a significantly greater cause of post-transplant mortality in EXCOR than in OPTN patients

179 ificantly (P=0.005) higher cause of 12-month post-transplant mortality in the EXCOR compared with the

180 he wait-list benefit more from HT unless the post-transplant mortality is predicted to be very high.

181 The effect of these devices on post-transplant mortality is unclear.

182 We developed a model for 1-year post-transplant mortality to estimate the risk of post-t

183 gher 5-year cumulative incidence of ESRD and post-transplant mortality.

184 .09; P=0.001) was a significant predictor of post-transplant mortality.

185 transplantation (LT) is associated with high post-transplant mortality.

186 t transplant (HT) are also at higher risk of post-transplant mortality.

187 resulted in higher in-hospital or first year post-transplant mortality.

188 ients not bridged with a VAD with respect to post-transplant mortality.

189 not confer additional risk for wait-list or post-transplant mortality.

190 decline and control subjects matched by time post-transplant (n = 22).

191 Alport post-transplant nephritis (APTN) is an aggressive form o

192 ecifically implicated in the pathogenesis of post-transplant nephritis in XLAS patients.

193 with X-linked Alport syndrome (XLAS) develop post-transplant nephritis mediated by pathogenic anti-GB

194 h the exception of one patient who developed post transplant nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, no etiolog

195 pretransplant serum albumin concentration on post-transplant outcome in heart transplant recipients.

196 the impact of preoperative albumin levels on post-transplant outcome.

197 There are significant differences in both post-transplant outcomes and time to transplantation bet

198 any differences in access to transplant and post-transplant outcomes for ethnic minority patients in

199 d understand a differential effect of SES on post-transplant outcomes that was not seen during LVAD s

200 Post-transplant outcomes were analyzed pertaining to pat

201 re in fact associated with adverse recipient post-transplant outcomes.

202 Little is known about their post-transplant outcomes.

203 onalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) with good post-transplant outcomes.

204 times more likely to suffer a cardiac event post-transplant (p < 0.001).

205 pretransplant versus 11.4 muM [8.9-20.2 muM] post-transplant; P=0.03).

206 Post-transplant patients received intravenous iron, eryt

207 In the post-transplant patients, in-stent LL was closely couple

208 Increase in DSA from pre treatment to a post transplant peak of 1000 was equivalent to an increa

209 tibody levels were measured during the early post transplant period and corresponding CMV, VZV and An

210 e likelihood of normalization of LVEF in the post-transplant period (odds ratio 0.82, 95% CI 0.74 to

211 ne) responses in recipients during the early post-transplant period involving autologous and certain

212 y unique immunological features of the early post-transplant period that modulate the growth and func

213 These data suggest that during the immediate post-transplant period, the microenvironment of the sple

214 utic strategies to protect beta cells in the post-transplant period.

215 ntigens associate with histologic CAI in the post-transplant period.

216 months and at the last follow-up during the post-transplant period.

217 progenitor classes during the early and late post-transplant phases, and hierarchical relationships a

218 ic clonal dynamics during the early and late post-transplant phases.

219 ively, to 57 at 6 months and 46 at 24 months post transplant; physical health scores improved from 37

220 d ENaC in immortalized cell lines as well as post-transplant, primary human bronchial epithelial cell

221 ons of post-transplant survival and examined post-transplant private-to-public and public-to-private

222 rovide intriguing clues to the mechanisms of post-transplant proteinuria in xenogeneic kidney transpl

223 The onset of post-transplant proteinuria was significantly delayed in

224 -Brody Scale), nursing diagnoses (NANDA) and post-transplant quality indicators.

225 treatment with Peg-IFN-alpha2b/RBV prevents post-transplant recurrence of HCV in selected patients.

226 ith poor clinical prognosis and high risk of post-transplant recurrence.

227 teroid sensitivity as a surrogate marker for post-transplant recurrence.

228 etic or familial SRNS and did not experience post-transplant recurrence.

229 Of these patients, 57 (45.6%) developed post-transplant recurrence; 26 of 28 (92.9%) patients wi

230 , 2 and 5 years after therapy, respectively; post-transplant, recurrence-free survival rates were 78%

231 Post-transplant reinnervation is a unique model to study

232 ation, patients with myocarditis had similar post-transplant rejection, retransplantation, and surviv

233 play a critical role in the pathogenesis of post-transplant renal dysfunction.

234 ks additively with cyclosporin A to preserve post-transplant renal function.

235 Donor biomarkers that predict post-transplant renal recovery could improve organ selec

236 Post-transplant reperfusion may result in cardiac death

237 ial risk factor for the development of early post-transplant respiratory failure and mortality is con

238 Pirfenidone treatment beginning one month post-transplant restored pulmonary function and reversed

239 hysiology who also had a higher incidence of post-transplant right ventricular failure and overall mo

240 t transplant, 110 (12.9%) patients had DSAs; post-transplant screening identified 186 (21.9%) DSA-pos

241 In this pilot study, GEP starting at 55 days post transplant seems comparable with EMB for rejection

242 s-infected rhesus with AIDS and 1 cynomolgus post-transplant selected with SV40 brain infection from

243 to compare antibody repertoires in pre- and post-transplant sera from several cohorts of patients wi

244 systematic allograft biopsies at the time of post-transplant serum evaluation.

245 Our results suggest that lower post-transplant serum magnesium level is an independent

246 tions of HHV-8-mediated human disease in the post-transplant setting.

247 tion/withdrawal protocols and more intensive post-transplant surveillance.

248 In the EXCOR group, 12-month post-transplant survival (88.7%) was similar to OPTN pat

249 me centers, ECMO had no adverse influence on post-transplant survival (hazard ratio, 0.853; 95% confi

250 he association between preoperative 6MWD and post-transplant survival after adjusting for potential c

251 kidney allocation policy may improve overall post-transplant survival and access for highly sensitize

252 of 11 247 patients included all durations of post-transplant survival and examined post-transplant pr

253 6MWD is significantly associated with post-transplant survival and is best incorporated into t

254 Kaplan-Meier's 5-year post-transplant survival and recurrence-free probabiliti

255 ng-term outcomes, compounding disparities in post-transplant survival attributed to insurance status

256 d to assess the association between 6MWD and post-transplant survival by disease category.

257 centration is a strong prognostic marker for post-transplant survival in heart transplant recipients.

258 waitlist mortality while exceeding national post-transplant survival metrics.

259 We compared the post-transplant survival of patients with and without he

260 ts meeting Milan criteria had similar 5-year post-transplant survival to patients meeting UCSF criter

261 Post-transplant survival was similar in EXCOR patients w

262 Influences of ECMO on post-transplant survival were estimated among adults rec

263 The 12-month post-transplant survival with EXCOR is comparable with o

264 ates in the top 20th percentile of estimated post-transplant survival, adding waiting time from dialy

265 h a low rate of HCC recurrence and excellent post-transplant survival, comparable to those meeting T2

266 pected, but with equivalent and satisfactory post-transplant survival.

267 lower KDPI scores are associated with better post-transplant survival.

268 ated with mortality during support influence post-transplant survival.

269 The primary outcome measure was post-transplant survival.

270 it by balancing pre-transplant mortality and post-transplant survival.

271 urrence rates (4.5% vs. 9.4%; P = 0.138) and post-transplant survivals (78.7% vs. 74.6% at 4 years; P

272 108 biopsy specimens obtained 10.2-35 years post-transplant, TCMR defined by molecular and conventio

273 C EphB2 expression demonstrated that, at 7 d post-transplant, the EphB2(high) BMSCs engrafted in the

274 the delay in recapitulating immune ontogeny post-transplant, the immunosuppressive drugs given to pr

275 At 1 month post-transplant, the patient had a 6 mm skin test to pea

276 nsformation of portal vein, and 3 (3.1%) had post-transplant thrombosis.

277 y, renal transplantation was associated with post-transplant TMA.

278 riteria were randomized beginning at 55 days post transplant to either GEP or EMB arms.

279 ne repertoire sequencing to monitor atypical post-transplant trajectories, we analyzed two more patie

280 Post-transplant tuberculosis (PTTB) is a serious opportu

281 This may result in lower post-transplant (Tx) survival for high-risk candidates m

282 this study was to assess the risk of de novo post-transplant type 2 diabetes (DM) in liver transplant

283 Post-LAS recipients also had higher post-transplant use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenati

284 ue of the first heart biopsy (median: 9 days post-transplant) versus all biopsies obtained within the

285 etransplant sustained virologic response and post-transplant virologic response (pTVR), defined as un

286 al trial data using adoptive T cells against post-transplant virus-associated hematologic malignancie

287 The median length of hospital stay post transplant was also similar across groups.

288 ality after BS performed on the waitlist and post-transplant was 3.5%, and one transplant recipient l

289 The cumulative incidence of CKD by 3 years post-transplant was 53.7% and 42.1% for DCD and DBD pati

290 Graft loss at 6 months post-transplant was significantly higher in group 1 (10

291 At baseline and 6 months post-transplant, we assessed mood, PTSD symptoms, and QO

292 At short and long times post-transplant, we found host-derived synapses on GFP-i

293 oniazid (300 mg q24h for 9 months) initiated post-transplant when liver function was stabilized.

294 trial of GEP versus EMB starting at 55 days post transplant (when GEP is valid).

295 At day 784 post-transplant, when HIV-1 was undetectable by multiple

296 tients at the initial biopsy within 4 months post-transplant with evidence of MGN and on follow-up bi

297 ent prospective screening biopsies at 1 year post-transplant, with concurrent evaluations of graft co

298 modified porcine organs with CHC may benefit post-transplant xenograft function.

299 culopathy (P=0.19) or rejection in the first post-transplant year (P=0.76).

300 sed risk of death extending beyond the first post-transplant year.