ライフサイエンスコーパス: radiologic

1 compared with deletion carriers without any radiologic abnormalities (P < .005, P < .002, and P < .0

2 MRI scans were also examined for radiologic abnormalities RESULTS: No group differences w

3 solitary pulmonary nodule (SPN) is a common radiologic abnormality on chest x-rays or computed tomog

4 activity and OR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.15-0.79 for radiologic activity).

5 A majority of PSC patients develop radiologic aggravation upon MRI over 4 years.

6 dictors of cPR included a favorable post-LRT radiologic/alpha fetoprotein tumor response, longer time

7 nd 23% were underestimated compared with the radiologic analysis.

8 d were subjected to saliva sampling and oral radiologic and clinical examinations.

9 SL) of 30 mg/day induced rapid resolution of radiologic and cutaneous lesions and was tapered to 10 m

10 cancerous from non-cancerous regions on both radiologic and digital pathology tissue images.

11 ng due to limitations of currently available radiologic and endoscopic tools.

12 Ancillary radiologic and genomic tests are investigational but may

13 ival review (1984-2012) was performed of the radiologic and histopathologic findings of 46 consecutiv

14 mmography and digital mammography, including radiologic and pathologic characteristics, were compared

15 be carefully monitored by both sophisticated radiologic and pathologic evaluations.

16 P-producing tumors is predicted by important radiologic and pathologic factors, and is negligible for

17 ened prospectively for clinical, laboratory, radiologic, and (when appropriate) histologic evidence o

18 Clinical, radiologic, and esthetic parameters were assessed at bot

19 We studied the clinical, radiologic, and histologic features of HIV-related ische

20 trospective study, we analyzed the clinical, radiologic, and neuropathologic data of 174 patients (77

21 may be used to complement the routinely used radiologic- and nuclear medicine-based modalities.

22 chnologies into perspective to the available radiologic- and/or nuclear medicine-based imaging techno

23 luminescence imaging with three-dimensional radiologic- and/or nuclear medicine-based preinterventio

24 ither the orbital quadrant location, nor the radiologic appearance (diffuse vs encapsulated), nor siz

25 nd the pathologic findings that underlay the radiologic appearance of disease.

26 At baseline and after 6 months, radiologic assessment of bone defect fill was performed.

27 Radiologic assessment of IBD fill was analyzed at baseli

28 Radiologic assessment of IBD fill was done using compute

29 At baseline and after 6 and 9 months, radiologic assessment of intrabony defect (IBD) fill was

30 Radiologic assessment of intrabony defects (IBDs) and pe

31 Radiologic assessment of progression was done at week 4

32 Radiologic assessments at week 8 were used to calculate

33 The overall response rates for radiologic, biochemical, and symptomatic responses were

34 nflammatory activity over time, serving as a radiologic biomarker for response to medical therapy, an

35 In this article, a model and a repository of radiologic CDEs is described, and three important applic

36 ; firstly, MP with stable and characteristic radiologic changes and secondly SM with atypical radiolo

37 The radiologic characteristics of cherubism are not pathogno

38 semantic image features, selected to reflect radiologic characteristics of nodule shape, margin, text

39 Prevalence of CCM and clinical and radiologic characteristics of study participants with CC

40 ral single gene disorders share clinical and radiologic characteristics with multiple sclerosis and h

41 age (ICH), including frequency, clinical and radiologic characteristics, predictors, and outcome.

42 area measurements and patients' clinical and radiologic characteristics.

43 alse-positive screening results according to radiologic classification of mammographic features.

44 etastatic disease, treatment continued until radiologic, clinical, or prostate-specific antigen (PSA)

45 e survival (treatment failure was defined as radiologic, clinical, or PSA progression or death from p

46 de an update on important recent advances in radiologic colorectal imaging, with emphasis on detectio

47 EVD disease and preparedness relevant to the radiologic community.

48 recurrence following an initial, unequivocal radiologic complete regression after T-cell-based immuno

49 The primary endpoint was overall radiologic course, including worsening, improvement, or

50 c CR or, in patients not undergoing surgery, radiologic CR) in patients with KRAS/BRAF wild-type tumo

51 Seventeen patients were diagnosed using radiologic criteria alone.

52 sented with changes that have met well-known radiologic criteria for the diagnosis of malignancy, yet

53 re compared and stratified according to each radiologic criteria with Kaplan-Meier and multivariate C

54 to 3 years was assessed by using Macnab and radiologic criteria.

55 ss does not require a biopsy and is based on radiologic criteria.

56 30 locus, is associated with the severity of radiologic damage in RA and is independent of establishe

57 Radiologic damage was assessed using a modified Larsen m

58 eatment consented to have their clinical and radiologic data included in this report.

59 Radiologic data included on a nonenhanced CT acquisition

60 ables, molecular biomarkers, physiologic and radiologic data, and factors associated with disease pro

61 Clinical features, radiologic data, and procedure-related data were reviewe

62 e medical record by a neurologist blinded to radiologic data.

63 (PD), 3) clinical attachment level (CAL), 4) radiologic defect depth, and 5) bone fill.

64 serum of asymptomatic patients precedes the radiologic detection of high-grade serous ovarian cancer

65 rwent FDG PET/computed tomography because of radiologic deterioration at follow-up MR imaging between

66 erventions for patients with clinical and/or radiologic diagnosis of acute or chronic DDwoR.

67 Participants agreed that radiologic diagnosis of intrathoracic tuberculosis would

68 ected with HIV and HCV frequently present at radiologic diagnosis with infiltrative-type HCC and port

69 asingly gaining interest within surgical and radiologic disciplines.

70 d and resulted in significant pathologic and radiologic downstaging.

71 e mainly to pancreatic fistula, requiring 10 radiologic drainage procedures, 7 endoscopic procedures,

72 Radiologic drainage resolved 2 (6%) cases, and 34 requir

73 al disease and is associated with the use of radiologic dyes.

74 astic diseases and can be used for the first radiologic evaluation, while MR enterography may effecti

75 per day for 1 year and followed with serial radiologic evaluation.

76 rs to undergo physiologic, morphometric, and radiologic evaluations before and after kidney donation.

77 ld (mean +/- SD, 41 +/- 11.5) and had AP and radiologic evidence of a fluid collection in or around t

78 there are patients with typical clinical and radiologic evidence of ALSP who do not carry pathogenic

79 tion, those without clinical, laboratory, or radiologic evidence of bacterial aspiration pneumonia di

80 tors, history of cardiovascular disease, and radiologic evidence of cerebrovascular pathology.Higher

81 nce of relapses, disability progression, and radiologic evidence of disease activity, is increasingly

82 tory of prostate cancer by histopathology or radiologic evidence of metastatic disease were intraveno

83 Five patients with radiologic evidence of metastatic PCa were studied after

84 unresponsive to conservative treatments and radiologic evidence of osteoarthritis were treated with

85 Bone pain and radiologic evidence of periostitis were exclusively obse

86 NI may present with clinical symptoms and/or radiologic evidence of PNI (clinical PNI [CPNI]), yet mo

87 Initial radiologic examination included chest radiography and pl

88 Clinical oral and radiologic examination was made from 2000 to 2005.

89 hernia should undergo MRI as the definitive radiologic examination.

90 ement were invited to undergo a clinical and radiologic examination.

91 All radiologic examinations should be used in diagnosis but

92 Internal septations and loculations on radiologic examinations should raise some suspicion of t

93 e reporting of pertinent imaging findings at radiologic examinations, adoption of a standardized temp

94 Thirty human radiologic exploration cone-beam CTs were used for compa

95 idence, residence more than 8.1 miles from a radiologic facility performing needle biopsy, and no mam

96 n, controlling for demographic, clinical and radiologic factors.

97 The dominant radiologic feature was of an irregular mass (56.8% [109

98 diagnostic accuracy of the three "worrisome" radiologic features (nonsmooth tumor margins, peritumora

99 ores, based on the combination of predictive radiologic features (score without gadolinium administra

100 Based on radiologic features and absence of clinical signs, a low

101 ervised machine learning was used to cluster radiologic features and an association between clusters

102 cs lack spatialness, expressing quantitative radiologic features as a single value for a region of in

103 A number of radiologic features have shown promise for achieving thi

104 greater accuracy than standard clinical and radiologic features in distinguishing 'aggressive/malign

105 al (3D) MRC and liver MRI to find predictive radiologic features of progression.

106 However, natural history of radiologic features of PSC is poorly known.

107 independently reviewed and the presence and radiologic features of SCPNs were analyzed for associati

108 (TL) encephalitis and identify clinical and radiologic features that distinguish herpes simplex ence

109 But IPEH has no specific radiologic features that we can use to differentiate fro

110 entified clinical, laboratory, systemic, and radiologic features that, taken together, help discrimin

111 ment was checked, and diagnostic accuracy of radiologic features was investigated.

112 Radiologic features were analyzed by logistic regression

113 Radiologic features worsened in 37 patients (58%) and st

114 Initially, other radiologic findings (multiple nodules and pleural effusi

115 pathologists sequentially reviewed clinical-radiologic findings and biopsy results, recording at eac

116 s of synovial hemangioma is reported and its radiologic findings are mentioned.

117 sizing the roles of clinical, endoscopic and radiologic findings of intestinal capillariasis are limi

118 We describe the clinical and radiologic findings of sCNSc caused by CARD9 deficiency

119 resent study was to describe the spectrum of radiologic findings on high resolution computed tomograp

120 Radiologic findings revealed a malignant-appearing soft-

121 Patients who had both clinical and radiologic findings that were diagnostic for nonvertebra

122 of clinical, surgical, pathologic, and other radiologic findings were analyzed.

123 Associations between conversion and radiologic findings were assessed by using univariate an

124 on host risk factors, clinical symptoms, and radiologic findings, 34 were diagnosed with IA, whereas

125 clinical symptoms and signs, laboratory and radiologic findings, and MERS-CoV-specific tests.

126 and septations (63.2 %) were the most common radiologic findings.

127 t received rituximab with improved pulmonary radiologic findings.

128 nt and present diagnostic and interventional radiologic findings.

129 systemic inflammation, fever and fluctuating radiologic findings.

130 onals for both experiments (>99.8 vs 40% for radiologic follow-up and >99.8 vs 5% for invasive follow

131 One experiment examined radiologic follow-up generated by false-positive diagnos

132 The median tipping point for radiologic follow-up occurred at a false-positive rate g

133 viewed 289 MRIs from 64 patients upon a mean radiologic follow-up of 4 years (range, 1-9).

134 2) with surgical exploration or clinical and radiologic follow-up of at least 3 months were retrospec

135 errors was assessed in terms of clinical and radiologic follow-up.

136 r pathologic data as well as on clinical and radiologic follow-up.

137 histopathologic examination and/or clinical-radiologic follow-up.

138 The most common progression events have been radiologic followed by rising VEGF.

139 al (age and Karnofsky performance score) and radiologic (Gaussian normalized relative cerebral blood

140 critical role in biologic tumor imaging and radiologic genomics.

141 tients with non-AFP-producing tumors include radiologic (>2 tumors [HR, 4.98; 95% CI, 1.72-14.4; P =

142 f this study is to evaluate the clinical and radiologic healing response of non-contained infrabony d

143 Radiologic heterogeneity within tumors is usually govern

144 n phase, but rarely in the scanning phase of radiologic image inspection.

145 Two observers independently reviewed radiologic images to evaluate the following features for

146 Surgical notes, radiologic images, and clinical data for each surgical p

147 rome, the exclusion of other liver diseases, radiologic imaging and sometimes biopsy.

148 luded measurement of serum tumor markers and radiologic imaging at defined intervals.

149 Radiologic imaging demonstrated occipital encephalocele

150 fact, more radiosensitive than adults in the radiologic imaging dose range, rendering dose reduction

151 systematic review (SR) specifically examined radiologic imaging in IBS; however, in the secondary lit

152 Radiologic imaging is claimed to carry an iatrogenic ris

153 t advances in cross-sectional and functional radiologic imaging of the colorectum will positively imp

154 f increasing health care costs is the use of radiologic imaging procedures.

155 nt recent advances in small-bowel endoscopy, radiologic imaging remains important for patients suspec

156 nodes (N+) who have a complete clinical and radiologic imaging response after chemoradiation do not

157 Consortium for Radiologic Imaging Study of PKD (CRISP) participants (n=

158 ogression of PKD Study and the Consortium of Radiologic Imaging Study of PKD Study.

159 titative image features derived from routine radiologic imaging to improve cancer diagnosis, prognosi

160 In 31 patients, bone scanning and radiologic imaging were performed for pretherapeutic ima

161 that impacts morbidity; routine liver tests, radiologic imaging, noninvasive fibrosis markers, and Fi

162 -third of ventral hernia recurrences seen on radiologic imaging.

163 trauma centers, opportunistic screening for radiologic indicators of frailty provides an additional

164 ly, 48 with osteopenia only, and 161 with no radiologic indicators.

165 mors allows the integration of molecular and radiologic information for enhanced clinical decision ma

166 ed standardized clinical, epidemiologic, and radiologic information on AFM cases to the Centers for D

167 it is crucial that CDEs be adopted widely in radiologic information systems.

168 samples, often without detailed clinical or radiologic information.

169 lassification and its evolution into current radiologic interpretation and surgical practice are revi

170 s of the most recent imaging, concordance of radiologic interpretation, and re-evaluation of referrin

171 h automated segmentation was used to confirm radiologic interpretation.

172 overall reintervention rate (relaparotomy or radiologic intervention).

173 imaging workstations move from the advanced radiologic interventional suite to the operating room, s

174 ts were overall complications, endoscopic or radiologic interventions, readmissions, and death.

175 (IFD), changes in recommended biomarkers and radiologic investigations for the evaluation of IFD in p

176 Clinical features and routine radiologic investigations have low diagnostic utilities

177 They are also discovered during radiologic investigations of unexplained headaches, seiz

178 There have been a multitude of radiologic investigations that have delineated anatomica

179 f nonmyositic IOI, and 11 of 14 clinical and radiologic items and 1 of 5 pathologic items for myositi

180 nsensus was achieved on 7 of 14 clinical and radiologic items and 5 of 7 pathologic items related to

181 genetic factors contribute significantly to radiologic joint damage in rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

182 0(-4)); the median modified Larsen scores of radiologic joint damage per genotype were 31 (for those

183 ound the world who have a strong interest in radiologic journalism.

184 s lesions and was tapered to 10 mg/day, then radiologic lesions worsened.

185 Radiologic malunion was more common in the casting group

186 TSC has a wide variety of clinical and radiologic manifestations.

187 h of studies that have compared clinical and radiologic markers of periodontal inflammation between w

188 To test and compare the association between radiologic measurements of lesion diameter, volume, and

189 ining independently confirmed the respective radiologic measurements.

190 Current radiologic methods for diagnosing breast cancer detect s

191 mals were then euthanized, and complementary radiologic (micro-CT scans) and histologic analyses were

192 When stratified by radiologic Milan criteria, 5-year survival was better, a

193 or each variant, the appearance at different radiologic modalities including computed tomography, mag

194 Magnetic resonance imaging is the best radiologic modality for differentiating lymphomas from o

195 Correlation with clinical, radiologic, morphologic, and immunohistochemical finding

196 Complications occurring during radiologic or surgical intraportal islet transplantation

197 om 4 families were identified with clinical, radiologic, or pathologic features of ALSP in whom CSF1R

198 onfirmatory features of LAM (i.e., clinical, radiologic, or serologic), the guideline panel made cond

199 0.611) was higher compared with that of the radiologic (OS: IBS, 0.175; C index, 0.603; PFS: IBS, 0.

200 cular stroke (eg, procedure times) and other radiologic outcome parameters (eg, radiation exposure) w

201 An independent core laboratory scored the radiologic outcomes in each trial.

202 brain imaging data as well as functional and radiologic outcomes were pooled from randomized phase 3

203 tients with CP in terms of both clinical and radiologic outcomes.

204 eat group (n = 124), clinical (P = .004) and radiologic (P = .02) MS activity was significantly lower

205 ted group (n = 124), clinical (P = .003) and radiologic (P = .03) MS activity was significantly lower

206 Clinical and radiologic parameters (i.e., probing depth [PD], relativ

207 Clinical and radiologic parameters such as probing depth (PD), clinic

208 Clinical and radiologic parameters, including probing depth (PD), cli

209 Clinical and radiologic parameters, such as probing depth (PD), clini

210 Clinical, radiologic, pathologic, and simulation findings were ana

211 The authors performed detailed radiologic-pathologic analysis while blinded to subseque

212 When careful radiologic-pathologic correlation is performed and conco

213 This radiologic-pathologic correlation study demonstrates the

214 e findings suggest that patients with benign radiologic-pathologic-concordant percutaneous breast bio

215 contributions of the AFIP, the ARP, and the Radiologic Pathology Correlation Course, high-ranking me

216 in the history of pathology education and in radiologic pathology correlation in the United States.

217 Various radiologic patterns of cryptogenic organizing pneumonia

218 luding existing radiogenomics data and other radiologic patterns of disease.

219 However, radiologic performance may lead to misdiagnosis, renderi

220 However, the radiologic perspective is not supported by either standa

221 CDEs can help advance radiologic practice, research, and performance improveme

222 Significant radiologic predictors included midline shift (OR, 6.8; 9

223 d multivariate logistic modeling to identify radiologic predictors of HSE.

224 otentially expensive interventions including radiologic procedures and surgical revisions.

225 the field of contrast media development and radiologic procedures helped give radiologists the lead

226 All patients showed clinical or radiologic progression after 1-3 infusions of fresolimum

227 he patient's symptoms exhibited clinical and radiologic progression after several attempts to taper t

228 The primary endpoint was radiologic progression at 12 months according to Europea

229 ic PFS (rPFS; time from random assignment to radiologic progression or death) per Prostate Cancer Wor

230 These scores were associated with radiologic progression, with an area under the curve of

231 PSA progression-free survival, clinical and radiologic progression-free survival, and overall surviv

232 Two simple scores can predict radiologic progression.

233 ent predictor of OS and PPS in patients with radiologic progression.

234 image reconstruction in PET/CT for confident radiologic reading when compared with other reconstructi

235 image reconstruction in PET/CT for confident radiologic reading when compared with other reconstructi

236 The patient was followed up for clinical and radiologic regression of cSCC.

237 mandatory for tumor relapse after a complete radiologic regression.

238 alter practice to maximize comprehension of radiologic reports and thus optimize the manner in which

239 Although designed for human consumption, radiologic reports contain a wealth of information that

240 language processing algorithm in a review of radiologic reports from January 2004 through October 201

241 Unfortunately, the lack of structure in radiologic reports limits the ability of information sys

242 ss and nonmass enhancement was obtained from radiologic reports.

243 ) for over 24 wk, which also correlated with radiologic response (decreased lesion number and size).

244 luded toxicity, disease-free survival (DFS), radiologic response (RaR), and biomarker correlates, inc

245 Secondary end points were radiologic response (RR), progression-free survival (PFS

246 nd osteopontin correlated significantly with radiologic response after TAE.

247 Additional end points were radiologic response and safety.

248 as not met, since there was no difference in radiologic response between the groups at 3, 6, or 12 mo

249 erability and no demonstrable improvement in radiologic response or disease stabilization compared wi

250 ble antitumor activity by means of objective radiologic response or tumor marker decline was observed

251 Confirmed radiologic response rates were 12% (95% CI, 8% to 18%) f

252 fenib treatment was initiated, and a partial radiologic response was confirmed within 1 month.

253 nically significant responses and a profound radiologic response.

254 Radiologic responses can be dramatic, and decreases in p

255 Radiologic responses were classified as optimal or subop

256 Radiologic restaging was performed after 3 cycles.

257 cross all dose cohorts, evaluated by central radiologic review according to the Response Evaluation C

258 Radiologic review of his outside computed tomography sca

259 sion-free survival (according to independent radiologic review) was 14.4 months in the R-CHOP group v

260 -free survival (PFS) assessed by independent radiologic review.

261 ogression-free survival (PFS) by independent radiologic review.

262 mpared with that of established clinical and radiologic risk models was demonstrated.

263 mpared with that of established clinical and radiologic risk models.

264 Review of the clinical records, radiologic scans, and histopathologic specimens, with ad

265 Additionally, radiologic scores at 14 days independently predicted poo

266 At 180 days, increased radiologic scores for reticulation were associated with

267 on were most strongly associated with higher radiologic scores.

268 An objective radiologic scoring system was used to quantify patterns

269 may have implications regarding the value of radiologic screening of other vascular beds, particularl

270 e evidence from the 3 studies, using data on radiologic severity of joint damage from a single time p

271 ies, the per T allele effect on the ratio of radiologic severity scores was 0.90 (95% confidence inte

272 d RA susceptibility loci are associated with radiologic severity.

273 ile the patient present typical clinical and radiologic signs of bile duct obstruction and cholangiti

274 sonance cholangiography (MRC) has become the radiologic standard of reference for diagnosis of primar

275 From a clinical-radiologic standpoint, there are a limited number of str

276 mptoms, signs, or laboratory markers or were radiologic studies compared with a reference standard fo

277 Relevant radiologic studies included computed tomography (CT) and

278 ium (gadodiamide) used for contrast-enhanced radiologic studies.

279 vides much necessary information in a single radiologic study.

280 s were similar when antifungal treatment and radiologic suspicion of IFD were used as the gold standa

281 imen in Li-Fraumeni syndrome, using multiple radiologic techniques, including rapid whole-body magnet

282 med to evaluate the predictive values of the radiologic techniques.

283 a subcohort of 1,500 participants of the US Radiologic Technologists (USRT) Study that included whit

284 ard ratios (HRs) for the risk of cataract in radiologic technologists according to NM work history pr

285 d on standardizing education for nuclear and radiologic technologists and physicians specifically for

286 In the years 2003-2005 and 2012-2013, 42 545 radiologic technologists from a U.S. prospective study c

287 ataract in a cohort of nuclear medicine (NM) radiologic technologists on the basis of their work hist

288 The US Radiologic Technologists Study (1983-2006) is a nationwi

289 Using data from the US Radiologic Technologists Study, a large, nationwide, pro

290 We evaluated 123 United States Radiologic Technologists subjects who wore personal UVR

291 sed risk of cataract was observed among U.S. radiologic technologists who had performed an NM procedu

292 is a serious risk in nuclear accidents or in radiologic terrorism.

293 olerate at least a 99.8% rate of unnecessary radiologic tests to detect an additional extracolonic ma

294 umber of nine common laboratory tests, three radiologic tests, and electrocardiograms performed in ea

295 eported overall survival (OS) or biochemical/radiologic time to disease progression.

296 dings, combined with selected laboratory and radiologic tools, aids in the early diagnosis and treatm

297 P < 0.001) from baseline, and the absence of radiologic tumor response (HR 1.7; P = 0.026) remained i

298 No improvement in radiologic tumor response or OS was observed in patients

299 lysis investigated associations between ETS (radiologic tumor size decrease at week 8) and survival a

300 The patient was referred to us for radiologic work up.