ライフサイエンスコーパス: readministration

1 duration of action and the need for frequent readministration.

2 reward processing that is normalized by drug readministration.

3 erminals that is reversed by methamphetamine readministration.

4 ene expression, potentially requiring vector readministration.

5 t be excluded from clinical trials or vector readministration.

6 ibodies were generated, which blocked vector readministration.

7 did produce significant gene expression upon readministration.

8 onths of therapy--both before and after drug readministration.

9 amuscular injection and its impact on vector readministration.

10 this did not prevent the efficacy of vector readministration.

11 here remain concerns about the safety of its readministration.

12 n obstacle to the potential option of vector readministration.

13 ene expression, and difficulties with vector readministration.

14 ti-rabbit Ab responses, which limits routine readministration.

15 sponse which precludes expression upon viral readministration.

16 Before a first readministration, a positive HACA titer was present in 2

17 With drug readministration, a positive rechallenge has recently be

18 in 22 of 454 patients (4.8%); after a first readministration, an additional 82 of 432 (19.0%) became

19 Subsequent readministration and augmentation of expression was poss

20 These results indicate that both readministration and immune modulation will be required

21 versus TD as induction was retained despite readministration as consolidation therapy after double a

22 We found that the ineffectiveness of readministration due to the humoral response to an Ad5 f

23 nstrated during initiation persist with drug readministration during chronic therapy.

24 Vector readministration failed to produce additional transducti

25 proteins from AAV serotypes 2, 3, and 6 for readministration in the mouse lung.

26 ient to suppress gene transduction following readministration in vivo.

27 In addition, readministration is usually ineffective unless the anima

28 ged genetic engraftment together with vector readministration) is possible with AAV in skeletal muscl

29 n of E3 genes in recombinant Ads facilitates readministration of a functional vector for long-term co

30 In addition, we demonstrate successful readministration of AAV2/5 to the lung 5 months after th

31 gainst Ad5 infection that often prevents the readministration of Ad5 vectors.

32 mice with Clenoliximab permitted successful readministration of adenoviral vectors at least four tim

33 In contrast, upon readministration of androgens, Her-2/neu mRNA, protein,

34 e study of a bone marrow harvest followed by readministration of autologous MNCs in 10 patients, 18 t

35 Readministration of doxycycline to tTA DT mice caused ha

36 l complications and mechanisms to facilitate readministration of ERT in these patients remain unexplo

37 Readministration of GAP-DLRIE liposome CAT complexes at

38 Coadministration and readministration of GV10 vectors showed that E4 provided

39 tion levels that are largely reversible upon readministration of iron.

40 Once-repeated BNCT treatment with readministration of liposomes at an interval of 4, 6, or

41 Readministration of M-CSF after various intervals contin

42 The readministration of MeAIB every 12 hours further decreas

43 Striatal readministration of rAAV2-GDNF was also tested in preimm

44 engaged students in the learning process and readministration of the quiz at the end of class allowed

45 e skeletal muscle; these responses prevented readministration of the same serotype but did not substa

46 stations of a hypersensitivity reaction upon readministration of the targeted nanoparticle.

47 esired in applications of gene therapy where readministration of the vector is necessary.

48 oes not allow for secondary expression after readministration of the vector.

49 esponse which precludes gene expression upon readministration of the virus.

50 une response, which prevents expression upon readministration of the virus.

51 e dosing strategies which promote successful readministration of vector in clinical trials and marked

52 the effects of the CD4 antibody diminished; readministration of vector without diminution of gene ex

53 IgA that neutralized and prevented effective readministration of vector.

54 against AAV capsid proteins does not prevent readministration of vector.

55 enovirus did not develop, allowing efficient readministration of vector.

56 roduction of neutralizing antibody, allowing readministration of vector.

57 neutralizing antibodies that block effective readministration of vector.

58 antibody responses to the vector, subretinal readministration results in additional transduction even

59 levels were reduced for only 4 wk, and viral readministration was ineffective.

60 the effect of neutralizing antibodies on AAV readministration, we attempted to deliver recombinant AA

61 t to be determined, but it seems likely that readministration will be necessary over the lifetime of

62 TNFR:Fc protein to the circulation following readministration with AAV[2/5].

63 , hinders long-term transgene expression and readministration with first-generation vectors.

64 s that intracerebral rAAV administration and readministration would not be affected by the presence o