ライフサイエンスコーパス: recurrence risk

1 alized care and counselling on prognosis and recurrence risk.

2 f CHD with chromosome abnormalities and high recurrence risk.

3 rombotic burden can identify subjects at low recurrence risk.

4 ese predictors may be useful for stratifying recurrence risk.

5 ual SNPs were at most mildly associated with recurrence risk.

6 able couples to be counseled as to their low recurrence risk.

7 d parental mosaicism as central variables in recurrence risk.

8 h the procedure has not been shown to reduce recurrence risk.

9 dneys from living donors (LD) have increased recurrence risk.

10 s that beta-blockers attenuate breast cancer recurrence risk.

11 alcium stone, increased fluid intake reduced recurrence risk.

12 ute to resection completeness and reduce the recurrence risk.

13 ropriate for treating PSP patients with high recurrence risk.

14 clinical prediction rule that stratifies VTE recurrence risk.

15 ss an individual patient's tumor biology and recurrence risk.

16 of comorbidities were associated with higher recurrence risk.

17 aracteristics and ERP, and estimated sibling recurrence risk.

18 rs in identifying patients with an increased recurrence risk.

19 n have emerged as the primary determinant of recurrence risk.

20 etastases in lymph nodes and better estimate recurrence risk.

21 independent predictors of reduced endoscopic recurrence risk.

22 is unlikely to cause substantially increased recurrence risk.

23 ion on mechanism of origin, inheritance, and recurrence risk.

24 mutation site may be important in assessing recurrence risk.

25 y independent predictors of reduced clinical recurrence risk.

26 involvement in breast cancer is a marker of recurrence risk.

27 ncluding rare individual pedigrees with high recurrence risk.

28 sus dizygotic (5%) twins as well as familial recurrence risk.

29 marginally associated with a decline in the recurrence risk.

30 osis challenging, which has implications for recurrence risk.

31 ne (RAI) does not improve survival or reduce recurrence risk.

32 serve as imaging biomarkers of breast cancer recurrence risk.

33 ransplantation model for posttransplantation recurrence risk.

34 to be the most important determinant of VTE recurrence risk.

35 of postpartum AD, duration of treatment, and recurrence risk.

36 -fetoprotein (AFP) have been associated with recurrence risk.

37 ogic, and treatment features known to affect recurrence risk.

38 ening corrected QT interval and reducing TdP recurrence risk.

39 m-effects model and used to calculate 5-year recurrence risk.

40 tamoxifen alone is minimal for those at low recurrence risk.

41 adjuvant chemotherapy is indicated to reduce recurrence risk.

42 treatment, geography, Child-Pugh status, and recurrence risk.

43 fined by the continuous composite measure of recurrence risk.

44 after ASD index cases were used to calculate recurrence risks.

45 f mosaic trisomy and UPD and (iii) potential recurrence risks.

46 nd 24.6% in validation set) without additive recurrence risks.

47 8%) and that BCS has a slightly higher local recurrence risk (63%); most accurately identified the ma

48 dentified the magnitude of ipsilateral local recurrence risk (91%).

49 xonidine treatment was associated with lower recurrence risk after adjustment for age, body mass inde

50 dated Vienna Prediction Model for estimating recurrence risk after an unprovoked venous thromboemboli

51 Independent predictors of survival and recurrence risk after curative-intent surgery for ACC we

52 ociated with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) recurrence risk after definitive treatment.

53 rnational bladder cancer nomogram predicting recurrence risk after radical cystectomy for bladder can

54 comes nomogram to predict the 5-year disease recurrence risk after radical cystectomy.

55 exposure to mood stabilizers versus the high recurrence risks after discontinuing lithium.

56 ion before surgery was associated with lower recurrence risk (aHR, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.71).

57 of non-RCC death exceeded that of abdominal recurrence risk already at 30 days after surgery, regard

58 Recurrence risk also increased with increasing age, prev

59 having an affected child, and determined the recurrence risks among the siblings and offspring of aff

60 Accurate assessments of recurrence risk and absolute treatment benefit are neede

61 more accurate information to assess disease recurrence risk and BC-related death.

62 develop multigene algorithms for estimating recurrence risk and benefit from FU/LV.

63 uantitative gene expression assays to assess recurrence risk and benefits from chemotherapy in patien

64 ing the underlying parameters that influence recurrence risk and could be useful for analyzing risk i

65 A key outcome is clarification of recurrence risk and facilitation of reproductive choices

66 erage risk, they will not contribute much to recurrence risk and heritability unless they persist on

67 for preventing gastric cancer will depend on recurrence risk and individual and community factors.

68 genes showed a significant trend for reduced recurrence risk and longer recurrence-free survival as t

69 mical markers to stratify patients regarding recurrence risk and may inform treatment decisions.

70 nderlying aetiology, theranostic strategies, recurrence risk and path to recovery are populated by a

71 em to be necessary and sufficient to explain recurrence risk and population incidence.

72 agnostic evaluation and counseling regarding recurrence risk and prognosis.

73 tatistically significant association between recurrence risk and receptor status.

74 with rivaroxaban resulted in a similarly low recurrence risk and reduced thrombotic burden without in

75 linical cohort study, the authors determined recurrence risk and survival-analysis-based time to recu

76 nitial hope that their presence would inform recurrence risk and thus decisions on anticoagulation du

77 r understanding of cancer origin, evolution, recurrence-risk and treatment diagnostics.

78 n insight into prognosis, inform families of recurrence risk, and facilitate prenatal diagnoses.

79 h CD68 score and Ki-67 index correlated with recurrence risk, and Ki-67 index inversely correlated wi

80 Ascribing causality, determination of recurrence risk, and prognostication for rare or unique

81 of genomic predictors of ER pathway status, recurrence risk, and sensitivity to chemotherapeutics wa

82 ns of nipple viability, flap necrosis, local recurrence risk, and the technical challenge of this pro

83 agnosis, to counsel family members for their recurrence risk, and to classify these rare disorders mo

84 alysis of the symptom loadings, comorbidity, recurrence risks, and within-family correlations indicat

85 ans and mice, CHD has a low absolute sibling recurrence risk ( approximately 2.7%), suggesting a cons

86 idering Mendelian diseases in which familial recurrence risks are high, and mutant alleles are both n

87 Thus, although early mortality and stroke recurrence risks are higher among non-lacunar than lacun

88 the context of common traits, where familial recurrence risks are modest, and for the most part the r

89 mptom reduction for even a small increase in recurrence risk, are at substantially increased risk of

90 DCE MR imaging features were predictive of recurrence risk as determined by the surrogate assay, wi

91 esults demonstrate no time trend in the ASDs recurrence risk as seen in the ASDs prevalence.

92 ositive/HER2-negative breast cancer and high recurrence risk, as defined by clinicopathologic charact

93 tor-positive, HER2-negative disease and high recurrence risk, as defined by clinicopathologic charact

94 Tumor testing can inform cancer recurrence risk assessment and cancer treatment options.

95 s in breast cancer diagnosis, prognosis, and recurrence risk assessment.

96 No variation in the recurrence risk associated with change of municipality o

97 of non-RCC death exceeded that of abdominal recurrence risk at 6 months in patients age 80 years and

98 al study cannot specifically examine adenoma recurrence risk at intervals suggested for patients with

99 Recurrence risks at 3 years were 12%, 18%, and 22% for p

100 ive, face-based ABM reduced both measures of recurrence risk (Beck Depression Inventory and cortisol

101 The difference in the recurrence risk between full- and half-siblings supports

102 .1, all P < 0.001) and accurately stratified recurrence risk beyond MC, ranging from 19% (CRS 0) to 6

103 , active dual-chamber pacing reduces syncope recurrence risk by 75% (95% confidence interval, 44-88).

104 istic, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.77-0.86) and superior recurrence risk classification compared with explant Mil

105 MAs had higher stroke recurrence risk compared with non-Hispanic white patient

106 0.84]) each further reduced composite stone recurrence risk compared with placebo or control, althou

107 drug-treated patients, dual-site RA reduced recurrence risk compared with SP (HR = 0.638, p = 0.011)

108 ristic phenotype is important due to the low recurrence risk compared with the other (recessive) cere

109 ) by exome sequencing, with implications for recurrence risk counseling.

110 In univariate analysis, the recurrence risk declined with higher number of intense b

111 Stroke recurrence risk decreased over time from sentinel stroke

112 Patients with the highest initial recurrence risk demonstrated the greatest increase in co

113 AFP model <=2 points exhibited heterogeneous recurrence risk, dependent upon alpha-fetoprotein (P = 0

114 ation can stratify autism spectrum disorders recurrence risk due to de novo mutations into a vast maj

115 Our population-based recurrence risk estimate is lower than the recently repo

116 The recurrence risk estimates provide an important clinical

117 These findings have implications for recurrence risk estimation and genetic counseling.

118 and develop novel prediction model for late recurrence risk estimation.

119 according to whether or not the 5-year local recurrence risk exceeded 10% (<10%, 17,000 women; >10%,

120 The aim of this study was to assess recurrence risk factors following ileocolonic resection

121 Recurrence risk factors of greatest significance were ap

122 , there are no definitive data regarding its recurrence risk factors.

123 lysis identified 3 statistically significant recurrence risk factors: advanced age, largest basal dia

124 The overall relative recurrence risk for ASDs was 6.9 (95% CI, 6.1-7.8), and

125 first population-based study to examine the recurrence risk for autism spectrum disorders (ASDs), in

126 The recurrence risk for autism spectrum disorders is substan

127 a promising prognostic tool to evaluate late recurrence risk for breast cancer.

128 Recurrence risk for CHD in offspring was 4.8%, with no s

129 sm indicates that there may be a significant recurrence risk for DC/XLIS in families at risk, even wh

130 The recurrence risk for depression or panic was much shorter

131 iate Cox's proportional hazard model defined recurrence risk for disease.

132 A continuous, composite measure of recurrence risk for each patient was determined from a C

133 complications for their patients and predict recurrence risk for families of children with congenital

134 ds, and the first study to consider the ASDs recurrence risk for full- and half-siblings.

135 isk for developing disease and calculate the recurrence risk for future offspring.

136 The sibling recurrence risk for HLHS was 8%, and for CVM was 22%.

137 Few reliable data exist concerning the recurrence risk for individual trisomies or the risk for

138 The recurrence risk for JIA was significantly elevated among

139 al half siblings (2.3%) was half the overall recurrence risk for maternal half siblings but was simil

140 The recurrence risk for paternal half siblings (2.3%) was ha

141 The mean sibling recurrence risk for TS/CT across all birth years was 9.8

142 The authors sought to determine the illness recurrence risk for women with bipolar disorder who disc

143 Recurrence risks for JIA were computed for relatives of

144 iting the range of genetic determination and recurrence risks for two-, three-, and four-locus purely

145 Seven recurrence-risk genes, six FU/LV-benefit genes, and five

146 substantive implications for calculation of recurrence risk, genetic counseling, and potential treat

147 % for predefined low, intermediate, and high recurrence risk groups, respectively.

148 The genotype-specific recurrence risk (GSR) is the genotype-specific risk to r

149 The observed pattern of familial recurrence risk has long suggested that multiple variant

150 ant chemotherapy was associated with overall recurrence risk (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.56), while histor

151 -6 genotype was associated with an increased recurrence risk (hazard ratio [HR], 4.60; 95% CI, 1.24 t

152 Patients were stratified by recurrence risk, histology, Eastern Cooperative Oncology

153 le was associated with significantly reduced recurrence risk (HR = 0.25; 95% CI, 0.10 to 0.64) and im

154 PPARG genotype was associated with a reduced recurrence risk (HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.86) among u

155 Sibling recurrence risk in autism has been estimated to be appro

156 ovides information in assessing the clinical recurrence risk in bladder cancer and that the specific

157 90th percentile also had greater categorical recurrence risk in both TEDS and CATSS.

158 By identifying VTE recurrence risk in cancer patients with VTE, we may be a

159 multigene signature to improve prediction of recurrence risk in clear cell renal cell carcinoma.

160 clinically important question of predicting recurrence risk in colorectal cancer patients, we demons

161 tative distributions in nature, estimates of recurrence risk in families have never previously consid

162 tients and may be helpful in determining the recurrence risk in families.

163 sulting in a substantially increased sibling recurrence risk in future pregnancies.

164 As recurrence risk in hormone receptor-positive breast canc

165 e of genetics in ASDs, while the significant recurrence risk in maternal half-siblings may support th

166 quency of conjugal MS and have estimated the recurrence risk in offspring of such matings.

167 of these findings, we hypothesized a higher recurrence risk in older than in younger patients when t

168 ance (MR) imaging features and breast cancer recurrence risk in patients with estrogen receptor-posit

169 ted in a prospective study for assessment of recurrence risk in patients with stage II colon cancer a

170 was able to reduce intermediate measures of recurrence risk in previously depressed patients.

171 robust demonstration of an fMRI signature of recurrence risk in remitted MDD.

172 tic architectures underlying the low sibling recurrence risk in S-CHD and NS-CHD.

173 The recurrence risk in second-born children was higher (11.5

174 The 12-gene Recurrence Score predicts recurrence risk in stage II and stage III colon cancer a

175 a genomic signature developed both to assess recurrence risk in stage II patients and to assist in tr

176 tus was associated with significantly higher recurrence risk in subgroups within Metroticket 2.0 crit

177 -treated HER2-positive subpopulation, 5-year recurrence risk in the low-low group was 10.1% (95% CI 3

178 -treated HER2-negative subpopulation, 5-year recurrence risk in women with low Ki67(B) and Ki67(2W) (

179 We have compared recurrence risks in half-siblings with respect to their

180 factor scores to comorbidity in probands and recurrence risks in relatives were examined.

181 Calculation of recurrence risks in siblings largely confirmed the herit

182 increase in diameter, the estimated rate of recurrence risk increased by 198%.

183 The 4-month recurrence risk increased by approximately 5% (absolute)

184 ; however, an optimistic under-estimation of recurrence risk is a common problem associated with thes

185 is an important observation, as the sibling recurrence risk is extremely low.

186 In simple D-TGA: 1) familial recurrence risk is low; 2) children diagnosed pre-natall

187 Recurrence risk is mostly associated with presence of re

188 cies may frequently be cured with resection, recurrence risk is significant.

189 E) recurrence, but further stratification of recurrence risk is uncertain.

190 t, identification of patients at low risk of recurrence risk is very difficult (that is, such people

191 bar intracerebral haemorrhage (with its high recurrence risk) is now well recognised, a number of man

192 garding the association between genotype and recurrence risk, is premature.

193 Age and gender-adjusted OR(s) and sibling recurrence risk (lambda(s)), with different thresholds d

194 e weighted MLS was 2.06 on 20q (chi = 57 cM, recurrence risk,lambda(s) = 1.25, P = 0.009).

195 nature predicted particularly well for early recurrence risk (<2 years), especially when combined wit

196 solute gains from radiotherapy; 5-year local recurrence risks (mainly at these sites) 6% versus 23% (

197 to the conserved breast), with 5-year local recurrence risks (mainly in the conserved breast, as mos

198 About three-quarters of the eventual local recurrence risk occurred during the first 5 years.

199 .35; I(2) = 73%) leading to a summary 5-year recurrence risk of 0.95% (95% CI, .35%-1.69%).

200 son-years (95% CI, 10.18-11.79) with 10-year recurrence risk of 10.26% (95% CI, 9.36%-11.23%).

201 on-years (95% CI:10.18-11.79) with a 10-year recurrence risk of 10.26% (95% CI:9.36-11.23%).

202 -up UBT (n=1091), 125 tested UBT positive, a recurrence risk of 11.5% (95% CI, 9.6%-13.5%).

203 gy of TOF is multifactorial, with a familial recurrence risk of 3%.

204 ct of epigenetic inheritance on the risk and recurrence risk of a complex disease.

205 ermine the true rate of familial ALS and the recurrence risk of ALS in family members, and to identif

206 identifiable provocative risk factors have a recurrence risk of approximately 25% at 4 years with the

207 FA supplementation reduced the recurrence risk of Cd exencephaly by as much as 55%.

208 The authors investigated the recurrence risk of congenital anomalies as a function of

209 ne or more successful pregnancies with a low-recurrence risk of congenital heart disease.

210 cs, with 98% both incorrectly estimating the recurrence risk of deafness and misunderstanding the con

211 This study defines the incidence and recurrence risk of Hodgkin disease (HD) and non-Hodgkin

212 The familial recurrence risk of lymphatic filariasis (LF) is unknown.

213 The recurrence risk of postpartum AD for women with a PPD ho

214 The recurrence risk of postpartum AD was markedly higher amo

215 Prediction of biochemical recurrence risk of prostate cancer following radical pro

216 of 2 functional MDM2 promoter variants with recurrence risk of SCCOP.

217 ed low and high RS groups had average 5-year recurrence risks of 13% (95% CI, 10% to 16%) and 21% (95

218 findings have important consequences for the recurrence risks of disorders caused by de novo mutation

219 t outcome predictor strongly associated with recurrence, risk of death, and shorter survival.

220 uled out linkage at 14q21-23 (lambda(s) [sib recurrence risk or genotypic risk ratio] = 1.8).

221 us at enrollment was associated with a lower recurrence risk (OR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.45, 0.99, for the m

222 ve surgical margin does not affect survival, recurrence risk, or site of recurrence.

223 liability, approximate heritability, sibling recurrence risk, overall genetic variance using a logari

224 Recurrence Score predicted recurrence risk (P = .001) after adjustment for stage, m

225 Recurrence risk peaked near 14 months for both treatment

226 Recurrence risk period was between approximately 45 and

227 and might ultimately lead to improvements in recurrence risk prediction, treatment, and prognosis.

228 eceiver operating curve) of established GIST recurrence risk prognostic scoring systems.

229 RETREAT was able to stratify 5-year post-LT recurrence risk ranging from less than 3% with a score o

230 associated with an increased risk of disease recurrence (risk rate, 3.12; P =.02) and decreased risk

231 therapy significantly reduced risk of stroke recurrence (risk ratio, 0.69; 95% confidence interval, 0

232 MAs had higher risk for stroke recurrence (risk ratio, 1.57; 95% confidence interval, 1

233 The estimated sibling recurrence risk ratio (lambdas ) for fibromyalgia was 13

234 The estimated sibling recurrence risk ratio (lambdas ) observed in this study

235 The recurrence risk ratio (RRR) is calculated to assess and

236 da(R)/lambda(jR), where lambda(R) is Risch's recurrence risk ratio and lambda(jR) is the contribution

237 The sibling recurrence risk ratio for the disease is 63 and heritabi

238 als with ERP had an ERP prevalence of 11.6% (recurrence risk ratio of 1.89).

239 The recurrence risk ratio of BAV in HLHS families (8.05) was

240 The lambdas and the parent-offspring recurrence risk ratio of RRD were 2.1 (95% CI, 1.3-3.2)

241 ed prevalence rates, we calculated a sibling recurrence risk ratio of up to 18.9.

242 netic contribution of >10% to the AS sibling recurrence risk ratio) within this area contributing to

243 ex diseases with large values of the sibling recurrence risk ratio, sequencing unselected affected in

244 es with small values for the overall sibling recurrence risk ratio, such as Alzheimer's disease and m

245 We introduce the idea of a restricted sib recurrence-risk ratio (lambda*S) estimated by restrictio

246 The recurrence-risk ratio of disease in siblings, lambdaS, i

247 Sibling-sibling recurrence risk ratios (lambdas) and parent-offspring re

248 Frequencies, recurrence risk ratios (RRRs), heritability, and twin co

249 Subsets linkage analyses and recurrence risk ratios in a combined cohort provide evid

250 e risk ratios (lambdas) and parent-offspring recurrence risk ratios were calculated.

251 t interbirth interval was observed, with the recurrence risk reaching 14.4% for an interbirth interva

252 because data suggest increased locoregional recurrence risks (relative to luminal subtypes) with bre

253 opic pleurodesis procedure for PSP with high recurrence risk remains controversial.

254 can benefit families with information about recurrence risk, resolve concerns about etiology, provid

255 HRT did not seem to affect breast cancer recurrence risk (RR = 0.64, 95% confidence interval [CI]

256 The prevalence of TS/CT and OCD and relative recurrence risk (RRR) for TS/CT or OCD among individuals

257 The relative recurrence risk (RRR) measures familial aggregation of d

258 A Recurrence Risk Score (RRS) was developed from a randoml

259 omy and open nephroureterectomy, investigate recurrence risks specific to laparoscopic nephroureterec

260 enetic etiology is indicated by an increased recurrence risk, sporadic occurrence suggests that CHD g

261 ts that mutations in parental blood increase recurrence risk substantially more than parental mutatio

262 sms had significantly worse DFS and a higher recurrence risk than patients with fewer combined risk g

263 Purged autotransplantation had a 26% lower recurrence risk than unpurged autotransplantation.

264 ved little (<10%) difference in 5-year local recurrence risk there was little difference in 15-year b

265 As a consequence, the recurrence risk to close relatives is reduced.

266 olute treatment effect across a continuum of recurrence risk to individualize endocrine therapy decis

267 tionship R for the true model and KRI is the recurrence risk to relatives for a multiplicative model

268 nteraction ratio, CR=KR/KRI, where KR is the recurrence risk to relatives with relationship R for the

269 ce across a continuous, composite measure of recurrence risk to tailor decision making.

270 sex bias in AS, and there are differences in recurrence risk to the offspring of affected mothers and

271 Reproductive fitness of adults with TOF and recurrence risks to offspring are of increasing interest

272 Additionally, recurrence risks to siblings were analyzed.

273 y regimens should take into account baseline recurrence risk, toxicities, likelihood of benefit, and

274 docrine treatment based on considerations of recurrence risk using established prognostic factors.

275 Thus, we aimed to predict ccRCC recurrence risk using lncRNA expression.

276 The overall sibling recurrence risk was 10.1%, compared with a prevalence of

277 icial effect of ER- or PR-positive tumors on recurrence risk was absent.

278 Recurrence risk was greater after rapid than after gradu

279 Recurrence risk was higher in patients with higher prote

280 Regarding the 31-SNP GRS, recurrence risk was highest in patients with >/=31 and l

281 Recurrence risk was independently and significantly high

282 The 9-year locoregional recurrence risk was low.

283 Our data also indicate that recurrence risk was not affected by use of rhTSH.

284 on, a validated model of posttransplantation recurrence risk was produced with a concordance statisti

285 However, recurrence risk was significantly decreased (adjusted ha

286 The recurrence risk was significantly higher for siblings wh

287 Among ever-users of HRT, recurrence risk was two-fold lower for estrogen receptor

288 versus continued mood stabilizer treatment, recurrence risk was twofold greater, median time to firs

289 The relative recurrence risks were 2.4 (95% CI, 1.4-4.1) for maternal

290 al (>10%) differences, however, 5-year local recurrence risks were 7% active versus 26% control (abso

291 nd combined polymorphisms, the above similar recurrence risks were particularly higher among patients

292 nosis, and model predictions of age-specific recurrence risks were tested against outcome data from S

293 whom had characteristics associated with low recurrence risk, were randomly assigned (WBI, n = 260; A

294 does not define a subgroup that is at higher recurrence risk when compared with patients with RT-PCR-

295 These results validate the recurrence risks which have previously been derived from

296 d fosters genetic counseling with respect to recurrence risks while assuring reproductive choices.

297 urgery, trauma, pregnancy) have a low annual recurrence risk, while patients without identifiable pro

298 Estimating individual recurrence risk will guide the development of personaliz

299 We observed an increased recurrence risk with genetic variations in AKT1 and AKT2

300 The increased recurrence risk with living donor liver transplantation