ライフサイエンスコーパス: rejection

1 and a better prediction of antibody-mediated rejection.

2 ction and 0.64 (95% CI, 0.44-0.93) for early rejection.

3 ersist about the potential increased risk of rejection.

4 as been successfully used to attenuate graft rejection.

5 pes of reducing relapse and decreasing graft rejection.

6 grammed cell death ligand 1 blockade-induced rejection.

7 ipts to refine diagnosis of heart transplant rejection.

8 ance in 1, all of which were associated with rejection.

9 ayer may reduce selectivity, e.g., for boron rejection.

10 n surveillance, autoimmunity, and transplant rejection.

11 ent may play a key role in antibody-mediated rejection.

12 ity, rehospitalization, or allograft failure/rejection.

13 ase-dependent and S-RNase-independent pollen rejection.

14 s in naive mice and hastened islet allograft rejection.

15 heir own cells, thus eliminating the risk of rejection.

16 actions that lead to transplant tolerance or rejection.

17 n of DSAs protects islet grafts from humoral rejection.

18 There were no cases of early or late rejection.

19 eas were at greater risk of graft failure or rejection.

20 of patients with impaired graft function had rejection.

21 2, one of whom lost the second graft due to rejection.

22 1%) had AMR, 24 of them showing C4d-positive rejection.

23 ischemia/reperfusion injury, infections, and rejection.

24 onse to steroid treatment of acute allograft rejection.

25 of anti-CTLA-4- and anti-PD-1-induced tumor rejection.

26 vels, and antidonor antibodies for revealing rejection.

27 CR events up to 40 days before biopsy-proven rejection.

28 e a nearly threefold increased risk of acute rejection.

29 ve medications administered to prevent graft rejection.

30 splantation, the typical hallmark of chronic rejection.

31 attrition, suggesting resistance to humoral rejection.

32 apy for T1D has been hampered by early graft rejection.

33 transplantation in a murine model of chronic rejection.

34 rect and reprogram T cells to mediate tumour rejection.

35 e of HCV infection without risk of allograft rejection.

36 for preventing or treating antibody-mediated rejection.

37 mportant role of IL-6 in mediating allograft rejection.

38 , membranes maintained >99% dissolved solids rejection.

39 he role of RIP3 in chronic cardiac allograft rejection.

40 ) is an increasingly recognized form of lung rejection.

41 f systemic immune responses that drive tumor rejection.

42 nstitute a biomarker platform for monitoring rejection.

43 ell priming, ultimately leading to allograft rejection.

44 h water RO elements with superior boric acid rejection.

45 de may be a promising strategy to counteract rejection.

46 y dysfunction and acute or chronic allograft rejection.

47 t correlates accurately with the severity of rejection.

48 ely to significantly contribute to xenoislet rejection.

49 Mtor(fl/fl) ) did not affect acute allograft rejection.

50 l-mediated pathologies, including transplant rejection.

51 ng diabetes might increase the risk of acute rejections.

52 ith those taking cyclosporin, had less acute rejection (11% versus 22%, P=0.05) and graft loss (9% ve

53 identified: (1) receptivity, (2) deflection/rejection, (3) emotion, (4) characterization of patient,

54 ction (25.8% vs 28.6%, P = 0.12), and 1-year rejection (5.7% vs 4.5%, P = 0.97) were similar for alem

55 Rates of biopsy-proven acute rejection (5.7% vs 7.9%), adverse events, and serious ad

56 able graft function, we found a high rate of rejection (53%) on biopsy.

57 diagnosis was the major reason reported for rejection (57%).

58 cell-mediated rejection or antibody-mediated rejection (68% vs 41%, P = 0.01) and fibrosis progressio

59 ular of capillaries during antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) are poorly understood and could contrib

60 Antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) can occur in patients with preexisting

61 of updates of C4d-negative antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) from the 2013 meeting, reports from act

62 Late antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) is a leading cause of kidney allograft

63 cell-mediated rejection or antibody-mediated rejection [ABMR]) and controls (no rejection histologica

64 CD8(+) T cells that mediate systemic tumour rejection (abscopal effect) in the context of immune che

65 ity to noninvasively diagnose acute cellular rejection (ACR) with high specificity and sensitivity wo

66 ntation is associated with antibody mediated rejection, acute cellular rejection, and bronchiolitis o

67 ups were graft loss, graft function, chronic rejection, acute rejection, mortality, infection, cancer

68 easons for intrinsic graft failure comprised rejection, acute tubular necrosis, urinary tract infecti

69 The risk for graft rejection after DMEK is low, and an even smaller minorit

70 ory cells (CD154+TcM) predict acute cellular rejection after liver transplantation (LTx) or intestine

71 ytotoxic memory cells predict acute cellular rejection after LTx or ITx in children.

72 Such strategies tend to detect allograft rejection after significant injury has already occurred,

73 plements an approximate-Bayesian-computation rejection algorithm to infer indel parameters from seque

74 and harmful dnDSA causing antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) and graft loss.

75 in the microcirculation in antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) and have been postulated to be activated

76 linical transplantation is antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) caused by anti-donor HLA antibodies.

77 Antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) contributes to heart allograft loss.

78 (GS-492429) could suppress antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) in a rat model of AMR in sensitized reci

79 Antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) is a major cause of kidney allograft los

80 mechanisms responsible for antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) is an important goal.

81 Antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) is an increasingly recognized form of lu

82 Antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) of most solid organs is characterized by

83 Antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) represents one of the cardinal causes of

84 Antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) resulting in transplant allograft vascul

85 A proposed chronic antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) score has recently predicted 50%10-year

86 specific antibodies (DSA), antibody-mediated rejection (AMR), acute cellular rejection, and graft sta

87 ies results in accelerated antibody-mediated rejection (AMR), complement activation, and graft thromb

88 hat identify patients with antibody-mediated rejection (AMR).

89 leads to acute and chronic antibody-mediated rejection (AMR).

90 Three antibody-mediated rejections (AMRs) occurred without detectable C5 residua

91 interval [CI], 0.41-0.91; P = 0.007) for any rejection and 0.57 (95% CI, 0.35-0.92; P = 0.020) for ea

92 ds ratio of 0.65 (95% CI, 0.49-0.87) for any rejection and 0.64 (95% CI, 0.44-0.93) for early rejecti

93 While imagining both interpersonal rejection and acting out aggressively, a sex x group int

94 Biopsy-proven acute rejection and acute rejection were significantly higher

95 The adjusted hazard ratio for acute rejection and all-cause mortality at 3 years in recipien

96 models of acute and chronic intestinal graft rejection and analyzed peripheral and intragraft immune

97 d also enable novel therapies for transplant rejection and autoimmune diseases.

98 ppression regimens effectively control acute rejection and decrease graft loss in the first year afte

99 nsisting of narratives of both interpersonal rejection and directing physical aggression toward other

100 We also demonstrate background rejection and enhanced specificity when protein detectio

101 incompatibility, on corneal transplant graft rejection and failure.

102 ies are associated with an increased risk of rejection and fibrosis progression.

103 m day -5 to -3 was used for preventing graft rejection and graft-versus-host disease (GVHD); no patie

104 uld provide essential insight into allograft rejection and lead to better therapies for transplant pa

105 is limited because of the risk for allograft rejection and poor tolerability.

106 A 1-mg TAC resulted in acute rejection and recipient death; 3 mg and 5 mg prolonged s

107 al application has been hampered by cellular rejection and the requirement for high levels of immunos

108 e patients appear to be less aroused through rejection and to successfully dampen aggressive tension

109 Immunological requirements for rejection and tolerance induction differ between various

110 (APCs) play an important role in transplant rejection and tolerance.

111 An additional focus had been immune rejections and responses of allogeneic or autologous ste

112 ound to correlate well with the experimental rejections and sorption data.

113 urvival in vivo, prevents corneal transplant rejection, and attenuates the progression and severity o

114 antibody mediated rejection, acute cellular rejection, and bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome; howeve

115 f cell-mediated rejection, antibody-mediated rejection, and chronic allograft vasculopathy.

116 ody-mediated rejection (AMR), acute cellular rejection, and graft status.

117 larly in the context of social separation or rejection, and suggest a specific relation between affec

118 is critical for preventing chronic allograft rejection, and that graft survival under such conditions

119 The high rate of asymptomatic rejection, and the fact that outcomes in asymptomatic pa

120 The former should result in greater solute rejection, and the latter is key because the PES used fo

121 he processes of host-pathogen defense, organ rejection, and wound healing.

122 role for IL-6 in mediation of cell-mediated rejection, antibody-mediated rejection, and chronic allo

123 Acute rejection (AR) and development of chronic rejection, bro

124 Glucocorticoid (GC)-refractory acute rejection (AR) is a risk factor for inferior renal allog

125 viving at least 90 days, early events (acute rejection [AR] and delayed graft function [DGF] before d

126 ickening of the En/DM is diagnostic of graft rejection as measured by DMT and DRI.

127 risk of graft-versus-host disease (GvHD) and rejection associated with such transplants.

128 Pathway analyses of rejection-associated miRNAs and their target messenger R

129 The rejection-associated miRNAs in sera appear to be ectopic

130 ped in 12 patients (estimated probability of rejection at 1 year, 0.9%; at 2 years, 2.3%; at 4 years,

131 onged as well, in 1 case showing no signs of rejection at least 53 days after placement.

132 Incidence of graft rejection, best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA

133 in Late Antibody-Mediated Kidney Transplant Rejection [BORTEJECT] Trial), we investigated whether tw

134 Cumulative rates of biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR) from first randomization to year 10 wer

135 te rejection (AR) and development of chronic rejection, bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome (BOS) remai

136 ged when compared with the last visit before rejection (BSCVA, 0.15+/-0.11 logMAR; CCT, 533.8+/-26.0

137 ficant effect modification by race for acute rejection, but not graft loss.

138 in tacrolimus CV augmented the risk of acute rejection by 20% (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.20, 1.13-1.28

139 induction therapy reduced the risk of acute rejection by 32% (OR 0.68, 0.62-0.75), graft loss by 9%

140 mune diseases, allergic disorders, and graft rejection by depleting undesired disease-causing T cells

141 to charge screening strongly influenced ion rejection by semi-aromatic membranes.

142 ences in surface charge, which suggests that rejection by these membranes is exclusively dependent on

143 eduction and elimination, and risk for graft rejection; (C) antiproliferative effects of EVR; and (D)

144 immunosuppressant used to prevent allograft rejection, can also increase the risk of RCC in transpla

145 The single pass rejection coefficients was >90% for all samples.

146 l induction experience higher rates of acute rejection compared to patients treated with conventional

147 c Tregs offers greater protection from graft rejection compared to polyclonal Tregs.

148 apy resulted in higher and more severe acute rejection compared with tacrolimus-based therapy.

149 a more negative subjective response to peer rejection, contributed to anhedonia severity, but only a

150 in the AMR than the CMR (P < 0.0001) and no rejection control groups (P < 0.01 vs DES control, P < 0

151 schemia-reperfusion, vascular injury, and/or rejection creates permissive conditions for the expressi

152 protein-1 antibodies promoted complete tumor rejection, demonstrating the relevance of CD25 as a ther

153 th fully aromatic membranes achieved similar rejection despite the differences in surface charge, whi

154 is mediates diseases like corneal transplant rejection, dry eye disease, and allergy.

155 nt increase in the rate of sample laboratory rejection due to haemolysis when commonly practiced devi

156 tients were found to be at increased risk of rejection during the first posttransplant year (P = 0.00

157 rsion and progressed to a severe necrotizing rejection early despite an unaltered baseline immunosupp

158 A graft rejection episode developed in 12 patients (estimated pr

159 All rejection episodes in the non-HLAabs group appeared arou

160 Rejection episodes occurred throughout the first year bu

161 One year after the rejection episodes, BSCVA and CCT in these eyes remained

162 adjusting for DSA_MFI_max, C4d, or previous rejection episodes, however lost their independent relat

163 c tacrolimus concentrations may induce acute rejection episodes.

164 and were evaluated retrospectively regarding rejection episodes.

165 Crossflow rejection experiments with dilute feed composition indic

166 predicting and receiving peer acceptance and rejection feedback, along with assessments of self-views

167 Recent data have shown an increased risk for rejection, fibrosis progression, and death in liver tran

168 nes with limited swelling, which exhibit 97% rejection for NaCl.

169 hospitalization and kidney allograft failure/rejection for weekend (defined as Friday to Sunday) vers

170 al (GS), death-censored GS (DCGS), and acute rejection-free survival (ARFS) rates for RDP compared wi

171 splant year (P = 0.0054) and to have reduced rejection-free survival (hazard ratio, 1.953; 95% confid

172 Correlation between chimerism and rejection, graft failure, and patient survival requires

173 eceptor antibody (IL-2RA) induction on acute rejection, graft loss and death in African-American (AA)

174 as compared with IL-2RA, reduces the risk of rejection, graft loss, and death in adult AA KTX recipie

175 ere utilized to assess the outcomes of acute rejection, graft loss, and mortality, with interaction t

176 There were no cases of chronic rejection, graft loss, or death.

177 s far, no biomarker for belatacept-resistant rejection has been validated.

178 Treatment of subclinical rejections has only proven beneficial to histological an

179 -mediated rejection [ABMR]) and controls (no rejection histologically), P<0.001 (receiver operating c

180 ater treatment technology that has high salt rejection; however, its commercialization potential for

181 ipients but declined before acute or chronic rejection in 1 and 3 mg TAC recipients.

182 ariability is strongly associated with acute rejection in AAs and graft loss in all patients.

183 ies in AAs; the crude relative risk of acute rejection in AAs was reduced by 46% when including tacro

184 splant training samples predicted LTx or ITx rejection in corresponding validation set samples in the

185 l regimens, and elucidating the incidence of rejection in HIV-to-HIV solid organ transplant recipient

186 pathology and diagnosis of acute and chronic rejection in intestinal transplantation (ITX) are far fr

187 receptor (ETAR) is associated with allograft rejection in kidney and heart transplantation.

188 and autoantibodies are involved in allograft rejection in kidney and heart transplantation.

189 has been shown to trigger chronic allograft rejection in kidney transplants.

190 an increased incidence of antibody-mediated rejection in patients with pretransplant DSA, neither th

191 aging can be used to image cell survival and rejection in preclinical models of cell therapy.

192 A were azathioprine, a drug to prevent acute rejection in renal transplantation, and kaempferol and e

193 n the majority of cases of antibody-mediated rejection in solid organ transplant recipients.

194 hat provides protection from early allograft rejection in the absence of systemic immunosuppressive d

195 ntation and may predict an increased risk of rejection in the early phase after renal transplantation

196 in studies in which the rate of subclinical rejection in the first 3 months was greater than 10% to

197 Our results show that prevention of cell rejection in the normal and degenerating retinal environ

198 There was no histological evidence of rejection in the other 9 patients.

199 Acute rejection in the year before nocardiosis was associated

200 t the presence of deoxycholate enhances NaCl rejection in these graphene-based membranes.

201 specific antibody responses to prevent organ rejection in transplant recipients.

202 We studied acute and chronic rejections in a preclinical model of ITX, which recapitu

203 type and associated with a decreased 3-month rejection incidence rate in patients with complement-act

204 t least a 40% reduction in the odds of acute rejection, independent of age, era, immunological status

205 En/DM rejection index (DRI) was computed to detect the relativ

206 sive reagents for preventing islet allograft rejection is associated with severe complications.

207 This enhanced solute rejection is the first successful demonstration of a TFC

208 Humoral rejection is the most common cause of solid organ transp

209 ctor molecules produced by T cells to tumour rejection is unclear, but interferon-gamma (IFNgamma) is

210 f the donor graft, in particular, by chronic rejection leading to cardiac allograft vasculopathy, rem

211 The associated enhanced brine rejection leads to a strongly increased deep ocean strat

212 Rejection led to a marked decrease in transplant islet e

213 ty to self-heal would recover their original rejection levels autonomously, bypassing the need for co

214 ment (mean, 14%; range, 0%-82%), endothelial rejection (mean, 10%; range, 0%-45%), and primary graft

215 ss, graft function, chronic rejection, acute rejection, mortality, infection, cancer (excluding skin)

216 Six episodes of acute rejection (n = 2 KT, 4 LT) occurred, during hepatitis C

217 longed period (120 h) while maintaining NaCl rejection near 85% and 96% for an anionic dye.

218 sitivity to negative social experiences (eg, rejection, negative social feedback), presumably to enha

219 Antibody-mediated rejection occurred in 10 patients (7 patients in the U.S

220 .57 (95% CI, 0.35-0.92; P = 0.020) for early rejection occurring in the first 6 months after transpla

221 and distant tumours, and leads to effective rejection of both tumours when used in combination with

222 itu healing technique recovered the particle rejection of compromised membranes to 99.1% of the origi

223 oxp3.LuciDTR4 mice failed to induce complete rejection of HCmel12 melanomas, demonstrating that resid

224 ruding nonhomologous tail, Msh2 promotes the rejection of mismatched substrates.

225 sition both phases evolve into alpha through rejection of Nb.

226 empo centrality also encodes the disturbance rejection of nodes in a consensus network.

227 The main outcome was approval or rejection of PCSK9i prescription claims.

228 te antigen (HLA) class I genes can cause the rejection of pluripotent stem cell (PSC)-derived product

229 in function in a pistil-side IRB that causes rejection of pollen from self-compatible (SC) red/orange

230 ons from Donnan theory and the observed high rejection of salts.

231 We investigated S-RNase-independent rejection of Solanum lycopersicum pollen by SC Solanum p

232 en-specific immune responses that can induce rejection of solid tumors.

233 However, rejection of the donor graft, in particular, by chronic

234 Factors associated with approval and rejection of these medications in the United States were

235 However, the recent reappraisal and rejection of these steranes as contaminants pushes the o

236 trial wastewater reuse may be limited by low rejection of volatile and semivolatile contaminants.

237 s and government actors often fear a 'public rejection' of biotechnology, especially regarding geneti

238 d with an increased risk for T cell-mediated rejection or antibody-mediated rejection (68% vs 41%, P

239 imens showing any rejection (T cell-mediated rejection or antibody-mediated rejection [ABMR]) and con

240 hed (M-->F) patients were at greater risk of rejection or graft failure.

241 No episodes of immune rejection or tumor formation were observed.

242 5; 95% CI, 1.0-2.2), and treatment for early rejection (OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.5-2.7).

243 gical complications and graft failure, graft rejection, or death.

244 No rejection, or vascular or biliary complications occurred

245 ull hypothesis of no efficacy (threshold for rejection p<0.0084).

246 ve been associated with higher risk of acute rejection, particularly within African American (AA) kid

247 upregulation of T cell- and B cell-mediated rejection pathways.

248 rate remarkable solvent-permeance and solute-rejection performance.

249 b specifically abrogated this histomolecular rejection phenotype and associated with a decreased 3-mo

250 , whether these antibodies induce a specific rejection phenotype and influence response to therapy re

251 of complement inhibition on kidney allograft rejection phenotype and the clinical response to complem

252 The histomolecular rejection phenotype associated with complement-activatin

253 ion, DSA levels, or morphologic or molecular rejection phenotypes in 24-month follow-up biopsy specim

254 ing, and allograft gene expression to assess rejection phenotypes.

255 In addition to rejection, probing of T and B cell fate in vivo provides

256 as well as an enhancer to the mechanical and rejection properties of the PES membranes.

257 recipients with DSAs at transplant receiving rejection prophylaxis with eculizumab or standard of car

258 In this randomized-controlled trial, acute rejection rate was compared between belatacept- and tacr

259 cold ischemia time and a potentially higher rejection rate.

260 objectives remain focused on improving acute rejection rates and graft survival in the first 12 month

261 n excellent outcomes with graft survival and rejection rates comparable with compatible transplants.

262 We aimed to identify payer approval and rejection rates for PCSK9i prescriptions and the potenti

263 Rejection remains the leading cause of allograft loss, a

264 rvival and led to severe or moderate chronic rejection, respectively, with 50% of the 5-mg TAC recipi

265 vo DSA ABMR (63% versus 34% at 8 years after rejection, respectively; P<0.001).

266 lial cells are initiators and targets of the rejection response.

267 Chronic rejection results in increased lymphatic flow from the d

268 l function during the first 5 years or acute rejection risk during the first year after renal transpl

269 tation but is associated with a higher acute rejection risk than ciclosporin.

270 reasing host immune competence also augments rejection risk.

271 dex (IR) if greater than 1 implies increased rejection-risk.

272 Unlike allograft samples showing acute rejection, samples from FCRx recipients did not show upr

273 Subclinical acute rejection (sc-AR) is a main cause for functional decline

274 n [sc-TCMR], 5 antibody-mediated subclinical rejection [sc-ABMR]), whereas 53 (70.7%) showed a noninj

275 3%) patients (17 T cell-mediated subclinical rejection [sc-TCMR], 5 antibody-mediated subclinical rej

276 from our Genomics of Chronic Renal Allograft Rejection study.

277 minated between biopsy specimens showing any rejection (T cell-mediated rejection or antibody-mediate

278 scriptions of chronic active T cell-mediated rejection (TCMR) or chronic ABMR.

279 for the treatment or prevention of allograft rejection that complement contemporary immunosuppression

280 he first one is nonfunctional due to chronic rejection, the second one is viable yet considerably lim

281 a diagnostic criterion for antibody-mediated rejection, the utility of diffuse ptc is under debate.

282 Strict L-chiral rejection through Gly-cisPro motif during chiral proofre

283 here could be a first step toward predicting rejections trends of, for example, hormones and pharmace

284 sive tools improving early diagnosis of this rejection type.

285 sed immunosuppression minimization diagnosed rejection up to 40 days prior to clinical expression.

286 ogeneic entities and that they mediate graft rejection via direct cytotoxicity and priming of allorea

287 741+/-274.5 cells/mm(2) at last visit before rejection vs. 1356+/-380.3 cells/mm(2) after 3 months [P

288 s in the cooccurring shrimp Palaemon elegans Rejection was also induced in the shrimp by the memory r

289 Biopsy-proven rejection was defined according to the Banff 2009-2013 c

290 Subclinical acute rejection was observed in 22 (29.3%) patients (17 T cell

291 ; ribavirin did not influence SVR, and graft rejection was rare.

292 Skin biopsies were also done when tissue rejection was suspected.

293 To study the mechanisms controlling tumor rejection, we assessed different mouse models for Treg d

294 Consistent with the Ca(2+) rejection, we found that high concentrations of Ca(2+) d

295 ients and immunological biomarkers for acute rejection were investigated.

296 Trends for lower freedom from acute cellular rejection were observed for recipients with pretransplan

297 Biopsy-proven acute rejection and acute rejection were significantly higher in arm 2 versus arm

298 tive ratings following peer 'acceptance' or 'rejection' were obtained.

299 cations, but their scalability and high salt rejection when in a strong cross flow for long periods o

300 limus levels predispose to episodes of acute rejection, whereas supratherapeutic levels may cause nep

301 ution of dielectric exclusion to overall ion rejection would be more significant for fully aromatic m