ライフサイエンスコーパス: safety

1 have significant implications for patients' safety.

2 to much of the current controversy about PPI safety.

3 ple injections, sites of administration, and safety.

4 ll survival (OS), quality of life (QoL), and safety.

5 utralizing antibodies, T cells, B cells, and safety.

6 onger-term and clinical outcomes, as well as safety.

7 absorption, alveolar macrophage uptake, and safety.

8 ng enough duration to draw conclusions about safety.

9 nvolves tradeoffs between immunogenicity and safety.

10 urred during periods of threat compared with safety.

11 ng wasteful testing is important for patient safety.

12 d and water is essential to help ensure food safety.

13 tive replication, providing a high degree of safety.

14 should be considered to help ensure patient safety.

15 by improving the quality of care and patient safety.

16 survival (OS), objective response rate, and safety.

17 essential for evaluating their efficacy and safety.

18 njurious ingredients and thus promote public safety.

19 sis-free survival, freedom from relapse, and safety.

20 hibitor plus NRTI in virological efficacy or safety.

21 e national level to make quality and patient safety a priority.

22 e estimated associations of individual-level safety, aggregated neighborhood-level safety, and police

23 rosis medications on BMD, fracture risk, and safety among patients with CKD are not clearly establish

24 Safety analyses included all participants who received a

25 Efficacy and safety analyses were by intention to treat.

26 od were included in the primary efficacy and safety analyses.

27 part of the assessment of mapping and in the safety analysis in an intention-to-treat manner.

28 The safety analysis included all participants who received a

29 ho underwent one of the assigned procedures; safety analysis included all patients who underwent surg

30 st one dose of the randomised treatment; the safety analysis was done according to treatment received

31 mug, and 50 to placebo) were included in the safety analysis.

32 assignment as treated, were included in the safety analysis.

33 d with 5-minute dosing and considered in the safety analysis.

34 nuous flow systems provide improved reaction safety and accelerated reaction kinetics, and have synth

35 , but patients are still being monitored for safety and anti-tumour activity.

36 f-of-concept monotherapy studies to evaluate safety and antiviral activity should be conducted prior

37 ther studies are needed to better assess its safety and applicability.

38 To evaluate the safety and bioactivity of autologous CD34+ cell (CLBS10)

39 ically assess evidence on the effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of AIT for these condition

40 (Global Study to Assess the Safety and Effectiveness of Edoxaban (DU-176b) vs. Stand

41 y (IOS) is an observational study monitoring safety and effectiveness of icatibant in the real-world

42 s potential mechanisms of action and examine safety and efficacy data.

43 Its safety and efficacy have been extensively demonstrated i

44 ully controlled and standardized to maximize safety and efficacy in clinical trials.

45 We assessed the safety and efficacy in mothers and infants of year-round

46 However, its safety and efficacy in preventing acute GVHD in settings

47 We analyzed its safety and efficacy in treatment of CD in a phase 2a stu

48 l in which the first cohort assessed for the safety and efficacy of 12 weeks of sofosbuvir plus ribav

49 We sought to assess the safety and efficacy of a novel intracerebral gene therap

50 enters across North America to determine the safety and efficacy of allogeneic human mesenchymal stem

51 Here, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of an adoptive CD4(+) T-cell therapy

52 assessment and high-quality evidence for the safety and efficacy of atraumatic needles as a superior

53 will provide more insight into the long-term safety and efficacy of bariatric embolization.

54 coronary angiography (CTCA), and assess the safety and efficacy of percutaneous coronary interventio

55 uate in a noninferiority design the relative safety and efficacy of ridaforolimus-eluting stents (RES

56 The authors sought to investigate the safety and efficacy of the different anticoagulants for

57 ity can have devastating consequences on the safety and efficacy of therapeutic proteins.

58 apy, there is little evidence concerning the safety and efficacy of treating individuals with multipl

59 A favorable safety and efficacy profile of E10030 combination therap

60 w-risk prostate cancer, has shown favourable safety and efficacy results in single-arm phase 1 and 2

61 ology and marker expression and for in vitro safety and efficacy screens.

62 ty, but limited data are available regarding safety and efficacy.

63 rovide new possibilities for evaluating drug safety and efficacy.

64 lamipretide is needed to determine long-term safety and efficacy.

65 egrity of the filter, thereby increasing its safety and efficacy.

66 ion are needed for adequate studies of their safety and efficacy.

67 essment with DD testing is feasible, but the safety and efficiency of such a diagnostic strategy are

68 methodologies to guarantee food quality and safety and especially consumers' health.

69 Safety and feasibility of the tiered treatment protocol

70 In this study, we investigated the safety and immunogenicity of an avian H5N2 live attenuat

71 Combined safety and immunogenicity results of MVA in allogeneic h

72 Safety and immunogenicity were assessed.

73 Due to concerns regarding their safety and in order to stack multiple traits in a single

74 To evaluate the safety and intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering effect of

75 Further study is needed to assess safety and long-term clinical outcome.

76 To compare the safety and long-term outcomes of MAG vs LITA+SVG among o

77 d high power densities, long-term stability, safety and low cost.

78 objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and outcomes of outpatient aspirin desensitizatio

79 purpose is to document outcomes of clinical safety and performance after European approval was given

80 These process-induced compounds impact safety and sensory aspects of baked products.

81 The safety and shelf-life are related to the presence of foo

82 heir toxins are driven by their specificity, safety and the move away from chemical control agents.

83 nd retrieved novel objects during periods of safety and threat of unpredictable shocks while we recor

84 shows comparable pharmacokinetics, improved safety and tolerability, and a more favorable toxicity p

85 The primary objectives were safety and tolerability.

86 strointestinal symptoms as well as treatment safety and tolerability.

87 harmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles, safety, and clinical activity of enasidenib in patients

88 o achieve meaningful improvements in patient safety, and create harm free environments for patients,

89 humanized mouse model to test the lifespan, safety, and functionality of adoptively transferred cell

90 -level safety, aggregated neighborhood-level safety, and police-recorded crime with baseline levels a

91 To compare the efficacy, safety, and risk factors for failure of standalone ab in

92 clinical trial to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and short-term efficacy of bariatric embolizatio

93 d, and we aimed to investigate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of switching to this regimen co

94 ead to better patient care, enhanced patient safety, and ultimately facilitate a more predictable, op

95 Pharmacokinetic, safety, and virology endpoints were also assessed.

96 cies, and for this reason their efficacy and safety are rarely proven.

97 s are needed to determine their efficacy and safety, as well as the appropriate patient candidates.

98 llowed by a 1 week washout period and, after safety assessment, three intramuscular injections of lon

99 efore the cells are introduced into chemical safety assessment.

100 Safety assessments included treatment-emergent adverse e

101 Safety assessments were hospital admissions for the firs

102 xic elements in seafood by the European food safety authorities, as well as recommended intakes for e

103 y intake (TDI) reported by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA).

104 Positive attitudes and beliefs about sun safety behavior, which would make sun protective behavio

105 arned about and less able to control fear or safety behaviors.

106 Despite the occupational safety benefits of these new explosives, feasible strate

107 The purpose of this study was to assess safety, biodistribution, and radiation dosimetry in huma

108 nes may prove as efficacious and have better safety, but they have not been tested to date.

109 y sensitive p24 assay can help improve blood safety by reducing the antibody negative window period i

110 evidence of efficacy of team-based surgical safety checklists in improving perioperative outcomes in

111 ly associated with a positive organizational safety climate (Odds Ratio [OR]=2.76, 95% Confidence Int

112 that is needed in many fields including food safety, clinical diagnostics, biosafety and biosecurity.

113 n and the resulting immunodeficiency prompts safety concerns about their use.

114 therapeutics, despite modest efficacy, have safety concerns that underscore the need for effective p

115 No new or long-term safety concerns were identified.

116 Conversely, there were no safety concerns with very low LDL-cholesterol concentrat

117 ssociated with patient compliance issues and safety concerns.

118 orticoids, have limited efficacy and present safety concerns.

119 ly reporting of the study results because of safety concerns.

120 literature suggest that there are three main safety concerns: (a) to prevent biological or neural dam

121 l study, no safety events were noted, but no safety conclusions can be drawn.

122 For safety consideration, these decayed potatoes should be s

123 batteries offers a promising way to overcome safety, cost, and energy density limitations of state-of

124 that offer better efficacy, selectivity, and safety could be discovered by exploiting allosterism in

125 tion of distinct cell populations by fear or safety cues and robust, global recruitment of most cells

126 n objectives were to: (1) provide additional safety data regarding TDF/FTC use among young MSM who ha

127 The study generated informative efficacy and safety data regarding the use of olaparib in combination

128 Safety data were available through day 210, and data on

129 r indication or for which there was existing safety data were considered to be priorities for evaluat

130 Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 early safety end point at 30 days was 7.4% with both devices w

131 The primary safety end point was major adverse cardiac, cerebrovascu

132 e prospectively defined to identify relevant safety end points, including arterial thromboembolic eve

133 The primary safety endpoint was a composite of cardiac death, myocar

134 Correlates of the primary safety endpoint were age, anemia, congestive heart failu

135 ule-out strategies balance effectiveness and safety equally well.

136 his randomized noncomparative design allowed safety evaluation of 2 interventions concurrently in the

137 novel therapeutics affected by a postmarket safety event at 10 years was 30.8% (95% CI, 25.1%-37.5%)

138 edian time from approval to first postmarket safety event was 4.2 years (IQR, 2.5-6.0 years), and the

139 Safety events were assessed at 3 months.

140 In this small study, no safety events were noted, but no safety conclusions can

141 d to monitor device-related and drug-related safety events.

142 diabetic retinopathy, with no unanticipated safety events.

143 iked-blood meals, representing an additional safety feature.

144 Therefore, in mainland China, safety for TEVAR of type B AD appeared better between 20

145 ow grade, and most resolved with established safety guidelines.

146 We assessed safety in all patients who received one or more doses of

147 d by using an approach that has demonstrated safety in human trials of an rVSV/HIV-1 vaccine.

148 nically meaningful responses with acceptable safety in patients with >/=1 prior treatments for cGVHD.

149 ronary intervention and CABG show comparable safety in patients with LMCA stenosis and low to interme

150 ted to evaluate real-world effectiveness and safety in patients with type 1 hepatorenal syndrome.

151 chieved at 4 weeks and clinical efficacy and safety in the FOURIER trial of evolocumab, a monoclonal

152 tudy treatment; SVR12) and the comparison of safety in the ITG and DTG.

153 n Society of Retina Specialists Research and Safety in Therapeutics (ASRS ReST) Committee, an indepen

154 The rate of stent thrombosis, a safety indicator, did not differ between groups and was

155 Food safety is a major issue to protect public health and a k

156 Patient safety is critical to the provision of quality health ca

157 Food contact materials' safety is evaluated using chemical risk assessment (RA).

158 tals, and hence eliminates the long-standing safety issue.

159 mmers' method, suffer from environmental and safety issues due to their use of hazardous and explosiv

160 No significant safety issues were observed in any treatment group.

161 more optimal efficacy, pharmacokinetics, and safety, leading to its selection as the preferred develo

162 tropolitan areas are already in breach of EU safety limits for NO2, this phenomenon does not seem to

163 Incorporating hydraulic safety loss raised the explanatory power of mortality by

164 The main safety measure was adverse events.

165 us adverse reactions were recorded and other safety measures did not differ between the groups, after

166 Safety measures included adverse events (AEs), clinical

167 The data and safety monitoring board recommended early reporting of t

168 The data and safety monitoring board recommended stopping the study f

169 dermatologic medications at a single, urban, safety-net hospital outpatient dermatology clinic.

170 rove access to dermatologic care in a public safety-net hospital setting.

171 measure would have on average penalties for safety-net hospitals (i.e., hospitals that treat a large

172 Safety-net hospitals serve vulnerable populations with l

173 The efficacy and safety of 0.005% calcipotriol ointment combined with 5%

174 To compare the efficacy and safety of 2 sclerosants used to treat reticular veins: 0

175 Evidence exists for the efficacy and safety of 6-month isoniazid monotherapy, rifampicin mono

176 Purpose To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a clofarabine-based combination (CLARA) versus

177 ntrolled trial, we assessed the efficacy and safety of adalimumab in children and adolescents 2 years

178 is study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of adjunctive lanicemine (NMDA channel blocker) i

179 study to evaluate feasibility, efficacy and safety of ADVOS in the first 14 patients ever treated wi

180 most children, we sought to investigate the safety of care provided to children in this setting.

181 We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of ceftazidime-avibactam in patients with nosocom

182 We assessed the efficacy and safety of ceritinib versus platinum-based chemotherapy i

183 We aimed to analyse the efficacy and safety of clemastine fumarate as a treatment for patient

184 To evaluate the safety of concurrent Boston type I keratoprosthesis (KPr

185 We aimed to assess the activity and safety of dabrafenib plus trametinib treatment in previo

186 ed in a larger patient cohort to improve the safety of ERC, especially in patients with secondary scl

187 etic and pharmacodynamic characteristics and safety of fitusiran.

188 The efficacy and safety of fixed-dose combination of AM and PQP was compa

189 We aimed to test the efficacy and safety of graded exercise delivered as guided self-help.

190 We sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of grass pollen intradermal immunotherapy in the

191 We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of idelalisib in combination with a second-genera

192 rial demonstrated production feasibility and safety of infusing high doses of ex vivo-expanded NK cel

193 of the published reports on the efficacy and safety of IVC filters.

194 mary objective of this trial was to evaluate safety of IVT or an estradiol vaginal ring in patients w

195 Improved safety of left ventricular assist devices means that the

196 The process of assuring the safety of medical devices is constrained by reliance on

197 rmal treatment preserves the microbiological safety of milk, but also induces Maillard reactions modi

198 Conclusion The durable clinical efficacy and safety of MR imaging-guided HIFU were demonstrated.

199 We assessed the persistence and safety of MtbDeltasigH, delivered directly to the lungs,

200 valuate the efficacy and ocular and systemic safety of netarsudil 0.02% ophthalmic solution, a rho-ki

201 turnover markers for assessment of the bone safety of new medications.

202 -blind trial designed to assess efficacy and safety of nintedanib plus chemotherapy as first-line tre

203 Larger and longer studies of the safety of ocrelizumab are required.

204 delling are required to monitor efficacy and safety of ongoing strategic vitamin D fortification.

205 the last years and is relevant to assess the safety of our consumer products and the emission of pote

206 We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of pacritinib versus best available therapy in pa

207 study was designed to test the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab, a humanized PD-1-blocking antib

208 Purpose To (a) investigate the safety of percutaneous irreversible electroporation (IRE

209 evidence-based recommendations regarding the safety of procedural interventions performed either conc

210 These findings challenge the safety of pure nicotine inhalation, i.e., E-cigarettes.

211 aluate the long-term (24-month) efficacy and safety of ranibizumab 0.5 mg administered pro re nata (P

212 To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ranibizumab 0.5 mg treat-and-extend (T&E) vers

213 CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Relative safety of ranibizumab and bevacizumab is important in ch

214 luate the cardiovascular and cerebrovascular safety of ranibizumab, 0.5 mg and 0.3 mg, compared with

215 We assessed the efficacy and safety of re-treating malaria patients with uncomplicate

216 We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of regorafenib in patients with HCC who have prog

217 Primary objectives were to assess the safety of rovalpituzumab tesirine, including the maximum

218 y evaluated the anti-cholestatic effects and safety of seladelpar in patients with an inadequate resp

219 gthen the evidence base for the efficacy and safety of sublingual immunotherapy in patients with HDM-

220 ailable evidence regarding effectiveness and safety of surgical versus conservative treatment of acut

221 We investigated the efficacy and safety of switching to a single-tablet regimen of daruna

222 These findings support the short-term renal safety of TDF/FTC PrEP in HIV-seronegative young men and

223 This trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of tezepelumab (AMG 157/MEDI9929), a human monocl

224 Although the safety of these electronic devices is still not fully kn

225 tudies are needed to establish the long-term safety of these strategies.

226 The durability of responses and long-term safety of this drug in patients with polycythaemia vera

227 In this study, we investigated the safety of three different sizes of SiNPs (50, 100, and 1

228 study aimed to examine the effectiveness and safety of TMVR in a cohort of patients with native valve

229 te the real-world clinical effectiveness and safety of U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved dev

230 whether genotype-guided dosing improves the safety of warfarin initiation.

231 easibility of a larger trial to evaluate the safety of withholding stress ulcer prophylaxis.

232 ned as subjectively perceived threats to the safety or security of the child's bodily integrity, fami

233 gitation that poses risk to patient or staff safety or threatens interruption of essential medical th

234 rs, and recommendations from leading patient safety organizations.

235 mortality within 30-35 days and the primary safety outcome was major bleeding.

236 The increase in the primary safety outcome with 24- versus 6-month DAPT was greater

237 calculated pooled OR for 3-month mortality (safety outcome) and 3-month death or dependency (modifie

238 Safety outcomes included major bleeding, blood transfusi

239 e survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety outcomes of patients treated on this trial.

240 orter treatment duration and more favourable safety outcomes.

241 these medications may increase risk for some safety outcomes.

242 , was noninferior to placebo with respect to safety (P<0.001 for noninferiority) but was not superior

243 communicating with others to improve patient safety, particularly in the areas of challenging poor pr

244 scalation study of oral leniolisib to assess safety, pharmacokinetics, and effects on lymphoprolifera

245 evel cohort expansions to provide additional safety, pharmacokinetics, and target occupancy data.

246 in HER2-positive EGA; here, we evaluate the safety, pharmacokinetics, biodistribution, and dosimetry

247 5%] of 3241 in the placebo group [p=0.0007]; safety population).

248 underscore the importance of organizational safety practices and culture to promote safe work practi

249 less than 30 mg/dL at 1 month had a similar safety profile (and numerically the lowest rate of cardi

250 NTERPRETATION: Avelumab showed an acceptable safety profile and antitumour activity in patients with

251 a daily dose up to 1200 mg has an acceptable safety profile and evidence of single-agent antimyeloma

252 The safety profile and risk of systemic toxic effects when b

253 NTERPRETATION: Gilteritinib had a favourable safety profile and showed consistent FLT3 inhibition in

254 We report a favorable safety profile and SVR12 rates of 96.7% among HIV/HCV co

255 t both doses tested, E-OIT had an acceptable safety profile and was highly successful in rapidly supp

256 To get a clearer idea of how to improve the safety profile of GCs, recent studies have investigated

257 compared with placebo, and showed a similar safety profile to currently available GLP-1 receptor ago

258 itions, with short reaction times, increased safety profile, and potential to scale up.

259 gravir was well tolerated with an acceptable safety profile.

260 at nivolumab is effective with an acceptable safety profile.

261 iod and demonstrated a clinically acceptable safety profile.

262 A-deficient SCID, with an excellent clinical safety profile.

263 al and clinical circumstances, their in vivo safety profiles (which are being incorporated into their

264 r hepatotoxicity and hence they had improved safety profiles compared to the known electrophilic Nrf2

265 ith improved interim outcomes and acceptable safety profiles in adults.

266 fficiencies in gene transfer and undesirable safety profiles remain key limitations in advancing this

267 eutics with greater efficacy and/or improved safety profiles.

268 Both treatments had similar safety profiles.

269 onepidemic settings, without harming patient safety, providing sufficient compliance with standard pr

270 The study was stopped prematurely for safety reasons after 16 patients (61+/-8 years, 1 female

271 We summarise efficacy and safety results from 13 polypill trials (9059 participant

272 ion of 1 item from each domain, the 10-point SaFETy (Serious fighting, Friend weapon carrying, commun

273 Our findings reveal an absence of vmPFC safety signaling in OCD, undermining flexible threat upd

274 No new safety signals were identified.

275 No ocular or systemic safety signals were observed during the long-term follow

276 No new safety signals were observed.

277 86% (95% CI, 83.0% to 88.7%), with no major safety signals.

278 Though this safety study was an important first step to evaluate e-P

279 00 million cells or placebo and assessed for safety through the first 7 days.

280 omprising the largest analysis of peanut OIT safety to date.

281 onducted an open-label trial to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of ledipasvir and sof

282 Primary endpoints were DSM265 safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics.

283 n-patient phase 1b trial was to evaluate the safety/tolerability and CP-blocking potential of 4 weekl

284 natural cytotoxicity against tumor cells and safety upon adoptive transfer to patients.

285 val in the intention-to-treat population and safety was assessed in all patients who received at leas

286 Safety was assessed in all patients who received at leas

287 Safety was assessed in all patients who received at leas

288 Safety was assessed in all patients who received at leas

289 Safety was assessed in all patients who received the int

290 Safety was assessed on the basis of adverse events, whic

291 Safety was assessed throughout.

292 SaFETy was associated with firearm violence in the valid

293 At baseline, greater individual-level safety was associated with more adiposity.

294 Safety was evaluated throughout the study.

295 Safety was generally similar between patients receiving

296 Safety was not explicitly addressed in any study, but th

297 Activity and safety were analysed in all patients who received at lea

298 OS, progression-free survival (PFS), and safety were analyzed.

299 The efficacy and safety were assessed for up to 4 months.

300 erbation rates, lung function, symptoms, and safety were assessed.