ライフサイエンスコーパス: standard therapy

1 placebo every 8 hours for up to 6 doses plus standard therapy.

2 ng ruxolitinib and in six patients receiving standard therapy.

3 irst presentation of AD and after 6 weeks of standard therapy.

4 re rates were 88% for telavancin and 89% for standard therapy.

5 All late recurrences were cured with standard therapy.

6 e of PPI, they can be a valuable addition to standard therapy.

7 tion may lead to improvements in the current standard therapy.

8 with very good outcome with continuation of standard therapy.

9 8 patients were randomly assigned to TAVR or standard therapy.

10 iogenesis) and differential sensitivities to standard therapy.

11 ol-based EGDT was superior to protocol-based standard therapy.

12 s occurred after TAVR versus surgical AVR or standard therapy.

13 the addition of infliximab (5 mg per kg) to standard therapy.

14 central nervous system and respond poorly to standard therapy.

15 gnificant survival benefit in the context of standard therapy.

16 r T. trichiura infection than the rates with standard therapy.

17 ase with widely disparate outcomes following standard therapy.

18 y useful to treat APS patients refractory to standard therapy.

19 ncy characterized by drug resistance, has no standard therapy.

20 nt tumors and convey them with resistance to standard therapy.

21 f aliskiren or placebo daily, in addition to standard therapy.

22 ssential hypertension that are refractory to standard therapy.

23 cancer remain at risk for relapse following standard therapy.

24 o receive standard therapy or rituximab with standard therapy.

25 cy by 3% and 8%, respectively, compared with standard therapy.

26 f calcinosis but none has been accepted as a standard therapy.

27 0 per QALY (advanced fibrosis) compared with standard therapy.

28 tified based on kill slopes in comparison to standard therapy.

29 hen combined and the regimen was compared to standard therapy.

30 gimens that have better performance than the standard therapy.

31 lear cell renal cell carcinomas that have no standard therapy.

32 icant benefit for either the experimental or standard therapy.

33 naive CHC G4 patients treated with low cost standard therapy.

34 tle cell lymphoma (MCL), there is no defined standard therapy.

35 zogamicin and in 1 patient (1%) who received standard therapy.

36 riority of bendamustine and rituximab to the standard therapy.

37 severely active UC who had not responded to standard therapy.

38 ctory acute lymphoblastic leukemia than does standard therapy.

39 ncogenesis and render tumors unresponsive to standard therapies.

40 ith peritoneal carcinomatosis who had failed standard therapies.

41 disorder (OCD) fail to respond adequately to standard therapies.

42 o show any additional benefit in addition to standard therapies.

43 e generally associated with poor response to standard therapies.

44 with active surveillance compared with other standard therapies.

45 t solid malignancies are often refractory to standard therapies.

46 nic exposure and regained sensitivity toward standard therapies.

47 rectal cancer which has progressed after all standard therapies.

48 ogically targeted in GBM in combination with standard therapies.

49 rectal cancer which has progressed after all standard therapies.

50 cal treatments have reshaped our approach to standard therapies.

51 heezing that is not relieved or prevented by standard therapies.

52 associated with benefits comparable to some standard therapies.

53 hese lymphomas remain largely incurable with standard therapies.

54 CTH appeared to be more effective than other standard therapies.

55 ogic malignancies that are not responsive to standard therapies.

56 with protocol-based EGDT vs. protocol-based standard therapy, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.51; P=0.31).

57 io, to receive ruxolitinib (110 patients) or standard therapy (112 patients).

58 ving rivaroxaban than in the group receiving standard therapy (16.8% in group 1, 18.0% in group 2, an

59 d a lower rate of treatment failure than the standard therapy (18% vs. 51%; P = 0.001).

60 gnificantly shorter with icatibant than with standard therapy (2.0 hours vs. 11.7 hours, P=0.03).

61 iving ruxolitinib and 20% of those receiving standard therapy; 38% and 1% of patients in the two grou

62 es was significantly lower after TAVR versus standard therapy (57.4% versus 80.9%, P<0.001; hazard ra

63 activity criteria not met) or standard care (standard therapy according to the treating clinician, wi

64 KR demonstrated comparable efficacy to standard therapies against blast cells in 63 primary leu

65 rates of pathological complete response than standard therapy alone specifically in triple-negative b

66 As compared with standard therapy alone, evolocumab reduced the level of

67 umab plus standard therapy, as compared with standard therapy alone, significantly reduced LDL choles

68 t prolongs remission in IBD in comparison to standard therapy alone.

69 or 420 mg monthly) plus standard therapy or standard therapy alone.

70 ncluding salbutamol, or placebo control plus standard therapy alone.

71 treatment when compared with mice receiving standard therapy alone.

72 uncontrolled persistent asthma compared with standard therapy alone.

73 6 months in addition to standard therapy or standard therapy alone.

74 nt and atypical meningiomas are resistant to standard therapies and associated with poor prognosis.

75 Advances in standard therapies and emergence of new treatment techni

76 interferon with ribavirin]; triple therapy [standard therapy and a protease inhibitor]).

77 with heparin was noninferior to high-quality standard therapy and caused significantly less bleeding

78 postoperative goal-directed therapy and best standard therapy and described as cost/hospital survivor

79 e, I discuss currently available options for standard therapy and existing clinical data.

80 t CLD, TAVR is better in these patients than standard therapy and is similar to SAVR.

81 risk of recurrent thrombotic events despite standard therapy and may derive particular benefit from

82 ression of disease in individual patients on standard therapy and measurement variability.

83 ho were null responders to prior peg-IFN/RBV standard therapy and on a raltegravir-based regimen with

84 apy stratifies patients with CC genotypes to standard therapy and those with non-CC types to triple t

85 TAVR performed better in these patients than standard therapy and was similar to SAVR.

86 o protocol-based EGDT, 446 to protocol-based standard therapy, and 456 to usual care.

87 higher with inotuzumab ozogamicin than with standard therapy, and a higher percentage of patients in

88 o respond to intravenous immunoglobulin, the standard therapy, and alternative treatments are being i

89 placebo or belimumab 1, 4, or 10 mg/kg, plus standard therapy, and completed the initial 52-week doub

90 eria included measurable disease, failure of standard therapy, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group

91 CL) is plagued by heterogeneous responses to standard therapy, and molecular mechanisms underlying un

92 ess than 25% of DL cases will be cured after standard therapy, and the majority of cases will require

93 Yet, no standard therapies are available targeting reperfusion i

94 group of uncommon malignancies in which the standard therapies are minimally effective and evolve sl

95 Inhaled steroids, the current standard therapy, are not always effective in this chron

96 year of therapy, the use of evolocumab plus standard therapy, as compared with standard therapy alon

97 Compared with standard therapy, BMC transplantation improved LV ejecti

98 hed results with melphalan and dexamethasone standard therapy, bortezomib is less beneficial to patie

99 al cancer that progresses after all approved standard therapies, but many patients maintain a good pe

100 per 1000 person-years than those assigned to standard therapy, but no improvement was seen in the rat

101 analyses show that t-MDS/AML can respond to standard therapy, but responses are less durable.

102 prostate androgens below that achieved with standard therapy, but significant AR signaling remains.

103 t in cancer, enabling tumor cells to survive standard therapies-chemotherapy and radiotherapy.

104 Current standard therapy comprises surgery and radiation, but no

105 umor-propagating cells that are resistant to standard therapies consisting of radiation and temozolom

106 ptor antagonist, or to the current off-label standard therapy consisting of intravenous prednisolone

107 nsent-before randomization to BMMC, PBMC, or standard therapy (control group)-and repeated at 4-month

108 Combining an NF-kappaB inhibitor with standard therapy could improve antitumor immunity in GBM

109 We assessed whether adding simvastatin to standard therapy could reduce rebleeding and death after

110 evere sepsis, with intermittent bolus dosing standard therapy, despite a strong theoretical rationale

111 early administration of erythropoietin plus standard therapy did not confer a benefit, and was assoc

112 LVEF, initiation of aliskiren in addition to standard therapy did not reduce CV death or HF rehospita

113 controlled trial, addition of simvastatin to standard therapy did not reduce rebleeding, but was asso

114 intensive glucose lowering, as compared with standard therapy, did not significantly reduce the rate

115 tive colitis (UC) is difficult to treat, and standard therapy does not always induce remission.

116 synergistic effects of I-CBP112 and current standard therapy (doxorubicin) as well as emerging treat

117 or 21 days, followed by 20 mg once daily) or standard therapy (enoxaparin 1.0 mg/kg twice daily and w

118 standard therapy (or for which no effective standard therapy existed), who had at least one measurab

119 After failure of standard therapy, few effective treatment options exist

120 Recent reports of reduced response to standard therapies for Clostridium difficile infection (

121 Standard therapies for localized inoperable intrahepatic

122 o trials have directly compared Tai Chi with standard therapies for osteoarthritis.

123 This review highlights standard therapies for primary focal hyperhidrosis as we

124 Sorafenib--a broad kinase inhibitor--is a standard therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (

125 Standard therapy for advanced soft-tissue sarcoma has no

126 The current standard therapy for antineutrophil cytoplasm antibody-a

127 Standard therapy for CDI involves administration of anti

128 Standard therapy for children newly diagnosed with Crohn

129 of these HCV protease inhibitors as part of standard therapy for chronic hepatitis C genotype 1 infe

130 The gold standard therapy for chronic hepatitis C patients is peg

131 Although standard therapy for drug-sensitive tuberculosis is high

132 hat represent the development of the current standard therapy for estrogen receptor-positive advanced

133 sphamide (FC), and rituximab (R) remains the standard therapy for fit patients with untreated chronic

134 tients and has been approved by the FDA as a standard therapy for late-stage melanoma.

135 Radiotherapy is the standard therapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC); how

136 dnisone, and thalidomide (MPT) is considered standard therapy for newly diagnosed patients with multi

137 et therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel is a standard therapy for patients who are at increased risk

138 ver transplantation has, thereby, become the standard therapy for patients with "early-stage" HCC on

139 Androgen deprivation is the standard therapy for patients with advanced or recurrent

140 prednisone-thalidomide (MPT) is considered a standard therapy for patients with myeloma who are ineli

141 scatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is standard therapy for patients with severe aortic stenosi

142 es support chemoimmunotherapy as the initial standard therapy for patients without del(17)(p13.1).

143 bine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab is the standard therapy for physically fit patients with advanc

144 Chronic oral anticoagulation therapy is the standard therapy for preventing thromboembolic events in

145 Standard therapy for secondary prevention of strokes and

146 y artery bypass grafting (CABG) has been the standard therapy for several decades.

147 isease, and mitral valve surgery is the gold standard therapy for severe MR.

148 that bariatric surgery should be part of the standard therapy for T2DM.

149 imen of rivaroxaban alone was noninferior to standard therapy for the initial and long-term treatment

150 , randomized trial comparing telavancin with standard therapy for the treatment of patients with comp

151 Although balloon valvotomy has been the standard therapy for this disease over the last 20 years

152 Adenosine, the standard therapy for treating supraventricular tachycard

153 Antibiotics are standard therapy for UTI, but a rise in antibiotic resis

154 The standard therapy for women with unexplained infertility

155 espectively) and esophageal AVB who received standard therapy from 2007 through 2010.

156 evelopment of chemoresistance to the current standard therapy, gemcitabine.

157 were significantly lower than the rates with standard therapy (gonadotropin or clomiphene) (P=0.003)

158 group (92.9% [95% CI 89.8-96.0]) than in the standard therapy group (88.9% [85.0-92.8]; OR 0.67 [95%

159 duration of bacteremia was 3.00 days in the standard therapy group and 1.94 days in the combination

160 s less frequent in the intensive than in the standard therapy group during active treatment (hazard r

161 combination group) or no additional therapy (standard therapy group).

162 nce interval, 41%-102%; P = .06) that in the standard therapy group.

163 varoxaban group vs four [2%] patients in the standard therapy group; HR 0.23, 95% CI 0.03-2.06) was s

164 rivaroxaban group vs five [2%] of 236 in the standard therapy group; HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.28-3.43) was s

165 roxaban group (2.1%) versus 44 events in the standard-therapy group (1.8%) (hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% c

166 EGDT group (21.0%), 81 in the protocol-based standard-therapy group (18.2%), and 86 in the usual-care

167 the inotuzumab ozogamicin group than in the standard-therapy group (80.7% [95% confidence interval {

168 the ruxolitinib group and 0% of those in the standard-therapy group (grade 1 or 2 in all cases).

169 wer risk of the primary outcome than did the standard-therapy group (hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% confiden

170 rivaroxaban group and 11.4% of those in the standard-therapy group (hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.76

171 ere 43.3% in the TAVR group and 68.0% in the standard-therapy group (P<0.001), and the corresponding

172 ruxolitinib group versus 1% of those in the standard-therapy group (P<0.001).

173 the ruxolitinib group and 9% of those in the standard-therapy group (P=0.003); 49% versus 5% had at l

174 between the intensive-therapy group and the standard-therapy group averaged 1.5 percentage points du

175 we pooled data, excluding the protocol-based standard-therapy group from the ProCESS trial, and resol

176 patients in the icatibant group than in the standard-therapy group had complete resolution of edema

177 ents at 1 year was reduced from 2.18% in the standard-therapy group to 0.95% in the evolocumab group

178 in 5%; the corresponding percentages in the standard-therapy group were 0% and 4%.

179 n group) or standard intensive chemotherapy (standard-therapy group).

180 The 3-year mortality rate in the TAVR and standard therapy groups was 54.1% and 80.9%, respectivel

181 3% and 0.2% of patients in the treatment and standard therapy groups, respectively (p < 0.0001).

182 tially whether protocol-based care (EGDT and standard-therapy groups combined) was superior to usual

183 injury at a time when N-acetylcysteine, the standard therapy, has no efficacy.

184 r initiation, propagation, and resistance to standard therapies have been isolated from human solid t

185 Standard therapies have high failure rates and little is

186 Babesiosis treatment failures with standard therapy have been reported, but the molecular m

187 patients versus 5.5% in patients undergoing standard therapy (hazard ratio, 2.81; 95% confidence int

188 ban and in 15 (5%) of 298 patients receiving standard therapy (HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.99).

189 an and in 49 (16%) of 298 patients receiving standard therapy (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.20).

190 FDs based on 4 factors: (1) host fitness for standard therapy (ie, fit, unfit, or frail); (2) leukemi

191 Adding imatinib to standard therapy improves CR rate and long-term OS for a

192 umab as monotherapy or combined with current standard therapies in first-line advanced NSCLC.

193 e impact of ESR1 mutations on sensitivity to standard therapies in two phase III randomized trials th

194 mbination to demonstrate an improvement over standard therapy in a randomized trial of patients with

195 substantial survival benefits compared with standard therapy in both inoperable cohorts.

196 mprovement in patient survival compared with standard therapy in BRAF V600-mutant metastatic melanoma

197 rom hydroxyurea, ruxolitinib was superior to standard therapy in controlling the hematocrit, reducing

198 re effective than beta-blockers, the current standard therapy in most centers.

199 he phase III VISTA trial (Velcade As Initial Standard Therapy in Multiple Myeloma: Assessment With Me

200 the benefit of early MRA use in addition to standard therapy in patients admitted for MI.

201 outstanding vision outcomes relative to the standard therapy in patients with NVAMD.

202 he efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib versus standard therapy in patients with polycythemia vera who

203 ences, the clinical features and response to standard therapy in pediatric- and adult-onset CVS were

204 cal Trial Comparing Cangrelor to Clopidogrel Standard Therapy in Subjects Who Require Percutaneous Co

205 cal Trial Comparing Cangrelor to Clopidogrel Standard Therapy in Subjects Who Require Percutaneous Co

206 o Lower Cardiovascular Events in Addition to Standard Therapy in Subjects With Acute Coronary Syndrom

207 o Lower Cardiovascular Events in Addition to Standard Therapy in Subjects with Acute Coronary Syndrom

208 o Lower Cardiovascular Events in Addition to Standard Therapy in Subjects With Acute Coronary Syndrom

209 nated after receiving trastuzumab as part of standard therapy in the per treatment analyses conducted

210 Standard therapies include the hypomethylating agents az

211 gSO(4) (three 500 mg doses in 1 h) alongside standard therapy including salbutamol, or placebo contro

212 nd to be less itchy and poorly responsive to standard therapy, including antihistamines.

213 sessed whether the addition of infliximab to standard therapy (intravenous immunoglobulin and aspirin

214 Standard therapy involves the use of systemic corticoste

215 l CAD, CABG surgery should be recommended as standard therapy irrespective of the severity of coronar

216 In settings where so-called standard therapy is not feasible, specific trials for ol

217 ng Lopinavir/r and Lamivudine vs LPV/r based standard therapy) is a 48 week, phase 3, randomised, con

218 rcoma proliferation and, in combination with standard therapy, is effective for reducing the size of

219 To make focal therapy an accepted segment of standard therapy, it needs to proceed toward phase II an

220 Because such standard therapies mainly kill cycling cells, this appro

221 Although surgical resection is standard therapy, multiple observations suggest that exp

222 led randomly assigned patients (TAVR, n=220; standard therapy, n=229) demonstrated significant improv

223 ychiatric illnesses remaining refractory to 'standard' therapies, neurosurgical procedures may be con

224 Rivaroxaban was noninferior to standard therapy (noninferiority margin, 2.0; P=0.003) f

225 gh flow nasal cannulae, in comparison to the standard therapy of continuous positive airway pressure

226 Drug-resistant micrometastases that escape standard therapies often go undetected until the emergen

227 fined as deteriorating signs and symptoms on standard therapy often leading to unscheduled clinic or

228 operable) treated by either TAVR (n = 72) or standard therapy only (n = 95).

229 was lower after TAVR (52.0% vs. 69.6% after standard therapy only, p = 0.04).

230 clinical splenomegaly poorly controlled with standard therapies or were newly diagnosed with intermed

231 statistically significant result in favor of standard therapy or a null result with no statistically

232 Standard therapy or aggressive therapy (targets: glycate

233 ith alkylating chemotherapy, given either as standard therapy or for immunomodulatory effect.

234 and eGFR<90 ml/min per 1.73 m(2), to receive standard therapy or rituximab with standard therapy.

235 140 mg every 2 weeks or 420 mg monthly) plus standard therapy or standard therapy alone.

236 5 mg once daily) for 6 months in addition to standard therapy or standard therapy alone.

237 etastatic cancer that had progressed despite standard therapy (or for which no effective standard the

238 urs (interquartile range, 20.3 to 48.0) with standard therapy (P=0.002).

239 acement (TAVR) versus AVR (PARTNER-A arm) or standard therapy (PARTNER-B arm).

240 -B arm included 179 TF-TAVR patients and 179 standard therapy patients.

241 of IL-28B genotyping and type of treatment (standard therapy [pegylated interferon with ribavirin];

242 orvastatin-based standard medical therapy or standard therapy plus STS injection (80 mg, once daily f

243 Multidrug resistance (MDR) against standard therapies poses a serious challenge in cancer t

244 or conjunctival malignancies are needed when standard therapy provides limited benefits or fails.

245 s were randomized to receive BR (n = 224) or standard therapy (R-CHOP/R-CVP, n = 223) for 6 cycles; 2

246 gastro-oesophageal carcinomas refractory to standard therapy regardless of HER2 status.

247 ignificantly higher in patients treated with standard-therapy regimens (P < .05).

248 Three patients receiving standard therapy required rescue intervention with icati

249 tilineage cytopenias are often refractory to standard therapies requiring chronic immunosuppression w

250 s with reduced EZH2 levels at progression to standard therapy responded to the combination of bortezo

251 Overall, 46% of children receiving standard therapy responded, compared to only 9% who resp

252 l showed that veliparib-carboplatin added to standard therapy resulted in higher rates of pathologica

253 of these drugs, CMV can become resistant to standard therapy, resulting in increased morbidity and m

254 nds use of immunosuppressive agents added to standard therapy, several recent studies have questioned

255 Standard therapies should be considered as initial treat

256 found that adding immunotherapy (Ch14.18) to standard therapy significantly improved outcomes in pati

257 ious MI and DM, the addition of vorapaxar to standard therapy significantly reduced the risk of major

258 were randomized either to MARS (n=95) or to standard therapy (SMT) (n=94).

259 -directed double-blind corticosteroid versus standard therapy study.

260 Participants were assigned to intensive or standard therapy (target HbA1c less than 42 or 53-63 mmo

261 itation: protocol-based EGDT; protocol-based standard therapy that did not require the placement of a

262 ed tumor kill by a factor of 2 to 4 over the standard therapy that the patients actually received.

263 Compared with standard therapy, the augmented treatment regimen (regim

264 Although some lymphomas are curable with standard therapy, the majority of the affected patients

265 l therapeutic strategies combining HAPs with standard therapies to achieve long-term tumor control or

266 ngrelor [PCI]: NCT00305162; Cangrelor Versus Standard Therapy to Achieve Optimal Management of Platel

267 grelor), CHAMPION PLATFORM (Cangrelor Versus Standard Therapy to Achieve Optimal Management of Platel

268 t-level data from the 3 phase 3 Cangrelor vs Standard Therapy to Achieve Optimal Management of Platel

269 analysis of the 3 CHAMPION (Cangrelor versus Standard Therapy to Achieve Optimal Management of Platel

270 the CHAMPION PHOENIX trial (Cangrelor versus Standard Therapy to Achieve Optimal Management of Platel

271 The Cangrelor Versus Standard Therapy to Achieve Optimal Management of Platel

272 METHODS AND CHAMPION (cangrelor versus standard therapy to achieve optimal management of platel

273 The Cangrelor versus Standard Therapy to Achieve Optimal Management of Platel

274 rate-control medications and not regarded as standard therapy to improve prognosis in patients with c

275 able cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is the standard therapy to prevent sudden cardiac death in pati

276 nts with moderate to severe COPD (already on standard therapy) to daily MK-7123 at 10, 30, or 50 mg o

277 itivity zone vs 0.083 +/- 0.011 per day with standard therapy, translating to a bacterial burden half

278 D high risk) were randomly assigned (1:1) to standard therapy (treatment regimens A and B) or augment

279 on Outcome Study Using Dronedarone On Top Of Standard Therapy Trial (PALLAS), dronedarone was associa

280 In the PARTNER-B arm, risk with standard therapy was 60% per year; TF-TAVR reduced risk

281 Veliparib-carboplatin plus standard therapy was considered for HER2-negative tumors

282 Neratinib added to standard therapy was highly likely to result in higher r

283 important insight was the realization that 'standard therapy' was actually harmful!

284 certain bacteria can enhance the efficacy of standard therapies, we orally administered the lysis str

285 malignancies who had disease progression on standard therapies were eligible to participate.

286 who had failed or had a contraindication to standard therapies were eligible to participate.

287 gressing advanced solid tumors refractory to standard therapies were treated intratumorally.

288 ion during or within 3 months after the last standard therapy were randomised (in a 2:1 ratio; by com

289 uced irAEs that were readily manageable with standard therapies when started in a timely fashion.

290 ing Mcl-1 introduces multidrug resistance to standard therapies, whereas its downregulation results i

291 critical determinant for cross-resistance to standard therapies, whereas topoisomerase IIbeta downreg

292 CALGB 49907 showed the superiority of standard therapy, which included either cyclophosphamide

293 us DAPT for 1, 6, or 12 months (group 2), or standard therapy with a dose-adjusted vitamin K antagoni

294 y compared the efficacy and tolerance of the standard therapy with a potentially less toxic combinati

295 of clinically significant bleeding than was standard therapy with a vitamin K antagonist plus DAPT f

296 etinal artery occlusion (CRAO) after current standard therapy with and without paracentesis.

297 Current standard therapy with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhi

298 These data indicate BR is noninferior to standard therapy with regard to clinical response with a

299 aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of standard-therapy with pegylated-interferon-alpha/ribavir

300 tabine improved response rates compared with standard therapies without major differences in safety.