ライフサイエンスコーパス: allograft survival

1 t of CD4(+) T cell dysfunction and long-term allograft survival.

2 s may enhance rejection and affect long-term allograft survival.

3 ed-coil protein kinase inhibitor, on corneal allograft survival.

4 ed rejection (AMR) is a major risk for renal allograft survival.

5 t infiltration and improve long-term corneal allograft survival.

6 ant recipients and results in improved renal allograft survival.

7 ell proliferation and only modestly prolongs allograft survival.

8 administration on Treg function and corneal allograft survival.

9 ge have independent adverse effects on renal allograft survival.

10 S13) treatment of graft recipients increased allograft survival.

11 dy-mediated rejection is a serious threat to allograft survival.

12 age (HR, 0.70; P = 0.001) adversely impacted allograft survival.

13 CD3-NK1.1(+) cells in the liver and prolongs allograft survival.

14 ansplantation is a risk factor for decreased allograft survival.

15 CNIs) have failed to improve long-term renal allograft survival.

16 ne the impact of HLA compatibility on kidney allograft survival.

17 Regulatory T cells (Tregs) are crucial for allograft survival.

18 n leucocyte antigen (HLA) matching in kidney allograft survival.

19 s the effect of anti-E-selectin on long-term allograft survival.

20 nsplanted in Europe and calculated predicted allograft survival.

21 he allograft and the impact of recurrence on allograft survival.

22 dritic cell recruitment to promote long-term allograft survival.

23 h stable IDO-expressing fibroblasts prolongs allograft survival.

24 heart transplantation resulted in prolonged allograft survival.

25 A)-1 in organ transplant recipients prolongs allograft survival.

26 ew therapeutic strategy to enhance long-term allograft survival.

27 hat, ultimately, may improve long-term renal allograft survival.

28 at CD27low but not CD27high NK cells enhance allograft survival.

29 hypothesis that ApoE(133-149) promotes renal allograft survival.

30 changes affect T cell fate and subsequently allograft survival.

31 ry will be essential for improving long-term allograft survival.

32 ntain adequate immunosuppression and prolong allograft survival.

33 ponsible of the maintenance of the long-term allograft survival.

34 splant, sex, donor type, induction agent) on allograft survival.

35 -dependent suppressive function and impaired allograft survival.

36 means for enhancing therapeutic results and allograft survival.

37 hat promote long-term immunosuppression-free allograft survival.

38 heterotopic heart transplantation to assess allograft survival.

39 networks of new regulatory cells to maintain allograft survival.

40 enger leukocytes significantly prolongs lung allograft survival.

41 noregulatory IL-10 associated with prolonged allograft survival.

42 ammatory kidney injury and promote long-term allograft survival.

43 CD11c(+) T cells and significantly prolonged allograft survival.

44 ptide resulted in indefinite prolongation of allograft survival.

45 peak viral load, rejection, and patient and allograft survival.

46 chanism of immune regulation in MSC-mediated allograft survival.

47 ssion may be a viable strategy for promoting allograft survival.

48 ted T cell depletion markedly prolonged skin allograft survival.

49 n between infiltration of memory T cells and allograft survival.

50 mune encephalitis and enabled long-term skin allograft survival.

51 revention of IRI and significantly prolonged allograft survival.

52 ls from B7-H4 transgenic mice enhances islet allograft survival.

53 ltrating T cells and significantly prolonged allograft survival.

54 t serve as a tool to improve long-term renal allograft survival.

55 nce of AMR, graft histological features, and allograft survival.

56 ation with cyclosporin A had prolonged renal allograft survival.

57 ds ratio, 11.4, P=0.001), and a lower 5-year allograft survival.

58 is associated with a 3-fold prolongation in allograft survival.

59 lications for both assays to improve overall allograft survival.

60 infection events (MIE) can reduce long-term allograft survival.

61 at early times after engraftment may predict allograft survival.

62 ferret with documented long-term functional allograft survival.

63 id not result in significant prolongation of allograft survival.

64 enic mice increases skin, cardiac, and renal allograft survival.

65 tion is a significant barrier to small bowel allograft survival.

66 matched skin allograft resulted in prolonged allograft survival.

67 transplant dysfunction and improve long-term allograft survival.

68 s well tolerated and induced long-term islet allograft survival.

69 anent, T cell-poor, mixed-chimerism on renal allograft survival.

70 ejection with antibiotics may improve kidney allograft survival.

71 ere no significant differences in patient or allograft survival.

72 reatment (which cleaves NETs) also prolonged allograft survival.

73 y reducing NET burden, resulting in enhanced allograft survival.

74 the effect of anti-CD40L in prolonging heart allograft survival.

75 ype of induction had no impact on patient or allograft survival.

76 3 weeks significantly prolonged human islet allograft survival.

77 i-IL-6 receptor treatment in prolonging skin allograft survival.

78 ts Granzyme B pathway to prolong human renal allograft survival.

79 Anti-alpha6 integrin or anti-DG prolonged allograft survival.

80 oimmune-inflammatory cells; and (d) prolongs allograft survival.

81 , with no difference in long-term patient or allograft survival.

82 t host adaptive immune responses and prolong allograft survival.

83 -regs) inhibit host alloimmunity and prolong allograft survival.

84 of antibody-mediated rejection and decreased allograft survival.

85 led to HSC mobilization and prolonged islet allograft survival.

86 tragraft accumulation of Tregs and prolonged allograft survival.

87 nsplants, analyzing 3-year patient and renal allograft survival.

88 allograft leading to infections and reduced allograft survival.

89 effect of PI3Kdelta inhibition on long-term allograft survival.

90 otypes and to determine factors that predict allograft survival.

91 rt-term allograft outcomes but not long-term allograft survival.

92 nts exhibit indefinite prolongation of heart allograft survival.

93 nzyme inhibitor also significantly prolonged allograft survival (12 versus 7 days; P<0.0001).

94 livered by lentiviral vector prolonged islet allograft survival (51.0 +/- 2.9 days) by increasing the

95 or 1.0 mg/kg KRP203 produced long-term islet allograft survival (9200 days) in one of five and two of

96 associated nephropathy is a threat to kidney allograft survival affecting up to 15% of renal transpla

97 DSA) has been associated with improved renal allograft survival after antibody-mediated rejection (AM

98 the last few decades, strategies to improve allograft survival after kidney transplantation have bee

99 matic improvements in short-term patient and allograft survival after kidney transplantation.

100 significance of humoral immune response for allograft survival after liver transplantation (LT) is s

101 Allograft survival after PTLD diagnosis was 94.4% (66.6-

102 remains a major clinical challenge limiting allograft survival after solid organ transplantation.

103 development of novel cell therapy to improve allograft survival after transplantation.

104 s will develop CKD or manifest shorter renal allograft survival after transplantation.

105 Overall, allograft survival analysis revealed a survival advantag

106 s associated with improved patient and renal allograft survival and decreased hospital length of stay

107 -specific pan-Notch blockade prolonged heart allograft survival and decreased IFN-gamma and IL-4 prod

108 attenuated in TLR4 mice; however, long-term allograft survival and function were not affected in our

109 iated with significant reduction in pancreas allograft survival and impact resource use.

110 rging phenomenon that may decrease long-term allograft survival and impair allograft function.

111 ciated severe arteriosclerosis had decreased allograft survival and increased mortality (P<0.0001); t

112 ted through IL-22 production, which enhances allograft survival and increases insulin secretion.

113 localized immune delivery in prolonging skin allograft survival and its potential utility in treating

114 e effect of this preservation method on limb allograft survival and long-term function has not yet be

115 This enhanced allograft survival and protolerogenic skewing of the all

116 onses because they are known to promote both allograft survival and rejection.

117 (Tregs) have been associated with prolonged allograft survival and tolerance across a wide variety o

118 eceased and living organ donation, improving allograft survival and unmet clinical needs in organ tra

119 nhibited host humoral immunity and prolonged allograft survival, and more effectively so than followi

120 alysis was performed for PTLD-free survival, allograft survival, and patient survival after PTLD.

121 etween CIT and delayed graft function (DGF), allograft survival, and patient survival for 1267 shippe

122 Perioperative complications, allograft survival, and patient survival were similar be

123 scular morbidity and mortality and shortened allograft survival are important consequences of inadequ

124 The implications of this policy for kidney allograft survival are not well understood.

125 fined acute kidney injury (AKI) have similar allograft survival as non-AKI kidneys but are discarded

126 to entrain a long-term response favorable to allograft survival as part of an immunomodulatory regime

127 and recipients were analyzed for patient and allograft survival as well as renal outcomes following C

128 and recipients were analyzed for patient and allograft survival as well as renal outcomes following C

129 Prolonged allograft survival associated with DCreg infusion may be

130 ving a DCD kidney transplant have good renal allograft survival at 3-year follow-up, comparable to th

131 Kidney allograft survival at 5 years was 83.6% for T1DM, 80.4%

132 all molecule inhibitor prolongs murine heart allograft survival at least partially through diminishin

133 as no significant difference in 3-year renal allograft survival between the DCD and DBD groups (P = 0

134 There was no difference in allograft survival between the TRAS+ intervention and TR

135 groups, p = 0.12; there was a difference in allograft survival between the TRAS- and TRAS+ noninterv

136 gatively affect intermediate-term patient or allograft survival but is associated with increased risk

137 -specific HLA antibodies significantly lower allograft survival, but as yet there are no satisfactory

138 analysis revealed that APOL1 impacted renal allograft survival, but not recipient survival.

139 s study was to explore prolongation of islet allograft survival by cotransplantation with myeloid-der

140 ndostatin plays an important role in corneal allograft survival by inhibiting neovascularization and

141 und that the CD27low NK cells restore better allograft survival by inhibiting the proliferation of al

142 s its neutralization significantly prolonged allograft survival by reducing intragraft expression of

143 ed the effect of HLA compatibility on kidney allograft survival by studying all first adult kidney tr

144 ation induces MDSCs and these cells regulate allograft survival, C57BL/6 donor hearts were transplant

145 +) cells, and significantly improved corneal allograft survival compared to saline-injected controls.

146 idney was associated with increased pancreas allograft survival compared with receiving a deceased do

147 ns of ECDI-SPs significantly prolong cardiac allograft survival concomitant with an impressive accumu

148 ta cells from transgenic mice prolongs islet allograft survival, confirming the negative role of B7-H

149 Progress in long-term renal allograft survival continues to lag behind the progress

150 Allograft survival despite complete immunosuppressant wi

151 The in vivo findings in terms of allograft survival did not reflect superior immunomodula

152 Kaplan-Meier curves showed global allograft survival differences (P=0.042) mostly due to p

153 Corneal allograft survival dramatically decreases in hosts with

154 ing the early stages of immune responses and allograft survival during CoB.

155 tion but does not appear to adversely impact allograft survival during the early follow-up period.

156 was associated with HLA mismatch and affects allograft survival even during the recent periods of inc

157 The higher transplant rates and allograft survival expected for candidates in the top 20

158 To detect other factors impacting allograft survival from deceased AA kidney donors, APOL1

159 Recipient age affects allograft survival from high-quality young DD kidneys, s

160 between patient survival and death-censored allograft survival (graft survival).

161 the time of transplant dramatically improved allograft survival (>100 d) over either agent alone (<30

162 splants became tolerant and showed long-term allograft survival (>100 d).

163 ) recipients with CTLA4-Ig induced long-term allograft survival (>100 days) without histological sign

164 ) regulatory T cells (T(regs)) and long-term allograft survival (>300 days).

165 e association of HLA mismatching with kidney allograft survival has been well established.

166 nfidence interval [95% CI], 0.28 to 2.49) or allograft survival (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.37 to 1.73) betw

167 de alone induced indefinite pancreatic islet allograft survival if anti-IL-7R treatment was started 3

168 rse of rapamycin provides indefinite cardiac allograft survival in 100% of the recipients.

169 C treatment resulted in long-term (>120 day) allograft survival in 47% of the animals, which correlat

170 he first time demonstrates that SHS shortens allograft survival in a cause-effect manner and unveils

171 monocytes in vitamin D3 and IL-10, on renal allograft survival in a clinically relevant rhesus macaq

172 Donor-derived MDSCs prolong cardiac allograft survival in a donor-specific manner via induct

173 dendritic cells (dexDCs) could prolong islet allograft survival in a full major histocompatibility co

174 that miR-142 deficiency leads to indefinite allograft survival in a fully MHC mismatched murine card

175 ration in vitro and were all able to prolong allograft survival in a model of skin transplantation.

176 hat lymphatic vessel formation improves lung allograft survival in a murine transplant model.

177 cy of IL-2 complex (cplx) treatment for skin allograft survival in a stringent murine skin graft mode

178 y activity in vivo, promoting long-term skin allograft survival in a stringent transplantation model.

179 ibodies (DSA) is associated with worse renal allograft survival in adult patients.

180 kidney transplantation has acceptable renal allograft survival in adults but there are few data in p

181 tion abolishes this discrepancy and improves allograft survival in African American recipients.

182 t leads to significant prolongation of islet allograft survival in allosensitized recipients.

183 sed neovascularization and prolonged corneal allograft survival in an inducible nitric oxide synthase

184 ection has long-term consequences for kidney allograft survival in an observational prospective cohor

185 TIM-1(+) B cells prolonged islet allograft survival in B-deficient mice, whereas TIM-4(+)

186 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10) significantly prolonged allograft survival in comparison with immunoglobulin G-t

187 AA) recipient race are associated with worse allograft survival in deceased-donor kidney transplantat

188 hylcarbodiimide (ECDI-SPs) induces long-term allograft survival in full MHC-mismatched models of allo

189 donor-specific antibody levels, and prolongs allograft survival in highly sensitized nonhuman primate

190 ng T cell depletion confers an advantage for allograft survival in murine transplant models.

191 Our findings showed a prolonged allograft survival in older recipients associated with a

192 nsplant registry data to compare patient and allograft survival in patients discharged from their ind

193 We evaluated the 15-year kidney allograft survival in patients with primary glomerulonep

194 ne prevents IRI and has beneficial effect on allograft survival in rat cardiac allografts.

195 een CD40 and CD40L induces long-term cardiac allograft survival in rats through a CD8+CD45RClo Treg p

196 taneous BMT and VCA may establish indefinite allograft survival in rats through Treg-mediated suppres

197 o the new 478 DDKTs replicated shorter renal allograft survival in recipients of APOL1 2-renal-risk-v

198 pt and sirolimus successfully prevents islet allograft survival in rhesus monkeys, but induction with

199 r without alefacept reliably prolonged renal allograft survival in rhesus monkeys.

200 ll expansion and significantly extends heart allograft survival in sensitized recipients.

201 munosuppression had no impact on patient and allograft survival in SLKT, while maintenance steroids a

202 perfusion (HESP) systems are used to prolong allograft survival in solid organ transplantations and h

203 mmatory B cells and promotes long-term islet allograft survival in such recipients.

204 We demonstrate that the cause of indefinite allograft survival in the absence of miR-142 maps specif

205 The better allograft survival in the BK group over acute rejection

206 er se were not significantly associated with allograft survival in the entire study sample.

207 significant improvement in long-term corneal allograft survival in the IL-2 treated group compared wi

208 by increased rejection or worsening patient/allograft survival in the short term.

209 Allograft survival in the TRAS+ intervention, TRAS+ noni

210 reports have documented unexplained reduced allograft survival in these patients.

211 revent alloimmunity and to improve long-term allograft survival in transplantation.

212 bits T cell proliferation in vitro, supports allograft survival in vivo, prevents corneal transplant

213 doptive transfer, significantly prolong skin allograft survival in vivo.

214 ing system, referred to as TRI-MP, prolonged allograft survival indefinitely without long-term system

215 dritic cell density was associated with poor allograft survival independent of clinical variables.

216 tibody generation and significantly extended allograft survival, indicating that donor-specific alloa

217 nd hand smoke (SHS) hindered long-term islet allograft survival induced by CD154 costimulatory blocka

218 r/lpr) mice were also resistant to prolonged allograft survival induced by CoB targeting the CD40-CD1

219 CD8+ Tmem is associated with prolonged renal allograft survival induced by DCreg infusion in CTLA4Ig-

220 site prognostic ABMR score to predict kidney allograft survival, integrating the disease characterist

221 Long-term allograft survival is a major challenge facing solid org

222 Corneal allograft survival is mediated by the variety of immunol

223 pacts costimulatory blockade induced cardiac allograft survival is not known.

224 Shorter renal allograft survival is reproducibly observed after DDKT f

225 In vivo, fully MHC mismatched cardiac allograft survival is significantly prolonged in knock-i

226 Islet allograft survival limits the long-term success of islet

227 To improve long-term kidney allograft survival, management paradigms should promote

228 ed ISDCs reduce the alloresponse and prolong allograft survival, not by themselves, but through conve

229 discarded kidneys would be expected to have allograft survival of 93.1% at 1 year, 80.7% at 5 years,

230 27low NK cells) show significantly prolonged allograft survival on costimulatory blockade when compar

231 nerated to assess differences in patient and allograft survival on the basis of BK viremia status; su

232 opathy progression and may improve long-term allograft survival owing to favorable coronary remodelin

233 edict long-term immunosuppression-free renal allograft survival (P < 0.0001).

234 Px was not associated with kidney allograft survival (P = 0.16).

235 Q DSA was associated with a 30% lower 5-year allograft survival (P=0.003).

236 nor and recipient genotyping exhibited worse allograft survival (P=0.02).

237 features and associated causes and distinct allograft survival profiles.

238 the 14 transplanted grafts, 1-year pancreas allograft survival rate was 100%.

239 Patients with TRIs had significantly lower allograft survival rates (50.9%) than patients without T

240 cant differences in allograft outcomes, with allograft survival rates 5 years after diagnosis ranging

241 Kidney allograft survival rates at 3, 5, 7, and 10 years after

242 ntified three risk strata with 6-year kidney allograft survival rates of 6.0% (high-risk group, n=40)

243 jection was 9% at 1 year and the patient and allograft survival rates were 100% and 91%, respectively

244 The 1-, 3-, 5- and 7-year death-censored allograft survival rates were 98%, 91%, 86%, and 78%, re

245 howed significantly higher patient and liver allograft survival rates.

246 Long-term patient and allograft survival remains limited by cardiovascular dis

247 pact of transplant center volume on pancreas allograft survival remains unclear.

248 ostimulatory blockade-induced murine cardiac allograft survival requires intragraft accumulation of C

249 ed with decreased patient, liver, and kidney allograft survivals (respective HR: 1.4 [1.1, 1.8]; 1.5

250 ex vivo expanded human Treg prolonged islet allograft survival resulting in the accumulation of Treg

251 donor T cell responses, and prolonging heart allograft survival than the commonly used treatment at t

252 +) that regulates Tregs fate while promoting allograft survival that may have clinical applications i

253 ect of various immunosuppressive regimens on allograft survival that we have previously reported.

254 ls, NAD(+) was able to promote an impressive allograft survival through a robust systemic IL-10 produ

255 SC-induced MDSCs significantly extends islet allograft survival through iNOS-mediated T-cell inhibiti

256 tive allograft preservation method to extend allograft survival time.

257 In summary, mature CD27low NK cells promote allograft survival under costimulatory blockade conditio

258 ntly, there was no significant difference in allograft survival up to 10 years (hazard ratio, 0.98; 9

259 In African Americans, the mean allograft survival was 54.8+/-0.98, months with PVD vers

260 In non-African Americans, the mean allograft survival was 55.4+/-0.44 months with PVD versu

261 Mean allograft survival was 55.5+/-0.55 months in patients wi

262 Allograft survival was 59.73+/-0.13 months in African Am

263 Mean allograft survival was 60.97+/-0.67 months in non-Africa

264 Two-year allograft survival was 91% and 55% in the 2 groups, resp

265 Two-year allograft survival was 91% and 55% in the 2 groups, resp

266 Three-year renal allograft survival was 95.2% in the DCD group, 87.1% in

267 R score less than 13, 10-year death-censored allograft survival was 96% to 100% regardless of MFI (P

268 After BLyS neutralization, indefinite islet allograft survival was achieved.

269 Allograft survival was analyzed employing the Kaplan-Mei

270 Furthermore, Tim4-/- allograft survival was associated with the infiltration

271 Long-term allograft survival was compared using Kaplan-Meier curve

272 Allograft survival was critically dependent on CD25(+)Fo

273 Long-term allograft survival was evaluated for up to 9 weeks using

274 The best kidney allograft survival was for patients who received a livin

275 A significant difference in allograft survival was identified between whites (n = 27

276 Islet allograft survival was investigated in streptozotocin-in

277 egs, a synergistic effect in prolonging skin allograft survival was observed.

278 Islet allograft survival was prolonged in IkappaBalphaDeltaN-T

279 Although prolonged allograft survival was seen in many recipients of APOL1

280 Death-censored allograft survival was similar in all groups except the

281 However, allograft survival was similar in eyes with and without

282 Overall allograft survival was similar in the DSA-SPA-positive a

283 Five-year renal allograft survival was superior for children receiving a

284 Five-year renal allograft survival was superior for children receiving a

285 Since the latter is relevant to human allograft survival, we sought to improve the efficiency

286 Patient and allograft survival were 100% at a median follow-up of 10

287 Patient and renal allograft survival were 100%.

288 Overall, the patient and allograft survival were equivalent.

289 etween donor age and APOL1 genotype on renal allograft survival were nonsignificant.

290 Five-year liver and kidney allograft survivals were 67% and 64% in the T-cell group

291 Death-censored AMR-free and allograft survivals were significantly lower in C1q-dnDS

292 nt with KRP203 significantly prolonged islet allograft survival, whereas additional intragraft delive

293 Sensitized blacks had the lowest rate of allograft survival, whereas nonsensitized Asians had the

294 combinant EPO administration prolonged heart allograft survival, whereas pharmacologic downregulation

295 ostimulation with CD40Ig leads to indefinite allograft survival, which is mediated by the induction o

296 treated with ApoE(133-149) showed prolonged allograft survival, which was associated with a reduced

297 cted therapies have the potential to improve allograft survival while minimizing patient harm related

298 he success of future therapies in prolonging allograft survival will require an intimate understandin

299 onths, there was 100% (death-censored) renal allograft survival with estimated glomerular filtration

300 , 3A8-based therapy markedly prolonged islet allograft survival without depleting B cells.