ライフサイエンスコーパス: chemoradiation

1 py (surgery with chemotherapy, radiation, or chemoradiation).

2 inoma benefit significantly from neoadjuvant chemoradiation.

3 en in the subgroup that received neoadjuvant chemoradiation.

4 o demonstrate survival benefit from adjuvant chemoradiation.

5 t consisting of transurethral resection with chemoradiation.

6 jected to curable treatment with surgery and chemoradiation.

7 n patients with NSCLC treated by concomitant chemoradiation.

8 ade 3-4 haematological adverse events during chemoradiation.

9 ad total mesorectal excision 6-8 weeks after chemoradiation.

10 d disease, which include chemotherapy and/or chemoradiation.

11 ncer when given as maintenance therapy after chemoradiation.

12 s were obtained before and after neoadjuvant chemoradiation.

13 no hypoxia response within the first 2 wk of chemoradiation.

14 eal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) receiving chemoradiation.

15 duction is related to clinical outcome after chemoradiation.

16 ents (total, 220) undergoing chemotherapy or chemoradiation.

17 Subsequently, patients received 5-FU based chemoradiation.

18 C receiving SOC neoadjuvant chemotherapy and chemoradiation.

19 after cediranib treatment, unlike that after chemoradiation.

20 ancer patients with a pCR after preoperative chemoradiation.

21 r patients with a pCR following preoperative chemoradiation.

22 onse 3 mo after the completion of concurrent chemoradiation.

23 prior to definitive radiation or concurrent chemoradiation.

24 misonidazole PET at weeks 0, 2, and 5 during chemoradiation.

25 g interferon-alpha with 5-fluorouracil-based chemoradiation.

26 patients; 79 patients (88%) completed chemo-chemoradiation.

27 ncepts for biology-driven personalization of chemoradiation.

28 aluation of patients for esophagectomy after chemoradiation.

29 problems with re-staging rectal cancer after chemoradiation.

30 ioma patients at diagnosis, before and after chemoradiation.

31 in those demonstrating objective response to chemoradiation.

32 18 months among patients given neo-adjuvant chemoradiation.

33 of cisplatin administered during concurrent chemoradiation.

34 e of the situation in vivo during concurrent chemoradiation.

35 ory comorbidity, tumor site, and neoadjuvant chemoradiation.

36 concomitant with induction chemotherapy and chemoradiation.

37 or T1b, as an alternative to no treatment or chemoradiation.

38 in glioblastoma recurrence after therapeutic chemoradiation.

39 as significantly associated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation.

40 ical cancer patients treated with definitive chemoradiation.

41 radiotherapy, and 53% prefer 5 to 6 weeks of chemoradiation.

42 progress rapidly and do not respond well to chemoradiation.

43 d the confounding impact of radiotherapy and chemoradiation.

44 with rectal cancer treated with preoperative chemoradiation.

45 nificant increase in the use of preoperative chemoradiation (1% versus 42%, P < 0.001) in the histori

46 8.6 months; endoscopic therapy, 77.7 months; chemoradiation, 17.3 months; no treatment, 8.2 months; P

47 histology (69% vs. 86%); use of neoadjuvant chemoradiation (28% vs. 52%); mean blood loss (677 vs. 3

48 She was treated with cisplatin-based chemoradiation (40 mg/m(2) body surface area once per we

49 d to 5 weeks preoperative capecitabine-based chemoradiation (45-50.4 Gy) followed by six cycles of ad

50 ll or adenocarcinoma and planned neoadjuvant chemoradiation (5- fluorouracil, cisplatin, 40Gy) follow

51 py, 51% v 71%, respectively; P = .038; after chemoradiation, 75% v 93%, respectively; P = .028) and O

52 n the selection of patients for preoperative chemoradiation, a strategy proven to improve outcomes in

53 without concurrent chemotherapy, or primary chemoradiation according to initial nodal disease burden

54 Liver transplantation with neoadjuvant chemoradiation achieved better survival with less recurr

55 During lethal dosages of chemoradiation, administering a short pulse of R-spondin

56 ance; Phase III Intergroup Trial of Adjuvant Chemoradiation After Resection of Gastric or Gastroesoph

57 carcinoma, previously randomized to adjuvant chemoradiation after surgery or surgery alone, to measur

58 systemic chemotherapy alone (n = 38; 6.5%), chemoradiation alone (n = 261; 44.8%), or both (n = 284;

59 trials of cediranib with chemoradiation vs. chemoradiation alone in nGBM patients.

60 parable survival has been demonstrated using chemoradiation alone, leading to the hypothesis that sur

61 tients, 41.2% (n = 539) received neoadjuvant chemoradiation and 47.2% (n = 618) were cN+.

62 rvical cancer prevents the need for adjuvant chemoradiation and allows fertility preservation.

63 Delivery of mFOLFOX6 after chemoradiation and before total mesorectal excision has

64 Addition of cetuximab to concurrent chemoradiation and consolidation treatment provided no b

65 erapy increased from 12.7% to 33.6%, whereas chemoradiation and esophagectomy decreased, P < 0.01.

66 h esophageal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation and esophagectomy in the National Cancer

67 AC after neoadjuvant chemoradiation and esophagectomy is associated with impr

68 adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) after neoadjuvant chemoradiation and esophagectomy is associated with impr

69 enefit of systemic therapy after neoadjuvant chemoradiation and esophagectomy is unclear.

70 peutic options will increase the efficacy of chemoradiation and improved the survival of these patien

71 ed by a significant response to preoperative chemoradiation and intersphincteric resection, without c

72 Outcome following neoadjuvant chemoradiation and liver transplantation for perihilar C

73 ellent single-center outcomes of neoadjuvant chemoradiation and liver transplantation for unresectabl

74 es and outcomes in HNSCC patients undergoing chemoradiation and may help to devise novel concepts for

75 rentiated tumors evidencing less response to chemoradiation and more likely to require extended resec

76 fter, a novel protocol combining neoadjuvant chemoradiation and orthotopic liver transplantation was

77 who received preoperative gemcitabine-based chemoradiation and pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for stag

78 n anoscopy-guided ablation) and anal cancer (chemoradiation and possibly intensity-modulated radiatio

79 aliplatin to preoperative capecitabine-based chemoradiation and postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy i

80 aliplatin to preoperative capecitabine-based chemoradiation and postoperative capecitabine improves d

81 comparing induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation and surgery in patients with locally adva

82 ss whether adding cycles of mFOLFOX6 between chemoradiation and surgery increased the proportion of p

83 received induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation and surgery.

84 fic resistances to treatment with concurrent chemoradiation and temozolomide, and that the model can

85 ed with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation and then an operation or an operation fir

86 from the anal verge, treated by preoperative chemoradiation and total mesorectal excision from 1998 t

87 ix cycles of mFOLFOX6, respectively, between chemoradiation and total mesorectal excision.

88 t restaging 4 to 6 weeks after completion of chemoradiation and, in the absence of disease progressio

89 nse at 26 weeks and acute toxic effects (for chemoradiation), and progression-free survival (for main

90 compared endoscopic therapy, esophagectomy, chemoradiation, and no treatment; and performed a subgro

91 advances are with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, chemoradiation, and preventive vaccination.

92 ments over time were calculated for surgery, chemoradiation, and subsequent hospitalizations.

93 native chemotherapy regimens and neoadjuvant chemoradiation are being investigated to improve outcome

94 y strategies incorporating radiation or even chemoradiation are frequently considered in some cases.

95 Chemoradiation as definitive therapy is the preferred pr

96 herapy alone, firmly establishing concurrent chemoradiation as the standard of care in locally advanc

97 copic biopsies can predict minor response to chemoradiation, as a basis for individualized therapy of

98 Chemoradiation became the standard of care for anal canc

99 Methods At first recurrence after chemoradiation, bevacizumab-naive patients with glioblas

100 versus 7 patients who received no therapy or chemoradiation but no antiangiogenic agents.

101 disease (MRD; enhancing tumour <2 cm(2) post-chemoradiation by central review), analysed by modified

102 The present study proposes how intratumoral chemoradiation can be best implemented.

103 therapy, but the associated toxic effects of chemoradiation can be unacceptable.

104 Genotoxic cancer therapies, such as chemoradiation, cause haematological toxicity primarily

105 in Carcinoma of the Anal Canal], concurrent chemoradiation (CCR) with fluorouracil (FU) plus mitomyc

106 Neither chemotherapy nor chemoradiation compensates for a margin positive for can

107 ylation inhibitors, angiogenesis inhibitors, chemoradiation, complexes with neoantigen-targeted monoc

108 Chemoradiation consisted of four weekly infusions of gem

109 Chemoradiation consisted of: cisplatinum, 5-fluorouracil

110 as divided into five phases: preirradiation, chemoradiation, consolidation, maintenance, and continua

111 The Timing of Rectal Cancer Response to Chemoradiation Consortium designed a prospective, multic

112 The identification of patients with a pCR to chemoradiation could potentially spare those patients th

113 rates after sphincter-preserving definitive chemoradiation (CRT) and is typically associated with an

114 s undergoing outpatient radiotherapy (RT) or chemoradiation (CRT) frequently require acute care (emer

115 gical complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) have favorable outcomes.

116 noma (ESCC) who do not benefit from standard chemoradiation (CRT) is an important medical need.

117 When nonsurgical approaches are preferred, chemoradiation (CRT) is the standard of care.

118 adiation twice a day (FCT) is an established chemoradiation (CRT) regimen for selective bladder-spari

119 shown resistance to conventional concurrent chemoradiation (CRT) therapy and carries a relatively po

120 TNT, or systemic chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation (CRT), addresses both occult metastases a

121 egional failure (LRF) rates after definitive chemoradiation (CRT), associated with anogenital human p

122 lishment of standard of care indications for chemoradiation (CRT).

123 The addition of cetuximab to concurrent chemoradiation did not improve OS.

124 inical and radiologic imaging response after chemoradiation do not require elective neck dissection.

125 l-based study, the addition of postoperative chemoradiation (either sequentially or concomitantly) af

126 patients which were treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation enrolled in this study.

127 All patients received chemoradiation (fluorouracil 225 mg/m(2) per day by cont

128 Cisplatin-based concurrent chemoradiation followed by adjuvant chemotherapy is the

129 local excision alone for very early tumors, chemoradiation followed by either local excision of a sm

130 were treated with adjuvant interferon-based chemoradiation followed by gemcitabine.

131 stal rectal cancer treated with preoperative chemoradiation followed by low anterior resection (LAR)/

132 Preoperative gemcitabine-based chemoradiation followed by restaging and evaluation for

133 ded into 2 treatment groups: (1) neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery and (2) surgery alone

134 identified, of whom 539 received neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery and 770 received surg

135 The 3-year OS was better for neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery compared with surgery

136 NCT00445861), which investigated neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery in patients with esop

137 tal cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery.

138 tested for MSI and treated definitively with chemoradiation followed by surgery.

139 omplete response (pCR) following neoadjuvant chemoradiation for advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarci

140 iews randomized trials and recent studies on chemoradiation for anal cancer.

141 Patients without response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation for esophageal cancer have no prognostic

142 While neoadjuvant chemoradiation for esophageal cancer improves oncologic

143 : In total, 49 patients receiving definitive chemoradiation for locally advanced HNSCCs underwent pre

144 review of 27 patients undergoing concurrent chemoradiation for locally advanced laryngeal cancers (8

145 review of 33 patients undergoing concurrent chemoradiation for locally advanced oropharyngeal cancer

146 nse with (18)F-FDG PET after curative-intent chemoradiation for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is

147 Methods: Three prospective trials of chemoradiation for NSCLC, involving baseline and posttre

148 nt (18)F-FDG PET/CT before and after radical chemoradiation for NSCLC.

149 and the addition of cetuximab to concurrent chemoradiation for patients with inoperable stage III no

150 ttempting to predict a pCR after neoadjuvant chemoradiation for rectal cancer.

151 lusion Although the addition of cetuximab to chemoradiation for SCCAC was associated with lower LRF r

152 Neoadjuvant chemoradiation for stage II/III rectal cancer results in

153 d to improve the reporting of RCTs examining chemoradiation for treatment of patients with squamous c

154 ndomised controlled trials (RCTs) of radical chemoradiation for treatment of squamous cell carcinoma

155 ria for an incomplete response to definitive chemoradiation for which salvage neck dissection would b

156 ne and cisplatin chemotherapy in addition to chemoradiation (Gem-Cis-XRT) and pancreaticoduodenectomy

157 achieved with preoperative gemcitabine-based chemoradiation (Gem-XRT) alone.

158 Adjuvant chemoradiation had a positive impact on overall survival

159 Preoperative chemotherapy and chemoradiation have also been explored in several small

160 athological complete response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation have an improved prognosis.

161 s, here we report that CC CSCs, which resist chemoradiation, have higher SUMO activating enzyme (E1)

162 er for cN+ patients who received neoadjuvant chemoradiation (hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.42-0.66; P

163 95% CI: 1.15-2.66, P = 0.009), and adjuvant chemoradiation (HR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.42-0.78, P < 0.0001)

164 oved survival [hazard ratio (HR): 0.85], and chemoradiation (HR: 1.79) and no treatment (HR: 3.57) wi

165 hemotherapy or postoperative chemotherapy or chemoradiation improves outcomes relative to surgery alo

166 hether replacing mitomycin with cisplatin in chemoradiation improves response, and whether maintenanc

167 was undertaken to determine whether adjuvant chemoradiation improves survival compared with surgery a

168 , and whether maintenance chemotherapy after chemoradiation improves survival.

169 mly assigned patients with progression after chemoradiation in a 2:1 ratio to receive lomustine plus

170 nsitizes otherwise resistant cancer cells to chemoradiation in a Bim-dependent manner.

171 ith resistance to cytotoxic chemotherapy and chemoradiation in an understudied phenomenon known as hy

172 table perihilar CCA treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation in anticipation for transplantation betwe

173 the ability of PDOs to predict responses to chemoradiation in cancer patients remains an open questi

174 edicted unfavorable responses to neoadjuvant chemoradiation in EAC patients.

175 The role of adjuvant chemoradiation in esophageal cancer has been underestima

176 histopathologic non-response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation in esophageal cancer.

177 seful for predicting significant response to chemoradiation in esophageal cancer.

178 sible mechanisms of increased sensitivity to chemoradiation in HPV-positive OPSCC.

179 tion chemotherapy to concomitant neoadjuvant chemoradiation in locally advanced rectal cancer could i

180 s article reviews data supporting the use of chemoradiation in NMIBC and discusses emerging biomarker

181 icant implications on the use of neoadjuvant chemoradiation in patients with cN- disease.

182 nstability (MSI) and response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation in rectal cancer is not well understood.

183 ied X-rays improves the efficacy of standard chemoradiation in resistant and aggressive head and neck

184 A clinical trial investigating the role for chemoradiation in T1 disease that has recurred is underw

185 There is an increasing use of neoadjuvant chemoradiation in this group of patients, especially for

186 lly advanced rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation in this NCDB-based analysis.

187 e induction of adult stem cells could repair chemoradiation-induced tissue injury and prolong overall

188 Together, our findings indicate that chemoradiation induces tumor antigen-specific T-cell res

189 , and predicted response to chemotherapy and chemoradiation irrespective of anatomic subtype (P < 0.0

190 Chemoradiation is an emerging treatment option for selec

191 reas liver transplantation after neoadjuvant chemoradiation is an option for a subset of patients wit

192 done little to improve survival and combined chemoradiation is associated with significant adverse ef

193 Preoperative chemoradiation is being advocated, with seemingly sound

194 For some locally advanced tumors, chemoradiation is currently standard of care.

195 Neoadjuvant chemoradiation is currently the preferred management app

196 nts with a complete response to preoperative chemoradiation is frequently reported as a marker of tre

197 Further optimisation of present standard chemoradiation is needed in patients with locally advanc

198 An immunotherapy approach integrated with chemoradiation is safe and demonstrates an overall survi

199 Assessment for residual cancer after chemoradiation is still problematic and hopefully techno

200 agement in patients with rectal cancer after chemoradiation is the inability to identify a pCR preope

201 k areas (esophagus/rectum) where neoadjuvant chemoradiation is used, the incidence of anastomotic lea

202 ive chemoradiation or postoperative adjuvant chemoradiation is widely practiced in major centers.

203 systemic induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation, is an optimal preoperative sequencing st

204 The current standard of care-resection and chemoradiation-is limited in part due to the genetic het

205 0, OR: 2.2) CONCLUSIONS:: After preoperative chemoradiation, long-term outcomes of esophageal carcino

206 Adjuvant chemoradiation may be offered to patients who did not re

207 All patients were treated with definitive chemoradiation (median dose 50.4 Gy) followed by resecti

208 66), including chemotherapy alone (n = 354), chemoradiation (n = 190, including 99 patients who under

209 ectal cancer (LARC) treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation (NACR) enrolled in a phase III clinical t

210 Response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT) has been debated as a biologic sur

211 te clinical response (cCR) after neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT) managed nonoperatively after each

212 The impact of neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT) on LN status remains poorly studie

213 The impact of adjuvant chemotherapy and chemoradiation on survival has been more clearly defined

214 urrently, there is insufficient evidence for chemoradiation only, or nonoperative management (NOM), t

215 In the United States, preoperative chemoradiation or postoperative adjuvant chemoradiation

216 operable stage II or III NSCLC, treated with chemoradiation or with radiotherapy alone, were extracte

217 s, and might involve radical hysterectomy or chemoradiation, or a combination of both.

218 ite improvements in survival with aggressive chemoradiation, outcomes for patients diagnosed as havin

219 I trials confirmed the benefit of concurrent chemoradiation over radiation therapy alone, firmly esta

220 suggested an OS advantage for postoperative chemoradiation over surgery alone, although prospective

221 towards studies of adjuvant chemotherapy and chemoradiation, particularly in defining the best regime

222 Multiple concurrent chemoradiation phase III trials were initiated in respon

223 The gemcitabine-based chemoradiation platform is a reasonable foundation on wh

224 nts with cN- tumors treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation plus surgery do not derive a significant

225 hese reasons, the use of chemotherapy and/or chemoradiation prior to surgery (neoadjuvant therapy) is

226 eatment and then repeated 4 to 6 weeks after chemoradiation, prior to the esophagectomy.

227 able for patients excluded from conventional chemoradiation protocols.

228 Compared with surgery alone, adjuvant chemoradiation provides a survival benefit to ESCC patie

229 This chemoradiation regime merits evaluation in phase II-III

230 vorably with AFX-C alone or other concurrent chemoradiation regimens tested by the Radiation Therapy

231 logies, the inclusion of newer agents to the chemoradiation regimens, the use of new hypoxic cell rad

232 with rectal cancer following radiotherapy or chemoradiation remains unclear.

233 Chemoradiation represents the standard of care for most

234 Chemoradiation-resistant cancers limit treatment efficac

235 Chemoradiation responses in patients are highly matched

236 dual population of cells escapes surgery and chemoradiation, resulting in a typically fatal tumor rec

237 Definitive chemoradiation results in high cure rates but causes lon

238 and the presence of human papilloma virus in chemoradiation-sensitive basaloid tumors.

239 ted changes in RNA expression correlate with chemoradiation sensitivity across cancers.

240 e whether the use of AFX-C in the concurrent chemoradiation setting further improves outcome.

241 a taxane followed by radiation or concurrent chemoradiation show that the three-drug induction chemot

242 ychological testing of patients treated with chemoradiation shows significant cognitive deficits that

243 therapy, providing an opportunity to deliver chemoradiation specifically to metastatic disease in col

244 X or gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel) followed by chemoradiation (standard group) or the same standard neo

245 potential target for biomarker discovery or chemoradiation strategies in bladder cancer.

246 growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibition in chemoradiation strategies in the nonoperative treatment

247 s consist of surgical resection and adjuvant chemoradiation; such approaches are often associated wit

248 from 2010 to 2014, who underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiation, surgical resection, and adjuvant therapy

249 Associations between chemoradiation therapies and survival were performed usi

250 stage I-III NSCLC and candidates for radical chemoradiation therapy (60 Gy in 30 fractions over 6 wk)

251 Endoscopic biopsy after chemoradiation therapy (CRT) for esophageal cancer has b

252 Although chemoradiation therapy (CRT) with cisplatin remains the

253 tion on colon cancer cell survival following chemoradiation therapy (CRT).

254 ll lung cancer (NSCLC) undergoing concurrent chemoradiation therapy (CXRT).

255 Of 63 cases, 39 (62%) patients received chemoradiation therapy and 24 (38%) received chemotherap

256 once per week; n = 221) for 3 weeks prior to chemoradiation therapy and for 12 weeks after chemoradia

257 patients following fluorouracil (5-FU)-based chemoradiation therapy and provide evidence for a functi

258 ent induction chemotherapy, and 52% received chemoradiation therapy as well for a median of 6 months

259 ts with HNSCC who were treated by concurrent chemoradiation therapy between March 2002 and December 2

260 Adjuvant chemoradiation therapy did not significantly influence l

261 the benefit of cetuximab added to concurrent chemoradiation therapy for patients undergoing nonoperat

262 rior to and following neoadjuvant 5-FU-based chemoradiation therapy in a series of colorectal cancer

263 )F-FLT) before and early after initiation of chemoradiation therapy in patients with squamous cell he

264 AK1 radiation-response pathway as a rational chemoradiation therapy target.

265 mall-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) during radical chemoradiation therapy using serial PET/CT with (18)F-FD

266 racellular amplification of chemotherapy and chemoradiation therapy via gold nanoparticle- and laser

267 latin and docetaxel, followed by concomitant chemoradiation therapy with cisplatin, docetaxel, and 45

268 with glioblastoma who had completed standard chemoradiation therapy, adding TTFields to maintenance t

269 risk of recurrence (including chemotherapy, chemoradiation therapy, and molecular targeted therapies

270 to predict patient responses to neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy, paving the way toward a new para

271 ts treated with preoperative chemotherapy or chemoradiation therapy, we also demonstrate for the firs

272 nd represents a major obstacle to successful chemoradiation therapy.

273 tient stratification for aggressive adjuvant chemoradiation therapy.

274 hemoradiation therapy and for 12 weeks after chemoradiation therapy.

275 ogic complete response (pCR) to preoperative chemoradiation therapy.

276 section margin (R1 resection) may be offered chemoradiation therapy.

277 3 in combination with capecitabine to target chemoradiation to metastatic colorectal cancer.

278 r lenalidomide, and 3 had received intensive chemoradiation to treat other cancers.

279 imen of preoperative staging and neoadjuvant chemoradiation treatment followed by orthotopic liver tr

280 The addition of bevacizumab to standard chemoradiation treatment for patients with nasopharyngea

281 nced rectal cancer patients with neoadjuvant chemoradiation treatment.

282 cts (ten [26%] vs four [12%], p=0.12) during chemoradiation treatment; the most frequent events were

283 denocarcinoma (EAC) is resistant to standard chemoradiation treatments, and few targeted therapies ar

284 rboplatin once a week (AUC 2); 2 weeks after chemoradiation, two cycles of consolidation chemotherapy

285 ected before, during, and after radiation or chemoradiation using a microfluidic chip.

286 ced rectal cancer who underwent preoperative chemoradiation using IGRT was performed.

287 e phase II clinical trials of cediranib with chemoradiation vs. chemoradiation alone in nGBM patients

288 ival for the 79 patients who completed chemo-chemoradiation was 18.7 months, with a median survival o

289 Fluoropyrimidine-based neoadjuvant chemoradiation was associated with a complete pathologic

290 f gemcitabine to adjuvant fluorouracil-based chemoradiation was associated with a survival benefit fo

291 sonidazole dynamics between weeks 0 and 2 of chemoradiation was associated with improved LRC (HR, 0.3

292 (PDI) as a target to overcome resistance to chemoradiation, we developed a GBM tumor model wherein c

293 accompanied by decreases in no treatment and chemoradiation, whereas the rate of esophagectomies rema

294 Adjuvant chemoradiation with 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin significan

295 Chemoradiation with a continuous infusion of fluorouraci

296 Concurrent chemoradiation with a platinum-based agent is the recomm

297 Clinical trials comparing chemoradiation with and without induction three-drug che

298 Purpose Chemoradiation with cisplatin 100 mg/m(2) given once eve

299 ced rectal cancers may tolerate preoperative chemoradiation with IGRT as well as younger patients.

300 urgical resection and completion of standard chemoradiation without progression.