ライフサイエンスコーパス: low-dose group

1 ients to the high-dose group and 1048 to the low-dose group).

2 0.05), and was similar to CHF values in the Low Dose group.

3 d from the high dose group compared with the low dose group.

4 mg (interquartile range, 100 to 190) in the low-dose group.

5 2) in the high-dose subgroup relative to the low-dose group.

6 up and 48% (95% CI, 28%-69%; P = .20) in the low-dose group.

7 s; patients on <50% or no drug comprised the low-dose group.

8 the high-dose group and 75.5% (4.2) for the low-dose group.

9 bined and 39% and 20%, respectively, for the low-dose group.

10 8.0% in the high-dose group and 18.6% in the low-dose group.

11 amples in weeks 3 and 4 as compared with the low-dose group.

12 consistent differences between the high- and low-dose groups.

13 ed in cytokine changes between the high- and low-dose groups.

14 topenia, schistocytosis, anemia, and melena (low-dose group, 0.05 to 0.2 microg/kg; n = 8).

15 ted control group to 0.3 in the sulforaphane low-dose group, 0.3 and 0.4 in the two sulforaphane-N-ac

16 bitor dose, this effect was primarily in the low-dose group (1-year percent event-free survival: II/I

17 ment groups, with 96% of participants in the low-dose group, 100% of those in the high-dose group, an

18 atment with placebo, 6.25 mg BID carvedilol (low-dose group), 12.5 mg BID carvedilol (medium-dose gro

19 rs included 28 of 74 patients (37.8%) in the low-dose group, 17 of 52 patients (32.7%) in the high-do

20 ere 0.7 IU/mL (range 0.0-54.0 IU/mL) for the low-dose group, 18.0 IU/mL (0.7-18.0 IU/mL) for the midd

21 03/HPTN 081, infection occurred in 28 in the low-dose group, 19 in the high-dose group, and 29 in the

22 tor IX levels of 1.7 IU per deciliter in the low-dose group, 2.3 IU per deciliter in the intermediate

23 ose groups: 5.0 x 10(9) viral particles in a low-dose group, 2.5 x 10(10) viral particles in an inter

24 ull-dose group; 13.7% (14/102) in the 14-day low-dose group; 20.8% (22/106) in the 6-day full-dose gr

25 .05) and increased in the CHF/ET(A) High and Low Dose groups (23+/-3 and 25+/-1%, p < 0.05).

26 an additive antitumorigenic response for the low dose group (25 + 25 microg/kg) and additive interact

27 N 085, HIV-1 infection occurred in 32 in the low-dose group, 28 in the high-dose group, and 38 in the

28 no significant difference between high- and low-dose groups (36/93 [38.7%] vs 27/95 [28.4%]; P = .07

29 ht participants (8%) received placebo in the low-dose groups; 39 participants (41%) received high-dos

30 3) occurred in 7 of 108 infants (6%) in the low-dose group, 4 of 88 infants (5%) in the high-dose gr

31 y index in 25 percent of the patients in the low-dose group, 44 percent of those in the medium-dose g

32 ported in 43 (73%) of 59 participants in the low-dose group, 47 (82%) of 57 participants in the high-

33 Participants were non-randomly enrolled to a low-dose group (5 x 109 viral particles [vp] of ChAdOx1

34 e treated i.v. with 50 U/kg of human AT-III (low dose group), 500 U/kg of human AT-III (high dose gro

35 Altogether, in the low-dose group, 51 participants received rVSV-ZEBOV and

36 mprised 164 participants (56 children in the low-dose group, 54 children in the high-dose group, and

37 For the low-dose group, 6 of 55 base substitutions were at GC ba

38 oup, 18 [38.3%]; mid-dose group, 14 [29.8%]; low-dose group, 7 [14.9%]; placebo group, 5 [10.4%]).

39 rse event (p=0.6751) and 76% of those in the low-dose group, 70% of those in the high-dose group, and

40 ts transfused was significantly lower in the low-dose group (9.25x10(11)) than in the medium-dose gro

41 ith seroconversion rates of 44% (n=4) in the low-dose group, 92% (n=11) in the medium-dose group, and

42 Fewer patients in the low-dose group abandoned IFN for reasons other than tran

43 6 to -0.85] x 10(3) muU/mL; P = .01) and the low-dose group (adjusted mean difference, -2.96 [95% CI,

44 MV-LASV (24 [96%] of 25 participants in the low-dose group; all 23 [100%] participants in the high-d

45 0.11 nmol of 99mTc-labeled Cy7 tilmanocept (low-dose group); an additional six mice were injected wi

46 n increase in SC of 0.08 mg/dl per yr in the low-dose group and 0.10 mg/dl per yr in the high-dose gr

47 in only ten (25%) of 40 participants in the low-dose group and 13 (33%) of 39 participants in the hi

48 IgG (geometric mean titre 62.9 EU/ml in the low-dose group and 145.9 EU/ml in the high-dose group on

49 rs (IQR 4.5-7.6) in 434 patients (217 in the low-dose group and 217 in the high-dose group).

50 [SD] age, 78.8 [3.4] years, all male) in the low-dose group and 22 patients (mean [SD] age, 70.7 [7.6

51 .045), with reduction rates of 18.95% in the low-dose group and 33.62% in the high-dose group.

52 ) time to FEF was 4.0 (1.0-8.0) days for the low-dose group and 4.0 (1.0-7.0) days for the high-dose

53 evels, with reduction rates of 40.18% in the low-dose group and 52.6% in the high-dose group.

54 d, and 18 patients developed ESRD: 10 in the low-dose group and 8 in the high-dose group (P: = 0.56).

55 glaucoma surgery at month 36 was 4.8% in the low-dose group and 8.1% in the high-dose insert group.

56 d a 16% lower risk of death (P =.001) in the low-dose group and a nonsignificantly lower risk in the

57 t a dose of either 10 or 30 mg per kilogram (low-dose group and high-dose group, respectively) or pla

58 se group, one of 34 (3%) participants in the low-dose group and zero of 62 (0%) participants in the c

59 lacebo group, 12 (6%) of 201 patients in the low-dose group, and 17 (8%) of 211 patients in the high-

60 bo group, four (2%) patients enrolled in the low-dose group, and 17 (8%) patients in the high-dose gr

61 [18%] in the placebo group, 17 [30%] in the low-dose group, and 20 [34%] in the high-dose group).

62 h-dose group, 22.1 mug/mL (19.3-28.6) in the low-dose group, and 3.2 mug/mL (2.4-4.9) in the placebo

63 b group, 47 in the mid-dose group, 47 in the low-dose group, and 48 in the placebo group.

64 h-dose group, 44.9 mug/mL (25.8-56.3) in the low-dose group, and 5.2 mug/mL (3.5-7.6) in the placebo

65 (33%) to the placebo group, 57 (33%) to the low-dose group, and 58 (34%) to the high-dose group.

66 se group, 33 (79%) of 42 participants in the low-dose group, and five (25%) of 20 participants in the

67 igh-dose group, 25 (60%) participants in the low-dose group, and five (25%) participants in the place

68 ate-dose group and in five (1%) women in the low-dose group, and post partum in six (1%) women and 11

69 ient in the placebo group, three (5%) in the low-dose group, and two (3%) in the high-dose group; onl

70 RD positivity of the high-dose group and the low-dose group at day 22 of induction 1.

71 ity in the high-dose group compared with the low-dose group at the end of study was observed (p = 0.0

72 ontamination was seen less frequently in the low-dose group, but the difference did not achieve signi

73 L greater in the high-dose group than in the low-dose group, but there was no treatment effect on any

74 these patients, 8 and 4 in the high-dose and low-dose groups, but none in the placebo group, met crit

75 s: BSJYD high dose group, middle dose group, low dose group, captopril group, and control group.

76 Combined analysis for high- and low-dose groups demonstrated increased efficacy of CMRIT

77 High- vs low-dose group effects were similar for these outcomes.

78 Although the majority of subjects in the low-dose group eventually acquired the task, their acqui

79 usions given was significantly higher in the low-dose group (five, vs. three in the medium-dose and t

80 ith the (-)-B[c]PhDE, both the high- and the low-dose groups for (+)-B[c]PhDE gave a 50:50 distributi

81 lizing Abs in one of five individuals in the low-dose group, four of five in the intermediate-dose gr

82 rences were minor between dosing groups, the low dose group had a higher number of isolates with MIC

83 By comparison, the low-dose group had a similar mean injury score of 1.79+/

84 The low-dose group had an adverse event (AE) profile similar

85 - and intermediate-dose groups; however, the low-dose group had significantly better vessel definitio

86 t event, as compared with 338 (32.3%) in the low-dose group (hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.00

87 No differences were found between high- and low-dose groups in basophil activation at the time of de

88 of 1350 and in 1320 of 1350 segments in the low-dose group (kappa= 0.66), respectively.

89 ICARS score from baseline to 6 months in the low-dose group (least squares mean difference -1.37 [95%

90 For the low-dose group, mean sensitivity was 93+/-0%, mean speci

91 in the high-dose group and 38,805 IU in the low-dose group (median difference, -7539 IU; 95% confide

92 IQR: 98.8-158.6; P = 0.03) compared with the low-dose group (median: 122.8 nmol/L, IQR: 99.5-136.0; m

93 treat analysis included 303 preterm infants (low-dose group: median [IQR] GA, 29.1 [28.1-30.4] weeks;

94 Twenty-nine participants were included (low-dose group, n = 10; high-dose group, n = 10; control

95 warfarin dose requirement of 1.5 mg or less (low-dose group, n=36), randomly selected patients with a

96 In the low-dose group, no significant effect of dutasteride on

97 significantly higher tumor %ID/g compared to Low dose group on day 2.

98 60 mg (mid-dose group); vixarelimab, 120 mg (low-dose group); or placebo.

99 roup, and fell by 43% from CHF values in the Low Dose group (p < 0.05).

100 SNRs and CNRs were lower in the low-dose group (P < .01).

101 first 24 hours by 23 patients (31.1%) in the low-dose group (P = 0.027 versus placebo), 18 patients (

102 ealed significantly lower CMV disease in the low-dose group (P = 0.02; odds ratio, 0.432, 95% confide

103 e high-dose group and 6.9+/-8.4 units in the low-dose group (P = 0.384 by t-test; favoring low-dose D

104 gh-dose group (P=0.008) and 2.8+/-0.1 in the low-dose group (P=0.005), as compared with 3.8+/-0.1 in

105 n both the high-dose group (P=0.048) and the low-dose group (P=0.14), as compared with 2.9+/-0.1 in t

106 When compared with the low-dose group, patients in the high-dose group had a no

107 events in the high-dose group and 507 in the low-dose group (rate ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.92).

108 n the weight-based group and 10 (40%) in the low-dose group relapsed after treatment completion leadi

109 ose group and in 16 (3%) of 555 in the fixed low-dose group (relative risk [RR] 0.69 [95% CI 0.32-1.4

110 d 233 +/- 87 SFC/10(6) PBMC, in the high and low dose groups, respectively.

111 98 segments in the high-, intermediate-, and low-dose groups, respectively.

112 nd 100 segments in high-, intermediate-, and low-dose groups, respectively.

113 ggregation in vitro, whereas plasma from the low-dose group resulted in only partial inhibition.

114 was 9.2% for the high-dose and 8.8% for the low-dose groups (risk ratio, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.8-1.3) (P =.

115 iate-dose group and in 20 (4%) of 525 in the low-dose group (RR 1.16 [95% CI 0.65-2.09]).

116 erved in six (10%) of 59 participants in the low-dose group, seven (12%) of 57 participants in the hi

117 ed events, compared with PA, the TA 10-mg/ml low-dose group showed lower odds (OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.55

118 visit, of whom 26 were enrolled (six in the low-dose group, six in the medium-dose group, and 14 in

119 ina frequency was significantly lower in the low-dose group than in placebo-treated patients at both

120 ited higher values (P=.005 to P=.042) in the low-dose group than in the high-dose group; this finding

121 in 71%, 69%, and 70% of the patients in the low-dose group, the medium-dose group, and the high-dose

122 lation stage were sequentially assigned to a low-dose group (two intramuscular doses of MV-LASV at 2

123 Two hundred thirty-seven high-risk RTR (low-dose group = valganciclovir 450 mg/day [n = 130]; hi

124 patients with adverse events were 21% in the low-dose group versus 33% in the high-dose group (P=0.00

125 %) achieved target levels: 48 (45%) from the low-dose group versus 63 (64%) from the high-dose group

126 erious adverse events (SAEs) occurred in the low-dose group versus 7 SAEs in the high-dose group.

127 -dose group and 11 (26%) participants in the low-dose group versus one (5%) participant in the placeb

128 nificant improvement in LLVA occurred in the low-dose group versus the control group at month 12 (33.

129 sensitivity improved significantly with the low-dose group versus the control group at month 12 (P =

130 incidence rates per 100 person-years in the low-dose group versus the moderate-dose group (27.43 vs

131 Effects in the high- and low-dose groups vs control were similar for fitness (adj

132 one (an acute allergic skin reaction in the low-dose group) was assessed to be causally related.

133 patients in the high-dose group than in the low-dose group were hospitalized for at least 3 days (36

134 Patients in the low-dose group were more likely to have difficulties at

135 tinal adverse events in the high-dose versus low-dose groups were 49% (37 of 76) and only 22% (18 of

136 High-dose and low-dose groups were combined as a single dexmedetomidin

137 d extravascular tumor uptake by day 2 in the Low dose group, while the Middle dose showed significant

138 Participants from the low-dose group with no plans to deploy to Ebola-aff5cted

139 Noninferiority of the high-dose group to the low-dose group would be established if the upper boundar