戻る
「早戻しボタン」を押すと検索画面に戻ります。 [閉じる]

コーパス検索結果 (１語後でソート)

通し番号をクリックするとPubMedの該当ページを表示します
1  transduction, even in the setting of vector readministration.
2 duration of action and the need for frequent readministration.
3 reward processing that is normalized by drug readministration.
4 erminals that is reversed by methamphetamine readministration.
5 ene expression, potentially requiring vector readministration.
6 ibodies were generated, which blocked vector readministration.
7 did produce significant gene expression upon readministration.
8 onths of therapy--both before and after drug readministration.
9 amuscular injection and its impact on vector readministration.
10  this did not prevent the efficacy of vector readministration.
11 t be excluded from clinical trials or vector readministration.
12 here remain concerns about the safety of its readministration.
13 ene expression, and difficulties with vector readministration.
14 sponse which precludes expression upon viral readministration.
15 n obstacle to the potential option of vector readministration.
16 ti-rabbit Ab responses, which limits routine readministration.
17 ely, reducing the concern of toxicities upon readministrations.
18 lant-treated eyes (-7.9 +/- 2.04% with fixed readministration; -5.2 +/- 1.35% with flexible readminis
19 and block liver transduction(3-5) and vector readministration(6); thus, they represent a major limita
20                               Before a first readministration, a positive HACA titer was present in 2
21                                    With drug readministration, a positive rechallenge has recently be
22  in 22 of 454 patients (4.8%); after a first readministration, an additional 82 of 432 (19.0%) became
23                                   Subsequent readministration and augmentation of expression was poss
24             These results indicate that both readministration and immune modulation will be required
25  versus TD as induction was retained despite readministration as consolidation therapy after double a
26  (n = 198) or 15 mug (n = 198) on day 1 with readministration at weeks 16 and 32, or twice-daily topi
27         We found that the ineffectiveness of readministration due to the humoral response to an Ad5 f
28 nstrated during initiation persist with drug readministration during chronic therapy.
29 xone dosing recommendations (ie, 1 dose with readministration every 2-3 minutes if needed) are adequa
30                                       Vector readministration failed to produce additional transducti
31  proteins from AAV serotypes 2, 3, and 6 for readministration in the mouse lung.
32 ient to suppress gene transduction following readministration in vivo.
33                                 In addition, readministration is usually ineffective unless the anima
34 ged genetic engraftment together with vector readministration) is possible with AAV in skeletal muscl
35 oup analysis, patients with flexible implant readministration met the same criteria.
36 n of E3 genes in recombinant Ads facilitates readministration of a functional vector for long-term co
37 ssive materials to AAV vectors, enabling the readministration of AAV vectors while maintaining their
38 ids still represents a major obstacle to the readministration of AAV vectors.
39       In addition, we demonstrate successful readministration of AAV2/5 to the lung 5 months after th
40 gainst Ad5 infection that often prevents the readministration of Ad5 vectors.
41  mice with Clenoliximab permitted successful readministration of adenoviral vectors at least four tim
42                            In contrast, upon readministration of androgens, Her-2/neu mRNA, protein,
43 e study of a bone marrow harvest followed by readministration of autologous MNCs in 10 patients, 18 t
44                                              Readministration of doxycycline to tTA DT mice caused ha
45 l complications and mechanisms to facilitate readministration of ERT in these patients remain unexplo
46                                              Readministration of GAP-DLRIE liposome CAT complexes at
47                         Coadministration and readministration of GV10 vectors showed that E4 provided
48 tion levels that are largely reversible upon readministration of iron.
49            Once-repeated BNCT treatment with readministration of liposomes at an interval of 4, 6, or
50                                              Readministration of M-CSF after various intervals contin
51                                          The readministration of MeAIB every 12 hours further decreas
52                                     Striatal readministration of rAAV2-GDNF was also tested in preimm
53 engaged students in the learning process and readministration of the quiz at the end of class allowed
54 e skeletal muscle; these responses prevented readministration of the same serotype but did not substa
55 stations of a hypersensitivity reaction upon readministration of the targeted nanoparticle.
56 esired in applications of gene therapy where readministration of the vector is necessary.
57 oes not allow for secondary expression after readministration of the vector.
58 ow-up, thus indicating potential barriers to readministration of the vector.
59 esponse which precludes gene expression upon readministration of the virus.
60 une response, which prevents expression upon readministration of the virus.
61 e dosing strategies which promote successful readministration of vector in clinical trials and marked
62  the effects of the CD4 antibody diminished; readministration of vector without diminution of gene ex
63 IgA that neutralized and prevented effective readministration of vector.
64 against AAV capsid proteins does not prevent readministration of vector.
65 enovirus did not develop, allowing efficient readministration of vector.
66 roduction of neutralizing antibody, allowing readministration of vector.
67 neutralizing antibodies that block effective readministration of vector.
68 lia A mouse model (FVIII knockout mice), the readministration of zwitterionic PS polypeptide-modified
69 antibody responses to the vector, subretinal readministration results in additional transduction even
70 h history of infusion reaction who underwent readministration, the majority received the same formula
71 administration; -5.2 +/- 1.35% with flexible readministration) versus -3.1 +/- 0.43% in SLT-treated e
72 levels were reduced for only 4 wk, and viral readministration was ineffective.
73 the effect of neutralizing antibodies on AAV readministration, we attempted to deliver recombinant AA
74 t to be determined, but it seems likely that readministration will be necessary over the lifetime of
75 TNFR:Fc protein to the circulation following readministration with AAV[2/5].
76 , hinders long-term transgene expression and readministration with first-generation vectors.
77 s that intracerebral rAAV administration and readministration would not be affected by the presence o