ライフサイエンスコーパス: reduced-intensity conditioning

1 following myeloablative or non-myeloablative-reduced intensity conditioning.

2 n Idua(-/-) recipient BM, particularly under reduced intensity conditioning.

3 either myeloablative or busulfan-containing reduced intensity conditioning.

4 o received HCT following nonmyeloablative or reduced-intensity conditioning.

5 vector (gRV) and infused following busulfan reduced-intensity conditioning.

6 mulative dose of <8 Gy, and nonmyeloablative/reduced-intensity conditioning.

7 ls are warranted to evaluate the benefits of reduced-intensity conditioning.

8 C, and HLA-DRB1 loci) unrelated donor, after reduced-intensity conditioning.

9 agent or at lower doses in conjunction with reduced-intensity conditioning.

10 s) who were undergoing transplantation after reduced-intensity conditioning.

11 ho received T-replete stem cell grafts after reduced-intensity conditioning.

12 This effect was absent when they received reduced-intensity conditioning.

13 ould the transplantation be myeloablative or reduced intensity conditioning?

14 cell transplantation after myeloablative or reduced-intensity conditioning across 5 Australian cente

15 hat prospectively compares tandem autologous/reduced intensity conditioning allogeneic transplantatio

16 The first prospective study for reduced-intensity conditioning allogeneic hematopoietic

17 h lymphoid malignancies being considered for reduced-intensity conditioning allogeneic hematopoietic

18 receive a single autologous HSCT followed by reduced-intensity conditioning allogeneic HSCT and then

19 We studied the effects of a reduced-intensity conditioning allogeneic HSCT from dono

20 We report the outcomes after reduced-intensity conditioning allogeneic stem cell tran

21 mtuzumab at lympholytic concentrations after reduced-intensity conditioning allogeneic stem cell tran

22 HDM/ASCT (16 of whom subsequently received a reduced-intensity conditioning allograft and seven a sec

23 As consolidation, young patients received a reduced-intensity conditioning allograft, whereas the re

24 For adults with ALL in CR, reduced intensity conditioning allografting results in m

25 and methotrexate for GVHD prophylaxis after reduced-intensity conditioning alloSCT using human leuko

26 reduction to 30 mg is safe in the context of reduced intensity conditioning and HLA-identical sibling

27 e, disease-free full donor engraftment using reduced intensity conditioning and mobilized peripheral

28 Reduced intensity conditioning and myeloablative conditi

29 e sufficient to achieve HIV-1 remission with reduced intensity conditioning and no irradiation, and t

30 B is sufficient to engraft most adults after reduced-intensity conditioning and is associated with a

31 Use of unrelated donors, reduced-intensity conditioning and the blood cell grafts

32 nsduced HSCs in transplant recipients, using reduced-intensity conditioning and varying gene transfer

33 of hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation, reduced-intensity conditioning, and the use of antithymo

34 r patients who received myeloablative versus reduced-intensity conditioning, as well as for patients

35 Following myeloablative or reduced-intensity conditioning-based HCT, patients recei

36 ve therapy for these patients and the use of reduced-intensity conditioning blood or marrow transplan

37 The use of reduced-intensity conditioning blood or marrow transplan

38 ) could promote allogeneic engraftment after reduced-intensity conditioning by enhancing the GVH effe

39 Reduced-intensity conditioning comprised total-body irra

40 Reduced-intensity conditioning consisted of high-dose fl

41 INTERPRETATION: In patients with reduced-intensity conditioning, EASIX-GVHD is a powerful

42 1 of 22 in complete remission [CR]) received reduced-intensity conditioning followed by allogeneic tr

43 cell carcinoma and basal cell carcinoma and reduced-intensity conditioning for basal cell carcinoma.

44 all survival was significantly better in the reduced-intensity conditioning group: 31 (94%) of 33 pat

45 undergoing allogeneic HLA-matched HSCT with reduced-intensity conditioning, GVHD-free, relapse-free

46 of GVHD in patients undergoing related-donor reduced-intensity conditioning haemopoietic stem-cell tr

47 tandard GVHD prophylaxis after related-donor reduced-intensity conditioning haemopoietic stem-cell tr

48 l malignant diseases who were candidates for reduced-intensity conditioning haemopoietic stem-cell tr

49 These data suggest that reduced-intensity conditioning haploidentical transplant

50 Its remarkable safety when used with reduced-intensity conditioning has been demonstrated in

51 Reduced-intensity conditioning has improved survival aft

52 Reduced-intensity conditioning has minimized nonrelapse-

53 ective studies using either myeloablative or reduced intensity conditioning have shown disease-free s

54 hematopoietic stem cell transplantation with reduced-intensity conditioning have altered the landscap

55 ased availability of alternative donors, and reduced-intensity conditioning, have improved the safety

56 adult patients aged 18-75 years who received reduced-intensity conditioning HCT were randomly assigne

57 To prospectively assess the applicability of reduced-intensity conditioning hematopoietic stem cell t

58 We conducted a prospective phase 2 trial of reduced-intensity conditioning HLA-haploidentical BMT an

59 In older patients with MDS, reduced-intensity conditioning HSCT resulted in a signif

60 Reduced-intensity conditioning HSCT to maintain remissio

61 The role of allogeneic transplantation with reduced-intensity conditioning in diffuse large B-cell l

62 topoietic cell transplantations (HCTs) after reduced-intensity conditioning in patients who experienc

63 ng-term disease control can be achieved with reduced-intensity conditioning in this population.

64 effective treatment for Hurler patients, but reduced intensity conditioning is a risk factor in trans

65 ioning regimens is difficult to justify, and reduced intensity conditioning is used.

66 LA)-matched bone marrow transplantation with reduced-intensity conditioning is a cure for several non

67 The decreased toxicity of reduced-intensity conditioning is more applicable to the

68 In contrast, after reduced intensity conditioning, KIR-L mismatch between t

69 ose total body irradiation (TBI) (2-4 Gy) to reduced intensity conditioning may reduce the rate of re

70 Reduced-intensity conditioning may reduce transplantatio

71 in analyses restricted to patients receiving reduced-intensity conditioning (n = 448; HR IBMFS = 2.39

72 o independent cohorts of adult patients with reduced-intensity conditioning (n=141, n=173) and in a c

73 In patients who received reduced-intensity conditioning (n=239), EASIX-GVHD was a

74 sed prognostic scoring system), and consider reduced intensity conditioning/nonmyeloablative conditio

75 le agreement on the patient factors favoring reduced intensity conditioning or myeloablative conditio

76 5-aza followed by HLA-compatible HSCT after reduced-intensity conditioning or by continuous 5-aza if

77 donor (P < 0.05) or MUD (P = 0.015) and with reduced-intensity conditioning (P < 0.01).

78 re chronic lymphocytic leukemia (P = 0.003), reduced-intensity conditioning (P = 0.02), acute graft-v

79 RAS pathway mutations, was evident only with reduced-intensity conditioning (P<0.001).

80 vs 160 x 10(9) cells per L [90.0-250.5] for reduced-intensity conditioning; p<0.0001).

81 the occurrence of acute grade 2-4 GVHD after reduced intensity conditioning PBSC h-HSCT, perhaps beca

82 Reduced intensity conditioning preceded a kidney allogra

83 ither myeloablative or non-myeloablative (or reduced intensity) conditioning preparative regimens bef

84 support the feasibility and effectiveness of reduced-intensity conditioning prior to allogeneic HSC t

85 The regimen used reduced-intensity conditioning (rabbit anti-thymocyte gl

86 BMT to treat hematological malignancies, the reduced intensity conditioning regimen used in the conte

87 younger than 45 years (P = .003) and after a reduced-intensity conditioning regimen (P = .03).

88 Purpose To compare a reduced-intensity conditioning regimen (RIC) with a myel

89 Patients received a melphalan-based reduced-intensity conditioning regimen and posttransplan

90 b; BC8) that can be combined with a standard reduced-intensity conditioning regimen before allogeneic

91 ildren with primary immunodeficiency using a reduced-intensity conditioning regimen between 1998 and

92 ls transduced with lentiviral vector after a reduced-intensity conditioning regimen combined with ant

93 We examined the effect of a reduced-intensity conditioning regimen designed to enhan

94 We sought to evaluate the efficacy of a reduced-intensity conditioning regimen for allogeneic HS

95 This reduced-intensity conditioning regimen is safe and effic

96 After treatment with rituximab and a reduced-intensity conditioning regimen of busulfan and f

97 We conclude that the reduced-intensity conditioning regimen results in improv

98 4 patients with IPEX syndrome using a novel reduced-intensity conditioning regimen that resulted in

99 d radiotherapy can be safely combined with a reduced-intensity conditioning regimen to yield encourag

100 ry, older patients with AML benefited from a reduced-intensity conditioning regimen with lower melpha

101 In such cases, reduced intensity conditioning regimens represent the ne

102 s frontline therapy have been performed with reduced intensity conditioning regimens using unmanipula

103 Both patients received reduced intensity conditioning regimens.

104 ents received myeloablative and 737 received reduced intensity conditioning regimens.

105 ients received myeloablative and 88 received reduced intensity conditioning regimens.

106 gimen (n = 873; 87%); the remainder received reduced-intensity conditioning regimens (n = 125; 13%).

107 tations was similar in patients who received reduced-intensity conditioning regimens and those who re

108 Reduced-intensity conditioning regimens are a reasonable

109 Reduced-intensity conditioning regimens are associated w

110 Thus, reduced-intensity conditioning regimens are being explor

111 and transplant-related mortality; therefore, reduced-intensity conditioning regimens are being used t

112 In addition, utilization of reduced-intensity conditioning regimens has been success

113 The development of non-myeloablative and reduced-intensity conditioning regimens has enabled olde

114 Reduced-intensity conditioning regimens have allowed the

115 Low and reduced-intensity conditioning regimens have allowed to

116 ver the past decade the development of safer reduced-intensity conditioning regimens, expanded donor

117 cifically the development of nonablative and reduced-intensity conditioning regimens, have enabled th

118 in allogeneic transplantation, particularly reduced-intensity conditioning regimens, have increased

119 The advent of reduced-intensity conditioning regimens, improvements in

120 e with comorbidities, have led to the use of reduced-intensity conditioning regimens, in parallel wit

121 logeneic stem-cell transplantation that uses reduced-intensity conditioning regimens.

122 lated and unrelated allogeneic SCT following reduced-intensity conditioning regimens.

123 donor, especially for transplantations with reduced-intensity conditioning regimens.

124 HCT (n = 180) or MSD-HCT (n = 807) following reduced-intensity conditioning regimens.

125 ithymocyte globulin (ATG; n = 491) following reduced-intensity conditioning regimens.

126 ication of SCT has been further increased by reduced-intensity conditioning regimens.

127 ng the ASCT conditioning phase or the use of reduced-intensity conditioning regimens.

128 acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) after reduced-intensity conditioning, related donor hematopoie

129 + nonTBI + PBSCs, (4) MA + nonTBI + BM, (5) reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) + PBSCs, and (6) RI

130 Reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) allogeneic hematopo

131 ient (ADA-deficient) SCID when combined with reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) and ERT cessation.

132 When adjusted for age, reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) has shown superior

133 oietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) with reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) is scarce, a retros

134 Use of a reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) regimen has now bec

135 (haploBMT) has seen a revival, thanks to the reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) regimens and graft-

136 -graft (HvG) tolerance is the primary aim of reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) regimens for alloge

137 Eleven patients underwent reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) regimens predominan

138 The success of reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) transplantation is

139 Reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) was used with eithe

140 cuss the rationale and potential benefits of reduced intensity conditioning (RIC), nonmyeloablative (

141 e conditioning (SMC), and 833 (62%) received reduced intensity conditioning (RIC).

142 Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and reduced intensity conditioning (RIC)/nonmyeloablative (N

143 Reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) allogeneic hematopo

144 nancies remain at risk for relapse following reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) allogeneic hematopo

145 This review examines reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) allogeneic hematopo

146 Reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) alloHSCT has been d

147 The introduction of reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) alloSCT led to thei

148 s adapted from a preclinical model that used reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) and protected again

149 conducted a 45 patient prospective study of reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) and transplantation

150 ord blood transplantation (UCBT) following a reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) consisting of low-d

151 Here, reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) for HLA-haploidenti

152 Despite the widespread adoption of reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) for myeloma, there

153 The trial compared reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) for patients older

154 enefit was restricted to patients undergoing reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) HSCT (3-year OS, 66

155 Reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) HSCT is associated

156 hematopoietic stem cell transplantation with reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) in 186 patients wit

157 the TNS9.3.55 lentiviral globin vector after reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) in a phase 1 clinic

158 Reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) included fludarabin

159 ransplants (alloHCT) are now performed using reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) instead of myeloabl

160 evaluated the feasibility and efficacy of a reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) regimen of fludarab

161 s (range, 27-68 years), were prepared with a reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) regimen.

162 Reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) regimens allow incr

163 Reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) regimens are increa

164 Recent experience suggests that reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) regimens can improv

165 Reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) regimens extend HSC

166 The safety and efficacy of reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) regimens for the tr

167 s who received an allograft for myeloma with reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) regimens from 33 ce

168 Reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) regimens have exten

169 The role of reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) regimens in pediatr

170 TBI) doses (0-1575 cGy), with an emphasis on reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) regimens.

171 All patients received reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) regimens.

172 se (MRD), but older adults typically receive reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) to limit toxicity.

173 th bone marrow (BM) grafts in the setting of reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) transplantations fo

174 to 81 patients (median age, 50 years) after reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) transplantations pe

175 In 18 allograft recipients (72%), reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) was used.

176 phase 1/2 study assessed the augmentation of reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) with total marrow a

177 lower treatment-related mortality (TRM) with reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) would result in imp

178 In reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC), neither ex vivo no

179 or T-cell replete peripheral blood HCT after reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC).

180 conditioning (MAC), and 21 patients received reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC).

181 ssion to myeloablative conditioning (MAC) or reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC).

182 ial hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis using reduced intensity conditioning SCT results in much impro

183 ions to high-intensity preparative regimens, reduced intensity conditioning should be considered.

184 rt, and 72% and 79% in the myeloablative and reduced-intensity conditioning strata, respectively.

185 Following reduced-intensity conditioning, there was rapid engraftm

186 tive study included 58 adults who received a reduced intensity conditioning to PBSC h-HSCT with cyclo

187 Moreover, we show a novel model using reduced-intensity conditioning to determine genetically

188 matched related donor after myeloablative or reduced-intensity conditioning to receive either post-tr

189 hase 1/2 study for sickle cell disease using reduced-intensity conditioning transplant of autologous

190 oved supportive care, decreased toxicity and reduced intensity conditioning), transplantation worldwi

191 Corresponding rates after reduced intensity conditioning transplants were 46% (95%

192 Corresponding rates after reduced intensity conditioning transplants were 93% and

193 Similar differences were observed after reduced intensity conditioning transplants, 19% vs 28% (

194 ic stem-cell transplantation (alloSCT) after reduced-intensity conditioning using either unrelated um

195 atopoietic stem cell transplantation after a reduced-intensity conditioning using peripheral blood st

196 TBI administered in reduced-intensity conditioning was most strongly associa

197 d unfractionated marrow from brother A after reduced-intensity conditioning with cyclophosphamide and

198 gnancies underwent transplantation following reduced-intensity conditioning with fludarabine and eith

199 n level of MRD compared with those receiving reduced-intensity conditioning with melphalan or myeloab

200 Patients receiving reduced-intensity conditioning without melphalan or nonm