ライフサイエンスコーパス: run-in period

1 cts of olive oil intake and a habitual diet (run-in period).

2 assessing medical problems at the end of the run-in period.

3 placebo (n = 12) after a 3- to 5-day placebo run-in period.

4 g behavior to the levels observed during the run-in period.

5 re and after the prerandomization colchicine run-in period.

6 at randomization after 6 to 10 weeks of the run-in period.

7 ared to baseline was demonstrated during the run-in period.

8 y cells, as observed in the vemurafenib-only run-in period.

9 d an elevated CRP level were enrolled in the run-in period.

10 s, following a 2-week, single-blind, placebo run-in period.

11 zed parallel intervention preceded by a 2-wk run-in period.

12 esponded (ie, entrained) after a tasimelteon run-in period.

13 isease who tolerated LD-MTX during an active run-in period.

14 or 84 days after a 14-day open-label placebo run-in period.

15 ionate (500 mug twice daily) during a 6-week run-in period.

16 re enrolled into a 2-month dose-optimisation run-in period.

17 buffet test meal obtained during the placebo run-in period.

18 on diagnosis claims during an initial 2-year run-in period.

19 concentration and eligibility over a 4-week run-in period.

20 cantly reduced during the ICS versus placebo run-in periods: 0.18 mm/wk (SD, 0.55 mm/wk) versus 0.45

21 After the run-in period, 132 patients received elexacaftor-tezacaf

22 After a 2-wk run-in period, 152 healthy men and women (aged 40-70 y)

23 After the run-in period, 19 patients randomized to the control gro

24 eb 16, 2023, we screened and enrolled in the run-in period 208 patients.

25 After a 1 week run-in period, 24 patients with constipation-predominant

26 After a 4-wk run-in period, 240 hypercholesterolemic but otherwise he

27 After a run-in period, 254 patients were randomly assigned to pl

28 After a 4-week run-in period, 304 participants were randomized to the f

29 After a single-blind, 4-5-week placebo run-in period, 332 patients were randomised double-blind

30 three to eight times a day during the study run-in period (362 of 621 who started) were randomly ass

31 Following a 4-wk run-in period, 39 corticosteroid-dependent asthmatic pat

32 In the run-in period, 4 patients had adverse events leading to

33 After a 2-wk run-in period, 44 Europeans and 40 Indo-Asian Sikhs were

34 After a run-in period, 518 individuals with previous vascular di

35 After an active run-in period, 6158 patients were enrolled and 4786 rand

36 Of 202 patients treated during the run-in period, 73 patients had tumor shrinkage of > or =

37 duced FEV1 fall was 27.9 +/- 1.4% during the run-in period, 8.1 +/- 1.2% (70.3 +/- 4.1% bronchoprotec

38 iosis-associated pain and, during the 35-day run-in period, a dysmenorrhoea Numerical Rating Scale (N

39 After a safety run-in period, a Simon 2-stage design was used.

40 During the 2-mo run-in period, all patients received fluticasone; they t

41 After a 2-week run-in period, all patients were given 50 mg/d of sertra

42 e scheduled (416 liters per minute after the run-in period and 414 liters per minute after the treatm

43 We established a 2-year run-in period and assembled 90 variables that characteri

44 nt was serious adverse events for the safety run-in period and progression-free rate at 8 weeks (8wk-

45 bjects were tested during a baseline placebo run-in period and retested after 28-days of drug (n = 21

46 red to the hip protector use during a 2-week run-in period and were enrolled.

47 egan with a 4-wk, placebo (olive oil; 4 g/d) run-in period and were then randomly assigned to 4 wk of

48 After 3-wk run-in periods and separated by a 5-wk washout period, 2

49 bitril/valsartan, 100 mg/d, during the short run-in period, and 49 patients (29%) discontinued sacubi

50 ek screening visit, a 3-week metformin-alone run-in period, and a 5-year treatment period, which was

51 Prerandomization run-in periods are being used to select or exclude patie

52 te for rollovers: 1 attack/4 weeks (based on run-in period attack rate during HELP Study); for nonrol

53 for rollovers: >=1 attack/4 weeks (based on run-in period attack rate during HELP Study); for nonrol

54 mm Hg were randomized after a 2-week placebo run-in period (baseline) in a double-blind, crossover fa

55 r more, underwent a riluzole-only 12-18 week run-in period before randomisation in a 1:1 ratio to eit

56 sacubitril-valsartan during a 6- to 10-week run-in period before randomization.

57 Run-in periods can dilute or enhance the clinical applic

58 After a 7-d cocoa-free run-in period, cocoa or flavanol-poor placebo (approxima

59 n period, the nature of treatment during the run-in period, concurrent treatment during the treatment

60 Following a 2-wk run-in period consuming control snacks (mini-muffins), p

61 undergoing a 1-month, single-blind, placebo run-in period during an existing clinical trial to 3 gro

62 After a 3-wk run-in period during which all participants received a l

63 METHODS AND After a 4-week run-in period during which fruit and vegetable intake wa

64 sover dietary intervention study with a 14-d run-in period during which subjects consumed their habit

65 hronic hemodialysis completed a 16- to 20-wk run-in period, during which maintenance ivID and rhEPO w

66 standard therapy were enrolled in a 12-week run-in period, during which rilonacept was initiated and

67 After a 4-week open-label run-in period, during which time all patients received s

68 After an open-label, run-in period, each patient was randomly assigned (doubl

69 1 patients entering sequential, single-blind run-in periods (enalapril 10 mg twice daily for 2 weeks

70 Participants completed a 2- to 8-week run-in period followed by 3 crossover periods with daily

71 M was consumed for 11 d, consisting of a 6-d run-in period followed by a 4-d balance period and 1 run

72 The study had a 1-week, placebo run-in period followed by an 11-week, double-blind, rand

73 rticipated in a 4-week prerandomization sham run-in period, followed by a 48-week treatment period.

74 The study period included a screening and run-in period, followed by a treatment period of over 28

75 of clinical trials, but the implications of run-in periods for interpreting the results of clinical

76 We excluded 1,546 patients during a 2-month run-in period from July 1, 2011, to August 31, 2011, res

77 Following a 2-week run-in period, HAE patients received 8 weekly rhC1INH ad

78 esions accumulated during 4 weeks of placebo run-in period in cohort 2.

79 reatment phase that most closely matched the run-in period in terms of ambient temperature) compared

80 All subjects started with a 2-wk run-in period in which they consumed 150 mL control soy-

81 derate Alzheimer's disease entered a 12-week run-in period in which they were randomly allocated done

82 ) subjects discontinued the study during the run-in period, including 1102 (10.5%) during the enalapr

83 nts with metabolic syndrome completed a 4-wk run-in period, limiting their dairy intake to 3 servings

84 ciprocalised creatinine was evident over the run-in period (mean 1/creatinine before MMF=0.005739-0.0

85 verse events were reported during the safety run-in period (n = 6 in V+A arm).

86 We examined data from the 3-month run-in period (no intervention) of the randomized Teen A

87 Eligible patients entered a run-in period of 14 to 20 days in which all patients adm

88 During a run-in period of 2 to 8 weeks, patients were instructed

89 Each test day was preceded by a run-in period of 3 d of a symptom-free diet and separate

90 All patients completed a run-in period of 3 weeks on a regimen based on standard

91 us ezetimibe at a dose of 10 mg daily, for a run-in period of 4 to 12 weeks.

92 ontrolled trials (RCTs) with a stable asthma run-in period of 4 weeks or more, an intervention to red

93 mized controlled trials with a stable asthma run-in period of 4 weeks or more, an intervention to sto

94 After a run-in period of 4 weeks, in which all patients received

95 During the 3-week run-in period of a randomized trial, 123 healthy individ

96 ject body weights.After a 2-wk provided-food run-in period of consuming a Western-style diet, 49 men

97 Following a 2-wk run-in period of maintaining a low polyphenol/fiber diet

98 F, in relation to treatment failure from the run-in period of open-label inhaled fluticasone, and the

99 at higher risk for noncompletion during the run-in period of PARADIGM-HF.

100 hange intakes from those observed during the run-in period of the buffet test meal (P = 0.78).

101 ients, 76 of whom were eligible to enter the run-in period of the study.

102 hma that was well controlled during a 6-week run-in period of treatment with inhaled triamcinolone (4

103 was suboptimally controlled during a 6-week run-in period of treatment with inhaled triamcinolone ac

104 Of these, 158 (65%) participated in the CPAP run-in period, of whom 39 (25%) patients did not tolerat

105 After a 2-week run-in period on a control diet (37% total fat, 16% satu

106 After a 2-wk run-in period on a nitrate-restricted diet the subjects

107 eened and 60 COPD patients entered a 1-month run-in period on low-dose ICS/LABA budesonide/formoterol

108 or random allocation after the 12-to-18-week run-in period on riluzole.

109 tom score (test day minus average of the 3-d run-in period) on a 0-100 mm visual analogue scale (Delt

110 than did olive oil intake (P < 0.05) and the run-in period (P < 0.005 and P < 0.05, respectively) and

111 increased HDL cholesterol compared with the run-in period (P < 0.05).

112 the butter period than in the olive oil and run-in periods (P < 0.0001).

113 During the 1-month run-in period, participants received their usual US ciga

114 After a 4-week tezacaftor plus ivacaftor run-in period, participants were randomly assigned (1:1)

115 After a 2-4 week run-in period, participants were randomly assigned (1:1)

116 After a 4-week, single-blind placebo run-in period, participants were randomly assigned (1:1:

117 After a 2-wk run-in period, participants were randomly assigned to co

118 After an active run-in period, participants were randomly assigned to re

119 After a 30-day run in period, patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) t

120 After a run-in period, patients (N = 719) were randomized at 30

121 After a 1-week, single-blind, placebo, run-in period, patients received a double-blind, 11-week

122 After a 1- to 2-week run-in period, patients received either 12 mug of small-

123 After a 2-week placebo run-in period, patients received either montelukast (5-m

124 blind placebo plus diet (600 kcal/d deficit) run-in period, patients were randomized to receive place

125 After a 2-week single-blind placebo run-in period, patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by

126 After a 30-day run-in period, patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) t

127 After a 4-week, single-masked run-in period, patients were randomly assigned to receiv

128 After the run-in period, patients with glycated haemoglobin of 8.0

129 %) of 3194 participants who had finished the run-in period proceeded to randomisation, with rates con

130 After a 2-week run-in period receiving one inhalation per day via singl

131 nicline treatment beyond the standard 1-week run-in period reduced prequit smoking exposure but, more

132 Reports of clinical trials using run-in periods should indicate how this aspect of their

133 After a 24-h placebo run-in period, subjects received a placebo (n = 19) or 4

134 After a 2-week run-in period, subjects were assigned randomly to groups

135 After a 2-week run-in period, subjects were randomized into 3 treatment

136 Trial exemplifies the use of an active-drug run-in period that enhances clinical applicability by se

137 After a run-in period that included treatment with an inhaled co

138 During the run-in period, the median time to resolution or near-res

139 The presence of a run-in period, the nature of treatment during the run-in

140 ts that would have been observed without the run-in period, the reported results overestimate the ben

141 from 41.3% (95% CI, 39.6%-43.0%) during the run-in period to 57.1% (95% CI, 55.9%-58.1%) by the end

142 dies of these drug classes should consider a run-in period to assess adherence and use a different st

143 After a run-in period to control for inhaled corticosteroid use,

144 -controlled study with a 2-week single-blind run-in period to determine baseline severity, followed b

145 After a 4-week run-in period to ensure insufficient response to standar

146 dy exemplifies the use of a prerandomization run-in period to exclude subjects who are nonadherent, w

147 E)-inhibitors were randomly assigned after a run-in period to oral ramipril 10 mg/day (n=8407), telmi

148 r exercise on two occasions during a placebo run-in period to receive 10 mg of montelukast (54 patien

149 After a run-in period to teach participants how to use the study

150 concomitant preventive drugs) after a 28 day run-in period to three 28 day treatment cycles of subcut

151 r congestive heart failure typify the use of run-in periods to exclude patients who do not tolerate o

152 nt of participants; use of pre-randomization run-in periods to improve participant adherence and asse

153 ized (after a 3-week, single-blind, placebo, run-in period) to 1 of 3 parallel, 6-month, double-blind

154 eline and tolerant of aspirin, over an 18-wk run-in period, to 325 mg aspirin or placebo on alternate

155 After an 8-9 month run-in period we asked patients, hospital staff and GPs

156 After a single-blind run-in period, we assigned patients, in a double-blind f

157 After a 4-week run-in period, we randomly assigned 317 subjects (age ra

158 After a 9-week run-in period, we randomly assigned patients with asthma

159 Screening procedures and a 3-week run-in period were added to increase the use of the mobi

160 ttacks in the first 56 days of a prospective run-in period were eligible.

161 with clinical response to goflikicept in the run-in period were randomized (1:1) to a placebo-control

162 d 7.5 on an 11.0-point scale during a 2-week run-in period were randomized to either an experimental

163 olone acetonide during a 2-wk, single-blind, run-in period were randomized to inhaled fluticasone pro

164 corticosteroids during a 2-wk, single-blind, run-in period were randomized to treatment with salmeter

165 cipants who adhered to treatment during this run-in period were then randomly assigned to 46 weeks of

166 mples of reports of clinical trials in which run-in periods were used to exclude noncompliant subject

167 During the run-in period, when albuterol use was kept to a minimum,

168 ria at screening entered a 2-week open-label run-in period where they received beclometasone dipropio

169 sting empagliflozin vs placebo) or an active run-in period with a randomized withdrawal (SONAR testin

170 After a 4-wk run-in period with a refined diet, we randomly allocated

171 Following a 14-day run-in period with an artificial tear administered 2 tim

172 After a run-in period with atorvastatin 10 mg daily, patients we

173 -C >130 mg/dl at screening entered an 8-week run-in period with atorvastatin 20 mg/day before randomi

174 ab + cobimetinib + vemurafenib, after a 28-d run-in period with cobimetinib + vemurafenib, had substa

175 After a 4-week run-in period with ivacaftor or tezacaftor-ivacaftor, pa

176 After a 4-week run-in period with provision of usual inhaled corticoste

177 verweight or obesity who completed a 20-week run-in period with subcutaneous semaglutide, 2.4 mg once

178 After a 2-week run-in period with twice-daily dosing of Systane Balance

179 omparing LLGR and 24-hour UFC in the placebo run-in period with values in the ICS treatment period by

180 study participants who completed the 20-week run-in period (with a mean weight loss of 10.6%) and wer

181 cipants reported grade 3 toxicity during the run-in period, with no upper gastrointestinal bleeding (