ライフサイエンスコーパス: survival benefit

1 lower dose of 50 mg/kg offered only limited survival benefit.

2 es (eg, <40), the KDPI had limited impact on survival benefit.

3 acceptance behavior may not always provide a survival benefit.

4 futile patients from those with significant survival benefit.

5 ith FAV are critical factors for obtaining a survival benefit.

6 reatic carcinoma and has shown a significant survival benefit.

7 multiple myeloma to result in a substantial survival benefit.

8 lows tumor growth and provides a significant survival benefit.

9 l-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) provides a modest survival benefit.

10 nsity statins were associated with a further survival benefit.

11 maintenance dialysis on the basis of limited survival benefit.

12 of docetaxel chemotherapy contributes to the survival benefit.

13 less was associated with significant midterm survival benefit.

14 arbazine, lomustine, and vincristine provide survival benefit.

15 ited States despite the lack of evidence for survival benefit.

16 , and current therapies provide only limited survival benefit.

17 tumor regression, and substantial long-term survival benefit.

18 ted with higher ORR, but no progression-free survival benefit.

19 1 or XPF antibodies did not confer any extra survival benefit.

20 al ligation and puncture failed to provide a survival benefit.

21 lantation outcomes and on transplant-related survival benefit.

22 local recurrence benefit but does not confer survival benefit.

23 ere cytolytic activity (CYT) imparts a known survival benefit.

24 or those with < 3 other mutations may derive survival benefit.

25 ic cancer did not show a significant overall survival benefit.

26 rent smoking was associated with the largest survival benefit.

27 rapy was not independently associated with a survival benefit.

28 o inhibit hemolysis and confer a significant survival benefit.

29 ogic complete response confers a significant survival benefit.

30 isks in this older population dilute overall survival benefits.

31 ated all intraperitoneal tumors and provided survival benefits.

32 icting data exist regarding its clinical and survival benefits.

33 the incidence of CM to null and showed some survival benefits.

34 sess their benefits in terms of efficacy and survival benefits.

35 this treatment strategy provides only modest survival benefits.

36 urface barriers endowing many pathogens with survival benefits.

37 but wider resection margins do not confer a survival benefit [57 months (95% confidence interval 38.

38 Liver resection leads to extensive survival benefit, accounting for measured and unmeasured

39 To evaluate the survival benefit achieved through surgical resection of

40 PTR offered a survival benefit across all grades (low-grade, HR 0.38,

41 verdosing, trended toward an increase in the survival benefit afforded by BRAF inhibition.

42 s not known, however, whether CABG confers a survival benefit after an extended follow-up period.

43 he enrichment of Akkermansia species and the survival benefit after cecal ligation and puncture.

44 entricular dysfunction may be a predictor of survival benefit after implantable cardioverter-defibril

45 rophylactic co-trimoxazole seems to offer no survival benefit among HEU children in non-malarial, low

46 ctions across a cell population that confers survival benefits; among unicellular bacteria, this can

47 gement of these disorders and the respective survival benefit and control of blood pressure.

48 Because of a lack of survival benefit and higher toxicity, the combination of

49 OLFM4 null mice had a significant 7-d survival benefit and less intestinal barrier dysfunction

50 s by multispectral imaging, which provided a survival benefit and positively correlated with T cell i

51 chronous lung only metastasis might confer a survival benefit and should be considered on an individu

52 fficiently inhibited tumor growth, conferred survival benefits and induced tumor infiltration by immu

53 s are needed to conclusively show an overall survival benefit, and to determine the maximum number of

54 developed empirically and, despite offering survival benefits, are not enough to halt disease progre

55 for colorectal cancer (CRC) provide limited survival benefit, as tumors rapidly develop resistance t

56 ng pediatric candidates, we did not detect a survival benefit associated with accepting an IRD kidney

57 The amputation-free survival benefit associated with an endovascular revascu

58 phase 3 trials have once again confirmed the survival benefit associated with ASCT in myeloma.

59 The survival benefit associated with heart transplant as def

60 of 6.2% (95% CI, 5.2% to 7.3%) in the 5-year survival benefit associated with heart transplant.

61 To determine the potential survival benefit associated with robotic-assisted laparo

62 The use of cetuximab conferred no survival benefit at the expense of increased toxicity.

63 ctionation and treatment effect, the overall survival benefit being restricted to the hyperfractionat

64 ing patients with calculated, individualized survival benefits between accepting and rejecting a kidn

65 response to detrimental microbes may provide survival benefits by allowing C. elegans to temporarily

66 ained through trade-offs where migrants gain survival benefits by avoiding unfavourable conditions, w

67 etrimental effect on survival, but offers no survival benefit, by contrast with similar patients stud

68 Survival benefit calculation accounts for patients' and

69 significantly different between high and low survival benefit centers (77.6% vs 77.1%, respectively;

70 ared with low survival benefit centers, high survival benefit centers performed heart transplant for

71 ist survival without transplant (29% at high survival benefit centers vs 39% at low survival benefit

72 significantly different between high and low survival benefit centers, compared with centers with sur

73 Compared with low survival benefit centers, high survival benefit centers

74 high survival benefit centers vs 39% at low survival benefit centers; survival difference, -10% [95%

75 iation was not associated with a significant survival benefit compared to no adjuvant therapy.

76 idney transplantation (KT) has confirmed the survival benefit compared to remaining listed on dialysi

77 milar to T1DM, T2DM patients with SPK have a survival benefit compared to those with kidney transplan

78 -1 and caspofungin resulted in a significant survival benefit compared with caspofungin or anti-PD-1

79 atients, KT is associated with a significant survival benefit compared with remaining on dialysis.

80 animals treated with ITPP had a significant survival benefit compared with respective controls, whil

81 s the only immunotherapy agent shown to have survival benefit compared with standard chemotherapy aft

82 NAT followed by resection has a significant survival benefit compared with UR in early-stage, resect

83 Moreover, we demonstrate an immediate survival benefit conferred by the enhanced redox reactiv

84 Overall survival benefit continues (HR, 0.591; 95% CI, 0.378-0.9

85 Thereafter, the survival benefit decreased by 10% for every 15 min of tr

86 s with middle or high EPTS scores (eg, >40), survival benefit decreased with higher KDPI but was stil

87 ma is controversial because progression-free survival benefit did not translate into an overall survi

88 olutionarily conserved response that confers survival benefits during infection.

89 ocardial or cerebral ischemia, and conferred survival benefit following severe hemorrhage.

90 85 KDPI transplantation is associated with a survival benefit for children vs remaining on the waitli

91 Neoadjuvant treatment offers a significant survival benefit for clinical T3N0M0 esophageal cancer.

92 saw no progression-free survival or overall survival benefit for gross total resection compared with

93 ions: This study demonstrates a reproducible survival benefit for Hispanic patients with Group 1 PAH

94 wait-time and provide substantial long-term survival benefit for liver transplant candidates.

95 wait time and provide substantial long-term survival benefit for liver transplant candidates.

96 Glucocorticosteroids were associated with a survival benefit for patients in all 3 analyses but were

97 and a weighted Cox model, we did not find a survival benefit for patients who underwent EVS in our c

98 d regimens are associated with a substantial survival benefit for persons infected with hepatitis C v

99 Several studies have reported a survival benefit for polymyxin B hemoperfusion treatment

100 nd a randomized controlled trial reported no survival benefit for polymyxin B hemoperfusion treatment

101 espite these increased risks, KT may provide survival benefit for the HIV-infected patient with ESRD,

102 er, post hoc analysis revealed a significant survival benefit for the subgroup of fast-progressing pa

103 Helicopter transport does not impart a survival benefit for trauma patients when geographic con

104 Facility birth does not necessarily convey a survival benefit for women or babies and should only be

105 de important insights into the durability of survival benefits for 2 process-of-care measures in curr

106 diagnosed grade II or III glioma have shown survival benefit from adding chemotherapy to radiotherap

107 stinguished patients who derived substantial survival benefit from BB exposure from a larger group th

108 ET MPI, patients with greater ischemia had a survival benefit from early revascularization.

109 positive ALCL PDX model showed a significant survival benefit from intermittent compared with continu

110 ipients who subsequently develop ESRD derive survival benefit from KT, but graft longevity is limited

111 To assess patient survival benefit from KT, we calculated the adjusted ris

112 pients, although transplantation conferred a survival benefit from listing for only younger recipient

113 romising results, others have shown no clear survival benefit from particular combination treatments.

114 Overall, there was no survival benefit from percutaneous coronary intervention

115 identified patients less likely to derive a survival benefit from primary prevention ICDs.

116 derive a substantial long-term relapse-free survival benefit from targeted therapy (HR [versus place

117 gent-based model that predicts trait-related survival benefits from mixed-species group formation in

118 Potential survival benefits from treating aggressive (Gleason scor

119 tigational therapeutics for EVD demonstrated survival benefits from two monoclonal antibody products

120 In randomized clinical trials, no survival benefit has been observed for selective interna

121 criteria, responder subgroups with potential survival benefit have not yet been identified.

122 When compared with PCI, CABG still showed a survival benefit (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence int

123 sEH inhibitor-treated nephritic mice had no survival benefit; however, histological changes were red

124 le adjustment, RT remained associated with a survival benefit (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.84-0.94, P < 0.001).

125 Although sorafenib use was associated with a survival benefit (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.47-0.79) among pat

126 ed human PBMCs exposed to UV-HSV-1 provide a survival benefit in a murine xenograft model of human ac

127 itumor immunity and results in a significant survival benefit in a widely accepted mouse model of pan

128 ectious risk donors (IRD) confer substantial survival benefit in adults, yet the benefit of IRD kidne

129 ause dual-agent HER2 blockade demonstrated a survival benefit in breast cancer, we conducted a phase

130 alysis at a higher eGFR is associated with a survival benefit in children with CKD.

131 iation was not associated with a significant survival benefit in completely resected, pathologically

132 h-quality studies demonstrated an unexpected survival benefit in favor of laparoscopic over open rese

133 the only systemic treatment shown to provide survival benefit in HCC patients progressing on sorafeni

134 st polygenic response predictor (PRP) for BB survival benefit in heart failure with reduced ejection

135 r adjuvant chemotherapy is associated with a survival benefit in high risk T2-4a, pathologically node

136 This integrin mAb induces a substantial survival benefit in highly metastatic murine TNBC models

137 CCR2 deficiency unmasked an anti-PD-1 survival benefit in KR158 glioma-bearing mice.

138 munotherapy study demonstrates a significant survival benefit in mCRC.

139 INTERPRETATION: We noted no survival benefit in men with metastatic castration-resis

140 Primary tumor resection (PTR) may offer a survival benefit in metastatic gastrointestinal neuroend

141 YKL-5-124 with anti-PD-1 offers significant survival benefit in multiple highly aggressive murine mo

142 creasing evidence to suggest that there is a survival benefit in patients exposed to beta-blockers un

143 rial peritonitis while other data suggests a survival benefit in patients with advanced liver disease

144 ANISH trial, ICD therapy was associated with survival benefit in patients with biventricular heart fa

145 dose of 45.0 to 50.4 Gy is associated with a survival benefit in patients with locally advanced recta

146 emotherapy was associated with a significant survival benefit in patients with newly diagnosed non-co

147 fter R0 PDAC resection was associated with a survival benefit in patients with node-positive disease.

148 Regorafenib confers an overall survival benefit in patients with refractory metastatic

149 However, CABG provided a significant survival benefit in patients with three-vessel disease,

150 eous coronary intervention (PCI) may offer a survival benefit in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D)

151 ies that neutralize toxin activity provide a survival benefit in preclinical animal models and preven

152 real cardiopulmonary resuscitation has shown survival benefit in select patients with refractory card

153 filtrating lymphocytes are associated with a survival benefit in several tumour types and with the re

154 nd bleeding complications and the documented survival benefit in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infa

155 Early AVR was associated with similar survival benefit in TAPSE <17 and >=17 mm (adjusted HR,

156 , which have demonstrated a progression-free survival benefit in the BRCAm cohort.

157 (212)Pb-L2 also demonstrated an increased survival benefit in the micrometastatic model compared w

158 (225)Ac-L1 also showed an increased survival benefit in the micrometastatic model compared w

159 gnant pleural mesothelioma did not result in survival benefit in the phase 3 PROMISE-meso trial compa

160 ighly enriched in passenger mutations show a survival benefit in the setting of high tumor mutational

161 SCC and to investigate whether HPV confers a survival benefit in these tumors.

162 hold LNR above which AC is associated with a survival benefit in this population.

163 results of long-term follow-up have found a survival benefit in this subgroup of patients.

164 Given the potential survival benefit in transplanting young adults and the s

165 modulation, leading to cell cycle arrest and survival benefit in vivo.

166 t-selective inhibitors provided considerable survival benefit in vivo.

167 tin binding that produced antimetastatic and survival benefits in a xenograft model with no significa

168 engineered viruses induced tumor control and survival benefits in both highly aggressive unilateral a

169 more, in mice, inhibition of activin conveys survival benefits in pancreatitis.

170 tiangiogenic therapies have failed to confer survival benefits in patients with metastatic breast can

171 Cancer immunotherapies provide survival benefits in responding patients, but many patie

172 High-flow nasal oxygen has recently shown survival benefits in unselected patients with acute resp

173 Despite providing survival benefit, increased risk for infectious disease

174 this setting and further research on overall survival benefit is needed to prove drug efficacy.

175 ncreatic cancer remains controversial as the survival benefit is questionable.

176 ction and ablation, the absolute incremental survival benefit is small over a 5-year time horizon.

177 tient characteristics, immediate KT provided survival benefit; KT only began showing evidence of harm

178 To confirm the stability of the relapse-free survival benefit, longer-term data were needed.

179 uent radiation provided the most significant survival benefit (median survivals: 24.8 vs 21.0 mo for

180 Nonetheless, in a survival benefit model (survival with versus without the

181 The survival benefit observed in patients receiving antifung

182 Translation of survival benefits observed in glioblastoma clinical tria

183 did not undergo heart transplant, which is a survival benefit of 44% (IQR, 27% to 59%).

184 Radiation therapy (RT) provides survival benefit of 6 mo over surgery alone, but these r

185 In addition, a survival benefit of a high lymph node yield was demonstr

186 Although the long-term survival benefit of acceptance did not vary by candidate

187 Although the long-term survival benefit of acceptance did not vary by candidate

188 The methodology calculates the survival benefit of accepting a kidney given a certain q

189 To characterize the survival benefit of accepting DCD50 kidneys, we used 201

190 To characterize survival benefit of accepting IRD kidneys, we used 2010-

191 Recent data have challenged the survival benefit of additional resection in patients wit

192 de II), as it was the first to demonstrate a survival benefit of adjuvant chemoradiotherapy over radi

193 No progression-free survival benefit of AZD8931 compared with placebo was no

194 ific targeting of UBR5 strongly augments the survival benefit of conventional chemotherapy and immuno

195 However, a survival benefit of CRT in this population has not been

196 aft survival and sequential Cox approach for survival benefit of ECD and > 85 KDPI transplantationvs

197 We observed no survival benefit of ECD transplants vs remaining on the

198 rrington weighted log-rank test and examined survival benefit of en bloc transplantation versus remai

199 This study demonstrated a survival benefit of heart transplantation across all ran

200 neoadjuvant-treated patients demonstrated a survival benefit of high lymph node yield on overall sur

201 y of recurrent infections, and to extend the survival benefit of ILDKT across the spectrum of recipie

202 study was to determine the progression-free survival benefit of isatuximab plus pomalidomide and dex

203 To determine the survival benefit of kidney transplantation in human immu

204 and treatment options for these patients and survival benefit of KT, we identified 5023 older (age >=

205 sh a counterfactual framework for estimating survival benefit of KT.

206 el, and the individual prediction of the ITT survival benefit of LT defined as the difference between

207 so, the concept of intention-to-treat (ITT) survival benefit of LT has been created.

208 However, in absolute terms, the incremental survival benefit of LT over resection or ablation was sm

209 T, there are limited data on the incremental survival benefit of LT versus other curative options (re

210 l steps were used in order to create the ITT survival benefit of LT: the development of an ITT LT and

211 r Primary Angioplasty) aimed to evaluate the survival benefit of prophylactic implantable cardioverte

212 There was a significant survival benefit of radiotherapy for younger patients wi

213 a kidney given a certain quality now and the survival benefit of rejecting it.

214 The survival benefit of RT was predominantly observed in sta

215 The aim of this study was to evaluate the survival benefit of sirolimus in patients undergoing liv

216 We previously showed a survival benefit of the implantable cardioverter defibri

217 I/III studies are warranted to elucidate the survival benefit of this new therapy in patients with mC

218 At 12 months, the survival benefit of transcatheter aortic valve replaceme

219 s, transplant center was associated with the survival benefit of transplant.

220 Uncertainty exists regarding potential survival benefits of bivalirudin compared with heparin w

221 Survival benefits of CRT versus RT alone increased in pa

222 Reciprocal transplants established that survival benefits of GSNOR deletion were attributable pr

223 ocarcinoma (EAC) has a dismal prognosis, and survival benefits of recent multimodality treatments rem

224 d tissue histopathology strongly support the survival benefits of treatments.

225 The ability to recognize close kin confers survival benefits on single-celled microbes that live in

226 r, the treatment regimen did not result in a survival benefit or decrease of disease signs in EBOV-in

227 study period despite evidence suggesting no survival benefit over breast conservation.

228 ction of tumour activity along with a marked survival benefit over either therapy alone.Our approach

229 ests that FAV provides a modest, medium-term survival benefit over expectant fetal management.

230 dition, only r-ATG was associated with graft survival benefit over no-induction category (hazard rati

231 h improvements in dietary quality did reveal survival benefits overall.

232 Whether this survival benefit persists after discharge is unknown.

233 ranib toxicity profile and small incremental survival benefit precludes additional development in MPM

234 The ITT transplant survival benefit presented here allows physicians to bet

235 Renal transplant was associated with a survival benefit, primarily due to reduced deaths from c

236 With the survival benefits provided by therapy, recommendations a

237 50 kidneys was associated with a substantial survival benefit; providers and patients should consider

238 ey was associated with substantial long-term survival benefit; providers should consider this benefit

239 Survival benefit ranged from 30% to 55% across centers a

240 The 37-kBq group experienced a survival benefit relative to the negative control but no

241 ver, FAV has well-established risks, and its survival benefit remains unknown.

242 We explored whether or not there was a survival benefit (SB) of LT according to the quality of

243 itumor immunity and results in a significant survival benefit.See related article by Principe et al.,

244 Unlike the substantial survival benefit seen in adults (hazard ratio = 0.52), a

245 between ICD implantation and mortality with survival benefit seen only in the youngest patients.

246 t significantly below the mean, centers with survival benefit significantly above the mean performed

247 benefit centers, compared with centers with survival benefit significantly below the mean, centers w

248 covorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) offers survival benefits superior to that of gemcitabine single

249 nd 31 centers (27%) had significantly higher survival benefit than the mean and 30 centers (27%) had

250 and 30 centers (27%) had significantly lower survival benefit than the mean.

251 sing focus is being placed on the additional survival benefits that could potentially be achieved wit

252 n together with the lack of progression-free survival benefit, these findings do not support routine

253 Adjuvant chemotherapy offers a survival benefit to a number of staging scenarios in non

254 nic signaling, may connect ADC phenotypes to survival benefit to anti-VEGF therapy.

255 hibition (ARNI) therapy provided incremental survival benefit to patients with heart failure and redu

256 Unlike in adults, IRD kidneys conferred no survival benefit to pediatric candidates, although they

257 A pervasive survival benefit to residency documented in recent liter

258 rmine whether there is improved disease-free survival benefit to taking the active drug in patients w

259 ferences provide a combined reproductive and survival benefit to the urban phenotype.

260 dates because it does not appear to confer a survival benefit to these candidates and may delay listi

261 oretical models that migration should confer survival benefits to evolve, and thus provide empirical

262 eproductive grandmothers provide significant survival benefits to their grandoffspring above that pro

263 The impact of KDPI on survival benefit varied greatly by EPTS score.

264 lumab demonstrated sustained recurrence-free survival benefit versus ipilimumab in resected stage III

265 to-treat analysis, the ICD group had overall survival benefit versus placebo drug (hazard ratio [HR]:

266 Treatment with quizartinib had a survival benefit versus salvage chemotherapy and had a m

267 > 85 KDPI transplants were associated with a survival benefit vs remaining on the waitlist (aHR = 0.4

268 nts with decompensated cirrhosis, the median survival benefit was 31 days, and it was not cost-effect

269 42; P <0.001), and statistically significant survival benefit was achieved by 194 days of KT.

270 nce, -0.84%; 95% CI: -1.11%, -0.57%), and no survival benefit was apparent (risk difference, -0.10%;

271 The survival benefit was associated with decreased serum con

272 Survival benefit was defined as absolute reduction in mo

273 benefit from heart transplantation; however, survival benefit was delayed.

274 promising evidence of localized efficacy, no survival benefit was demonstrated.

275 Each transplant center's mean survival benefit was estimated using a mixed-effects pro

276 , 1.20; 95% CI, 1.02-1.41; P=0.02), but this survival benefit was no longer present at 3 years (3.5%

277 < 0.004); however, statistically significant survival benefit was not achieved until 392 days after K

278 Comparable survival benefit was observed even with DCD donors age >

279 No survival benefit was observed from this QI programme to

280 In subgroup analyses, no survival benefit was observed in patients with septic sh

281 UVr in the residual lesion (P = .006), and a survival benefit was observed in patients with SUVr of l

282 Preliminary evidence of an overall survival benefit was seen in an interim analysis; confir

283 No overall survival benefit was seen with ACP versus BCP in patient

284 Survival benefits were consistent in the five largest (1

285 ce and short life-span, yielded a remarkable survival benefit when bred with CH24H-knockout animals.

286 ssociated with a high graft loss risk and no survival benefit, whereas > 85 KDPI transplantation is a

287 les were associated with similarly increased survival benefits whether requiring antibiotics within 1

288 e tumor immune microenvironment but not with survival benefit, which resembled only part of their con

289 rior to irradiation seemed to impart maximum survival benefit, while the lower dose of 50 mg/kg offer

290 ollow-up is necessary to establish whether a survival benefit will emerge.

291 m ventricular arrhythmias, would predict the survival benefit with an implantable cardioverter-defibr

292 but suggests a clinically meaningful overall survival benefit with atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel i

293 with a QRSD >/=180 ms had a greater adjusted survival benefit with CRT-D versus standard ICD (hazard

294 cardial perfusion imaging (MPI) have shown a survival benefit with early revascularization in patient

295 Exploratory subgroup analysis suggested survival benefit with lestaurtinib in patients receiving

296 ngs provided further explanation of the late survival benefit with long-term SRL use.

297 the first time in the literature to report a survival benefit with RALP.

298 The CONKO-003 phase III study reported a survival benefit with second-line fluorouracil (FU) and

299 assessed consistency of the progression-free survival benefit with the global phase 3 ALEX study.

300 The model indicates clear survival benefits with cardioprotective treatments in th