Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(12)
However, the 60 patients without visually large cores had more favourable baseline imaging characteristics than treated target mismatch (smaller cores and smaller perfusion lesions), yet still had a worse outcome than the treated target mismatch group.
Despite larger baseline perfusion lesions and more occlusions, the treated target mismatch group had substantially greater rates of major reperfusion (62% versus 19%, P < 0.001).
The latter group of untreated 23 patients fulfilled target mismatch criteria but their baseline core volumes were larger than the treated target mismatch group.
In addition, when the comparison to SITS controls was limited to the treated target mismatch patients only, even unadjusted outcomes were superior.
This group did not do as well clinically as the treated target mismatch patients despite more favourable baseline imaging (Supplementary Table 1).
Relative fold difference (N) was the number of the treated target gene copies relative to the untreated control gene copies and is calculated as follows: N=2Δ Cq.
Similar(48)
Pre-treatment MRI served only to plan the anatomic distribution of the optic fibres into the lobe to be treated, targeting the zones of positive biopsy.
Data from three donors showed further reduction in Perforin and Granzyme B expression on coincubation with rituximab treated targets as compared to untreated targets (data not shown).
We studied 32 HCC lesions, where 23 lesions (22 patients) were treated targeting small non-resectable primary HCC, and 9 lesions (9 patients) targeting PVTT using the Cyberknife.
However, in systems where matrix back-diffusion is an important process, the ability of the oxidant to migrate and treat target contaminants within the rock matrix will likely determine the overall effectiveness of this remedial approach.
Promising approaches using explicit water molecules in the binding pocket [10] (approximation ii) and treating target flexibility (approximation iii) have been reported for focused docking [29].
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com