Search results for " C-2"

showing 2 items of 2 documents

12-month follow-up analysis of a multicenter, randomized, prospective trial in de novo liver transplant recipients (LIS2T) comparing cyclosporine mic…

2006

The LIS2T study was an open-label, multicenter study in which recipients of a primary liver transplant were randomized to cyclosporine microemulsion (CsA-ME) (Neoral) (n = 250) (monitoring of blood concentration at 2 hours postdose) C2 or tacrolimus (n = 245) (monitoring of trough drug blood level [predose]) C0 to compare efficacy and safety at 3 and 6 months and to evaluate patient status at 12 months. All patients received steroids with or without azathioprine. At 12 months, 85% of CsA-ME patients and 86% of tacrolimus patients survived with a functioning graft (P not significant). Efficacy was similar in deceased- and living-donor recipients. Significantly fewer hepatitis C–positive pati…

Graft RejectionMaleTime Factorsmedicine.medical_treatmentTACROLIMUSAzathioprineHepacivirusHEPATITIS-CLiver transplantationmedicine.disease_causeGastroenterologychemistry.chemical_compoundLiving DonorsLongitudinal StudiesC-2IMMUNOSUPPRESSIONHEPATITIS-C DIABETES-MELLITUS C-2 REPLICATION RECURRENCE SURVIVALGraft SurvivalHepatitis CTreatment Outcomesurgical procedures operativeCreatinineSURVIVALEmulsionsFemaleSteroidsImmunosuppressive Agentsmedicine.drugmedicine.medical_specialtyHepatitis C virusRenal functionRANDOMIZED STUDYAge DistributionInternal medicinemedicineDiabetes MellitusHumansHypoglycemic AgentsRECURRENCEMonitoring PhysiologicHepatitisTransplantationCreatinineHepatologybusiness.industryLIVER TRANSPLANTATIONDIABETES-MELLITUSmedicine.diseaseSurvival AnalysisTacrolimusSurgerychemistryREPLICATIONCYCLOSPORINESurgerybusinessFollow-Up Studies
researchProduct

Striking a Balance among Security, Privacy and Competition. The Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014 (DRIP)

2015

Following the ECJ decision that declared the Data Retention Directive invalid, the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014 (DRIP) has been enacted. It is not indisputable whether the DRIP gives more powers to the intelligence services at the detriment of both citizens’ privacy and freedom of enterprise or whether it simply clarifies the nature and extent of obligations that can be imposed on telecommunications service providers based outside the UK under Part 1 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA). The article provides news also on Data Retention Regulations 2014, R (David Davis MP and Tom Watson MP) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and the proposed…

Settore IUS/01 - Diritto Privatoprivacy security competition DRIP DRIPA RIPA data retention data retention directive european court of justice C-293/12 Digital Rights Ireland C-594/12 Seitlinger investigatory powers data retention and investigatory powers terrorism balance human rights telecommunications
researchProduct