Given a passage, construct a question on the basis of the information present in the passage. Construct the question in such a way that (i) it is unambiguous, (ii) it is answerable from the passage, (iii) its answer is unique (iv) it answer uses text phrases from the passage. Avoid creating questions that (i) can't be answered correctly without actually understanding the passage and (ii) uses the same words or phrases given in the passage.

Input: Consider Input: The author addresses whether the face bow is irrelevant for all types of prosthetic work and for planning orthognathic surgery.', 'The author searched electronic databases to find studies whose investigators used the strongest clinical evidence (that is, randomized clinical trials) and studies whose investigators incorporated the use of cinefluorography. The author found 13 studies and 1 Internet video that provided strong evidence to support the irrelevancy of the face bow transfer.', 'Evidence indicates that the face bow has nothing\xa0to do with speech, the fit and comfort of the prostheses, ridge morphology, facial contours, the color of\xa0the teeth and denture bases, the arrangement of the artificial teeth, chewing efficiency stability, and the psychological aspects of prosthodontic treatment. The cinefluorographic example showed that there was no condylar axis\xa0of rotation\xa0during functional activity, a sawing action of the\xa0mandibular incisors during the incising of\xa0toast and\xa0the\xa0mandible moving in a back and forth,\xa0rocking\xa0chair-like movement during functional activity.

Output: Is the face bow irrelevant for making prostheses and planning orthognathic surgery?


Input: Consider Input: To examine the effect of a single spinal manipulation therapy (SMT) on the in vitro production of inflammatory cytokines, tumor necrosis factor alpha, and interleukin (IL) 1beta, in relation to the systemic (in vivo) levels of neurotransmitter substance P (SP).', 'Sixty-four asymptomatic subjects were assigned to SMT, sham manipulation, or venipuncture control group. SMT subjects received a single adjustment in the thoracic spine. Blood and serum samples were obtained from subjects before and then at 20 minutes and 2 hours after intervention. Whole-blood cultures were activated with lipopolysaccharide (LPS) for 24 hours. Cytokine production in culture supernatants and serum SP levels were assessed by specific immunoassays.', 'Over the study period, a significant proportion (P </= .05) of sham and control subjects demonstrated progressive increases in the synthesis of tumor necrosis factor alpha and IL-1beta. Conversely, in a comparable proportion of cultures from SMT-derived subjects, the production of both cytokines decreased gradually. Normalization of the observed alterations to reflect the changes relative to self-baselines demonstrated that, within 2 hours after intervention, the production of both cytokines increased significantly (P < .001 to .05) in both controls. In contrast, a significant (P < .001 to .05) reduction of proinflammatory cytokine secretion was observed in cultures from SMT-receiving subjects. In all study groups, serum levels of SP remained unaltered within 2 hours after intervention.

Output: Does spinal manipulative therapy reduce inflammatory cytokines but not substance P production in normal subjects?


Input: Consider Input: We aimed to select true groove pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (GPDACs) and define their specific features.', 'We performed histopathologic and immunohistochemical comparisons of 6 GPDACs with 6 duodenal adenocarcinomas (DACs) and 24 conventional pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (cPDACs). Both groups were adjusted to ensure similar mean tumor size.', 'Representative loupe image showed prominent duodenal invasion and slight pancreatic invasion. Groove pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas exhibited different mucins and cytokeratin profiles in DACs, but cPDACs and small branch pancreatic ducts had the same profiles. Histopathologic analysis of GPDACs showed a significantly higher incidence of duodenal invasion and well differentiation than cPDACs, although the incidences of lymph node metastasis, angiolymphatic invasion, and neural invasion were similar. Immunohistochemical analysis of GPDACs showed a significantly lower frequency of abnormal Smad4 immunolabeling, and fewer GPDAC samples exhibited abnormal immunolabeling for MUC1, p16, Smad4, and p53 than cPDACs.


Output: Are well differentiation and intact Smad4 expression specific features of groove pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas?