In this task, you are given a passage which has a question and the context. You have to generate an answer to the question based on the information present in the context.

Input: Consider Input: Context: Urothelial carcinoma associated 1 (UCA1) functions as an oncogene, which promotes cancer cell proliferation, invasion, and metastasis, and is responsible for drug resistance. This study aimed to determine the expression level of UCA1 in ovarian cancer and to further investigate its clinical significance.', 'The expression levels of UCA1 in ovarian cancer and normal ovaries were determined by quantitative real-time PCR. The relationship between UCA1 expression and clinical features and the prognostic value of UCA1 for overall survival were examined.', 'UCA1 expression in ovarian cancer tissues was significantly upregulated compared with normal ovarian tissues. High UCA1 expression was related to lymph node metastasis, FIGO stage, and response to chemotherapy. Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated that high UCA1 expression was associated with poorer overall survival in patients with ovarian cancer. Cox proportional hazards analysis showed that high UCA1 expression was an independent prognostic marker of poor outcome. This effect remained significant in the further stratification analysis.\Question: Does uCA1 overexpression predict clinical outcome of patients with ovarian cancer receiving adjuvant chemotherapy?

Output: Our findings provided the first evidence that UCA1 may serve as an indicator of response to chemotherapy and prognosis of ovarian cancer. UCA1 may play an important role in the progression of ovarian cancer.


Input: Consider Input: Context: Recent studies have implicated central nicotinic cholinergic receptor systems in the reinforcing properties of alcohol. In laboratory animals, mecamylamine, a central nicotinic receptor antagonist, reduces the consumption of and preference for alcohol. This study investigated the effect of mecamylamine on the subjective responses to alcohol in humans. It was hypothesized that mecamylamine (7.5 and 15 mg) would attenuate the stimulant-like subjective effects of alcohol (0.8 g/kg) and decrease the self-reported desire to consume additional alcohol beverages.', 'Fourteen male and 13 female nonsmokers participated in 6 laboratory sessions. During each session, subjects received, in randomized order under double-blinded conditions, a capsule containing mecamylamine (7.5 or 15 mg) or placebo followed by a beverage containing alcohol (0.8 g/kg) or placebo. Physiologic and subjective-effect measures were taken at 30-min intervals for 2 hr after beverage consumption.', 'Mecamylamine attenuated the stimulant and euphoric effects of alcohol and reduced the self-reported desire to consume additional alcohol beverages. This effect was most pronounced in men, even though women exhibited greater physiologic reactions to mecamylamine.\Question: Does mecamylamine attenuate the subjective stimulant-like effects of alcohol in social drinkers?

Output: These findings suggest that nicotinic cholinergic receptors are involved in mediating some of the stimulant-like effects of alcohol.


Input: Consider Input: Context: Active engagement in education improves learning outcomes. To enhance active participation in seminars, a student-centered course design was implemented and evaluated in terms of self-reported preparation, student motivation and exam scores. We hypothesized that small group learning with intensive peer interaction, using buzz-groups followed by plenary discussion, would motivate students to prepare seminar assignments at home and to actively engage in the seminars. Active engagement involved discussion of the preparatory assignments until consensus was reached.', "In total seven seminars were scheduled in a 10-week physiology course of an undergraduate Biomedical Sciences program. After each seminar, students were asked to fill out their perceptions of preparation and quality of the seminar (deepening of knowledge and confidence in answers) on a five-point scale using electronic questionnaires. Student motives were first collected using open questions. In the final questionnaire students were asked to indicate on a five-point scale how each motive was perceived. Students overall explanations why they had learned from seminars were collected via open questions in the final questionnaire. One hundred and twenty-four students of the cohort from November 2012 to February 2013 (82.6\xa0%) voluntarily participated. Students' motives to prepare and attend seminars were analyzed by inspection of descriptive statistics. Linear regression analysis was conducted to relate student preparation to the quality of seminars, seminar attendance to exam scores, and exam scores to the quality of seminars. Answers to open questions were deductively clustered.", "Studying the material, training for exams and comparing answers with peers motivated students to prepare the seminars. Students were motivated to participate actively because they wanted to keep track of correct answers themselves, to better understand the content and to be able to present their findings in plenary discussions. Perceived preparation of peers was positively associated with the perceived quality of seminars. Also, seminar attendance was positively associated with exam scores. Students' overall explanations suggest that discussing with peers and applying knowledge in pathophysiology cases underlies this association.\Question: Is peer-instructed seminar attendance associated with improved preparation , deeper learning and higher exam scores : a survey study?


Output: Discussion with well-prepared peers during seminars improves student perceptions of deeper learning and peer-instructed seminar attendance was associated with higher exam scores.