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: Non-viral gene transfer efficiency is low as compared to viral vector systems. Here we describe the discovery of new drugs that are capable of enhancing non-viral gene transfer into mammalian cells using a novel two-stage screening procedure.', 'First, potential candidates are preselected from a molecular library at various concentrations by a semi-automated yeast transfection screen (YTS). The maximal transfection efficiency of every positive drug is subsequently determined in independent experiments at the optimal concentration and compared to the inhibitory effect of the drug on cell growth (IC50). In a subsequent mammalian cell transfection screen (MTS), the maximal transfection efficiency and the IC50 are determined for all preselected drugs using a human cell line and a luciferase reporter gene construct.', 'Employing our novel system we have been able to identify a new class of transfection enhancers, the tricyclic antidepressants (i.e. doxepin, maprotiline, desipramine and amoxapine). All positive drugs enhanced gene transfer in both yeast and human cell lines, but lower concentrations were sufficient for mammalian cells. With a triple combination of doxepin, amoxapine and chloroquine we obtained a transfection efficiency that exceeded that of chloroquine, one of the best-known transfection enhancers of mammalian cells, by nearly one order of magnitude.\Question: Does novel two-stage screening procedure lead to the identification of a new class of transfection enhancers?

Output: Non-viral gene transfer efficiency can be increased significantly using new transfection enhancers that are identified by a novel, semi-automated two-stage screening system employing yeast cells in the first and specific human target cells in the second round.


Input: Consider Input: Context: We developed an algorithm that prospectively defines when to excise the neurovascular bundles during radical retropubic prostatectomy with the goal of maximizing the performance of nerve sparing procedures while minimizing positive surgical margins.', 'From January 1 to December 31, 2000 a single surgeon performed 272 radical retropubic prostatectomies and 263 were performed from January 1 to December 31, 2001. A single pathologist analyzed all specimens with positive margins. There were no prospectively defined criteria to guide decisions regarding excision of the neurovascular bundles in the 2000 study cohort. Gleason score, percent tumor volume and perineural invasion were independently analyzed in the biopsy specimens according to the site of origin (right versus left side) for the 2001 group only. The ipsilateral neurovascular bundle was excised for Gleason 6 or less tumors when there were 50% or greater tumor volume in the biopsy specimen and perineural invasion, for Gleason 7 tumors when there was 30% or greater tumor volume, or perineural invasion and for Gleason 8 to 10 tumors when there was 10% or greater tumor volume, or perineural invasion.', 'There were no statistically significant differences between the 2000 and 2001 groups in regard to preoperative prostate specific antigen, clinical and pathological stage, biopsy Gleason score and percent tumor volume in the surgical specimen. There was a statistically significant decrease in the incidence of positive margins between the 2000 and 2001 groups (14% versus 8%, p = 0.027). The lower positive margin rate was not achieved because of a tendency to excise more neurovascular bundles since a significantly greater percent of neurovascular bundles was preserved in the 2001 group. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy of our algorithm were 18%, 93%, 28%, 89% and 84%, respectively. In sides of the prostate with extraprostatic extension ipsilateral wide excision of the neurovascular bundle was associated with positive margins in 33% of cases compared with 22% when the neurovascular bundle was preserved (p = 0.42).\Question: Does the New York University nerve sparing algorithm decrease the rate of positive surgical margins following radical retropubic prostatectomy?

Output: The New York University nerve sparing algorithm prospectively defines when to excise the neurovascular bundle based on Gleason score, perineural invasion and tumor volume in the biopsy specimen. Use of this algorithm decreases positive surgical margin rates, while significantly increasing the preservation of neurovascular bundles.


Input: Consider Input: Context: Substantial country differences in neurosurgical training throughout Europe have recently been described, ranging from subjective rating of training quality to objective working hours per week. The aim of this study was to analyse whether these differences translate into the results of the written and oral part of the European Board Examination in Neurological Surgery (EBE-NS).', 'Country-specific composite scores for satisfaction with quality of theoretical and practical training, as well as working hours per week, were obtained from an electronic survey distributed among European neurosurgical residents between June 2014 and March 2015. These were related to anonymous country-specific results of the EBE-NS between 2009 and 2016, using uni- and multivariate linear regression analysis.', 'A total of n\u2009=\u20091025 written and n\u2009=\u200963 oral examination results were included. There was a significant linear relationship between the country-specific EBE-NS result in the written part and the country-specific composite score for satisfaction with quality of theoretical training [adjusted regression coefficient (RC) -3.80, 95\xa0% confidence interval (CI) -5.43-7\u2009-2.17, p\u2009<\u20090.001], but not with practical training or working time. For the oral part, there was a linear relationship between the country-specific EBE-NS result and the country-specific composite score for satisfaction with quality of practical training (RC 9.47, 95\xa0% CI 1.47-17.47, p\u2009=\u20090.021), however neither with satisfaction with quality of theoretical training nor with working time.\Question: Do residency program trainee-satisfaction correlate with results of the European board examination in neurosurgery?


Output: With every one-step improvement on the country-specific satisfaction score for theoretical training, the score in the EBE-NS Part 1 increased by 3.8 %. With every one-step improvement on the country-specific satisfaction score for practical training, the score in the EBE-NS Part 2 increased by 9.47 %. Improving training conditions is likely to have a direct positive influence on the knowledge level of trainees, as measured by the EBE-NS. The effect of the actual working time on the theoretical and practical knowledge of neurosurgical trainees appears to be insignificant.