instruction:
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.
question:
Context: To determine the effect of introducing a rapid enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) D-dimer on the percentage of emergency department (ED) patients evaluated for pulmonary embolism (PE), the use of associated laboratory testing, pulmonary vascular imaging, and the diagnoses of PE.', 'Patients evaluated for PE during three 120-day periods were enrolled: immediately before (period 1), immediately after (period 2), and one year after the introduction of a rapid ELISA D-dimer in the hospital. The frequency of ED patients evaluated for PE with any test, with D-dimer testing, and with pulmonary vascular imaging and the frequency of PE diagnosis during each time period were determined.', 'The percentage of patients evaluated for PE nearly doubled; from 1.36% (328/24,101) in period 1 to 2.58% (654/25,318) in period 2 and 2.42% (583/24,093) in period 3. The percentage of patients who underwent D-dimer testing increased more than fourfold; from 0.39% (93/24,101) in period 1 to 1.83% (464/25,318) in period 2 and 1.77% (427/24,093) in period 3. The percentage of patients who underwent pulmonary vascular imaging increased from 1.02% (247/24,101) in period 1 to 1.36% (344/25,318) in period 2 and to 1.39% (334/24,093) in period 3. There was no difference in the percentage of patients diagnosed as having PE in period 1 (0.20% [47/24,101]), period 2 (0.27% [69/25,318]), and period 3 (0.24% [58/24,093]).\Question: Does a highly sensitive ELISA D-dimer increase testing but not diagnosis of pulmonary embolism?
answer:
In the study's academic ED, introduction of ELISA D-dimer testing was accompanied by an increase in PE evaluations, D-dimer testing, and pulmonary vascular imaging; there was no observed change in the rate of PE diagnosis.


question:
Context: To describe a novel form of pontocerebellar hypoplasia (PCH) and map its genetic locus.', 'PCH is a heterogeneous group of disorders that are characterized by abnormally small cerebellum and brainstem. Autosomal recessive inheritance has been implied in many cases, but no genetic loci have been mapped to date.', 'The authors studied a consanguineous family from the Sultanate of Oman with three siblings with a novel form of PCH. The authors performed clinical studies and linkage analysis of this pedigree.', 'The clinical features of the affected children include developmental delay, progressive microcephaly with brachycephaly, seizures during the first year of life, hypotonia with hyperreflexia, short stature, and optic atrophy. Imaging studies showed a small pons and cerebellum, prominent sulci and lateral ventricles, and decreased cerebral white matter volume. A lack of dyskinesias distinguishes this pedigree from PCH type 2. Genetic studies of this family revealed evidence of significant linkage to chromosome 7q11-21 (maximum multipoint lod score 3.23).\Question: Does a novel form of pontocerebellar hypoplasia map to chromosome 7q11-21?
answer:
This pedigree represents a novel form of autosomal recessive PCH, which the authors propose to call cerebellar atrophy with progressive microcephaly (CLAM). This disorder maps to chromosome 7q11-21, and this locus was named CLAM. This report represents the first identification of a genetic locus for PCH.


question:
Context: Human xenografts in athymic mice are frequently used as preclinical models of cancer to investigate the targeting of drugs. In order to distinguish specific from nonspecific targeting of the xenograft, the mice can be implanted with different malignant cell lines. We studied in xenograft success and growth rates after implantation of human lymphoma and breast cancer cells to begin an assessment of the validity of this approach for distinguishing specific from nonspecific targeting. Investigations were undertaken to determine the effect of two different cell-line xenografts, and prior radiation needed for one of the xenografts, on implantation success and growth rates.', 'Female athymic mice were given 4 Gy of external beam radiation 4 days prior to subcutaneous (s.c.) abdominal implantation of 6 x 10(6) Raji human lymphoma cells. One week later, 3 x 10(6) hamster blood transfusion (HBT) 3477 human breast cancer cells were implanted s.c. in a contralateral abdominal site. Xenografts were evaluated frequently thereafter. Xenograft success and growth rates were compared to those observed in "historical" control groups, wherein only a single xenograft of each type was implanted.', 'Raji xenografts developed from 73.7% of the implantations, and 100% of the HBT 3477 xenografts were successful in the experimental group. The "historical" Raji xenograft success rate was 74.1% (+/-9.3%), and the "historical" HBT 3477 xenografts success rate was 99.0% (+/-1.1%). HBT 3477 xenografts did not affect the growth rate of the Raji xenografts, and the mean doubling time for the experimental Raji xenografts was 6.3 days (+/-4.5 days), compared to the "historical" control group mean of 5.1 days (+/-3.9 days; p = 0.2). Similarly, the growth rates for the HBT 3477 xenografts were not affected by the Raji xenografts and the pre-radiation needed for this model. Mean doubling time for HBT 3477 xenografts in the presence of Raji xenografts was 9.2 days (+/-17.6 days), compared to a doubling time of 1.4 days (+/-15.2 days; p = 0.55 and 0.94 studies 1 and 2, respectively). Mean HBT 3477 xenograft doubling time for the "historical" control group was 4.4 days (+/-6.0 days).\Question: Does implantation of different malignant human cell lines in an athymic mouse alter success and growth rates of either xenograft?
answer:

Implantation of Raji xenografts and HBT 3477 breast cancer xenografts in the same mouse did not affect xenograft success or growth rates, even when whole-body radiation of 4 Gy was used to promote Raji xenografts. These observations are not intended to imply an absence of differences in other biological parameters in this sytem or to encourage extrapolation of the conclusions indiscriminately to other preclinical models. Contrarily, our aim was to encourage other investigators to further validate these frequently used approaches.