Given a passage with a context and an answer, 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.

Ex Input:
Context: Histologic evidence of the comparative neurotoxicity of lidocaine, mepivacaine, and prilocaine is incomplete. We compared the intrathecal neurotoxicity in rats among these 3 drugs based on morphologic and neurofunctional findings.', 'Rats (n=169) randomly received 0.12 microL/g of 0%, 2%, 5%, 7.5%, 10%, or 20% lidocaine, mepivacaine, or prilocaine or 25% glucose dissolved in distilled water via a chronically implanted intrathecal catheter. The effect of the agents on neurofunction was evaluated by movement of the hind limb (behavior test) and by sensory threshold (paw-stimulation test). The L1 spinal cord, the posterior and anterior roots, and the cauda equina were removed en bloc 5 days later and examined by light and electron microscopy.', 'A significant decrease in sensory threshold or irreversible hind-limb limitation was observed only in rats receiving 20% lidocaine. Morphologic abnormalities characterized by axonal degeneration were observed in rats receiving > or =7.5% lidocaine, 20% mepivacaine, and 20% prilocaine, at the posterior white matter and the proximal portion of the posterior root just at the entrance into the spinal cord. The incidence of lesions was significantly higher in rats receiving lidocaine than mepivacaine and prilocaine.
Answer: It is suggested that intrathecal mepivacaine and prilocaine are less neurotoxic than highly concentrated lidocaine in a rat intrathecal model.

Ex Output:
Are intrathecal mepivacaine and prilocaine less neurotoxic than lidocaine in a rat intrathecal model?


Ex Input:
Context: Angiostatin is a potent angiogenesis inhibitor that has been identified as a cryptic fragment of plasminogen molecule containing the first four kringle domain. Angiogenin, a 14-kDa monomeric protein, a potent blood vessel inducer, is expressed in tumors and present in mammalian plasma. The purpose of this study was to determine whether recombinant kringle 1-3 (rKI-3) of human plasminogen could interfere with angiogenesis induced by angiogenin and to evaluate the role of angiogenin in corneal angiogenesis in rabbit.', 'A Hydron polymer pellet containing 2.0 microg of angiogenin was implanted intrastromally into the superior cornea of each of 44 rabbit eyes. All eyes received an intrastromal pellet and were randomized into either one group treated with 12.5 microg of rKI-3 (n = 25) or the other group treated with phosphate-buffered saline (PBS; n = 19). Both pellets were positioned in parallel at the site 1.2 mm from the superior limbus. Two masked observers kept the angiogenesis score daily, based on the number and the length of new vessels. The corneas with induced angiogenesis also were examined histologically.', 'On the third day of the angiogenin pellets implantation, the eye treated with rKI-3 had less angiogenesis (mean score, 4.2 +/- 6.6) than eye treated with PBS (mean score, 16.1 +/- 17.1; p < 0.05, Mann-Whitney U test). The cornea treated with PBS also showed much more leukocyte adhesion than the cornea treated with rKI-3.
Answer: Recombinant kringle 1-3 appears to inhibit angiogenin-induced angiogenesis in a rabbit corneal pocket assay. Recombinant kringle 1-3 may have therapeutic potential as an antiangiogenic agent.

Ex Output:
Does recombinant kringle 1-3 of plasminogen inhibit rabbit corneal angiogenesis induced by angiogenin?


Ex Input:
Context: To develop a specific SARS virus-targeted antibody preparation for emergent prophylaxis and treatment of SARS virus infection.', 'By using phage display technology, we constructed a naive antibody library from convalescent SARS patient lymphocytes. To obtain the neutralizing antibody to SARS virus surface proteins, the library panning procedure was performed on purified SARS virions and the specific Fab antibody clones were enriched by four rounds of repeated panning procedure and screened by highthroughput selection. The selected Fab antibodies expressed in the periplasma of E. coli were soluble and further purified and tested for their binding properties and antiviral function to SARS virus. The functional Fab antibodies were converted to full human IgG antibodies with recombinant baculovirus/insect cell systems and their neutralizing activities were further determined.', 'After four rounds of the panning, a number of SARS-CoV virus-targeted human recombinant Fab antibodies were isolated from the SARS patient antibody library. Most of these were identified to recognize both natural and recombinant SARS spike (S) proteins, two Fab antibodies were specific for the virus membrane (M) protein, only one bound to SARS-CoV nucleocapsid protein. The SARS-CoV S and M protein-targeted Fab or IgG antibodies showed significant neutralizing activities in cytopathic effect (CPE) inhibition neutralization test, these antibodies were able to completely neutralize the SARS virus and protect the Vero cells from CPE after virus infection. However, the N protein-targeted Fab or IgG antibodies failed to neutralize the virus. In addition, the SARS N protein-targeted human Fab antibody reacted with the denatured N proteins, whereas none of the S and M protein specific neutralizing antibodies did. These results suggested that the S and M protein-specific neutralizing antibodies could recognize conformational epitopes which might be involved in the binding of virions to cellular receptors and the fusion activity of the virus.
Answer: The SARS-CoV spike protein and membrane proteins are able to elicite efficient neutralizing antibodies in SARS patients. The neutralizing antibodies we generated in this study may be more promising candidates for prophylaxis and treatment of SARS infection.

Ex Output:

Do sARS patients-derived human recombinant antibodies to S and M proteins efficiently neutralize SARS-coronavirus infectivity?