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.

Example Input: Context: To assess the effect of six different enteral diets on the gut barrier.', 'Laboratory study.', 'University hospital, Germany.', '70 Specific pathogen free female Crl:CDR BR rats.', 'For 7 days, 6 groups of rats were fed orally with standard chow (n = 15); total parenteral nutrition solution (oral TPN, n = 15); elemental diet (ED, n = 10); nutrient-defined diet (NDD, n = 10); or the NDD supplemented with uracil (NDD+uracil, n = 10), or fibre (NDD+fibre, n = 10).', 'Bacterial translocation to mesenteric lymph nodes, numbers of Gram negative enterobacteria and total aerobic bacteria in the caecum, and intestinal concentrations of secretory IgA.', 'The incidence of bacterial translocation was significantly increased in the groups given oral TPN, ED, NDD, and NDD+uracil compared with the group given chow. Only NDD+fibre resulted in a similar degree of translocation to that in the chow group. All groups in which there was increased translocation had a highly significant overgrowth of aerobic bacteria in the caecum, mainly by Gram negative enteric organisms. The secretory IgA concentration was reduced in the group that had been given oral TPN, and that in the ED and NDD+uracil groups was similar to that in the chow group. NDD and NDD+fibre were associated with higher intestinal concentrations of secretory IgA than chow.\Question: Is fibre an essential ingredient of enteral diets to limit bacterial translocation in rats?
Example Output: Fibre-free enteral diets do not protect the gut antimicrobial barrier whatever else is in them. The superiority of early enteral as opposed to parenteral nutrition after injury may, therefore, not be the result of a specific protective effect on the gut barrier. The supplementation of commercial enteral diets with bulk fibre should be tested in clinical trials.

Example Input: Context: Reg IV, a secreted protein and member of the Reg multigene family, is up-regulated in malignancies of the human gastrointestinal tract, including colorectal carcinoma (CRC). However, in vitro signal transduction pathway(s) utilized by Reg IV are not yet known.', 'To determine the signaling pathway(s) responsive to Reg IV, we examined the effects of purified recombinant human Reg IV (rhR4) on HCT116 and HT29 colon adenocarcinoma cells.', 'Addition of rhR4 to cultures led to a dose-dependent increase in cell number similar to that observed after treatment with epidermal growth factor (EGF). In addition, rhR4 treatment resulted in rapid phosphorylation of EGF receptor at Tyr992 and Tyr1068 and Akt at Thr308 and Ser473. Using luciferase reporter gene assays, we demonstrated that Reg IV signaling through EGF receptor and Akt results in increased activator protein-1 (AP-1) transcription factor activity. Real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction and Western blot analyses revealed quantitative increases in c-Jun, JunB, JunD, and FosB expression associated with increased AP-1 activity. Electrophoretic mobility shift assay further revealed significant increases in AP-1 binding activity in rhR4-treated cells, with increased supershift in the presence of antibodies to JunB, JunD, and FosB. Furthermore, rhR4 treatments led to the increased expression of Bcl-2, Bcl-XL, survivin, and matrilysin, genes associated with a poor prognosis in advanced CRC.\Question: Does reg IV activate the epidermal growth factor receptor/Akt/AP-1 signaling pathway in colon adenocarcinomas?
Example Output: Reg IV is a potent activator of the EGF receptor/Akt/AP-1 signaling pathway in CRC. Disruption of Reg signaling may have utility as a therapeutic intervention for human gastrointestinal adenocarcinomas.

Example Input: Context: The aim was to assess the effect of population-based mammography screening on treatment costs for fatal breast cancer in Turku, Finland.', 'The study included 556 women with invasive breast cancer, diagnosed at the age of 40-74 years in 1987-1993: 427 in the screened group (screen-detected or interval cancer) and 129 in the unscreened group (not yet invited or refused screening). Both groups were followed up for 8 years from diagnosis.', 'In the unscreened group, 32 (25%) patients died of breast cancer versus 49 (12%) in the screened group (p < 0.001). The non-discounted mean treatment costs were 2.8-fold for those dying of breast cancer compared to survivors: 26,222 euros versus 9,434 euros; the difference between means was 16,788 euros (95% CI 14,915-18,660) (p<0.001). The mean costs for fatal cases were high, irrespective of the way cancer was detected: 23,800 euros in the unscreened group versus 27,803 euros in the screened group; the difference between means was -4,003 euros (-10,810 to 2802) (p=0.245). In the unscreened group, patients with fatal breast cancer accounted for 41% (0.76/1.87 million euros) of the total treatment costs versus 29% (1.36/4.76 million euros) in the screened group. It was estimated that about one third of costs for fatal breast cancer were avoided through mammography screening, accounting for 72-81% of the estimated total treatment cost savings achieved by screening. About 31-35% of the screening costs for 1987 to 1993 were offset by savings in treatment costs.\Question: Does population-based mammography screening result in substantial savings in treatment costs for fatal breast cancer?
Example Output:
Treatment costs for fatal breast cancer are high. Mammography screening results in substantial treatment cost savings, in which reduction of fatal disease is the key element.