Given a passage, 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.
--------
Question: To compare the efficacy and safety of prophylactic modalities for heterotopic ossification prevention after elbow and acetabular surgeries.', 'The retrospective chart review was conducted at the Aga Khan University Hospital and comprised record of patients who underwent open reduction and internal fixation for elbow and acetabular fractures between 2010 and 2013. Data was classified into three groups: Group A patients had received single dose of radiotherapy; Group B patients had received indomethacin, and Group C patients had not received any prophylaxis. Outcome variables included time-to-fracture healing, heterotopic ossification, non-union and wound infection.', 'Of the 104patients 70(67.3%) had elbow fractures and 34(32.7%) had acetabular fractures. Out of the 70patients with elbow fractures, 28(27%) were in Group A, 24(23%) in Group B, and 18(17%) in Group C. In Group A, 4(22%) patients had wound infection compared to 1(5.5%) patient in Group C (p=0.131). One (4%) patient in Group B and 1(5.5%) in Group C developed heterotopic ossification (p=0.486). Non-union occurred in 1(4%) patient in Group B and 1(5.5%) in Group C. Out of the 34 patients with acetabular fractures, 11(32.3%) were in Group A, 10(29.4%) in Group B, and 13(38.2%) in Group C. In Group A, 2(18.2%) patients developed wound infection. Only 1(7.6%) patient in Group C developed heterotopic ossification.

Answer: Do prophylaxis against heterotopic ossification after elbow and acetabular fractures - Do we really need it?

Question: IQ-domain GTPase-activating protein 1 (IQGAP1) binds to Dishevelled (Dvl) and functions as a modulator of Dvl nuclear localization in Xenopus embryos. However, the relationship between IQGAP1 and Dvl in tumor tissues is unclear.', 'We used immunohistochemistry to assess the expressions of IQGAP1 and Dvl in a cohort of 111 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Association of their localization expressions with clinicopathological factors was also analyzed.', 'The positive rate of IQGAP1 in primary tumors was 48.6% (54/111) for its cytoplamic expression, 9.0% (10/111) for nuclear expression and 31.5% (35/111) for membranous expression; the positive rate of Dvl was 65.8% (73/111) for cytoplamic expression, 9.9% (11/111) for nuclear expression and 10.8% (12/111) for membranous expression. Coexpression rate of IQGAP1 and Dvl was 77.8% (42/54) in the cytoplasm, 80.0% (8/10) in the nucleus and 8.6% (3/35) in the membrane. Coexpression of IQGAP1 and Dvl in the cytoplasm and nucleus were significantly correlated (P<0.05), but not in the membrane (P>0.05). The positive expression rates of cyclin D1 and c-myc were significantly higher in the group of IQGAP1 and Dvl coexpression in the nucleus than that in the cytoplasm. Coexpression rate of IQGAP1 and Dvl in the cytoplasm and nucleus was significantly higher in lymph nodal metastases (63.3%, 19/30) than in primary growths (38.3%, 31/81), correlating with poor prognosis. Five-year survival time after resection in the group with their coexpression in the cytoplasm and nucleus was significantly lower than that with no coexpression (44.7053.355 vs 58.4032.543 months, p<0.05).

Answer: Is coexpression of IQ-domain GTPase-activating protein 1 ( IQGAP1 ) and Dishevelled ( Dvl ) correlated with poor prognosis in non-small cell lung cancer?

Question: Stroke is a leading cause of long-term disability. Currently, there are no consistently effective rehabilitative treatments for chronic stroke patients. Our recent studies demonstrate that vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) paired with rehabilitative training improves recovery of function in multiple models of stroke. Here, we evaluated the ability of VNS paired with rehabilitative training to improve recovery of forelimb strength when initiated many weeks after a cortical and subcortical ischemic lesion in subjects with stable, chronic motor deficits.', 'Rats were trained to perform an automated, quantitative measure of voluntary forelimb strength. Once proficient, rats received injections of endothelin-1 to cause a unilateral cortical and subcortical ischemic lesion. Then, 6 weeks after the lesion, rats underwent rehabilitative training paired with VNS (Paired VNS; n = 10), rehabilitative training with equivalent VNS delivered 2 hours after daily rehabilitative training (Delayed VNS; n = 10), or rehabilitative training without VNS (Rehab, n = 9).', 'VNS paired with rehabilitative training significantly improved recovery of forelimb function compared with control groups. The Paired VNS group displayed an 86% recovery of strength, the Rehab group exhibited 47% recovery, and the Delayed VNS group exhibited 42% recovery. Improvement in forelimb function was sustained in the Paired VNS group after the cessation of stimulation, potentially indicating lasting benefits. No differences in intensity of rehabilitative training, lesion size, or MAP-2 expression were observed between groups.

Answer:
Does vagus Nerve Stimulation During Rehabilitative Training improve Forelimb Recovery After Chronic Ischemic Stroke in Rats?