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.

[EX Q]: Human insulin is commonly used to treat hyperglycemia in patients with diabetes, but its potential link with female breast cancer is under debate. This study investigated whether human insulin use might be associated with breast cancer risk in Taiwanese women with type 2 diabetes.', 'The reimbursement databases of all Taiwanese diabetic patients from 1996 to 2009 were retrieved from the National Health Insurance. An entry date was set at 1 January 2004 and a total of 482,033 women with type 2 diabetes were followed up for breast cancer incidence until the end of 2009. Incidences for ever-users, never-users and subgroups of human insulin exposure (using tertile cutoffs of time since starting insulin, cumulative dose and cumulative duration of insulin) were calculated and the adjusted hazard ratios were estimated by Cox regression. The potential risk modification by concomitant treatment with metformin, statin and angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker (ACEI/ARB) was also evaluated.', 'There were 59,798 ever-users and 422,235 never-users of human insulin, with respective numbers of incident breast cancer of 559 (0.93 %) and 4,711 (1.12 %), and respective incidence of 207.9 and 215.1 per 100,000 person-years. The overall adjusted hazard ratio (95 % confidence interval) did not show a significant association with insulin [1.033 (0.936-1.139)]. However, patients in the third tertiles of dose-response parameters might show a significantly higher risk of breast cancer while compared to never-users: 1.185 (1.026-1.368), 1.260 (1.096-1.450) and 1.257 (1.094-1.446) for 67 months for time since starting insulin, 39,000 units for cumulative dose of insulin, and 21.8 months for cumulative duration of insulin, respectively. Additional analyses suggested that the breast cancer risk associated with human insulin use might be beneficially modified by concomitant use of metformin, statin and ACEI/ARB.
[EX A]: Does prolonged use of human insulin increase breast cancer risk in Taiwanese women with type 2 diabetes?

[EX Q]: To study the long-term effects of selegiline in monotherapy and in combination with levodopa in the early phase of Parkinson disease (PD).', "One hundred fifty-seven de novo PD patients were randomized in a double-blind, placebo-controlled study of 7 years' duration. In the monotherapy part, selegiline significantly delayed the initiation of levodopa therapy vs placebo. The authors now report the results from the combination part of the study, in which 140 patients received selegiline or placebo in addition to individually tailored levodopa therapy.", 'Compared with placebo, selegiline slowed the progression of disease disability as measured by the Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) total score (p = 0.003) or by motor (p = 0.002) and Activities of Daily Living (p = 0.0002) subscores. After 5 years in combination therapy, the mean difference in the UPDRS total score was nearly 10 points, with patients receiving placebo having 35% higher scores. Simultaneously, patients receiving placebo needed progressively higher doses of levodopa than patients receiving selegiline; after 5 years, the mean dosage of levodopa was 19% higher with placebo than with selegiline (p = 0.0002). Considering the entire (monotherapy and combination therapy) 7-year study time, there was a trend for selegiline to delay the start of wearing-off fluctuations (hazard ratio 0.55, p = 0.08). In both phases of the study, selegiline was safe and well tolerated.
[EX A]: Does selegiline slow the progression of the symptoms of Parkinson disease?

[EX Q]: Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is recommended after coronary artery bypass graft surgery; however, the consequences of longer wait times to start CR have not been elucidated.', "Cardiopulmonary, demographic, and anthropometric assessments were conducted before and after 6 months of CR in consecutively enrolled patients from January 1995 to October 2012. Wait times were ascertained from referral forms and charts. Neighborhood characteristics were ascertained using census data and cross-referencing with patients' home geographic location. Among 6497 post- coronary artery bypass graft participants, mean and median total wait time (time from surgery to first exercise session) was 101.147.9 and 80 days, respectively. In multiple linear regression, correlates of longer total wait time and the 2 wait-time phases, time from surgery to CR referral and time from CR referral to first exercise session, were determined. Factors influencing longer wait times included female sex, greater age, being employed, less social support, longer drive time to CR, lower neighborhood socioeconomic status, higher systolic blood pressure, abdominal obesity, and a complex medical history. After adjusting for correlates of delayed entry, longer wait time for each of the total and 2 wait-time phases was significantly associated with less improvement in cardiopulmonary fitness (VO2peak; =-0.165, P<0.001), body fat percentage (=0.032, P<0.02), resting heart rate (=0.066, P<0.001), and poorer attendance to CR classes (=-0.081, P<0.001) and completion rate (=2.741, P<0.001).
[EX A]:
Do delays in Referral and Enrolment Are Associated With Mitigated Benefits of Cardiac Rehabilitation After Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery?