Given a context passage, generate a question from the passage such that its answer is shortest continous span from the passage.

Q: This was a 12-week randomized, placebo-controlled trial to assess the efficacy of quetiapine monotherapy in the treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Eighty patients were randomly assigned to treatment with either quetiapine or placebo. The primary outcome measure was the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS). Secondary efficacy measures included the CAPS subscales, the Davidson Trauma Scale, the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), the Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) scales for severity of Illness and improvement, the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D), and the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A). Safety measurements included adverse events, vital signs, the Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale, the Barnes Akathisia Scale, the Simpson-Angus Scale, and the Arizona Sexual Experiences Scale. After a 1-week placebo run-in, quetiapine was started at a daily dosage of 25 mg and increased to a maximum of 800 mg; the average was 258 mg (range, 50-800 mg). Reductions in CAPS total, re-experiencing, and hyperarousal scores were significantly greater for the quetiapine group than for the placebo group. Greater improvements were also observed for quetiapine in scores on the Davidson Trauma Scale, CGI severity and improvement ratings, PANSS positive symptom and general psychopathology subscales, HAM-A, and HAM-D than for placebo. Adverse events were generally mild and expected based on prior studies of quetiapine in this and other patient population. There were no differences in safety measures between groups. Quetiapine monotherapy was efficacious in the treatment of PTSD. These findings suggest quetiapine as a single agent is effective in treating military PTSD.

A: Symptoms of which disorder are evaluated with the Davidson Trauma Scale?
****
Q: It has been reported that the R497K polymorphism of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene has attenuated functions in ligand binding, tyrosine kinase activation, and growth stimulation. On other hand, EGFR gene mutations at kinase domain in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have been examined for their ability to predict sensitivity to gefitinib or erlotinib. We investigated the EGFR mutations and/or R497K polymorphism statuses in 225 surgically treated NSCLC cases. 192 adenocarcinoma cases were included. The presence or absence of EGFR polymorphism of exon 13 was analyzed by PCR-RFLP method. EGFR mutations at kinase domain were found from 95 of 225 lung cancer patients. In 86.2% of patients, homo- or heterozygous Lys497 allele was present. No correlation existed between R497K EGFR genotype and clinico-pathological features, such as gender, smoking status, and pathological subtypes. EGFR mutation status was not correlated with R497KEGFR genotype of lung cancers. In node-negative patients, R497KEGFR genotype was not correlated with disease outcome. In node-positive patients, however, R497K EGFR was significantly associated with better overall survival. This association was attributable to neo-adjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy. In 46 total gefitinib treated NSCLC patients, the prognosis was not different between the EGFR wild type (GG) patients and AG+AA patients. R497KEGFR polymorphism might be associated with favorable prognosis of advanced lung cancers and correlated with chemosensitivity.

A: Mutations in which gene determine response to both erlotinib and gefitinib?
****
Q: Everywhere man is altering the balance of nature.He is facilitating the spread of plants and animals into new regions, sometimes deliberately, sometimes unconsciously.He is covering huge areas with new kinds of plants, or with houses, factories, slag-heaps and other products of his civilization.He exterminates some species on a large scale, but favours the multiplication of others.In brief, he has done more in five thousand years to alter the biological aspect of the planet than has nature in five million. Many of these changes which he has brought about have had unforeseen consequences.Who would have thought that the throwing away of a piece of Canadian waterweed would have caused half the waterways of Britain to be blocked for a decade, or that the provision of pot cacti for lonely settlers' wives would have led to Eastern Australian being overrun with forests of Prickly Pear? Who would have prophesied that the cutting down of forests on the Adriatic coasts, or in parts of Central Africa, could have reduced the land to a semidesert, with the very soil washed away from the bare rock? Who would have thought that improved communications would have changed history by the spreading of disease-sleeping sickness into East Africa, measles into Oceania, very possibly malaria into ancient Greece? These are spectacular examples; but examples on a smaller scale are everywhere to be found.We make a nature sanctuary for rare birds, prescribing absolute security for all species; and we may find that some common and hardy kind of bird multiplies beyond measure and ousts the rare kinds in which we were particularly interested.We see, owing to some little change brought about by civilization, the starling spread over the English country-side in hordes.We improve the yielding capacities of our cattle; and find that now they exhaust the pastures which sufficed for less exigent stock.

A:
What have spread diseases?
****