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.

Input: Consider Input: Context: Combination therapy for cancer is more effective than using only standard chemo- or radiotherapy. Our previous results showed that dendritic cell-activated -fetoprotein (AFP)-specific T-cells inhibit tumor in vitro and in vivo. In this study, we focused on antitumor function of CD8(+) T-cells combined with or without JAK2 inhibitor.', 'Proliferation and cell cycle were analyzed by CCK-8 and flow cytometry. Western blot was used to analyze the expression level of related protein and signaling pathway.', 'We demonstrated reduced viability and induction of apoptosis of tumor cells with combination treatment. Intriguingly, cell cycle was blocked at the G1 phase by using AFP-specific CD8(+) T-cells combined with JAK2 inhibitor (AG490). Furthermore, an enhanced expression of BAX but no influence on Fas/FasL was detected from the tumor cells.\Question: Does jAK2 inhibitor combined with DC-activated AFP-specific T-cells enhance antitumor function in a Fas/FasL signal-independent pathway?

Output: These results indicate a Fas/FasL-independent pathway for cellular apoptosis in cancer therapies with the treatment of AFP-specific CD8(+) T-cells combined with JAK2 inhibitor.

Input: Consider Input: Context: The proteasome is the proteolytically active core of the ubiquitin-proteasome system, which regulates vital processes and which can cause various diseases when it malfunctions. Therefore, the proteasome has become an attractive target for pharmaceutical interventions. Inhibition of the cardiac proteasome by specific proteasome inhibitors has been shown to attenuate cardiac hypertrophy and ischaemia reperfusion injury of the heart. We have resolved the cardiac proteasome into its subtypes and have addressed the key question of how proteasome inhibitors affect single cardiac proteasomal subtypes.', 'The 20S proteasome from rat heart was dissected into three different subpopulations (groups I-III), each comprising 4-7 different subtypes. The major group (group II) comprises standard proteasome subtypes; the two minor subpopulations (groups I and III) contain intermediate proteasome subtypes. All subtypes exhibit chymotrypsin-, trypsin-, and caspase-like activity but to different degrees. We have tested the effect of two common proteasome inhibitors on the chymotrypsin-like activity of all subtypes: 20-30 nmol/L MG132 caused 50% inhibition of all subtypes from groups I and II, whereas 100 nmol/L was necessary to affect group III subtypes to the same extent. However, another inhibitor, bortezomib (VELCADE), already used clinically, inhibited 50% of the activity of group III proteasome subtypes even below 20 nmol/L, a concentration showing almost no effect on group I and II proteasome subtypes. The caspase-like activity of group II proteasome subtypes was not affected by MG132 and was inhibited by bortezomib only at concentrations above 100 nmol/L.\Question: Do multiple cardiac proteasome subtypes differ in their susceptibility to proteasome inhibitors?

Output: These data show that different inhibitors have differential inhibitory effects on the various cardiac proteasome subtypes. Different cardiac subtypes are inhibited by the same dose of proteasome inhibitor to a different extent.

Input: Consider Input: Context: The main aim was to compare robotic gait training vs. balance training for reducing postural instability in patients with Parkinson's disease. The secondary aim was to compare their effects on the level of confidence during activities of daily living requiring balance, functional mobility and severity of disease.", 'Randomized controlled trial.', 'University hospital.', "A total of 66 patients with Parkinson's disease at Hoehn and Yahr Stage 3.", 'After balanced randomization, all patients received 12, 45-minute treatment sessions, three days a week, for four consecutive weeks. A group underwent robot-assisted gait training with progressive gait speed increasing and body-weight support decreasing. The other group underwent balance training aimed at improving postural reactions (self and externally induced destabilization, coordination, locomotor dexterity exercises).', 'Patients were evaluated before, after and one month posttreatment.', 'Berg Balance Scale.', "Activities-Specific Balance Confidence Scale; Timed Up and Go Test; Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale.", 'No significant differences were found between the groups for the Berg Balance Scale either immediately after intervention (mean score in the robotic training group 51.58 3.94; mean score in the balance training group 51.15 3.46), or one-month follow-up (mean score in the robotic training group 51.03 4.63; mean score in the balance training group 50.97 4.28). Similar results were found for all the secondary outcome measures.\Question: Is robot-assisted gait training superior to balance training for improving postural instability in patients with mild to moderate Parkinson 's disease : a single-blind randomized controlled trial?
Output: Our findings indicate that robotic gait training is not superior to balance training for improving postural instability in patients with mild to moderate Parkinson's disease.