tbuckley/cabot-search huggingface dataset:
THE HOBBIES OF PHYSICIANS.
Journal: JAMA (2008)

Our website uses cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing to use our site, or clicking "Continue," you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy | Continue JAMA HomeNew OnlineCurrent IssueFor Authors Publications JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry (1919-1959) Podcasts Clinical Reviews Editors' Summary Medical News Author Interviews More JN Learning / CMESubscribeJobsInstitutions / LibrariansReprints & Permissions Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Accessibility Statement 2023 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved Search All JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Forum Archive JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry Input Search Term Sign In Individual Sign In Sign inCreate an Account Access through your institution Sign In Purchase Options: Buy this article Rent this article Subscribe to the JAMA journal
THE ATLANTIC CITY SESSION
Journal: JAMA (1904)

Our website uses cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing to use our site, or clicking "Continue," you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy | Continue JAMA HomeNew OnlineCurrent IssueFor Authors Publications JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry (1919-1959) Podcasts Clinical Reviews Editors' Summary Medical News Author Interviews More JN Learning / CMESubscribeJobsInstitutions / LibrariansReprints & Permissions Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Accessibility Statement 2023 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved Search All JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Forum Archive JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry Input Search Term Sign In Individual Sign In Sign inCreate an Account Access through your institution Sign In Purchase Options: Buy this article Rent this article Subscribe to the JAMA journal
Eighteenth Annual San Francisco Cancer Symposium
Journal: JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute (1982)

Eighteenth Annual San Francisco Cancer Symposium Get access JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Volume 69, Issue 6, December 1982, Page 1421, https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/69.6.1421-a Published: 01 December 1982
Stress Testing
Authors: R. A. Lippin
Journal: JAMA (1976)

<h3>To the Editor.—</h3> As an occupational physician for a major corporation, I have recently had occasion to review the techniques and predictive value of cardiovascular stress testing. Although I am convinced of the value of traditional techniques, it has occurred to me that other techniques are also indicated. Specifically, I am referring to psychophysiologic methods to yield a higher percentage of meaningful, positive results. It is known that stress-induced catecholamine discharge is a normal response producing tachycardia and a normal frequency of premature contractions. This stress reaction, however, taken to inappropriate excess under given conditions becomes pathogenic. I am referring to the sedentary, high-powered, pressured executive who is continually stressed during the working day. His resultant cardiovascular stress reaction, coupled with shallow hyperventilation and muscular tension, contribute to an increased myocardial oxygen demand. His unhealthy, maladaptive response is to bear down harder to the task at hand with resultant Valsalva
Molecular characterization of circulating tumor cells (CTC) and CTC subpopulations in baseline and progressive metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).
Authors: Ryan Dittamore, Jessica Louw, Rachel Krupa, Daniel Costin Danila, Zaina Arslan, Nicole A Schreiber, Natalee Bales, Dena Marrinucci, Howard I. Scher
Journal: Journal of Clinical Oncology (2014)

e16018 Background: Constitutively active androgen signaling has been postulated as a resistant mechanism in progressive mCRPC for patients (pts) failing androgen receptor targeting therapeutics (AR tx). We examined CTC and CTC subpopulation incidence, AR protein expression, AR localization and molecular characterized CTCs from pts with baseline (BL) and progressive mCRPC to assess if a model could be developed to identify true responders (TR) from acquired resistors (AcR) and de novo resistors (DR) of AR tx. Methods: 56 samples from 45 unique mCRPC pts treated with AR tx; 38 samples were from Pts progressing on abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (n=16) and and/or enzalutamide (n=22) and 18 were drawn prior to AA+P (n=9) or E (N=9). BL pts were followed and were classified as TR, AcR, or DR. Samples were processed utilizing the Epic Sciences platform. CTCs, defined as traditional (CK+, CD45-, intact nucleus, distinct morphology), apoptotic (CK+, CD45-, fragmented nuclei), CK- (CK-, CD45-, distinct morphology, intact nucleus), and small (CK+, CD45-, small intact nucleus) were examined for AR by IF and for PTEN and ERG alterations by FISH. PSA, CellSearch, and clinical history were recorded. Results: Traditional CTCs were detected (>5 cells/7.5 ml) in 96% (54 of 56) with Epic vs. 63% (35 of 56) of cases by CellSearch. Epic CTC counts were higher in 82% (46 of 56) of samples. Non-traditional CTCs that expressed PCa specific proteins and/or genomics were seen in all samples. TR, AcR & DR samples differed in number of AR+ CTC, AR localization heterogeneity, and CK- CTC count (see Table). Conclusions: Epic analysis provides higher detection rates than CellSearch in this cohort. Novel CTC populations were detected in all (56) samples with 5 or more traditional CTC/7.5mL. AR expression & localization in CTCs and CK- CTC count may play a role in progression of AR tx. Studies are ongoing to quantitate measures we are reporting and undergoing further prospective validation. Blood draw Epic CTC result Mean AR+ CTC/7.5mL % of Pts w/both Nuc & Cyto AR CTCs CK- CTC/7.5mL TR; n=4 4 (0-10) 0% 26 (0-53) AcR; n=19 28 (0-192) 32% 28 (0-150) DR; n=33 168 (0-2716) 48% 95 (0-1440)
Leptin Passes Safety Tests, but Effectiveness Varies
Authors: D. F. Phillips
Journal: JAMA (1998)

Our website uses cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing to use our site, or clicking "Continue," you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy | Continue JAMA HomeNew OnlineCurrent IssueFor Authors Publications JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry (1919-1959) Podcasts Clinical Reviews Editors' Summary Medical News Author Interviews More JN Learning / CMESubscribeJobsInstitutions / LibrariansReprints & Permissions Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Accessibility Statement 2023 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved Search All JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Forum Archive JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry Input Search Term Sign In Individual Sign In Sign inCreate an Account Access through your institution Sign In Purchase Options: Buy this article Rent this article Subscribe to the JAMA journal
Resident Forum
Journal: JAMA (1995)

Our website uses cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing to use our site, or clicking "Continue," you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy | Continue JAMA HomeNew OnlineCurrent IssueFor Authors Publications JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry (1919-1959) Podcasts Clinical Reviews Editors' Summary Medical News Author Interviews More JN Learning / CMESubscribeJobsInstitutions / LibrariansReprints & Permissions Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Accessibility Statement 2023 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved Search All JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Forum Archive JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry Input Search Term Sign In Individual Sign In Sign inCreate an Account Access through your institution Sign In Purchase Options: Buy this article Rent this article Subscribe to the JAMA journal
Can the NHS cut costs without substantially damaging the quality of health care? No
Authors: James Owen Drife
Journal: BMJ (2010)

Rebecca Rosen (doi: 10.1136/bmj.c1967) and Paul Corrigan (doi: 10.1136/bmj.c1999) think that the NHS cost cutting that will occur over the next few years does not inevitably mean that the quality of care it provides will suffer. John Appleby (doi: 10.1136/bmj.c1959) and James Owen Drife are not so sure
Correction
Journal: British Journal of Dermatology (1972)

British Journal of DermatologyVolume 87, Issue 4 p. 403-403 Free Access Correction First published: October 1972 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2133.1972.tb07438.xAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. Volume87, Issue4October 1972Pages 403-403 RelatedInformation
Mechanisms, Measurement, and Significance of Lung Macrophage Function
Authors: J. D. Brain
Journal: Environmental Health Perspectives (1992)

Macrophages exist throughout the body. They have critical roles in the peritoneal cavity, bone marrow, skin, spleen, liver, and elsewhere. Their migratory patterns, phagocytic behavior, immunologic roles, and secretory potential are pivotal to both defense mechanisms and to the pathogenesis of disease. Macrophages have been implicated recently in such diverse disease processes as arthritis, AIDS, and juvenile onset diabetes. It is important to recognize the existence of other lung macrophages besides alveolar macrophages. Macrophages exist in small and large airways above and below the mucus. They may release chemotactic factors and a variety of mediators. They ingest and degrade antigens and are microbicidal. Interstitial macrophages are in direct contact with the extracellular matrix as well as other cells in pulmonary connective tissue such as fibroblasts. Thus, release of mediators or enzymes by interstitial macrophages can have a profound effect. Pulmonary intravascular macrophages are resident cells within the pulmonary capillaries of some species. They avidly remove particles and pathogens from circulating blood and secrete inflammatory mediators. Finally, pleural macrophages are involved in the fate and consequences of inhaled particles, especially fibers. A key attribute of macrophages is motility. Movement is an essential step in phagocytosis. There can be no particle binding or ingestion unless macrophage-particle contact occurs. To what extent and by what mechanisms do alveolar macrophages move on the alveolar epithelium? We have used optical methods as well as magnetometry to describe macrophage motility. Lung macrophages express an array of contractile proteins that are responsible for spreading, migration, phagocytosis, and the controlled intracellular motions of phagosomes and lysosomes.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
WARNING AGAINST PANAMA LABOR
Journal: JAMA (1905)

Our website uses cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing to use our site, or clicking "Continue," you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy | Continue JAMA HomeNew OnlineCurrent IssueFor Authors Podcasts Clinical Reviews Editors' Summary Medical News Author Interviews More Publications JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry (1919-1959) JN Learning / CMESubscribeJobsInstitutions / LibrariansReprints & Permissions Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Accessibility Statement 2023 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved Search All JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Forum Archive JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry Input Search Term Sign In Individual Sign In Sign inCreate an Account Access through your institution Sign In Purchase Options: Buy this article Rent this article Subscribe to the JAMA journal
Brad
Authors: John D. Cantwell
Journal: JAMA (1983)

Like E.T., he is funny-looking, emits weird noises, drinks and eats whatever he gets his hands on (beer, wooden balls, plastic bananas, sponges), and brings out the best—and occasionally the worst—in those he encounters. Unlike the Extra-Terrestrial, he has a double row of teeth, repeatedly voids on his mother's best carpeting, and is not obsessed with phoning home, for he lives there, within the warmth and security of a close-knit family. Bradley arrived on a night I was to quarterback the Mayo Clinic residents' team against a squad of Rochester construction workers (affectionately known as the "cement heads"). It was cold and rainy, a miserable night for football, so I didn't mind accompanying my wife to the labor and delivery area of St Mary's Hospital. I was hoping for a future all-American, a Rhodes scholar, or at least an Olympic candidate. The birth was uneventful, but within several days my
Impact of prior definitive therapy on survival outcomes in men with new hormone-sensitive metastatic prostate cancer (mHSPC).
Authors: Anitha Alex, David D. Stenehjem, Przemyslaw Twardowski, Heather H. Cheng, David Michael Gill, Tyler Howard Buckley, Shiven B. Patel, Elizabeth Riley Kessler, Namita Chittoria, Aarati Poudel, Ulka N. Vaishampayan, Neeraj Agarwal
Journal: Journal of Clinical Oncology (2016)

5083 Background: In mHSPC, treating the primary tumor may have a biologic effect on the metastatic sites, and definitive therapy in this setting has been hypothesized to delay disease progression and even death. Outcomes with prior definitive therapy in this setting have not been reported. Methods: In this multicenter study, men with new mHSPC, starting androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) were included. Index date was the day of starting ADT for new mHSPC. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard methods assessed time to castrate resistance (CRPC) and overall survival (OS) in those with or without prior definitive therapy. Variables significant at P < 0.05 were included in the final models. Results: A total of 253 men with new mHSPC were eligible (median age ~ 68 yrs). Prior definitive therapy was performed in 115 men (45%). In prior definitive therapy vs no definitive therapy: age at initiation of ADT was 68 years vs 67.5 years, p = 0.81; Gleason score 7 vs 8 p < 0.0001; ECOG 0 70.8% vs 54.6%, p = 0.0349; and visceral metastases at diagnosis was present in 6 (5%) vs 13 (9%), p = 0.18. Definitive treatment was associated with improved time to CRPC and OS in univariate analysis (table). After adjusting for baseline log PSA and Gleason score, the hazard ratio for time to CRPC was 0.88, 95% CI 0.58-1.34, p = 0.56; and for overall survival the HR was 0.71, 95% CI 0.35-1.39, p = 0.32. Conclusions: Definitive treatment may be associated with improved time to CRPC and OS in new mHSPC setting, and may aid in risk stratification for therapy decision making in this setting. Data is hypothesis generating and needs validation in a larger cohort. Definitive Treatment vs No Definitive treatment HR; 95% CI; P-value Time to CRPC, months 24 vs 13.8 0.54; 0.38-0.76; p = 0.0004 Overall Survival, month 117.5 vs 45.6 0.42;0.25-0.70; p = 0.0008
Studies In Immunity.
Journal: JAMA (1910)

Our website uses cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing to use our site, or clicking "Continue," you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy | Continue JAMA HomeNew OnlineCurrent IssueFor Authors Publications JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry (1919-1959) Podcasts Clinical Reviews Editors' Summary Medical News Author Interviews More JN Learning / CMESubscribeJobsInstitutions / LibrariansReprints & Permissions Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Accessibility Statement 2023 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved Search All JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Forum Archive JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry Input Search Term Sign In Individual Sign In Sign inCreate an Account Access through your institution Sign In Purchase Options: Buy this article Rent this article Subscribe to the JAMA journal
SPOTTED FEVER.
Journal: JAMA (1905)

Our website uses cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing to use our site, or clicking "Continue," you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy | Continue JAMA HomeNew OnlineCurrent IssueFor Authors Publications JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry (1919-1959) Podcasts Clinical Reviews Editors' Summary Medical News Author Interviews More JN Learning / CMESubscribeJobsInstitutions / LibrariansReprints & Permissions Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Accessibility Statement 2023 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved Search All JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Forum Archive JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry Input Search Term Sign In Individual Sign In Sign inCreate an Account Access through your institution Sign In Purchase Options: Buy this article Rent this article Subscribe to the JAMA journal
New Names
Journal: JAMA (1965)

Our website uses cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing to use our site, or clicking "Continue," you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy | Continue JAMA HomeNew OnlineCurrent IssueFor Authors Podcasts Clinical Reviews Editors' Summary Medical News Author Interviews More Publications JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry (1919-1959) JN Learning / CMESubscribeJobsInstitutions / LibrariansReprints & Permissions Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Accessibility Statement 2023 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved Search All JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Forum Archive JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry Input Search Term Sign In Individual Sign In Sign inCreate an Account Access through your institution Sign In Purchase Options: Buy this article Rent this article Subscribe to the JAMA journal
Prevention and Treatment of Kidney Stones
Journal: JAMA (1988)

Our website uses cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing to use our site, or clicking "Continue," you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy | Continue JAMA HomeNew OnlineCurrent IssueFor Authors Publications JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry (1919-1959) Podcasts Clinical Reviews Editors' Summary Medical News Author Interviews More JN Learning / CMESubscribeJobsInstitutions / LibrariansReprints & Permissions Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Accessibility Statement 2023 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved Search All JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Forum Archive JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry Input Search Term Sign In Individual Sign In Sign inCreate an Account Access through your institution Sign In Purchase Options: Buy this article Rent this article Subscribe to the JAMA journal
Gehirn und Rückenmark: Leitfaden für das Studium der Morphologie und des Faserverlaufes
Journal: JAMA (1949)

Our website uses cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing to use our site, or clicking "Continue," you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy | Continue JAMA HomeNew OnlineCurrent IssueFor Authors Publications JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry (1919-1959) Podcasts Clinical Reviews Editors' Summary Medical News Author Interviews More JN Learning / CMESubscribeJobsInstitutions / LibrariansReprints & Permissions Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Accessibility Statement 2023 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved Search All JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Forum Archive JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry Input Search Term Sign In Individual Sign In Sign inCreate an Account Access through your institution Sign In Purchase Options: Buy this article Rent this article Subscribe to the JAMA journal
In Reply
Authors: C. Richard Boland
Journal: Journal of Clinical Oncology (2007)

It would appear we all agree that retrospective analyses have inherent biases, and I would add that there is no substitute for prospective randomization.The problem with the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project analyses 1 and the Australian study 2 is that patients were selected for treatment from larger groups of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients, and since the treatments were new and untested at the time, the patients selected were likely to be younger, more robust, and to live longer. 2Despite Kim et al's contrary statement, this was not the case in the Ribic study, in which the patients were prospectively randomized, and this study showed no