《Table 5 Comparison between parameters determined at 24±6 wk from start of ustekinumab therapy betwe

《Table 5 Comparison between parameters determined at 24±6 wk from start of ustekinumab therapy betwe   提示：宽带有限、当前游客访问压缩模式
本系列图表出处文件名：随高清版一同展现
《Ustekinumab: “Real-world” outcomes and potential predictors of nonresponse in treatment-refractory Crohn's disease》


  1. 获取 高清版本忘记账户？点击这里登录
  1. 下载图表忘记账户？点击这里登录

In conclusion，our data strongly suggest that ustekinumab is effective in treatmentrefractory，moderate to severe CD under“real-world”conditions.In particular，more data is needed on the long-term safety of this drug and on potential predictors of response.

图表编号XD0087253400    严禁用于非法目的
绘制时间2019.08.21
作者Peter Hoffmann、Johannes Krisam、Cyrill Wehling、Petra Kloeters-Plachky、Yvonne Leopold、Nina Belling、Annika Gauss
绘制单位Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Hospital Heidelberg、Department of Medical Biometry, University Hospital Heidelberg、Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Hospital Heidelberg、Department of Gastroenterology and H
更多格式高清、无水印（增值服务）

相关图表

  1. 《Table 1 Comparison of the essential parameters between the commercial soft and stiff cantilever AFM probes produced by O》2018.05.15
  2. 《Table 1 Parameters of CF and CPF-0.5-800-6 determined by BET》2020.02.10
  3. 《Table 3 Comparison of gastric motility parameters between children with abdominal pain-predominant functional gastrointe》2019.01.07
  4. 《Table 2 Comparison of autonomic parameters between children with abdominal pain-predominant functional gastrointestinal》2019.01.07
  5. 《表5 IMC亚微乳胶及市售IMC普通乳膏的药动学参数对比 (n=6) Tab.5 The comparison of the pharmacokinetic parameters between IMC submicron emulsion》2019.01.15
  6. 《表6 可靠性优化设计与确定性优化结果对比Tab.6 Comparison between reliability-based design optimiza-tion and determined design optimization》2019.01.28
  7. 《Table 1 Comparison of Galilei parameters between eyes with gonioscopically narrow and open ACA》2019.02.18
  8. 《表5 轻轨车型主要技术参数对比Tab.5 Parameters comparison between LRV》2019.02.18
  9. 《表2 两组射频消融手术指标比较Table 2 Comparison of radiofrequency ablation parameters between the two groups》2018.06.01
  10. 《表2 术后不同时间点两组患者疼痛评分比较 (分, ±s) Table 2 Comparison of pain scores between two groups at different times after operation (sc》2018.08.28
  11. 《表3 原模型与优化模型参数对比Table 3 Parameter comparison between original and opti-mized model》2018.08.05
  12. 《表2 各发动机不同时刻声腔频率比较Table 2 Comparison of the acoustic frequency between 1#motor and 2#motor at different moments Hz》2018.04.01
  13. 《表4 B组永久修复和复诊时5个参数的比较Table 4 Comparison of 5 parameters of Group B at permanent restoration and a subsequent visit》2018.06.20
  14. 《表3 土壤剖面稀土元素参数对比Table 3 The REE parameter comparison between two profiles》2018.06.10
  15. 《表5 两组患者治疗6月后疗效比较Tab.5 Comparison of the effectiveness between two groups at 6 months post-treatment (n, %)》2018.02.20
  16. 《Table 1.Plasma parameters comparison between the present model and[5] (internal coil lamp) .》2018.10.01
  17. 《表4 两组术后24周相关指标情况比较Table 4 Comparison of related indexes between the two groups at 24 weeks after operation》2018.07.10
  18. 《表3 两组术后12周相关指标情况比较Table 3 Comparison of related indexes between the two groups at 12 weeks after operation》2018.07.10
  19. 《表2 24 h组和48 h组中PM2.5各元素组分ΔI/O比值与PM2.5ΔI/O比值的比较Table 2 Comparison betweenΔI/O ratio of PM2.5elementary constituents and P》2018.06.18
  20. 《表5 舞蹈和武术风格情况比较 (n=24) Table 5 Style Comparison Between Dance and Wushu》2018.05.15

随机翻阅

《表1 两组患者护理满意度对比[n(%))]》 《表2 教学任务量化评分表》 《表6 欺凌指数和欺凌发生率的校际差异（基于PISA2015和PISA2018)》 《表2 影响ICU老年患者EN期间腹泻的单因素分析》 《表3.《勇敢的心：世界大战》通过“小人物”视角重审战争》 《表2 长4+5、长6油层有效厚度下限值一览表》 《表2 双向权重形成性评价预期结果》 《表2 入口钻井液流量影响滑套工作性能表》 《表3 两组SS-QOL评分比较 (±s，分)》 《表2 工况情况：铺装层对钢箱梁结构抗爆性能影响试验研究》