Review



takeda 2017a  (Takeda)

 
  • Logo
  • About
  • News
  • Press Release
  • Team
  • Advisors
  • Partners
  • Contact
  • Bioz Stars
  • Bioz vStars
    • 90
      Buy from Supplier

    Structured Review

    Takeda takeda 2017a
    Takeda 2017a, supplied by Takeda, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/takeda+2017a/takeda+2017a/pmc10612271__12967_2023_4620_MOESM13_ESM-1-1-30
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    takeda 2017a - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    90/100 stars

    Images

    Related Articles

    other:

    Article Title: Meningioma animal models: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Article Snippet: Random effects model Heterogeneity: I = 0%, τ = 0, p = 0.84 Senol 2015a Senol 2015b Soto−Montenegro 2014 Gal−Gonzalez 2018 Ragel 2008a Ragel 2006 Choudhury 2022 Yazaki 1995 Ding 2022a Ding 2022b Takeda 2017a Takeda 2017b Kanno 2013 Ishiwata 2004 Kim 2020a Kim 2020b Guo 2021 Wang 2018 Zhang 2020 Wang 2016 Park 2015 Iwami 2015a Iwami 2015b Wilisch−Neumann 2013 Pachow 2013 Kliese 2013 Haase 2010 Ge 2016 Kargiotis 2008 Ragel 2008 Gupta 2007 Ragel 2006a Ragel 2006b Kondraganti 2006 Surace 2004 Lee 1990 John 2021 Deng 2022 Chen 2021 Bao 2021 Tanaka 1989 Jungwirth 2021 Jungwirth 2019 Saydam 2009 Events

    Article Title: Meningioma animal models: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Article Snippet: Heterogeneity: I2 = 0%, τ2 = 0, p = 0.84 Senol 2015a Senol 2015b Soto−Montenegro 2014 Gal−Gonzalez 2018 Ragel 2008a Ragel 2006 Choudhury 2022 Yazaki 1995 Ding 2022a Ding 2022b Takeda 2017a Takeda 2017b Kanno 2013 Ishiwata 2004 Kim 2020a Kim 2020b Guo 2021 Wang 2018 Zhang 2020 Wang 2016 Park 2015 Iwami 2015a Iwami 2015b Wilisch−Neumann 2013 Pachow 2013 Kliese 2013 Haase 2010 Ge 2016 Kargiotis 2008 Ragel 2008 Gupta 2007 Ragel 2006a Ragel 2006b Kondraganti 2006 Surace 2004 Lee 1990 John 2021 Deng 2022 Chen 2021 Bao 2021 Tanaka 1989 Jungwirth 2021 Jungwirth 2019 Saydam 2009 Events 30 16 16 6 10 15 20 40 48 48 6 9 10 3 8 6 28 9 64 23 8 10 10 15 15 14 13 8 40 19 10 55 30 30 16 10 15 10 16 35 3 30 6 24 Total 867 30 16 16 6 10 15 20 40 48 48 6 9 10 3 8 6 28 9 64 30 8 10 10 15 15 14 15 8 40 20 10 55 30 30 16 10 15 10 16 35 3 30 6 24 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 Tumor induction rate Proportion 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.77 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.87 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 95%−CI [0.93; 0.96] [0.88; 1.00] [0.79; 1.00] [0.79; 1.00] [0.54; 1.00] [0.69; 1.00] [0.78; 1.00] [0.83; 1.00] [0.91; 1.00] [0.93; 1.00] [0.93; 1.00] [0.54; 1.00] [0.66; 1.00] [0.69; 1.00] [0.29; 1.00] [0.63; 1.00] [0.54; 1.00] [0.88; 1.00] [0.66; 1.00] [0.94; 1.00] [0.58; 0.90] [0.63; 1.00] [0.69; 1.00] [0.69; 1.00] [0.78; 1.00] [0.78; 1.00] [0.77; 1.00] [0.60; 0.98] [0.63; 1.00] [0.91; 1.00] [0.75; 1.00] [0.69; 1.00] [0.94; 1.00] [0.88; 1.00] [0.88; 1.00] [0.79; 1.00] [0.69; 1.00] [0.78; 1.00] [0.69; 1.00] [0.79; 1.00] [0.90; 1.00] [0.29; 1.00] [0.88; 1.00] [0.54; 1.00] [0.86; 1.00] Weight 100.0% 1.8% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 1.8% 1.8% 1.8% 1.8% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 1.6% 1.7% 1.7% 1.8% 1.7% 1.8% 19.3% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 6.2% 1.7% 1.8% 3.4% 1.7% 1.8% 1.8% 1.8% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 1.8% 1.6% 1.8% 1.7% 1.8% ECLM-Hetero-Tumor take rate

    Article Title: Meningioma animal models: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Article Snippet: Random effects model Heterogeneity: I2 = 0%, τ2 = 0, p = 1.00 Heterogeneity: I2 = 0%, τ2 = 0, p = 0.98 Heterogeneity: I2 = 26%, τ2 = 0.4290, p = 0.22 Heterogeneity: I2 = 0%, τ2 = 0, p = 0.53 Heterogeneity: I2 = 0%, τ2 = 0, p = 0.86 Senol 2015a Soto−Montenegro 2014 Choudhury 2022 Kanno 2013 Guo 2021 Zhang 2020 Wilisch−Neumann 2013 Pachow 2013 Kliese 2013 Ge 2016 Kargiotis 2008 Kondraganti 2006 John 2021 Deng 2022 Bao 2021 Tanaka 1989 Jungwirth 2021 Senol 2015b Ragel 2006 Takeda 2017a Kim 2020a Iwami 2015a Iwami 2015b Ragel 2006a Saydam 2009 Gal−Gonzalez 2018 Ragel 2008a Yazaki 1995 Ishiwata 2004 Wang 2016 Ragel 2008 Lee 1990 Chen 2021 Ding 2022a Ding 2022b Kim 2020b Takeda 2017b Park 2015 Haase 2010 Gupta 2007 Ragel 2006b Surace 2004 Jungwirth 2019 Wang 2018 Events 30 16 20 10 28 64 15 15 14 8 40 30 15 10 35 3 30 16 15 6 8 10 10 55 24 6 10 40 3 23 19 10 16 48 48 6 9 8 13 10 30 16 6 9 Total 867 383 144 135 102 94 30 16 20 10 28 64 15 15 14 8 40 30 15 10 35 3 30 16 15 6 8 10 10 55 24 6 10 40 3 30 20 10 16 48 48 6 9 8 15 10 30 16 6 9 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 Tumor induction rate Proportion 0.95 0.97 0.97 0.92 0.98 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.77 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.87 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 95%−CI [0.93; 0.96] [0.95; 0.99] [0.92; 0.99] [0.82; 0.97] [0.91; 1.00] [0.85; 0.97] [0.88; 1.00] [0.79; 1.00] [0.83; 1.00] [0.69; 1.00] [0.88; 1.00] [0.94; 1.00] [0.78; 1.00] [0.78; 1.00] [0.77; 1.00] [0.63; 1.00] [0.91; 1.00] [0.88; 1.00] [0.78; 1.00] [0.69; 1.00] [0.90; 1.00] [0.29; 1.00] [0.88; 1.00] [0.79; 1.00] [0.78; 1.00] [0.54; 1.00] [0.63; 1.00] [0.69; 1.00] [0.69; 1.00] [0.94; 1.00] [0.86; 1.00] [0.54; 1.00] [0.69; 1.00] [0.91; 1.00] [0.29; 1.00] [0.58; 0.90] [0.75; 1.00] [0.69; 1.00] [0.79; 1.00] [0.93; 1.00] [0.93; 1.00] [0.54; 1.00] [0.66; 1.00] [0.63; 1.00] [0.60; 0.98] [0.69; 1.00] [0.88; 1.00] [0.79; 1.00] [0.54; 1.00] [0.66; 1.00] Weight 100.0% 29.6% 13.9% 33.0% 5.2% 16.6% 1.8% 1.7% 1.8% 1.7% 1.8% 1.8% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 1.8% 1.8% 1.7% 1.7% 1.8% 1.6% 1.8% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 1.8% 1.8% 1.7% 1.7% 1.8% 1.6% 19.3% 3.4% 1.7% 1.7% 1.8% 1.8% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 6.2% 1.7% 1.8% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% ECLM-hetero-number of cells

    Article Title: Meningioma animal models: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Article Snippet: Random effects model Heterogeneity: I2 = 0%, τ2 = 0, p = 1.00 Heterogeneity: I2 = 34%, τ2 = 0.7780, p = 0.09 Heterogeneity: I2 = 0%, τ2 = 0, p = 0.96 Senol 2015a Senol 2015b Soto−Montenegro 2014 Ding 2022a Ding 2022b Takeda 2017a Takeda 2017b Kanno 2013 Kim 2020a Kim 2020b Guo 2021 Wang 2018 Iwami 2015b Wilisch−Neumann 2013 Pachow 2013 Haase 2010 Kondraganti 2006 Surace 2004 Lee 1990 John 2021 Deng 2022 Chen 2021 Jungwirth 2021 Jungwirth 2019 Saydam 2009 Gal−Gonzalez 2018 Ragel 2006 Choudhury 2022 Yazaki 1995 Ishiwata 2004 Zhang 2020 Wang 2016 Park 2015 Kliese 2013 Ge 2016 Kargiotis 2008 Gupta 2007 Ragel 2006a Ragel 2006b Bao 2021 Tanaka 1989 Ragel 2008a Ragel 2008 Iwami 2015a Events 30 16 16 48 48 6 9 10 8 6 28 9 10 15 15 13 30 16 10 15 10 16 30 6 24 6 15 20 40 3 64 23 8 14 8 40 10 55 30 35 3 10 19 10 Total 867 446 381 30 30 16 16 48 48 6 9 10 8 6 28 9 10 15 15 15 30 16 10 15 10 16 30 6 24 6 15 20 40 3 64 30 8 14 8 40 10 55 30 35 3 10 20 10 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 Tumor induction rate Proportion 0.95 0.96 0.96 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.87 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.77 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 95%−CI [0.93; 0.96] [0.94; 0.98] [0.91; 0.98] [0.79; 0.99] [0.88; 1.00] [0.79; 1.00] [0.79; 1.00] [0.93; 1.00] [0.93; 1.00] [0.54; 1.00] [0.66; 1.00] [0.69; 1.00] [0.63; 1.00] [0.54; 1.00] [0.88; 1.00] [0.66; 1.00] [0.69; 1.00] [0.78; 1.00] [0.78; 1.00] [0.60; 0.98] [0.88; 1.00] [0.79; 1.00] [0.69; 1.00] [0.78; 1.00] [0.69; 1.00] [0.79; 1.00] [0.88; 1.00] [0.54; 1.00] [0.86; 1.00] [0.54; 1.00] [0.78; 1.00] [0.83; 1.00] [0.91; 1.00] [0.29; 1.00] [0.94; 1.00] [0.58; 0.90] [0.63; 1.00] [0.77; 1.00] [0.63; 1.00] [0.91; 1.00] [0.69; 1.00] [0.94; 1.00] [0.88; 1.00] [0.90; 1.00] [0.29; 1.00] [0.69; 1.00] [0.75; 1.00] [0.69; 1.00] Weight 100.0% 47.9% 45.2% 5.1% 1.8% 1.7% 1.7% 1.8% 1.8% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 1.8% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 6.2% 1.8% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 1.8% 1.7% 1.8% 1.7% 1.7% 1.8% 1.8% 1.6% 1.8% 19.3% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 1.8% 1.7% 1.8% 1.8% 1.8% 1.6% 1.7% 3.4% 1.7% ECLM-hetero-injection volume



    Similar Products

    takeda 2017a  (Takeda)
    90
    Takeda takeda 2017a
    Takeda 2017a, supplied by Takeda, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/takeda+2017a/takeda+2017a/pmc10612271__12967_2023_4620_MOESM13_ESM-1-1-30
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    takeda 2017a - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    90/100 stars
    		  Buy from Supplier

    Image Search Results