Given the task definition, example input & output, solve the new input case.
In this task, you are given an abstract of article. Your task is to generate label "True" if abstract is structured, otherwise generate "False". A structured abstract is composed of a topic sentence (or key sentence), relevant supporting sentences, and a closing (or transition) sentence. This structure is key to keeping your abstract focused on the main idea and creating a clear and concise image.
Example: RanBP type proteins have been reported to increase the catalytic efficiency of the RanGAP-mediated GTPase reaction on Ran. Since the structure of the Ran-RanBP1-RanGAP complex showed RanBP1 to be located away from the active site, we reinvestigated the reaction using fluorescence spectroscopy under pre-steady-state conditions. We can show that RanBP1 indeed does not influence the rate-limiting step of the reaction, which is the cleavage of GTP and/or the release of product P(i). It does, however, influence the dynamics of the Ran-RanGAP interaction, its most dramatic effect being the 20-fold stimulation of the already very fast association reaction such that it is under diffusion control (4.5 x 10(8) M(-1) s(-1)). Having established a valuable kinetic system for the interaction analysis, we also found, in contrast to previous findings, that the highly conserved acidic C-terminal end of RanGAP is not required for the switch-off reaction. Rather, genetic experiments in Saccharomyces cerevisiae demonstrate a profound effect of the acidic tail on microtubule organization during mitosis. We propose that the acidic tail of RanGAP is required for a process during mitosis.
Output: False
Output is appropriate for the given abstract because it is not structured.

New input case for you: From April 1986 to September 2000, 122 MRCC patients were treated by monthly intralymphatic injections (containing a mean of 573 IL-2 U and 26 x 10(6) LAK cells) and i.m. administration of IFN and TF; 71 patients also received a 3-day cycle of monthly IL-2 inhalations with a mean of 998 daily U. MRCC cases not treated by immunotherapy (n = 89) represent our historical controls. Adverse clinical side effects related to treatment were negligible. CR (n = 11) and PR (n = 13) were noticed in 24/122 patients. Of 24 responding patients, 17 resumed progression, whereas 7 remain in remission 11-69 months later. The overall median survival of treated patients (28 months) was 3.5-fold higher than the median survival of historical controls (7.5 months), and a Kaplan-Meier curve showed 25% survival 11 years after the beginning of immunotherapy. Apparently, the addition of IL-2 by inhalation improved survival. The present immunotherapy protocol appears to be efficacious, safe, devoid of adverse side effects, far less costly than others and able to offer a good quality of life to MRCC patients; if confirmed in a multicenter trial, it could set the basis for developing low-dose immunomodulatory treatments.
Output:
False