MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1886572529 · doi:10.1002/wnan.1227

Tracking and evaluation of dendritic cell migration by cellular magnetic resonance imaging

2013· review· en· W1886572529 on OpenAlexaff
Gregory A. Dekaban, Amanda M. Hamilton, Corby Fink, Bryan Au, Sonali N. de Chickera, Emeline J. Ribot, Paula J. Foster

Bibliographic record

VenueWiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Nanomedicine and Nanobiotechnology · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmunotherapy and Immune Responses
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIn vivoMagnetic resonance imagingEx vivoImmunotherapyLymph nodeImmunogenicityLymphatic systemDendritic cellPreclinical imagingBiomedical engineeringImmune systemMedicineCancer researchPathologyImmunologyBiologyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cellular magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a means by which cells labeled ex vivo with a contrast agent can be detected and tracked over time in vivo. This technology provides a noninvasive method with which to assess cell-based therapies in vivo. Dendritic cell (DC)-based vaccines are a promising cancer immunotherapy, but its success is highly dependent on the injected DC migrating to a secondary lymphoid organ such as a nearby lymph node. There the DC can interact with T cells to elicit a tumor-specific immune response. It is important to verify DC migration in vivo using a noninvasive imaging modality, such as cellular MRI, so that important information regarding the anatomical location and persistence of the injected DC in a targeted lymph node can be provided. An understanding of DC biology is critical in ascertaining how to label DC with sufficient contrast agent to render them detectable by MRI. While iron oxide nanoparticles provide the best sensitivity for detection of DC in vivo, a clinical grade iron oxide agent is not currently available. A clinical grade (19) Fluorine-based perfluorcarbon nanoemulsion is available but is less sensitive, and its utility to detect DC migration in humans remains to be demonstrated using clinical scanners presently available. The ability to quantitatively track DC migration in vivo can provide important information as to whether different DC maturation and activation protocols result in improved DC migration efficiency which will determine the vaccine's immunogenicity and ultimately the tumor immunotherapy's outcome in humans.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.284 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations50
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Nanomedicine and NanobiotechnologySame topicImmunotherapy and Immune ResponsesFrench-language works237,207