Determination of optimal drug dose and light dose index to achieve minimally invasive focal ablation of localised prostate cancer using <scp>WST</scp> 11‐vascular‐targeted photodynamic ( <scp>VTP</scp> ) therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the optimal drug and light dose for prostate ablation using WST11 (TOOKAD Soluble) for vascular-targeted photodynamic (VTP) therapy in men with low-risk prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In all, 42 men with low-risk prostate cancer were enrolled in the study but two who underwent anaesthesia for the procedure did not receive the drug or light dose. Thus, 40 men received a single dose of 2, 4 or 6 mg/kg WST11 activated by 200 J/cm light at 753 nm. WST11 was given as a 10-min intravenous infusion. The light dose was delivered using cylindrical diffusing fibres within hollow plastic needles positioned in the prostate using transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) guidance and a brachytherapy template. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was used to assess treatment effect at 7 days, with assessment of urinary function (International Prostate Symptom Score [IPSS]), sexual function (International Index of Erectile Function [IIEF]) and adverse events at 7 days, 1, 3 and 6 months after VTP. TRUS-guided biopsies were taken at 6 months. RESULTS: In all, 39 of the 40 treated men completed the follow-up. The Day-7 MRI showed maximal treatment effect (95% of the planned treatment volume) in men who had a WST11 dose of 4 mg/kg, light dose of 200 J/cm and light density index (LDI) of >1. In the 12 men treated with these parameters, the negative biopsy rate was 10/12 (83%) at 6 months, compared with 10/26 (45%) for the men who had either a different drug dose (10 men) or an LDI of <1 (16). Transient urinary symptoms were seen in most of the men, with no significant difference in IPSS score between baseline and 6 months after VTP. IIEF scores were not significantly different between baseline and 6 months after VTP. CONCLUSION: Treatment with 4 mg/kg TOOKAD Soluble activated by 753 nm light at a dose of 200 J/cm and an LDI of >1 resulted in treatment effect in 95% of the planned treatment volume and a negative biopsy rate at 6 months of 10/12 men (83%).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".