MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980073077 · doi:10.1002/lsm.20338

Photodynamic therapy of brain tumors—A work in progress

2006· article· en· W1980073077 on OpenAlexaffabout
Paul J. Müller, Brian C. Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenueLasers in Surgery and Medicine · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhotodynamic Therapy Research Studies
Canadian institutionsOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicinePhotodynamic therapyGliomaRandomized controlled trialBrain tumorSurgeryOncologyInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: PDT has been used in the treatment of malignant brain tumors. This communication updates our series of unselected malignant gliomas treated with Photofrin-PDT. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We examined the records of 112 patients with malignant gliomas, metastatic brain tumors and meningiomas treated with Photofrin-PDT at St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto. These patients were treated prior to the onset of ongoing randomized trials in Photofrin PDT or had pathology that excluded them from such trials. RESULTS: The overall post-PDT survival of 96 patients with supratentorial gliomas was 42 weeks, with a 40 and 22% 1- and 2-year survival, respectively. The greater the degree of oligodendroglial involvement the longer was the survival. Seventy-five percent of patients had no significant post-operative complications. CONCLUSIONS: Photofrin-PDT was safe. However, higher light doses than were used in these patients may be required for improved responses.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.289 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations138
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLasers in Surgery and MedicineSame topicPhotodynamic Therapy Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207