Preferential tumour accumulation of gold nanoparticles, visualised by magnetic resonance imaging: Radiosensitisation studies in vivo and in vitro
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate the radiosensitisation of gold nanoparticles (GNP) with an average diameter of 5 nm coated with the gadolinium chelating agent dithiolated diethylenetriaminepentaacetic gadolinium (Au@DTDTPA:Gd) in vitro and in mice bearing tumours (MC7-L1). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In vivo, the gadolinium chelate coating allows one to perform real-time Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) pharmacokinetic analysis during intravenous infusion. Experiments were performed following treatment with 10 Gy of 150 kVp X-rays. In vitro experiments were also performed with clonogenic assays to generate dose response curves for the same cells. RESULTS: We observed a preferential accumulation of Au@DTDTPA:Gd in tumours; a substantial toxicity for tumour cells in vitro, but no obvious toxicity for mice; and the absence of a synergistic effect with Au@DTDTPA:Gd and radiation in all experiments. CONCLUSIONS: The additional absorption of radiation and the subsequent increase in secondary electrons, attributable to the presence of gold in Au@DTDTPA:Gd, does not lead to radiosensitisation. However, this chelating agent exhibits a chemotherapeutic action which warrants further investigation. When compared to positive results obtained by others on radiosensitisation by GNP, the present study suggests that the chemotherapeutic and radiosensitising properties of GNP may depend strongly on the nature of the coating.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".