MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985364674 · doi:10.1586/era.12.35

Antiangiogenic therapies in glioblastoma multiforme

2012· review· en· W1985364674 on OpenAlexaff
Mairéad G. McNamara, Warren Mason

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Anticancer Therapy · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGlioblastomaAngiogenesisAntiangiogenic therapyRadiation therapyOncologyGliomaChemotherapyTemozolomideCancer researchDiseaseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is the most common and lethal of adult gliomas. The prognosis for the great majority of patients with GBM is poor as almost all tumors recur following optimal surgical resection, radiation and standard chemotherapy, resulting in rapid disease-related death. The standard of care for recurrent GBM has not been clearly established. GBMs are highly vascularized brain tumors and growth has been shown to be angiogenesis dependent, thus stimulating interest in developing antiangiogenic therapeutic strategies. Antiangiogenic agents are the most promising novel agents in development for GBM but to date have not substantially changed overall survival. Future antiangiogenic strategies designed to overcome limitations of current antiangiogenic agents will likely involve the use of agent combinations that target pathways mediating resistance to antiangiogenic agents and tumor invasion.

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: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.340 · 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

Citations33
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Anticancer TherapySame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207