Antisense oligonucleotide therapy in the management of bladder cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: In this paper, we will review the recent advances in antisense oligonucleotide therapy in the treatment of superficial bladder cancer. Bladder cancer has an exciting potential as a model to study antisense oligonucleotide therapy because of the ease of accessibility of treatment, ease of diagnosis through biopsy and urine cytology, and direct observation of treatment efficacy through cystoscopy and posttreatment biopsy. RECENT FINDINGS: We will elaborate on the recent developments in the delivery of antisense oligonucleotide and the implications of these results on the use of antisense oligonucleotide intravesically. We will also discuss recent preclinical in-vitro results of antisense oligonucleotide therapy in different bladder cancer cell lines. SUMMARY: Recent developments of the in-vitro and animal in-vivo effectiveness of antisense treatment in bladder cancer provide the foundation to pursue future phase I clinical trials. Antisense oligonucleotide technology is a promising tool that may become an effective method of treating bladder cancer.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
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".