MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006878588 · doi:10.2174/1381612023393585

Bisphosphonates as a Foundation of Drug Delivery to Bone

2002· review· en· W2006878588 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Pharmaceutical Design · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBisphosphonateDrug deliveryMedicineDrugPharmacologyBioavailabilityBone Density Conservation AgentsOsteoporosisChemistryInternal medicineBone density

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bisphosphonates are organic analogues of pyrophosphate that are resistant to hydrolysis. Bisphosphonates exhibit an exceptional affinity to bone, which led to exploration of their utility for targeting pharmacological agents to bone. Among the pharmacological agents explored for bone delivery are radioisotopes, anti-neoplastic drugs, agents intended for augmentation of systemic bone mass, anti-inflammatory drugs and proteins. This review is intended to provide a summary of the literature on bisphosphonate-based drug delivery. A survey of therapeutic agents designed for bone targeting was provided in the first part of this review. Special emphasis was placed on the preclinical performance of the developed agents. In the second part, several aspects that were considered critical for the success of bisphosphonate-based drug delivery were explored. These aspects were oral bioavailability, protein binding of BPs, the nature of a BP-drug linkage and the choice of bone-affinity molecule. This article concludes with the author's perspective on the future of bisphosphonate-based drug delivery.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.248
GPT teacher head0.473
Teacher spread0.226 · 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