Antivascular agents for non-small-cell lung cancer: current status and future directions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite improvements in surgery and chemo(radio)therapy which have allowed for modest advances in the treatment of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), survival remains poor and further improvements are needed. Attention over recent years has focused, therefore, on targeted therapies, with notable success in the development of antivascular drugs. OBJECTIVE: To summarize the current knowledge on antivascular therapy in patients with NSCLC. METHOD: Review of randomized controlled trials exploring treatment of NSCLC patients with antivascular drugs. RESULTS/CONCLUSION: Bevacizumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody against the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), when added to cytotoxic chemotherapy, was the first treatment to prolong the overall survival of patients with advanced NSCLC beyond 12 months, a significant breakthrough in the management of advanced NSCLC. Small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors and alternative antivascular strategies such as VEGF-trap and vascular disrupting agents are also being investigated and have shown promise in clinical trials. This review summarizes the most recent and important findings in antivascular agents in NSCLC.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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".