MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027609803 · doi:10.1517/14712590903002039

Reovirus-based therapy for cancer

2009· review· en· W2027609803 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin R. Kelly, Steffan T. Nawrocki, Alain C. Mita, Matthew Coffey, Francis J. Giles, Monica Mita

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Opinion on Biological Therapy · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicVirus-based gene therapy research
Canadian institutionsOncolytics Biotech (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOncolytic virusImmune systemMedicineToxicityCancer therapyAntibodyRadiation therapyVirusCancerCancer researchImmunologyVirologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reovirus is an oncolytic virus that is not associated with significant disease in humans, but is selectively able to replicate in cancer cells through exploitation of abnormal Ras signaling. Pre-clinical studies have demonstrated that treatment with reovirus is associated with significant anticancer activity across a range of tumor types. Reolysin is a proprietary formulation of the human reovirus developed by Oncolytics Biotech. Clinical evaluation of reovirus therapy has shown that it is well tolerated when administered locally or systemically. Encouraging anticancer efficacy has been observed with single-agent treatment and in combination with chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Phase II studies are currently evaluating reovirus alone and in combination with standard therapy in an array of tumor types. While immune sensitization hinders the anticancer efficacy of reovirus, it is important in preventing systemic toxicity. Immunosuppressive strategies are being developed that reduce immune neutralization of the virus to allow for improved tumor penetration, but retain sufficient antibody levels to protect normal tissues. The lack of toxicity and promising efficacy of reovirus has raised hopes that it will become an established anticancer agent.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.211
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations69
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Opinion on Biological TherapySame topicVirus-based gene therapy researchFrench-language works237,207