MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030059142 · doi:10.1002/lsm.20337

PDT‐associated host response and its role in the therapy outcome

2006· review· en· W2030059142 on OpenAlexaff
Mladen Korbelik

Bibliographic record

VenueLasers in Surgery and Medicine · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhotodynamic Therapy Research Studies
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInnate immune systemPhotodynamic therapyImmune systemContext (archaeology)InflammationImmunologyPhagocytosisAcquired immune systemBiologyCancer researchMedicineChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The outcome of the treatment of solid tumors by photodynamic therapy (PDT) is critically dependent on the contribution from the host. This host response is provoked by the rapidly induced massive tumor tissue injury delivered by PDT that is experienced as a local trauma threatening the integrity and homeostasis at the affected site. STUDY DESIGN/MATERIALS AND METHODS: Mouse tumor models were extensively employed in pre-clinical studies investigating various aspects of host-tumor interaction following PDT, but important input was also derived from clinical data. RESULTS: The recognition of this PDT-inflicted insult by innate immune sensors detecting danger signals from the distressed/altered tumor tissue, triggers host-protecting responses dominantly manifested as acute inflammation that are elicited and orchestrated by the innate immune system. To secure the affected PDT-targeted site, the inflammatory reaction attacks tumor vasculature and then neutralizes the focal source of danger signals by eliminating the injured tumor cells. CONCLUSION: The provoked highly intensified phagocytosis of dead tumor cells occurring in the context of a vigorous innate immune reaction emerges as a key factor responsible for the development of tumor antigen-specific adaptive immune response that contributes to the eradication of PDT-treated cancers.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.313 · 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

Citations202
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLasers in Surgery and MedicineSame topicPhotodynamic Therapy Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207