MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032452990 · doi:10.1562/2004-05-31-ra-182.1

Assessment of Cutaneous Photosensitivity of TOOKAD (WST09) in Preclinical Animal Models and in Patients¶

2005· article· en· W2032452990 on OpenAlexaff
Robert Weersink, Jason Forbes, Stuart K. Bisland, John Trachtenberg, Mostafa Elhilali, Pierre H. Brún, Brian C. Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenuePhotochemistry and Photobiology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhotodynamic Therapy Research Studies
Canadian institutionsRoyal Victoria HospitalPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhototoxicityPhotosensitizerPhotosensitivityErythemaPhotodynamic therapyAction spectrumMedicineDermatologySkin cancerDrugIrradiationPharmacologyChemistryInternal medicineCancerMaterials sciencePhotochemistryOptoelectronicsIn vitro

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

TOOKAD (WST09) is a new, long-wavelength palladium bacteriopheophorbide photosensitizer that targets tissue vasculature. The cutaneous phototoxicity of TOOKAD was assessed in normal rat and pig animal models and in patients in a Phase-I trial of TOOKAD-mediated photodynamic therapy (PDT) for recurrent prostate cancer. Controlled skin exposures were administered using solar-simulated light at various times after drug administration. Two different spectral ranges were used. In the first, the UV portion of the spectrum was removed (UV(-)) because UV irradiation in nondrugged control animals produced an erythema response at incident energy densities (J/cm(2)) lower than those required to induce a PDT response. In the second, the full solar spectrum (UV(+)) was used, and the potentiation by the photosensitizer of the UV-mediated minimum erythema dose was assessed. Results showed that the PDT skin response was negligible at clinical drug doses of 2 mg/kg for any period after administration at light doses of 128 J/cm(2) in the animal models. In patients, there was no observed UV(-) skin response at doses of up to 2 mg/kg, drug-light intervals of 1-3 h or greater and light exposures up to 128 J/cm(2). At higher drug doses in the rat and pig models, the duration of skin phototoxicity was found to be approximately 3 h and less than 1 h, respectively. Using the full spectrum of solar-simulated light, the presence of TOOKAD did not measurably enhance the UV(+)-induced erythema in the rats, pigs or patients.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.227
Threshold uncertainty score0.582

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.336 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations59
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhotochemistry and PhotobiologySame topicPhotodynamic Therapy Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207