Vaccinia Virus Outperforms a Panel of Other Poxviruses as a Potent Oncolytic Agent for the Control of Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma Cell Lines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is the fifth most common cancer worldwide. Existing therapies for advanced tumors have high failure rates and can have severe consequences in terms of pain, disfigurement, and poor speech and swallowing function. New treatment strategies are needed to improve outcomes for patients suffering with this disease and oncolytic viruses represent a promising approach. METHODS: We infected six well-characterized HNSCC cell lines (Cal27, Detroit562, FaDu, SCC4, SCC15, SCC25), with increasing doses of a panel of poxviruses (including myxoma, vaccinia, raccoonpox and tanapox viruses) modified to express green fluorescence protein to determine which virus was the most effective oncolytic agent in cell-based assays. RESULTS: While myxoma, raccoonpox and tanapox displayed differing efficacy in the panel of cell lines, vaccinia virus was the most potent of the tested poxviruses and was highly effective in controlling cell growth in all cell lines. CONCLUSION: Oncolytic poxviruses, particularly vaccinia virus, were effective in killing HNSCC in vitro and hold promise as potential treatments for patients with HNSCC.
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) | 0.000 | 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".