Effects of Pd-bacteriopheophorbide (TOOKAD)-Mediated Photodynamic Therapy on Canine Prostate Pretreated with Ionizing Radiation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of photodynamic therapy (PDT) using a novel palladium bacteriopherophorbide photosensitizer TOOKAD (WST09) on canine prostate that had been pretreated with ionizing radiation. To produce a physiological and anatomical environment in canine prostate similar to that in patients for whom radiotherapy has failed, canine prostates (n = 4) were exposed to ionizing radiation (54 Gy) 5 to 6 months prior to interstitial TOOKAD-mediated PDT. Light irradiation (763 nm, 50-200 J/cm at 150 mW/cm from a 1-cm cylindrical diffusing fiber) was delivered during intravenous infusion of TOOKAD at 2 mg/kg over 10 min. Interstitial measurements of tissue oxygen profile (pO(2)) and of local light fluence rate were also measured. The prostates were harvested for histological examination 1 week after PDT. The baseline pO(2) of preirradiated prostate was in the range 10-44 mmHg. The changes in relative light fluence rate during PDT ranged from 12 to 43%. The acute lesions were characterized by hemorrhagic necrosis, clearly distinguishable from the radiotherapy-induced pre-existing fibrosis. The lesion size was correlated with light fluence and comparable to that in unirradiated prostate treated with a similar TOOKAD-PDT protocol. There was no noticeable damage to the urethra, bladder or adjacent colon. The preliminary results obtained from a small number of animals indicate that TOOKAD-PDT can effectively ablate prostate pretreated with ionizing radiation, and so it may provide an alternative modality for those prostate cancer patients for whom radiotherapy has failed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".