MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057277981 · doi:10.1080/0265673042000196478

Methodology for applied 4 MHz RF hyperthermia concomitant with<sup>31</sup>P NMR spectroscopic monitoring of murine tumours

2004· article· en· W2057277981 on OpenAlexaff
Tedros Bezabeh, Jeffrey L. Evelhoch, David J. Sloop, Joseph J. H. Ackerman

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Hyperthermia · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicElectron Spin Resonance Studies
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Institute for Biodiagnostics
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsHyperthermiaConcomitantMagnetic resonance imagingRadiation therapyIn vivoNuclear magnetic resonanceCancer researchChemotherapyMaterials scienceNuclear medicineMedicineChemistryBiomedical engineeringBiologyRadiologySurgeryInternal medicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has been generally found that solid tumours in vivo are more susceptible to destruction by heat than normal tissues. Hyperthermia has, thus, been employed in the treatment of cancer either applied alone or in combination with other modalities such as chemotherapy and radiotherapy. However, the critical mechanism(s) by which heat sensitizes and kills cells in the solid tumour remains poorly defined. Magnetic resonance spectroscopic monitoring of tumour metabolism during application of hyperthermia may provide important insight into the response to hyperthermic challenge. The implementation of dual antenna-coil methodology that provides for NMR spectroscopic monitoring (31P at 121 MHz) concomitant with applied 4 MHz RF hyperthermia in murine tumours is described herein, in some detail. This technology, which does not require advanced (and expensive) magnetic resonance imaging systems, should be readily adaptable by other laboratories with an interest in murine tumour models.

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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.694

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Citations4
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of HyperthermiaSame topicElectron Spin Resonance StudiesFrench-language works237,207