MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058351664 · doi:10.3109/10717541003762854

Polymeric drug delivery systems for localized cancer chemotherapy

2010· review· en· W2058351664 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDrug Delivery · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNanoparticle-Based Drug Delivery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDrug deliveryDrugChemotherapyCancerCancer therapyCancer treatmentCancer chemotherapyMedicinePharmacologyIntensive care medicineNanotechnologyCancer researchMaterials scienceInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cancer has become one of the most difficult health challenges of our time, accounting for millions of deaths yearly. Systemic chemotherapy is the most common therapeutic approach; however, considerable limitations exist including toxicities to healthy tissues and low achievable drug concentrations at tumor sites. More than 85% of human cancers are solid tumors, which can greatly benefit from localized delivery. This approach allows for high drug concentrations at the target site, lower systemic toxicity, and extended drug exposure which may be beneficial for cell cycle-specific drugs. Polymers have been widely considered in the development of localized delivery systems. This review focuses on both natural and synthetic biodegradable polymers that have been explored for localized chemotherapy, exploring their advantages, disadvantages, and clinical potential while citing examples of their use in pre-clinical development.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.269 · 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