MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062047640 · doi:10.1017/s1460396912000465

A review of vascular disrupting agents as a concomitant anti-tumour modality with radiation

2013· review· en· W2062047640 on OpenAlexaff
William T. Tran, Ahmed El Kaffas, Azza Al‐Mahrouki, Carol Gillies, Gregory J. Czarnota

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Radiotherapy in Practice · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAngiogenesis and VEGF in Cancer
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadiation therapyMedicineStromaCancer researchBioinformaticsPathologyInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Tumour vasculature plays an important role in the development, maintenance and sustainability of a tumour. Endothelial cells which are recruited into the tumour stroma facilitate the formation of essential blood vessels that deliver nutrients and oxygen to tumour cells. A growing body of research is showing that there are synergistic anti-tumour effects when anti-vascular agents are combined with radiation. More recent reports have described favourable radiation response as a function of vascular targeting and blood vessel breakdown, primarily through interactions of radiation with vascular endothelial cells. Vascular disrupting agents are being utilised in several forms that include molecular targeting, biophysical assault and biological interference. Purpose In the present review, we examine current advances in anti-vascular agents to enhance tumour response when combined with radiation therapy. Methods A comprehensive literature search was conducted on the US National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health (PubMed) using the following search keywords: vascular disrupting agents, radiation sensitisation, anti-angiogenic therapy, anti-vascular therapy, radiation therapy. Conclusion Current research suggests the applicability of vascular disrupting agents as an effective radiation sensitisation agent. Pre-clinical and clinical trials have been well developed to form the theoretical framework to apply this powerful modality to the treatment of cancer.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.380
Teacher spread0.352 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Radiotherapy in PracticeSame topicAngiogenesis and VEGF in CancerFrench-language works237,207