MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2064480398 · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/52/11/023

Mathematical modeling of brain tumors: effects of radiotherapy and chemotherapy

2007· article· en· W2064480398 on OpenAlexafffund
Gibin Powathil, Mohammad Kohandel, S. Sivaloganathan, Amit M. Oza, Michael Milosevic

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematical Biology Tumor Growth
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreFields Institute for Research in Mathematical SciencesUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacs
KeywordsRadiation therapyTemozolomideChemotherapyMedicineBrain tumorClinical trialAdjuvantOncologyRadiologyInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gliomas, the most common primary brain tumors, are diffusive and highly invasive. The standard treatment for brain tumors consists of a combination of surgery, radiation therapy and chemotherapy. Over the past few years, mathematical models have been applied to study untreated and treated brain tumors. In an effort to improve treatment strategies, we consider a simple spatio-temporal mathematical model, based on proliferation and diffusion, that incorporates the effects of radiotherapeutic and chemotherapeutic treatments. We study the effects of different schedules of radiation therapy, including fractionated and hyperfractionated external beam radiotherapy, using a generalized linear quadratic (LQ) model. The results are compared with published clinical data. We also discuss the results for combination therapy (radiotherapy plus temozolomide, a new chemotherapy agent), as proposed in recent clinical trials. We use the model to predict optimal sequencing of the postoperative (combination of radiotherapy and adjuvant, neo-adjuvant or concurrent chemotherapy) treatments for brain tumors.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations129
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and BiologySame topicMathematical Biology Tumor GrowthFrench-language works237,207