MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Strategies for Prevention of Toxicity Caused by Platinum‐Based Chemotherapy: Review and Summary of the Annual Meeting of the Blood–Brain Barrier Disruption Program, Gleneden Beach, Oregon, March 10, 2001

2002· article· en· W2090264451 on OpenAlexaff
Brian W. Blakley, James I. Cohen, Nancy D. Doolittle, Leslie L. Muldoon, Kathleen C. M. Campbell, D. Thomas Dickey, Edward A. Neuwelt

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Laryngoscope · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, Genetics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsOtotoxicityCarboplatinMedicineCisplatinToxicityChemotherapyLimitingClinical trialPharmacologyOtorhinolaryngologyIntensive care medicineSodium thiosulfateOncologyInternal medicineSurgeryChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To summarize the findings relevant to otolaryngology from the annual meeting of the Blood-Brain Barrier Disruption Consortium in Gleneden Beach, Oregon, March 10, 2001. STUDY DESIGN: Summaries are provided by the speakers, as well as related data from the published literature. Findings in otology and oncology regarding ototoxicity that were discussed at the meeting are included. RESULTS: Data considered included physiological research, animal studies, and clinical trials that relate to platinum-based chemotherapy and prevention of toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: The dose-limiting side effects of platinum-based chemotherapy are preventable, but questions about the effect of the protective agents on oncological efficacy remain. Strategies for prevention of chemotherapy-induced toxicity include temporal or anatomical separation of cisplatin or carboplatin from sodium thiosulfate, D-methionine, or N-acetyl-cysteine. Clinical application of these methods has begun. The mechanisms presumably involve free radicals or drug conjugation, or both. Understanding the role of free radicals in medicine is likely to become important in the future.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.477

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations59
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe LaryngoscopeSame topicHearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, GeneticsFrench-language works237,207