MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149879542 · doi:10.1517/13543784.15.5.507

The potential of clusterin inhibiting antisense oligodeoxynucleotide therapy for prostate cancer

2006· review· en· W2149879542 on OpenAlexaff
Hideaki Miyake, Isao Hara, Masato Fujisawa, Martin Gleave

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Opinion on Investigational Drugs · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClusterin in disease pathology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClusterinProstate cancerProstateGene silencingCancer researchMedicineCancerApoptosisOncologyInternal medicineBiologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This review summarise the authors' recent experience in the development of antisense (AS) oligodeoxynucleotide (ODN) therapy that targets a cytoprotective gene, clusterin, for the treatment of prostate cancer. The acquisition of resistance to a wide variety of proapototic stimuli was initially demonstrated by introducing the clusterin gene into prostate cancer cells. Furthermore, silencing clusterin expression using AS ODN synergistically enhanced the effects of several conventional therapeutic modalities through the effective induction of apoptosis in prostate cancer xenograft models. Based on these outcomes, Phase I clinical trials were conducted using AS clusterin ODN incorporating 2'-O-(2-methoxy)ethyl-gapmer backbone (OGX-011), and the optimal dose of OGX-011 capable of inducing </= 90% suppression of clusterin in human prostate cancer tissue was determined. Collectively, these findings suggest the utility of inactivating clusterin function using AS ODN technology as a novel therapeutic strategy for prostate cancer treatment. There have been four kinds of Phase II studies that have begun to further evaluate the efficacy of OGX-011 in patients with prostate, breast and lung cancers.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.946
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.330 · 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.

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

Citations28
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Opinion on Investigational DrugsSame topicClusterin in disease pathologyFrench-language works237,207