Recent Advances in Blood–Brain Barrier Disruption as a CNS Delivery Strategy
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The blood-brain barrier (BBB) is a complex functional barrier composed of endothelial cells, pericytes, astrocytic endfeets and neuronal cells. This highly organized complex express a selective permeability for molecules that bear, amongst other parameters, adequate molecular weight and sufficient liposolubility. Unfortunately, very few therapeutic agents currently available do cross the BBB and enters the CNS. As the BBB limitation is more and more acknowledged, many innovative surgical and pharmacological strategies have been developed to circumvent it. This review focuses particularly on the osmotic opening of the BBB, a well-documented approach intended to breach the BBB. Since its inception by Rapoport in 1972, pre-clinical studies have provided important information on the extent of BBB permeation. Thanks to Neuwelt and colleagues, the osmotic opening of the BBB made its way to the clinic. However, many questions remain as to the detailed physiology of the procedure, and its best application to the clinic. Using different tools, amongst which MRI as a real-time in vivo characterization of the BBB permeability and CNS delivery, we attempt to better define the osmotic BBB permeabilization physiology. These ongoing studies are described, and data related to spatial and temporal distribution of a molecule after osmotic BBB breaching, as well as the window of BBB permeabilization, are discussed. We also summarize recent clinical series highlighting promising results in the application of this procedure to maximize delivery of chemotherapy in the treatment of brain tumor patients.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it