MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164239756 · doi:10.2174/156800912802429292

Mouse Models as a Translational Platform for the Development of New Therapeutic Agents in Multiple Myeloma

2012· review· en· W2164239756 on OpenAlexaff
Pierfrancesco Tassone, Paola Neri, Renate Burger, Maria Teresa Di Martino, Emanuela Leone, Nicola Amodio, Michele Caraglia, Pierosandro Tagliaferri

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Cancer Drug Targets · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersAssociazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro
KeywordsStromal cellMultiple myelomaSyngenicIn vivoCancer researchBone marrowTumor microenvironmentMedicineBiologyImmunologyTumor cells

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mouse models of multiple myeloma (MM) are basic tools for translational research and play a fundamental role in the development of new therapeutics against plasma cell malignancies. All available models, including transplantable murine tumors in syngenic mice, xenografts of established human cell lines in immunocompromised mice and transgenic models that mirror specific steps of MM pathogenesis, have demonstrated some weaknesses in predicting clinical results, particularly for new drugs targeting the human bone marrow microenvironment (huBMM). The recent interest to models recapitulating the in vivo growth of primary MM cells in a human (SCID-hu) or humanized (SCID-synth-hu) host recipient has provided powerful platforms for the investigation of new compounds targeting MM and/or its huBMM. Here, we review and discuss strengths and weaknesses of the key in vivo models that are currently utilized in the MM preclinical investigation.

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)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.327
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.115 · 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

Citations45
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Cancer Drug TargetsSame topicMultiple Myeloma Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207