MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2264089637 · doi:10.1039/c5cs00712g

Harnessing the bone-seeking ability of Ca(<scp>ii</scp>)-like metal ions in the treatment of metastatic cancer and resorption disorders

2016· review· en· W2264089637 on OpenAlexafffund
David M. Weekes, Chris Orvig

Bibliographic record

VenueChemical Society Reviews · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and treatments
Canadian institutionsVancouver Biotech (Canada)University of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsResorptionCancerChemistryBone resorptionMetalIonMetal ions in aqueous solutionMedicineCancer researchInternal medicineOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Metal ions are naturally retained by skeletal tissues in living systems because of their high affinity for the hydroxyapatite-like mineral matrix that makes up cortical bone. This is particularly true for metal ions that bear a close resemblance to calcium(ii) (such as the lanthanides or alkaline earth metals), and in a few key cases this targeting ability has been exploited in order to develop medicinal agents that are intended to treat bones which have become diseased. In this review, we focus on two areas where this has been particularly effective: first is in the diagnosis and therapy of metastatic bone cancer, in which radioactive metal ions including (99m)Tc, (153)Sm, and (223)Ra are used to image, alleviate, and ablate harmful cancerous legions with good specificity versus healthy tissues; second is the use of trivalent lanthanides to treat osteoporosis, an emerging concept which has gathered significance over the last 15 years, and is now entering preclinical trials with carefully designed systems.

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)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.309 · 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

Citations29
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemical Society ReviewsSame topicBone health and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207