MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2343304458 · doi:10.1002/jbio.201600055

Photosensitized singlet oxygen generation and detection: Recent advances and future perspectives in cancer photodynamic therapy

2016· review· en· W2343304458 on OpenAlexaff
Buhong Li, Lisheng Lin, Huiyun Lin, Brian C. Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biophotonics · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNanoplatforms for cancer theranostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Fujian ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsPhotodynamic therapySinglet oxygenLuminescenceDosimetryReactive oxygen speciesPhototoxicityNanotechnologyCancer therapyCancerCancer researchComputer scienceChemistryMedicineMaterials scienceOxygenOptoelectronicsNuclear medicineBiochemistryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) uses photosensitizers and visible light in combination with molecular oxygen to produce reactive oxygen species (ROS) that kill malignant cells by apoptosis and/or necrosis, shut down the tumor microvasculature and stimulate the host immune system. The excited singlet state of oxygen ( 1 O 2 ) is recognized to be the main cytotoxic ROS generated during PDT for the majority of photosensitizers used clinically and for many investigational new agents, so that maximizing its production within tumor cells and tissues can improve the therapeutic response, and several emerging and novel approaches for this are summarized. Quantitative techniques for 1 O 2 production measurement during photosensitization are also of immense importance of value for both preclinical research and future clinical practice. In this review, emerging strategies for enhanced photosensitized 1 O 2 generation are introduced, while recent advances in direct detection and imaging of 1 O 2 luminescence are summarized. In addition, the correlation between cumulative 1 O 2 luminescence and PDT efficiency will be highlighted. Meanwhile, the validation of 1 O 2 luminescence dosimetry for PDT application is also considered. This review concludes with a discussion on future demands of 1 O 2 luminescence detection for PDT dosimetry, with particular emphasis on clinical translation. Eye‐catching color image for graphical abstract. magnified image Eye‐catching color image for graphical abstract.

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
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations212
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of BiophotonicsSame topicNanoplatforms for cancer theranosticsFrench-language works237,207