Sono-Photodynamic Therapy with Photolon for Recurrence Glioblastoma Grade IV: Case Report and Review of Experimental Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim : to view the first clinical testing for intraoperative sono-photodynamic therapy (iSPDT) with a photosensitizer (PS) photolon for patient with recurrent glioblastoma grade IV. Materials and Methods : in patient with recurrent glioblastoma with Karnofsky score 80, a single intravenous injection of chlorin-based PS photolon at a dose of 2 mg/kg was administered 0.5 hour before tumor resection. The resection cavity were sonicated («Phyaction USTH 91», 1.04 MHz, 1.0 W/cm 2 ) and photoirradiated («PDT DIODE LASER», I»=660±5 nm, 50 J/cm 2 , 100 mW/cm 2 ). Toxicities were graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE, Version 4.0). Immediate results were evaluated based on data magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) after 3 and 6 months after treatment. Results : no adverse events directly attributable to iSPDT occurred in patient. According to the MRI control in terms of 3 and 6 months revealed tumor stabilization. The follow-up after diagnosis verification was 23 months, post-iSPDT follow-up – 16.5 month and recurrence-free period – 6 months. Conclusion : iSPDT with photolon may be considered as a potentially effective and sufficiently safe option for adjuvant management of reccurent glioblastoma.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".