MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2413710303 · doi:10.1016/s0074-7742(03)01006-7

The principles of molecular therapies for glioblastoma.

2003· book-chapter· en· W2413710303 on OpenAlexaff
George Karpati, Joséphine Nalbantoglu

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2003
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicVirus-based gene therapy research
Canadian institutionsMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlioblastomaModalitiesMedicineDebulkingRadiation therapyTreatment modalityIntensive care medicineBioinformaticsCancerInternal medicineCancer researchBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Publisher Summary This chapter discusses the principles for molecular therapies for glioblastoma (GBS). Molecular therapy is defined as the introduction of genetic material into GBS cells, either for direct killing of the cells or to facilitate the ability of the host to eradicate them. The therapy of glioblastoma continues to be a major challenge for neurosurgeons, oncologists, radiotherapists, and other health professionals involved in the care of patients. For the complete eradication of GBS, more than one molecular strategy is necessary in a given patient. However, it appears that for an optimal outcome, molecular and non-molecular modalities should be combined. The use of corticosteroids, radiotherapy, and drugs for inhibition of neovascularization is likely to be the most important. In addition, debulking of operable tumors by advanced techniques (i.e., gamma knife) is also a valuable adjunct. To ascertain the feasibility, efficacy, synergy, and safety of the cited modalities for GBS therapy, carefully designed preclinical experiments must be conducted in appropriate animal models.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0380.034

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations5
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicVirus-based gene therapy research→French-language works237,207→