MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2558507894 · doi:10.82308/45676

Direct intra-tumour delivery of zoledronate is superior to systemic administration for mitigating metastasis- induced bone destruction

2017· dissertation· en· W2558507894 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Anas Nooh

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2017
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Cancer Society Research InstituteNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacs
KeywordsMedicineBone metastasisSystemic administrationBreast cancerBisphosphonateCancerMetastasisZoledronic acidOsteoporosisBone marrowInternal medicinePathologyIn vivo

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Bone metastases are the most common cause of cancer-related pain and often lead to other complications. Bisphosphonates (BPs) are a class of potent anti-resorptive agents have been found recently to have direct anti-tumour properties. Currently, the use of BPs for cancer therapy is generally restricted to high dose systemic delivery. Questions/ purpose: (1) whether local delivery of BPs can inhibit tumour-induced osteolysis and tumour growth in an animal model of bone metastases; and (2) whether the efficacy in impairing cancer-induced osteolysis that is achieved by local delivery of BPs is comparable to that of systemic BPs treatment. Methods: Seven days following intra-tibial inoculation of MDA-MB-231 human breast cancer cells (N = 105) in athymic nude mice, the experimental group (N = 11) was treated by local administration of 2µg of zoledronate into the tibial lesion (three times/week for three weeks) and compared to vehicle-treated mice (N = 5). The formation of bone metastases and growth of the lesions were followed up by weekly bioluminescence imaging. In a subsequent experiment, a comparison of the effects of local versus systemic delivery of zoledronate on the formation of osteolytic bone metastases was carried in athymic mice (N = 19). The systemic group (N = 5) was treated with zoledronate (0.025mg/kg) once per week for 4 weeks and compared to systemic delivery of vehicle (N = 4). The local group (N=6) was treated by direct infusion of zoledronate (0.025mg/kg) once per week for 4 weeks and compared to local delivery of vehicle (N = 4). The effect of treatment on bone was determined using micro-computed tomography (μ-CT), and on tumour cells proliferation and apoptosis by immunohistochemistry using antibodies for Ki-67 and caspase-3. Results: The first experiment showed a statistically significant increase in mean bone volume/tissue volume % (BV/TV) in the treated group (12.30±2.80%) as compared to the control group (7.13±1.22%) (P<0.001, 95%CI=3.10-7.30). This corresponded to a net increase of 72.51% in response to zoledronate treatment. Bioluminescence imaging showed insignificant inhibition of the tumour growth in the treated group. Additionally, the treated group had an insignificant decrease in Ki-67-positive cells and this was mirrored with an insignificant increase in the number of caspase-3-positive cells. Comparison between the local and systemic effects of zoledronate also revealed a significant increase in the BV/TV in the locally treated group (10.90±1.25%) when compared to the cohort administered systemic bisphosphonate treatment (7.53±0.75%) (P<0.001, 95%CI=2.10-4.81), corresponding to a net increase of 44.8%. Conclusion: These preliminary results suggest that high dose sustained release of BPs can lead to a significant inhibition of tumour-induced osteolysis. Moreover, comparison between local and systemic delivery revealed that the effect of local BPs administration exceeds the benefits of systemic delivery in terms of osteolysis inhibition. Lastly, the noted effect of BPs local delivery triggers the need for further assessment of its anti-tumour activity.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)→Same topicBone health and treatments→French-language works237,207→