MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2617597517 · doi:10.1093/brain/aww355

Glioblastoma-associated microglia and macrophages: targets for therapies to improve prognosis

2017· review· en· W2617597517 on OpenAlexafffund
Candice C. Poon, Susobhan Sarkar, V. Wee Yong, John J. Kelly

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersAlberta InnovatesAlberta Cancer FoundationUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsMicrogliaGlioblastomaTumor microenvironmentU87Cancer researchMedicineMacrophageGliomaCancerImmunologyBiologyIn vitroImmune systemInflammationInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Glioblastoma is the most common and most malignant primary adult human brain tumour. Diagnosis of glioblastoma carries a dismal prognosis. Treatment resistance and tumour recurrence are the result of both cancer cell proliferation and their interaction with the tumour microenvironment. A large proportion of the tumour microenvironment consists of an inflammatory infiltrate predominated by microglia and macrophages, which are thought to be subverted by glioblastoma cells for tumour growth. Thus, glioblastoma-associated microglia and macrophages are logical therapeutic targets. Their emerging roles in glioblastoma progression are reflected in the burgeoning research into therapeutics directed at their modification or elimination. Here, we review the biology of glioblastoma-associated microglia and macrophages, and model systems used to study these cells in vitro and in vivo. We discuss translation of results using these model systems and review recent advances in immunotherapies targeting microglia and macrophages in glioblastoma. Significant challenges remain but medications that affect glioblastoma-associated microglia and macrophages hold considerable promise to improve the prognosis for patients with this disease.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations251
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrainSame topicNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration MechanismsFrench-language works237,207