T‐cell modulation by cyclophosphamide for tumour therapy
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The power of T cells for cancer treatment has been demonstrated by the success of co-inhibitory receptor blockade and adoptive T-cell immunotherapies. These treatments are highly successful for certain cancers, but are often personalized, expensive and associated with harmful side effects. Other T-cell-modulating drugs may provide additional means of improving immune responses to tumours without these disadvantages. Conventional chemotherapeutic drugs are traditionally used to target cancers directly; however, it is clear that some also have significant immune-modulating effects that can be harnessed to target tumours. Cyclophosphamide is one such drug; used at lower doses than in mainstream chemotherapy, it can perturb immune homeostasis, tipping the balance towards generation of anti-tumour T-cell responses and control of cancer growth. This review discusses its growing reputation as an immune-modulator whose multiple effects synergize with the microbiota to tip the balance towards tumour immunity offering widespread benefits as a safe, and relatively inexpensive component of cancer immunotherapy.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.005 |
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 it