MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885032915 · doi:10.1109/lo.2018.8435737

Studies of photophysical characteristics and in vitro photocytotoxicity of photosensitizer dimegine

2018· article· en· W2885032915 on OpenAlexaff
А. В. Дадеко, Lothar Lilge, Pavel Kaspler, И. М. Белоусова, T.D. Muravreva, A.M. Starodubtcev, В. М. Киселев, И. В. Багров, Г. В. Пономарев

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhotodynamic Therapy Research Studies
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotosensitizerPhotodynamic therapyChemistryPhotochemistryMaterials scienceOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the represented work, a study of a low-toxic photosensitizer of dimegine (disodium salt of 2,4-di (alphamethoxyethyl) -deuteroporphyrin-IX ”) was carried out. The quantum yields of singlet oxygen generation and fluorescence as the main photophysical characteristics of the photosensitizer were studied. To ensure the stability of dimegine upon irradiation, its photobleaching coefficient was investigated. The photocytotoxicity was studied on four cell lines: U87 – human primary glioblastoma cell line, RG2 – rat glioma cell lines, HT1372 – human bladder cancer cell line, AY27 – rat bladder carcinoma cell line. The same cell lines were used in cells distribution studies. Results of this research have shown high effectiveness of photodynamic therapy with dimegine under irradiation by light with a wavelength of 530 nm and 625 nm. Images, received after photosensitizer distribution studies, demonstrated dimegine’s primary location in cell's organelles, thereby allowing to make the assumption about domination of apoptosis over necrosis as mechanism of cell death.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.429

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.320 · 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.

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPhotodynamic Therapy Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207