MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3025781494 · doi:10.1149/ma2020-01272000mtgabs

(Invited) Theranostics with Lanthanide Doped Nanoparticles

2020· article· en· W3025781494 on OpenAlexaff
Fiorenzo Vetrone

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNanoplatforms for cancer theranostics
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhoton upconversionNanotechnologyMaterials scienceNanoparticleLanthanidePhotodynamic therapyComputer scienceLuminescenceOptoelectronicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, a significant amount of research has focused on nanoparticle-based “theranostic” agents for the treatment of a wide array of diseases, including cancer. This new paradigm in personalized medicine intends to exploit nanoplatforms that carry both therapeutic and diagnostic (theranostic) modalities. Compared with delivering drugs or imaging agents separately, theranostic agents can simultaneously deliver them to specific sites, enabling detection and treatment of disease in a single procedure. Many theranostic nanoplatforms are triggered by light, however, the vast majority of these are limited in that the ultraviolet or visible excitation light used has minmal applicability in biological applications. Lanthanide doped nanoparticles, on the other can be excited with biologically friendly near-infrared light (in the biological windows) and can emit in the ultraviolet, visible or near-infrared regions through a multiphoton upconversion process while simultaneously emitting in the near-infrared region through a Stokes or downshifted process. Hence, the upconversion luminescence can be used to trigger the therapeutic application (drug delivery, photodynamic therapy, etc.) while the near-infrared luminescence can be used for the diagnostic modality (bioimaging, nanothermometry, etc). In this presentation, we will introduce lanthanide doped nanoparticles and demonstrate their usefulness in theranostics. In particular, we will show complex nanoparticle architectures can endow further functionality to these nanoparticles including the ability to decouple the theranostic processes that are conventionally delivered simultaneously.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.009

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.186 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS Meeting AbstractsSame topicNanoplatforms for cancer theranosticsFrench-language works237,207