Low energy amplitude modulated radiofrequency electromagnetic fields to show antitumor effect in combination with standard treatment or as monotherapy in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
332 Background: Exposure to amplitude-modulated radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (EMF) in immortalized hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) cell cultures and xenograft models demonstrated anti-tumor effect. Patients with advanced HCC exposed to systemic EMF showed objective response with potential survival benefit. Methods: An open-label, single center, prospective clinical protocol was performed in advanced HCC patients as an initial, second or third treatment modality. Systemic exposure to EMF modulated at patient-specific frequencies was applied as an add-on strategy (combination) to systemic conventional treatment or as a single therapeutic modality. A spoon-shaped antenna placed in the oral cavity delivered EMF over 90 minutes with monthly repetitions until death or consent of withdrawal. The primary objective was overall survival (OS) in comparison with historical control group of 45 advanced patients HCC from the same institution. Retrospective radiological review was conducted by two independent radiologists for objective response (OR) using RECIST1.1 criterion. Results: From March 2018 to April 2020, 55 advanced HCC patients were submitted to 373 EMF exposures. 87% were male, median age of 67, 84% were BLCL-C, 16% were Child-Pugh B, 29% had extra-hepatic metastasis, 55% had failed previous treatment and 71% had documented radiological progression. 31(56%) patients received EMF in combination with systemic therapy (25 sorafenib, 3 lenvatinib, 3 nivolumab). 24 patients received EMF as single treatment modality. The median OS for the entire patient cohort was 11.5 months. The median OS for combination treatment was 12.0 month and the median OS for single modality was 11.3 months. The median OS for the historical control was 5.3 month. The median OS from the entire cohort and the historical control were significant different (p = 0.0026) but the median OS from combination and single modality were not (p = 0.3434). Radiological images were available from 38(69%) patients. There were 6/38 (16%) documented objective responses (1 CR and 5 PR) and 30/38 (79%) patients experienced disease control. 4/21 (19%) OR were in patients using TKIs + EMF and 2/17 (12%) OR were in patients using EMF alone. Conclusions: EMF showed objective anti-tumor effect in combination with TKI or as single modality in advanced HCC patients. EMF showed improvement in overall survival in comparison with the historical control group supporting future development as a novel systemic treatment modality in advanced HCC patients. Clinical trial information: NCT 01686412.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".