Comparing therapeutic‐focused ultrasound (TFUS) in conjunction with bosutinib versus independent TFUS administration among Alzheimer’s patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background To date, there are limited therapeutic options for the treatment or symptomatic relief of degenerative dementia [1]. There has been growing interest in the class of medications known as tyrosine kinase inhibitors, such as bosutinib, as a therapeutic intervention for dementia [2]. Ongoing clinical and preclinical trials also suggest focused ultrasound may yield therapeutic potential for patients with neurodegenerative conditions such as Alzheimer’s disease [3‐5]. Focused ultrasound may be used as an independent therapeutic intervention or adjunctively to facilitate delivery of medicine. The present study compares the efficacy of focused ultrasound as an independent intervention to the efficacy of focused ultrasound combined with bosutinib, using several outcome measures to demonstrate accuracy. Methods Structural and functional imaging were used to navigate cerebral and subcortical ultrasound targets for 13 patients (9 female; Mage = 72.08 years, SDage = 9.30 years), 7 of which received therapeutic ultrasound as an independent intervention, and the remaining 6 received both therapeutic ultrasound in conjunction with bosutinib. The Clinical Dementia Rating scale (as estimated by the Quick Dementia Rating System [QDRS]) was the primary cognitive status outcome measure. Secondary outcome measures included the Montreal Cognitive Assessment [MoCA]. Results The combination of therapeutic ultrasound with bosutinib was associated with 66% of patients maintaining or improving their Clinical Dementia Rating scale during the eight‐week protocol, whereas therapeutic ultrasound as a stand alone intervention showed 43% of patients maintaining or improving their Clinical Dementia Rating scale. Similarly, 67% of patients who underwent the combination intervention maintained or improved their MoCA scores, and of the patients who only received therapeutic ultrasound, 57% maintained or improved their MoCA scores. Conclusions The results of these comparisons suggest a combination of medication and therapeutic ultrasound may have a more positive outcome than therapeutic ultrasound alone. Clinical studies have shown that this ultrasound technology has been successfully applied for small molecules [6]. This technique of tailored targeting for each patient’s brain in conjunction with medication may represent a significant advancement to the field. Future studies should explore this combination.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".