Mathematical Modeling of Targeted Drug Delivery Using Magnetic Nanoparticles during Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy has emerged as a promising method for the treatment of peritoneal malignancies (PMs). However, microenvironmental barriers in the tumor limit the delivery of drug particles and their deep penetration into the tumor, leading to reduced efficiency of treatment. Therefore, new drug delivery systems should be developed to overcome these microenvironmental barriers. One promising technique is magnetically controlled drug targeting (MCDT) in which an external magnetic field is utilized to concentrate drug-coated magnetic nanoparticles (MNPs) to the desired area. In this work, a mathematical model is developed to investigate the efficacy of MCDT in IP chemotherapy. In this model, considering the mechanism of drug binding and internalization into cancer cells, the efficacy of drug delivery using MNPs is evaluated and compared with conventional IP chemotherapy. The results indicate that over 60 min of treatment with MNPs, drug penetration depth increased more than 13 times compared to conventional IPC. Moreover, the drug penetration area (DPA) increased more than 1.4 times compared to the conventional IP injection. The fraction of killed cells in the tumor in magnetic drug delivery was 6.5%, which shows an increase of more than 2.5 times compared to that of the conventional method (2.54%). Furthermore, the effects of magnetic strength, the distance of the magnet to the tumor, and the magnetic nanoparticles' size were evaluated. The results show that MDT can be used as an effective technique to increase the efficiency of IP chemotherapy.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 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".