A clinically compatible drug‐screening platform based on organotypic cultures identifies vulnerabilities to prevent and treat brain metastasis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We report a medium-throughput drug-screening platform (METPlatform) based on organotypic cultures that allows to evaluate inhibitors against metastases growing in situ. By applying this approach to the unmet clinical need of brain metastasis, we identified several vulnerabilities. Among them, a blood-brain barrier permeable HSP90 inhibitor showed high potency against mouse and human brain metastases at clinically relevant stages of the disease, including a novel model of local relapse after neurosurgery. Furthermore, in situ proteomic analysis applied to metastases treated with the chaperone inhibitor uncovered a novel molecular program in brain metastasis, which includes biomarkers of poor prognosis and actionable mechanisms of resistance. Our work validates METPlatform as a potent resource for metastasis research integrating drug-screening and unbiased omic approaches that is compatible with human samples. Thus, this clinically relevant strategy is aimed to personalize the management of metastatic disease in the brain and elsewhere.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".