Focused Delivery of Chemotherapy to Augment Surgical Management of Brain Tumors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chemotherapy as an adjuvant therapy that has largely failed to significantly improve outcomes for aggressive brain tumors; some reasons include a weak blood brain barrier penetration and tumor heterogeneity. Recently, there has been interest in designing effective ways to deliver chemotherapy to the tumor. In this review, we discuss the mechanisms of focused chemotherapies that are currently under investigation. Nanoparticle delivery demonstrates both a superior permeability and retention. However, thus far, it has not demonstrated a therapeutic efficacy for brain tumors. Convection-enhanced delivery is an invasive, yet versatile method, which appears to have the greatest potential. Other vehicles, such as angiopep-2 decorated gold nanoparticles, polyamidoamine dendrimers, and lipid nanostructures have demonstrated efficacy through sustained release of focused chemotherapy and have either improved cell death or survival in humans or animal models. Finally, focused ultrasound is a safe and effective way to disrupt the blood brain barrier and augment other delivery methods. Clinical trials are currently underway to study the safety and efficacy of these methods in combination with standard of care.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".