MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313415119 · doi:10.30683/1927-7229.2022.11.11

Radiodynamic Therapy with Photosensitizers: Mini-Review of Experimental and Clinical Studies

2022· article· en· W4313415119 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
D. A. Tzerkovsky, A.N. Mazurenko, F.F. Borychevsky, D.V. Shashkouski

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Analytical Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhotodynamic Therapy Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTolerabilityMedicinePhotodynamic therapyRadiation therapyAdverse effectOncologyCancer researchCancerInternal medicineChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Photodynamic Therapy (PDT) is a light-based method that uses photo-reactive molecules, such as different types of photosensitizers (PS), to destroy malignant tumors. As some authors testify, PS was shown to act as a radio-reactive molecule by enhancing generation of reactive oxygen species upon X-ray irradiation. The method of treatment, which is based on the combined use of PS and ionizing radiation, is called «Radiodynamic therapy» (RDT). The advantage of RDT over PDT is the X-ray’s penetrability through tissues, which will find many applications for treatment of deep malignant tumors. The authors of a number of research centers in Japan, Germany, Israel and Lithuania presented the experience of using RDT in experiments on tumor cell lines and animals with transplanted tumors. A clinical approbation of the method has been started in patients with unresectable forms of bladder and cervical cancer, with gliomas and other forms of malignant tumors. The data obtained in experiments on cultures of tumor cells and animals with transplanted tumors indicate a high antitumor efficacy of the RDT with various types of PS. This fact is confirmed by a statistically significant decrease in viable tumor cells with the combined use of RT and PS, as well as a pronounced inhibition of the growth of transplanted tumors compared with the control groups, including the group of radiation therapy in mono mode. The preliminary data obtained show good tolerability of the method in clinical oncology (no serious adverse reactions) and satisfactory antitumor efficacy (an increase in the frequency of objective responses and an increase in the % reduction in tumor volume, which made it possible to transfer them to a resectable state).

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.463
Threshold uncertainty score0.356

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.077
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.397 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Analytical OncologySame topicPhotodynamic Therapy Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207