Focused Ultrasound and Ultrasound Stimulated Microbubbles in Radiotherapy Enhancement for Cancer Treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Radiation therapy (RT) has been the standard of care for treating a multitude of cancer types. However, ionizing radiation has adverse short and long-term side effects which have resulted in treatment complications for decades. Thus, advances in enhancing the effects of RT have been the primary focus of research in radiation oncology. To avoid the usage of high radiation doses, treatment modalities such as high-intensity focused ultrasound can be implemented to reduce the radiation doses required to destroy cancer cells. In the past few years, the use of focused ultrasound (FUS) has demonstrated immense success in a number of applications as it capitalizes on spatial specificity. It allows ultrasound energy to be delivered to a targeted focal area without harming the surrounding tissue. FUS combined with RT has specifically demonstrated experimental evidence in its application resulting in enhanced cell death and tumor cure. Ultrasound-stimulated microbubbles have recently proved to be a novel way of enhancing RT as a radioenhancing agent on its own, or as a delivery vector for radiosensitizing agents such as oxygen. In this mini-review article, we discuss the bio-effects of FUS and RT in various preclinical models and highlight the applicability of this combined therapy in clinical settings.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".