CTNI-55. A MULTICENTER STUDY OF LOW-INTENSITY FOCUSED ULTRASOUND WITH SYSTEMIC MICROBUBBLE OSCILLATORS FOR BLOOD-BRAIN BARRIER DISRUPTION FOR LIQUID BIOPSY IN GLIOBLASTOMA (LIBERATE)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract BACKGROUND Liquid biopsy in glioblastoma (GBM) is hindered by a lack of requisite circulating-free DNA (cfDNA) blood levels in due to the blood-brain barrier (BBB). Real-time image-guided low-intensity focused ultrasound (LIFU) with intravenously administered microbubble oscillators non-invasively causes BBB disruption (BBBD). This clinical trial aimed to evaluate the utility of LIFU for increasing cfDNA in blood for liquid biopsy in GBM. METHODS LIBERATE is an ongoing, prospective, multi-center, self-controlled, ongoing, pivotal trial evaluating the safety and technical efficacy of LIFU for BBBD to increase cfDNA in blood for GBM. Patients aged 18-80 years with suspected GBM planned for tumor biopsy or resection at ten centers in the US are being included. Patients are administered intravenous oscillating microbubbles for enhancing sonication, after which MR-guided BBBD using 220 kHz LIFU device is performed, with real-time acoustic feedback for effective sonication. Pre- and post-procedure, phlebotomies, and MRI brain are performed. The primary study endpoint is defined, per subject, as the ratio between cfDNA levels in blood 1-hour post-LIFU procedure compared to cfDNA level in blood pre-procedure. The primary study hypothesis is that BBBD with LIFU leads to ≥2-fold increase in cfDNA in blood. The secondary hypothesis is that there exists ≥75% concordance between biomarker patterns in the cfDNA sample from 1-hour post-LIFU sample and tumor tissue obtained later. Exploratory endpoints include (1) sensitivity of detection of known somatic mutations in cfDNA from blood samples collected before and after LIFU, (2) estimation of cfDNA levels in samples collected at 30 minutes, 1 hour, 2 hours, and 3 hours post-LIFU to determine the time of greatest yield, (3) correlation of MRI parameters related to BBBD grading and biomarkers in cfDNA from post-LIFU samples. Patient enrollment commenced in 2022, and 13 patients have been recruited by 06/09/2023. Clinical trial information: NCT05383872.
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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".