International guidelines for intratumoral and intranodal injection of <scp>NBTXR3</scp> nanoparticles in head and neck cancers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: An international multidisciplinary panel of experts aimed to provide consensus guidelines describing the optimal intratumoral and intranodal injection of NBTXR3 hafnium oxide nanoparticles in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) of the oral cavity, oropharynx, and cervical lymph nodes and to review data concerning safety, feasibility, and procedural aspects of administration. METHODS: The Delphi method was used to determine consensus. A 4-member steering committee and a 10-member monitoring committee wrote and revised the guidelines, divided into eight sections. An independent 3-member reading committee reviewed the recommendations. RESULTS: After two rounds of voting, strong consensus was obtained on all recommendations. Intratumoral and intranodal injection was deemed feasible. NBTXR3 volume calculation, choice of patients, preparation and injection procedure, potential side effects, post injection, and post treatment follow-up were described in detail. CONCLUSIONS: Best practices for the injection of NBTXR3 were defined, thus enabling international standardization of intratumoral nanoparticle injection.
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 | 0.075 | 0.062 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| 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".