MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398207790 · doi:10.3390/molecules29112438

Application of High-Z Nanoparticles to Enhance Current Radiotherapy Treatment

2024· article· en· W4398207790 on OpenAlexafffund
Nolan Jackson, Daniel Cecchi, Wayne Beckham, Devika B. Chithrani

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecules · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Therapy and Dosimetry
Canadian institutionsOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNanoMedicines Innovation Network
KeywordsRadiation therapyCancer treatmentMedicineSensitizationCancer researchMedical physicsCancerInternal medicineImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Radiotherapy is an essential component of the treatment regimens for many cancer patients. Despite recent technological advancements to improve dose delivery techniques, the dose escalation required to enhance tumor control is limited due to the inevitable toxicity to the surrounding healthy tissue. Therefore, the local enhancement of dosing in tumor sites can provide the necessary means to improve the treatment modality. In recent years, the emergence of nanotechnology has facilitated a unique opportunity to increase the efficacy of radiotherapy treatment. The application of high-atomic-number (Z) nanoparticles (NPs) can augment the effects of radiotherapy by increasing the sensitivity of cells to radiation. High-Z NPs can inherently act as radiosensitizers as well as serve as targeted delivery vehicles for radiosensitizing agents. In this work, the therapeutic benefits of high-Z NPs as radiosensitizers, such as their tumor-targeting capabilities and their mechanisms of sensitization, are discussed. Preclinical data supporting their application in radiotherapy treatment as well as the status of their clinical translation will be presented.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.480
Threshold uncertainty score0.225

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations37
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMoleculesSame topicRadiation Therapy and DosimetryFrench-language works237,207