Chemistry of Antimony in Radiopharmaceutical Development: Unlocking the Theranostic Potential of Sb Isotopes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Antimony‐119 ( 119 Sb) holds promise for radiopharmaceutical therapy (RPT), emitting short‐range Auger and conversion electrons that can deliver cytotoxic radiation on a cellular level. While it has high promise theoretically, experimental validation is necessary for 119 Sb in vivo applications. Current 119 Sb production and separation methods face robustness and compatibility challenges in radiopharmaceutical synthesis. Limited progress in chelator development hampers targeted experiments with 119 Sb. This review compiles literature on the toxicological, biodistribution and redox properties of Sb, along with existing Sb complexes, evaluating their suitability for radiopharmaceuticals. Sb(III) is suggested as the preferred oxidation state for radiopharmaceutical elaboration due to its stability in vivo and lack of skeletal uptake. While Sb complexes with both hard and soft donor atoms can be achieved, Sb thiol complexes offer enhanced stability and compatibility with the desired Sb(III) oxidation state. For 119 Sb to find application in RPT, scientists need to make discoveries and advancements in the areas of isotope production, and radiometal chelation. This review aims to guide future research towards harnessing the therapeutic potential of 119 Sb in RPT.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".