MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414520939 · doi:10.1097/iio.0000000000000587

Angiogenesis Signaling in Retinoblastoma: Prognostic and Therapeutic Applications

2025· article· en· W4414520939 on OpenAlexaff
Eleen Yang, Noa Odell, Helen Dimaras, Timothy W. Corson

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Ophthalmology Clinics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Oncology and Treatments
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNational Eye Institute
KeywordsAngiogenesisRetinoblastomaAntiangiogenic therapyBevacizumabChemotherapyBiomarkerMetastasisVascular endothelial growth factor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Angiogenesis is a critical player in tumor metastasis that is involved in the pathophysiology of the pediatric ocular cancer retinoblastoma (RB). This review summarizes evidence linking angiogenesis to RB prognostication, response to treatment, and therapy. Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), a major proangiogenic growth factor, has potential as a biomarker of therapy response in RB treatment. High VEGF correlates with poor chemotherapy response, subsequent local invasion, and lower patient survival. VEGF levels are also strongly correlated with choroidal invasion, poor differentiation, and an overall negative disease prognosis for RB patients. In contrast, decreasing VEGF levels can predict vitreous seed regression after intravitreal chemotherapy. Further investigation is needed to determine the accuracy and clinical value of using aqueous humor liquid biopsies to assess VEGF levels to predict prognosis or therapy response. Antiangiogenic agents, including approved drugs and experimental compounds, have shown potential in RB models and may become potential therapeutics, adjuvants to current chemotherapies, or treatments for chemotherapy complications, although there is limited evidence that antiangiogenic monotherapy may be sufficient for RB. Overall, future research aimed at integrating angiogenesis markers and therapies with existing RB strategies holds promise for improving patient outcomes and personalizing treatment approaches.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.350 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Ophthalmology ClinicsSame topicOcular Oncology and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207