ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2024
Characterization of focused ultrasound blood-brain barrier disruption effect on inflammation as a function of treatment parameters.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The technology of focused ultrasound-mediated disruption of the blood-brain barrier (FUS- BBB opening) has now been used in over 20 Phase 1 clinical trials to validate the safety and feasibility of BBB opening for drug delivery in patients with brain tumors and neurodegenerative diseases. The primary treatment parameters, FUS intensity and microbubble dose, are chosen to balance sufficient BBB disruption to achieve drug delivery against potential acute vessel damage leading to microhemorrhage. This can largely be achieved based on both empirical results from animal studies and by monitoring the microbubble cavitation signal in real time during the treatment. However, other safety considerations due to second order effects caused by BBB disruption, such as inflammation and alteration of neurovascular function, are not as easily measurable, may take longer to manifest and are only beginning to be understood. This study builds on previous work that has investigated the inflammatory response following FUS-BBB opening. In this study, we characterize the effect of FUS intensity and microbubble dose on the extent of BBB disruption, observed level of microhemorrhage, and degree of inflammatory response at three acute post-treatment time points in the wild-type mouse brain. Additionally, we evaluate differences related to biological sex, presence and degree of the anti- inflammatory response that develops to restore homeostasis in the brain environment, and the impact of multiple FUS-BBB opening treatments on this inflammatory response.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.