Identification of a new microRNA expression profile as a potential cancer screening tool
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Small non-coding microRNAs (miRNAs) are key components of cancer development and are considered as potential biomarkers for cancer diagnosis and treatment monitoring. This study investigated miRNA expression profiles of human cancer cells in order to develop a screening method for lung cancer. METHODS: A series of lung cancer related miRNAs (miR-21, miR-145, miR-155, miR-205, miR-210, miR-92, miR-17-5p, miR-143, miR-182, miR-372, let-7a) were selected as candidates for miRNA expression profiles of human lung cancer cell lines (A549, SK-mes-1). MicroRNA u6 was the endogenous control. Cancer cell lines for positive controls; breast MCF-7, prostate Du-145, and glioblastoma U118. The negative control was normal lung fibroblast cell line MRC-5. RT-PCR was performed on StepOnePlus (Applied Biosystem, USA). MiRNA expressions of malignant cells were compared with normal fibroblast cells as well as endogenous control (u6) using the thermal cycle at threshold. Assessment of miRNA expression profiles were then performed using agglomerative hierarchical cluster analysis software (SPSS13, USA). RESULTS: We demonstrated that miR-21, miR-182 and let7-5a were over-expressed, and miR-145 and miR-155 were under-expressed in all cancer cell lines. Combined with the cluster analysis we were able to clearly distinguish cell lines for normal fibroblasts, breast cancer, prostate cancer, glioblastoma, and lung cancer. CONCLUSION: There is potential utility of screening for lung cancer with miRNA expression profiles. Future work will focus on the sensitivity of such miRNA expression profiles in screening sputum for lung cancer, which can be performed in real time.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it