Abnormalities of chromatin in tumor cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nuclear morphometric descriptors such as nuclear size, shape, DNA content and chromatin organization are used by pathologists as diagnostic markers for cancer. Tumorigenesis involves a series of poorly understood morphological changes that lead to the development of hyperplasia, dysplasia, in situ carcinoma, invasive carcinoma, and in many instances finally metastatic carcinoma. Nuclei from different stages of disease progression exhibit changes in shape and the reorganization of chromatin, which appears to correlate with malignancy. Multistep tumorigenesis is a process that results from alterations in the function of DNA. These alterations result from stable genetic changes, including those of tumor suppressor genes, oncogenes and DNA stability genes, and potentially reversible epigenetic changes, which are modifications in gene function without a change in the DNA sequence. DNA methylation and histone modifications are two epigenetic mechanisms that are altered in cancer cells. The impact of genetic (e.g., mutations in Rb and ras family) and epigenetic alterations with a focus on histone modifications on chromatin structure and function in cancer cells are reviewed here.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
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".