MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1560328293 · doi:10.1002/9781118670613.ch8

Isolation and Identification of Neural Cancer Stem/Progenitor Cells

2015· other· en· W1560328293 on OpenAlexaff
David Bakhshinyan, Maleeha Qazi, Neha Garg, Chitra Venugopal, Nicole McFarlane, Sheila K. Singh

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Cells and Metastasis
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCancer stem cellBiologyProgenitor cellNeural stem cellStem cellComputational biologyCancerCD15Cancer cellCancer researchCell biologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the introduction of the cancer stem cell (CSC) hypothesis, research has been invested into discovering and characterizing cancer stem cells based on their gene and protein expression profiles, epigenetic changes and locality within the tumour mass. In this chapter, we review basic principles used in the identification and isolation of CSCs in brain tumours, also termed brain tumour-initiating cells (BTICs). Assays, such as the limiting-dilution assay, proliferation assay and differentiation assay, are used to identify and describe functional differences between BTICs and other tumour cells. Flow-cytometric assays provide the means to isolate BTICs based on the expression pattern of extracellular proteins, such as CD133 and CD15. Further characterization and refinement of the criteria by which to identify BTICs will lead to the development of novel therapies that confer better overall survival and prolonged remission-free survival for patients diagnosed with brain cancer.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCancer Cells and MetastasisFrench-language works237,207