Ciliary neurotrophic factor (CNTF) in combination with its soluble receptor (CNTFRalpha) increases connexin43 expression and suppresses growth of C6 glioma cells.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The loss of gap junctional intercellular communication has been proposedas playing a major role in the process of carcinogenesis. Most neoplastic cells, including C6 gliomas, express less connexins and have fewer gap junctions, reduced gap junctional intercellular communication, and increased growth rates compared with their nonneoplastic counterparts. The purpose of this study was to determine whether ciliary neurotrophic factor (CNTF) can be used to increase endogenous connexin43 levels, increase intercellular coupling, and retard the growth rate of C6 glioma cells. C6 cells were grown in serum-reduced medium (1% serum) and exposed to the following agents: vehicle (PBS), CNTF (20 ng/ml), CNTF soluble receptor (CNTFRalpha; 200 ng/ml), or Complex (CNTF + CNTFRalpha). Reverse transcription-PCR analysis indicated that C6 cells express CNTF mRNA but not CNTFRalpha mRNA. When cells were exposed to the above agents, only Complex caused an up-regulation of connexin43 protein (based on immunocytochemical and immunoblot analysis). Furthermore, Complex increased gap junctional coupling in C6 cells as noted by the passage of the gap junction permeable dye calcein. Finally, it was demonstrated that Complex-treatment reduces the growth rate of C6 cells compared with all of the other agents tested. Taken together, this study has demonstrated that CNTF in combination with its soluble receptor can increase connexin43 expression, increase gap junctional coupling, and reduce the in vitro proliferation of C6 glioma cells.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".