MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1589440025 · doi:10.4049/jimmunol.0990070

Response to Comment on “Spontaneous Autoimmunity Sufficiently Potent to Induce Diabetes Mellitus Is Insufficient to Protect against Insulinoma”

2009· article· en· W1589440025 on OpenAlexaff
Oliver F. Bathe, Christa Chatten

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Immunology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeuroendocrine Tumor Research Advances
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInsulinomaAutoimmunityParallelsDiabetes mellitusMedicineAutoimmune diabetesImmunologyEndocrinologyInsulinImmune systemEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

and ketosis-prone type 1 diabetes since the age of 13, developed a highly malignant, metastatic, and intractable insulinoma at age 33, i.e., some 20 years after her type 1 diabetes was diagnosed.While not directly addressed (although tumor tissue is still available), there may have been a small subset of ␤ cells, surviving for unknown reasons in the face of long-standing type 1 diabetes, that might have altered their Ag presentation to thereby escape destruction and then undergo neoplastic transformation into insulinoma cells.Unraveling the mechanisms underlying this phenomenon may offer unique insights into therapeutical possibilities by which endogenous or transplanted ␤ cell survival can be improved by genetic immune manipulation in type 1 diabetes.We also have another relevant case (yet unpublished), a 60year old nondiabetic woman with benign insulinoma and grossly elevated plasma levels of C peptide, proinsulin, and insulin who also shows persistent high titers of autoantibodies against GAD-65, the prime ␤ cell Ag in human type 1 diabetes.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0470.047
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.012

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Immunology→Same topicNeuroendocrine Tumor Research Advances→French-language works237,207→