MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1765254582 · doi:10.1089/cell.2012.0048

Positive Correlation of Oct4 and ABCG2 to Chemotherapeutic Resistance in CD90 <sup>+</sup> CD133 <sup>+</sup> Liver Cancer Stem Cells

2013· article· en· W1765254582 on OpenAlexaff
Qian Jia, Xiaoli Zhang, Tao Deng, Jian Gao

Bibliographic record

VenueCellular Reprogramming · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Cells and Metastasis
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCD90Cancer stem cellBiologyAbcg2Cancer researchLiver cancerStem cellCancerHepatocellular carcinomaCell cultureDrug resistanceStem cell markerMolecular biologyATP-binding cassette transporterCD34GeneBiochemistryCell biologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Liver cancer is one of the most common tumors worldwide and drug resistance is a major obstacle to successful therapy. The growing data show that cancer stem cells (CSCs), a rare subpopulation of cancer cells, might be an important mechanism of drug resistance. To explore the self-renewal ability and chemotherapy resistance in liver CSCs, we enriched CD90(+)CD133(+) hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) CSCs using sphere formation, which was accomplished by cultivating HCC CSCs from established HCC cell lines (HepG2 line and Hep3B line). Cell proliferation capacity was detected using colony formation assays, and cell activity was detected using methyl thiazolyl tetrazolium (MTT) assays after doxorubicin treatment. Expression of CD90, CD133, Oct4, and ABCG2 mRNA and protein levels was detected by PCR and western blot, respectively, which showed that these genes were significantly overexpressed in liver CSCs compared to parental cells (p<0.05). Oct4 and ABCG2 are highly expressed in enriched CD90(+)CD133(+) liver CSCs and are closely associated with chemotherapy drug resistance. We postulated that liver CSCs maybe the cause of high recurrence in liver 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.804
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations62
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCellular ReprogrammingSame topicCancer Cells and MetastasisFrench-language works237,207