Cell Proliferation Profile of Five Human Uveal Melanoma Cell Lines of Different Metastatic Potential
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to establish a proliferation profile of uveal melanoma cell lines, using different methods, and to compare it with their previously determined metastatic potential (MP). METHODS: Four human uveal melanoma and one transformed human uveal melanocytic cell line were ranked according to proliferation profiles. The proliferation profiles of the cell lines were compared to their MPs, which were previously determined from an immunosuppressed rabbit model. RESULTS: Ranking of the cell lines using pulse labeling with tritiated thymidine was similar to the MP of the cell lines. CONCLUSION: The correlation between the proliferative rate of the uveal melanoma cell lines and their previously determined MP resulted in the proposal of a new classification scheme: high proliferation/high MP, low proliferation/low MP, and high proliferation/no MP. High proliferative capacity of a cell line did not necessarily confer MP; therefore, further cellular functions/adaptations must be required for tumor cell dissemination, survival, and growth at a metastatic site.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".