Abstract B22: Modulation of insulin-like growth factor binding proteins expression in human prostate cancer cells in vitro by american cranberry (<i>Vaccinium macrocarpon</i>) extract
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract American cranberry (Vaccinium macrocarpon) extract has been previously shown to affect cell cycle, apoptosis, and proliferative ability in prostate cancer cells in vitro. The insulin-like growth factors (IGFs) and their modulators the insulin-like growth factor binding proteins (IGFBPs) may play roles in these events. IGFBPs act by regulating IGF action but also exhibit many IGF-independent activities. IGFBP expression in response to cranberry extract [50 & 100 ug/mL for 3 and 24 hours] was determined via Western blot analysis in DU145 and in PC3 androgen-refractory human prostate cancer cells. Cranberry extract treatment decreased the expression levels of both IGFBP-2 and IGFBP-5 and increased the expression levels of IGFBP-4. IGFBP-3 protein expression levels were apparently unaffected by cranberry extract suggesting that IGFBP-3 is likely not involved in this cellular response to cranberry extract. A reduction in IGFBP-2/-5 expression suggests a reduction in IGF through loss of IGF-stabilization by the IGFBPs suggesting an inhibition of the cell cycle due to this restriction in IGF. Increases in IGFBP-4 levels in response to cranberry would also inhibit IGFs and thereby inhibit cellular growth and proliferation. Increased IGFBP-2/-5 expression has been associated with progression from androgen-sensitivity to androgen-insensitivity in prostate cancer cells. Decreased IGFBP-2/-5 expression levels in response to cranberry extract could counteract this progression in vitro. [funded by The Cranberry Institute (Wisconsin Board) and Jeanne & J.-Louis Levesque Foundation] Citation Format: Robert Hurta, Brendan McKeown, Ravi Boddeti, Catherine Neto. Modulation of insulin-like growth factor binding proteins expression in human prostate cancer cells in vitro by american cranberry (Vaccinium macrocarpon) extract. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Third AACR International Conference on Frontiers in Basic Cancer Research; Sep 18-22, 2013; National Harbor, MD. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2013;73(19 Suppl):Abstract nr B22.
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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".