Epigenetic Aberrations and Targeted Epigenetic Therapy of Esophageal Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus is one of the ten most frequent malignancies worldwide, characterized by a striking geographic variation in incidence. In North America and Europe, there has recently been a marked change in the epidemiology of this disease, where incidence rates for primary esophageal adenocarcinoma have increased in excess of any other human solid tumor. Although the reasons for this are largely unknown, several molecular genetic alterations have been associated with esophageal tumor progression. In recent years, epigenetic aberrations have been increasingly recognized as an important alternative mechanism of carcinogenesis and it is anticipated that substantial progress in the treatment of esophageal malignancy will likely only be made with a clearer understanding of esophageal tumor biology. Whereas genetic mutations, deletions, or allelic losses are fixed and irreversible, epigenetic abnormalities can potentially be corrected without interfering with the fundamental sequence of the target gene. Our current understanding of epigenetics in esophageal cancer, and the potential for targeted epigenetic therapy, will be the subject of this review.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".