MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995341351 · doi:10.1172/jci13073

Osteolysis and cancer

2001· letter· en· W1995341351 on OpenAlexaff
David Goltzman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Investigation · 2001
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCancerOsteolysisMedicineOncologyCancer researchInternal medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bone is a highly hospitable environment for colonization and growth of metastatic tumors, and some of the most common human malignancies, notably breast cancer and prostate cancer, have a strong propensity to produce skeletal metastases (1). Tumor cells, in turn, can produce a spectrum of skeletal manifestations which spans diffuse osteopenia, focal osteolysis, focal osteogenesis, and osteomalacia (2). The most common skeletal manifestation of malignancy is focal osteolysis in association with metastases. In order for tumor cells to grow and invade mineralized bone, osteolysis must occur. Osteoclasts appear uniquely adapted to produce the microenvironment and the biochemical milieu that are needed to resorb bone. Although previous reports have indicated that some tumor cells appear capable of assuming an osteoclast phenotype and directly resorbing bone (3), the bulk of the evidence suggests that most tumor cells act indirectly by co-opting the physiologic mechanisms that normally favor bone resorption. Thus, they release agents such as hormones, eicosanoids, growth factors, and cytokines into the bone microenvironment, which act on osteoblastic stromal cells to enhance the production of osteoclast activating factors. Most notable of these is the cell membrane–associated protein termed receptor activator of NF-κB ligand (RANKL), which is a member of the TNF family of cytokines. RANKL can then bind to its cognate receptor (RANK) on osteoclast precursors and, in the presence of M-CSF, enhance the differentiation and fusion of these cells to produce functioning multinucleated osteoclasts (4) (Figure ​(Figure1).1). Concomitantly, production of a soluble decoy receptor for RANKL, termed osteoprotegerin (OPG) (5), may be downregulated (6), thus eliminating one means by which the ensuing osteolysis could be repressed. Figure 1 Schematic representation of tumor-cell induced osteolysis. A tumor cell may release soluble mediators such as hormones (e.g., PTHrP), eicosanoids, cytokines (e.g., IL-6), or growth factors (e.g., TGF-α) that act on an osteoblastic stromal cell. ... Mineralized bone matrix is a rich source of stored growth factors such as TGF-β. Such growth factors, once released from degraded bone matrix, may further accelerate growth of the tumor, which can now expand within the lysed area. Such growth factors also appear capable of further increasing the release from tumor cells of osteolytic mediators, such as parathyroid hormone–related peptide (PTHrP) (7, 8). A cycle may therefore be initiated that consists of release of osteolytic mediators by tumor cells, bone degradation, release of growth factors from degraded bone, enhanced tumor cell growth, and further release of osteolytic mediators (9).

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0270.007

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 head0.149
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.297 · 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
GenreEditorial

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

Citations80
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical InvestigationSame topicBone health and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207