Gene expression profiling of the human prostate zones
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate differences in gene expression in different zones of the prostate by microarray analyses, to better understand why aggressive tumours predominantly occur in the peripheral zone (PZ), whereas benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) occurs almost exclusively in the transition zone (TZ). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Expression profiling of both prostate zones was done by microarray analysis. Reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) of the top 18 genes confirmed the microarray analyses. RT-PCR with common cell-type markers indicated that the differential expression between the zones was not caused by an unequal distribution of different cell types. Primary stromal and epithelial prostate cells were used to study cell type expression in the 12 highest differentially expressed zonal-specific genes. RESULTS: In all, 346 genes were identified as preferentially expressed in the TZ or PZ. A few of the TZ-specific genes, including ASPA, FLJ10970 and COCH, were also stroma-specific. Comparisons with other microarray studies showed that gene expression profiles of prostate cancer and BPH correlate with the expression profiles of the PZ and TZ, respectively. CONCLUSION: Gene expression differs between the PZ and TZ of the prostate, and stromal-epithelial interactions might be responsible for the distinct zonal localization of prostate diseases.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".