MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007908190 · doi:10.1289/ehp.8751

The OECD Program to Validate the Rat Hershberger Bioassay to Screen Compoundsfor <i>in Vivo</i> Androgen and Antiandrogen Responses. Phase 1: Use of a Potent Agonistand a Potent Antagonist to Test the Standardized Protocol

2006· article· en· W2007908190 on OpenAlexaff
William Owens, Errol Zeiger, Michael P. Walker, John Ashby, Lesley Onyon, L. Earl Gray

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Health Perspectives · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEstrogen and related hormone effects
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAntiandrogenIn vivoAndrogen receptorAndrogenBioassayAntagonistFlutamidePharmacologyMedicineEndocrinologyChemistryBiologyInternal medicineProstate cancerHormoneReceptorGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has completed phase 1 of the Hershberger validation intended to identify in vivo activity of suspected androgens and antiandrogens. Seventeen laboratories from 7 countries participated in phase 1, and results were collated and evaluated by the OECD with the support of an international committee of experts. Five androgen-responsive tissues (ventral prostate, paired seminal vesicles and coagulating glands, levator ani and bulbocavernosus muscles, glans penis, and paired Cowper's or bulbourethral glands) were evaluated. The standardized protocols used selected doses of a reference androgen, testosterone propionate (TP), and an antiandrogen, flutamide (FLU). All laboratories successfully detected TP-stimulated increases in androgen-responsive tissue weight and decreases in TP-stimulated tissue weights when FLU was co-administered. The standardized protocols performed well under a variety of conditions (e.g., strain, diet, housing protocol, bedding). There was good agreement among laboratories with regard to the TP doses inducing significant increases in tissue weights and the FLU doses decreasing TP-stimulated tissue weights. Several additional procedures (e.g., weighing of the dorsolateral prostate and fixation of tissues before weighing) and serum component measurements (e.g., luteinizing hormone) were also included by some laboratories to assess their potential utility. The results indicated that the OECD Hershberger protocol was robust, reproducible, and transferable across laboratories. Based on this phase 1 validation study, the protocols have been refined, and the next phase of the OECD validation program will test the protocol with selected doses of weak androgen agonists, androgen antagonists, a 5alpha-reductase inhibitor, and chemicals having no androgenic activity.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.006

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations44
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Health PerspectivesSame topicEstrogen and related hormone effectsFrench-language works237,207