Three-Dimensional Telomeric Analysis of Isolated Circulating Tumor Cells (CTCs) Defines CTC Subpopulations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) have been identified with the potential to serve as suitable biomarkers for tumor stage and progression, but the availability of effective isolation technique(s) coupled with detailed molecular characterization have been the challenges encountered in making CTCs clinically relevant. For the first time, we combined isolation of CTCs using the ScreenCell filtration technique with quantitative analysis of CTC telomeres by TeloView. This resulted in the identification and molecular characterization of different subpopulations of CTCs in the same patient. Three-dimensional (3D) telomeric analysis was carried out on isolated CTCs of 19 patients that consisted of four different tumor types, namely, prostate, colon, breast, melanoma, and one lung cancer cell line. With telomeric analysis of the filter-isolated CTCs, the level of chromosomal instability (CIN) of the CTCs can be determined. Our study shows that subpopulations of CTCs can be identified on the basis of their 3D telomeric properties.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".