MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026108290 · doi:10.2217/nnm.11.102

Metalloestrogenic Effects of Quantum Dots

2011· article· en· W2026108290 on OpenAlexafffund
Manasi Jain, Farida Vaisheva, Dušica Maysinger

Bibliographic record

VenueNanomedicine · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsEstrogen receptorIn vivoOvariectomized ratEstrogenIn vitroEndocrinologyInternal medicineCadmiumChemistryCancer researchBiologyMedicineBreast cancerBiochemistryCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To investigate the metalloestrogenic effects of cadmium telluride quantum dots (QDs) in both human breast cancer cells and in vivo in mice. MATERIALS & METHODS: Human breast cancer cells (MCF-7 cells) were utilized to study QDs, cadmium and 17β-estradiol induced estrogen-related genomic and nongenomic signaling. Female prepubescent and ovariectomized adult mice were treated with CdTe QDs to assess whether QD-induced estrogenicity would lead to uterine changes. RESULTS & DISCUSSION: Our findings demonstrate that in vitro cadmium-containing QDs induce cellular proliferation, estrogen receptor α activation, and biphasic phosphorylation of AKT and ERK1/2, comparable with 17β-estradiol. Green QDs elicited a more robust estrogenic response than orange QDs. Addition of the selective estrogen receptor antagonist, ICI 182780, completely abolished all QD-induced estrogenic effects, suggesting that QD-induced estrogenic signaling is mediated via the estrogen receptor. In vivo, chronic treatment of mice with QDs led to a two- to three-fold increase in uterine weight, comparable or greater than 17β-estradiol. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that certain cadmium-containing nanocrystals are endocrine disruptors, whose effects can exceed those induced by ionic cadmium or 17β-estradiol.

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)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations20
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNanomedicineSame topicCancer Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207