MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2031890665 · doi:10.1159/000225657

In vitro Colony Assay of Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells – A Comparison of Breast Cancer Patients and Normal Individuals

2009· article· en· W2031890665 on OpenAlexaff
Leo F. Skinnider, Donna E. Malcolm

Bibliographic record

VenueOncology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Treatment and Pharmacology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeripheral blood mononuclear cellBreast cancerIn vitroStage (stratigraphy)Internal medicineCancerImmunologyMedicinePeripheral bloodMammary glandBiologyOncologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The in vitro colony growth in agar of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) with phytohemagglutinin (PHA) as a stimulant is on an average lower in breast cancer patients than in normal individuals of the same age and sex group. This difference is statistically significant in patients with stage 1 disease but not in those with stage 2 or stage 4 disease. It is also noted that in normal individuals the in vitro colony growth of PBMC stimulated with PHA alone is invariably greater than that obtained with PHA combined with phorbol myristate acetate as mitogens. Among stage 1 breast cancer patients there is a group in which this pattern is reversed. No distinguishing features in this group can as yet be identified.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.273
Threshold uncertainty score0.489

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOncologySame topicCancer Treatment and PharmacologyFrench-language works237,207