MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mechanisms of Tumor Metastasis to Bone

2000· review· en· W2034348558 on OpenAlexaff
Michael H. Weber, David Goltzman, Paul Kostenuik, Shafaat A. Rabbani, Gurmit Singh, F. William Orr

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Reviews in Eukaryotic Gene Expression · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityRoyal Victoria HospitalRoyal Victoria Regional Health CentreHamilton Regional Laboratory Medicine ProgramUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOsteolysisMedicineBone metastasisBone marrowCancerMetastasisCancer researchPathologyInternal medicineRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bone metastases occur in approximately 80% of patients with advanced cancer. They are characterized by cancer cell growth and bone destruction that cause pain, fractures, anemia, and hypercalcemia. At diagnosis, bone metastases are usually incurable owing to their advanced development. However, the early stages in their formation are asymptomatic and begin as single micrometastatic cells from the blood stream. These cells can be detected by molecular analysis of bone marrow in approximately 30% of patients at the time of cancer diagnosis, but not all single micrometastatic cells develop into clinically significant bone metastases. A synergistic relationship exists between the micometastasis and the bone environment creating favorable conditions for the development and growth of disseminated tumor cells. Such bone metastases induce osteolysis or new bone formation, releasing growth factors and cytokines, which in turn amplify this pathological mechanism. The underling hypothesis, first proposed by Paget in 1889, is that the growth of disseminated tumor cells in bone is dependent on the fertility of the soil or bone itself. This article explores the most current opinions in this area of study and presents a comprehensive summary of the major factors involved.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations22
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Reviews in Eukaryotic Gene ExpressionSame topicBone health and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207