MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Role of endocrine and growth factors on the ovarian surface epithelium

2007· review· en· W2047119337 on OpenAlexafffund
Alice S.T. Wong, Peter C. K. Leung

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of obstetrics and gynaecology research · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsOvaryOvulationMalignant transformationHormoneOvarian cancerEpitheliumMedicineNeoplastic transformationEndocrine systemCancer researchBiologyEndocrinologyInternal medicinePathologyCancerCarcinogenesis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Epithelial ovarian cancer is a highly fatal disease for which prevention strategies have been limited; in part because of our poor understanding of the underlying biology of its precursor, the ovarian surface epithelium (OSE). The OSE is a single layer of flat-to-cuboidal mesothelial cells that covers the surface of the ovary. Despite its inconspicuous appearance in vivo, it is believed that OSE cells actively participate in the cyclical ovulatory rupture and repair process. The continuous rupture of the OSE at ovulation and the subsequent proliferation to repair the wound renders the cells susceptible to genetic damage and malignant transformation. As the ovary is a rich source of multiple hormones, and normal OSE and ovarian carcinomas secrete and have receptors for hormones, growth factors and cytokines, these factors are strong candidates to regulate normal OSE physiology and the transformation and progression of ovarian cancers. In particular, alterations of hormone/growth factor production and receptor expression are common in ovarian tumors. This review summarizes the current knowledge in the field of endocrinology and its relationship to the biology and pathology of the OSE.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.970
Threshold uncertainty score0.646

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.136
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations63
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of obstetrics and gynaecology researchSame topicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207