MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Lysosomal Acid Hydrolases of the Cathepsin Family Are Novel Targets of INSL3 in Human Thyroid Carcinoma Cells

2009· article· en· W2047501610 on OpenAlexafffund
Joanna Białek, Sabine Hombach‐Klonisch, B. Fiebig, Ekkehard Weber, Cuong Hoang‐Vu, Thomas Klonisch

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy-related medical research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftResearch ManitobaManitoba Health Research Council
KeywordsCathepsin DCathepsinCarcinomaThyroidChemistryThyroid carcinomaBiochemistryCancer researchEnzymeBiologyInternal medicineEndocrinologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Insulin-like peptide 3 (INSL3) is present in hyperactive and neoplastic thyrocytes, but the functional role of this relaxin-like peptide hormone during carcinogenesis in the thyroid gland is currently unknown. We generated new cell models of stable transfectants of the human follicular thyroid carcinoma cell line FTC-133 expressing and secreting bioactive human INSL3. These transfectants displayed higher intracellular ATP levels, but INSL3 failed to act as a promoter of growth. The acquisition of an invasive tumor cell phenotype with local tissue invasion represents the beginning of a number of events leading to metastasis, the major cause of fatal outcome in cancer patients. Here we demonstrate a function of INSL3 in elastin degradation, which is considered an early step during basal membrane penetration and tissue invasion by tumor cells. INSL3 markedly increased the production of the lysosomal enzymes cathepsin-L and cathepsin-D. Enhanced secretion of the elastinolytic cathepsin-L was associated with increased elastinolytic activity of FTC-133-INSL3 transfectants. Thus, we provide the first evidence that the INSL3 peptide can promote early tumor cell invasiveness in human thyroid carcinoma cells by enhancing their metabolic activity and elastin-degrading potential.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.193
Threshold uncertainty score0.734

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 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

Citations15
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the New York Academy of SciencesSame topicPregnancy-related medical researchFrench-language works237,207