MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2049543624 · doi:10.2741/3703

Growth Factors and their receptors in cancer metastases

2010· review· en· W2049543624 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in bioscience · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer, Hypoxia, and Metabolism
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersWorld Anti-Doping AgencyMotor Neurone Disease AssociationWellcome Trust
KeywordsCancerAngiogenesisReceptorMetastasisCancer researchMedicineCancer cellEpithelial–mesenchymal transitionOncologyBiologyPathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Metastatic, rather than primary tumours are responsible for ninety percent cancer deaths. Despite significant advances in the understanding of molecular and cellular mechanisms in tumour metastases, there are limitations in preventive treatment of metastatic tumours. Much evidence arising from laboratory and clinical studies suggests that growth factors and their receptors are implicated in cancer metastases development. We review the origin and production of growth factors and their receptors in all stages of cancer metastases including epithelial-mesenchymal transition, cancer cell invasion and migration, survival within the circulation, seeding at distant organs and metastatic tumour angiogenesis. The functions of growth factors and their receptors are also discussed. This review presents the efforts made in understanding this challenge to aid in the development of new treatment strategies for cancer metastases.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.991
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.269 · 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