MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2049923126 · doi:10.1007/s11060-015-1744-y

A preclinical study demonstrating the efficacy of nilotinib in inhibiting the growth of pediatric high-grade glioma

2015· article· en· W2049923126 on OpenAlexaff
Karolyn Au, Sanjay K. Singh, Kelly Burrell, N. Sabha, Cynthia Hawkins, Annie Huang, Gelareh Zadeh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuro-Oncology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenToronto Western HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersBrain Tumour Research
KeywordsNilotinibPlatelet-derived growth factor receptorGliomaCancer researchMedicineTyrosine-kinase inhibitorGrowth factor receptorTyrosine kinaseU87In vitroReceptor tyrosine kinaseGrowth factorReceptorInternal medicineBiologyCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Solid tumors arising from malignant transformation of glial cells are one of the leading causes of central nervous system tumor-related death in children. Recurrence in spite of rigorous surgical and chemoradiation therapies remains a major hurdle in management of these tumors. Here, we investigate the efficacy of the second-generation receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor nilotinib as a therapeutic option for the management of pediatric gliomas. We have utilized two independent pediatric high-grade glioma cell lines with either high platelet-derived growth factor receptor alpha (PDGFRα) or high PDGFRβ expression in in vitro assays to investigate the specific downstream effects of nilotinib treatment. Using in vitro cell-based assays we show that nilotinib inhibits PDGF-BB-dependent activation of PDGFRα. We further show that nilotinib is able to decrease cell proliferation and anchorage-independent growth via suppression of AKT and ERK1/2 signaling pathways. Our results suggest that nilotinib may be effective for management of a PDGFRα-dependent group of pediatric gliomas.

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)0.005
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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.546

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.291 · 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

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neuro-OncologySame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207