Stromelysin‐3 expression by mammary tumor‐associated fibroblasts under <i>in vitro</i> breast cancer cell induction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To understand better the influence of the host stromal phenotype on stromal expression of stromelysin-3 (ST3) in breast cancer, we have investigated ST3 expression by host stromal cells isolated from 9 different primary breast carcinomas. These tumor-associated fibroblasts were cocultivated with 3 epithelial cancer cell lines of mammary origin (MDA-MB-231, SK-BR-3 and MCF-7), as well as with normal human mammary epithelial cells (NME and 184A1) and keratinocytes, using both direct and indirect coculture systems. ST3 expression was demonstrated by both in situ hybridization and immunocytochemistry. The results showed that ST3 expression by stromal cells was cancer-specific. Indeed, ST3 expression by tumor-associated stromal cells was induced by 3 malignant cancer cell lines (MDA-MB-231, SK-BR-3 and MCF-7), whereas no ST3 was expressed under normal mammary epithelial cell stimulation. ST3 expression was weak or absent in unstimulated tumor-associated fibroblasts. However, after direct coculture with cancer cells, expression of ST3 transcripts reappeared in 8 of the 9 cases and was observed only in fibroblasts located in close contact with tumor cells. Under similar coculture conditions and using the same cancer cell line stimulation, ST3 expression was, however, quite variable among these 9 cases, reflecting the difference of protease expression observed on the sections of the original tumors. Tumor induction of ST3 expression was much more important by direct cell-cell contact than by indirect stimulation and was not influenced by the addition of basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF) and anti-bFGF to the culture medium. Our results suggest that the host stromal cell phenotype may significantly influence host stromal cell protease expression under cancer cell stimulation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".