Constitutive activation of met kinase in non‐small‐cell lung carcinomas correlates with anchorage‐independent cell survival
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lung cancer is currently the most frequent cause of cancer death in North America. Hepatocyte growth factor (HGF) and its receptor Met are frequently over-expressed in non-small-cell lung carcinomas (NSCLC), but their potential role in tumor progression is not clearly known. To assess the role of HGF/Met signaling in lung carcinomas, we have examined the expression, activation status, and function of Met in NSCLC cell lines (n = 7), established from primary tumors or pleural fluids of cancer patients. We observed Met expression in three NSCLC cell lines, two of which exhibited constitutive tyrosine-phosphorylation of Met, and Met kinase activity. In addition, the observed constitutive activation of Met was sustained under anchorage-independent conditions, and correlated with phosphatidyl inositol 3-kinase-dependent cell survival. Immunoreactive HGF-like protein was secreted by two Met-positive and two Met-negative NSCLC cell lines. However HGF activity, as determined by the ability to induce cell scattering and tyrosine-phosphorylation of Met in reporter cell lines, was detected in conditioned medium from only one Met-negative NSCLC cell line: none of the conditioned media from Met-expressing NSCLC cell lines showed detectable HGF activity. Thus, constitutive activation of Met in NSCLC cell lines may occur at least in part through intracrine, or HGF-independent mechanisms. Interestingly, additional paracrine stimulation with exogenous recombinant HGF was required for DNA synthesis and correlated with increased activation of ERK1/2 in all Met-positive NSCLC cell lines, regardless of the basal activation status of Met. These findings indicate that a medium level of constitutive activation of Met occurs in some NSCLC cell lines, and correlates with survival of detached carcinoma cells; whereas additional paracrine stimulation by recombinant HGF is required for DNA synthesis. Thus constitutive and paracrine activation of Met may provide complementary signals that promote survival and proliferation, respectively, during tumor progression of NSCLC.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".