MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070823430 · doi:10.1016/j.ymthe.2004.12.005

A novel knock-in prostate cancer model demonstrates biology similar to that of human prostate cancer and suitable for preclinical studies

2005· article· en· W2070823430 on OpenAlexaff
Manal Gabril, Wenming Duan, Guojun Wu, Madeleine Moussa, Jonathan I. Izawa, Chandra J. Panchal, Hideki Sakai, Jim W. Xuan

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Therapy · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsProstate cancerCancer researchBiologyGenetically modified mouseProstateCancerTransgeneGene knockinAdenocarcinomaGenePathologyMedicineGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Preclinical studies of prostate cancer (CaP) have employed a genetically engineered mouse model, since there is no naturally occurring CaP in rodents. We have previously reported a new knock-in mouse adenocarcinoma prostate (KIMAP) model. In this study, we demonstrate that the new model possesses a tumor architecture of heterogeneity and multifocality similar to that of human CaP, by utilizing a new compound scoring system to compare with the PSP94 (approved gene symbol Msmb) gene-directed transgenic mouse CaP model (TGMAP). KIMAP mice showed a balanced distribution of tumor extent, which penetrated the prostate gland. Comparative studies on cDNA microarrays demonstrated that KIMAP tumors were upregulated with higher contents of immunoresponse genes, whereas PSP-TGMAP tumors had neuroendocrine (NE) differentiation. The majority of KIMAP mice did not progress to NE CaP, which was observed only at a very late stage and a low frequency. Several tumor marker genes characteristic of human CaP were uniquely identified in KIMAP tumors, including hepsin, maspin, Nkx3.1, CD10 and PSP94 (similar to PSA), etc. The differences between these two CaP models are attributed to the introduction of a single endogenous knock-in mutation. Due to the similarities between human CaP tumors and the PSP-KIMAP tumors, this preclinical model may supplement the current transgenic models to study CaP more accurately.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.143
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations32
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueMolecular TherapySame topicProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207