MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078878285 · doi:10.3892/ijmm.8.5.543

Comparison of expression of apoptosis regulatory proteins in the adipose tissue of tumor-bearing and diet-restricted rabbits

2001· article· en· W2078878285 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Osamu Ishiko, Toshiyuki Sumi, Hideki Yoshida, Young‐Min Hyun, Sachio Ogita

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Molecular Medicine · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdipose Tissue and Metabolism
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTerry Fox Foundation
KeywordsApoptosisOncogeneAdipose tissueBiologyMolecular medicineEndocrinologyInternal medicineAdipocyteBAX ProteinCell cycleAndrologyProtein expressionMedicineGeneBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigated the expression of apoptosis regulatory proteins in the adipose tissue of tumor-bearing and diet-restricted rabbits, and analyzed the differences between the two groups. The apoptotic index in the tumor-bearing group was 25.1+/-12.4 on day 10 and increased to 27.2+/-14.4 by day 20. Thereafter, however, it gradually decreased, falling to 11.2+/-7.8 on day 30 and 0.67+/-0.88 on day 40. By contrast, no apoptotic cells were detected in the diet-restricted group at any of the times examined. Bcl-2 immunoreactivity was either not detected at all, or was only weakly observed in both groups. Bax expression, on the other hand, gradually increased after implantation in the tumor-bearing group. In 2 of the 5 tumor-bearing rabbits, Bax expression in adipocytes was moderate 10 days after tumor implantation, and strong by day 20, but steadily decreased thereafter. By contrast, hardly any Bax-immunopositive cells were detected in the diet-restricted group. These results suggested that loss of body weight in the tumor-bearing group was different from that in the diet-restricted group, and that it was related to adipocyte apoptosis.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.132
Threshold uncertainty score0.282

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 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

Citations6
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Molecular MedicineSame topicAdipose Tissue and MetabolismFrench-language works237,207