MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080100501 · doi:10.2147/ijn.s72144

Treating cancer stem cells and cancer metastasis using glucose-coated gold nanoparticles

2015· article· en· W2080100501 on OpenAlexafffund
Jie Chen, Chenxia Hu, Martin Niestroj, Daniel Yuan, Steven D. Chang

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Nanomedicine · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGraphene and Nanomaterials Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaCanadian Light Source (Canada)National Institute for Nanotechnology
FundersCanadian Breast Cancer Research AllianceBreast Cancer Alliance
KeywordsColloidal goldMetastasisCancer cellCancerNanotechnologyCancer stem cellMaterials scienceCancer metastasisCancer researchNanoparticleMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cancer ranks among the leading causes of human mortality. Cancer becomes intractable when it spreads from the primary tumor site to various organs (such as bone, lung, liver, and then brain). Unlike solid tumor cells, cancer stem cells and metastatic cancer cells grow in a non-attached (suspension) form when moving from their source to other locations in the body. Due to the non-attached growth nature, metastasis is often first detected in the circulatory systems, for instance in a lymph node near the primary tumor. Cancer research over the past several decades has primarily focused on treating solid tumors, but targeted therapy to treat cancer stem cells and cancer metastasis has yet to be developed. Because cancers undergo faster metabolism and consume more glucose than normal cells, glucose was chosen in this study as a reagent to target cancer cells. In particular, by covalently binding gold nanoparticles (GNPs) with thio-PEG (polyethylene glycol) and thio-glucose, the resulting functionalized GNPs (Glu-GNPs) were created for targeted treatment of cancer metastasis and cancer stem cells. Suspension cancer cell THP-1 (human monocytic cell line derived from acute monocytic leukemia patients) was selected because it has properties similar to cancer stem cells and has been used as a metastatic cancer cell model for in vitro studies. To take advantage of cancer cells' elevated glucose consumption over normal cells, different starvation periods were screened in order to achieve optimal treatment effects. Cancer cells were then fed using Glu-GNPs followed by X-ray irradiation treatment. For comparison, solid tumor MCF-7 cells (breast cancer cell line) were studied as well. Our irradiation experimental results show that Glu-GNPs are better irradiation sensitizers to treat THP-1 cells than MCF-7 cells, or Glu-GNPs enhance the cancer killing of THP-1 cells 20% more than X-ray irradiation alone and GNP treatment alone. This finding can help oncologists to design therapeutic strategies to target cancer stem cells and cancer metastasis.

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)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations74
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of NanomedicineSame topicGraphene and Nanomaterials ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207