MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090079954 · doi:10.1182/blood-2001-11-0007

Short-term granulocyte colony-stimulating factor and erythropoietin treatment enhances hematopoiesis and survival in the mitomycin C–conditioned Fancc−/− mouse model, while long-term treatment is ineffective

2002· article· en· W2090079954 on OpenAlexafffund
Madeleine Carreau, Lili Liu, Olga I. Gan, Johann Hitzler, John E. Dick, Manuel Buchwald

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
Canadian institutionsHôpital Saint-François d'Assise
FundersHospital for Sick Children
KeywordsErythropoietinHaematopoiesisGranulocyte colony-stimulating factorGranulocyteMedicineMitomycin CInternal medicineCancer researchTerm (time)MyelofibrosisImmunologyOncologyBiologyChemotherapyBone marrowStem cellSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transient treatment with cytokines appears to improve hematopoietic function in Fanconi anemia; however, the effectiveness or adverse effect of long-term treatment is not known. The mitomycin C-treated Fancc(-/-) mouse provides a valuable model to address long-term efficacy of such treatment. Fancc(-/-) mice injected with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, erythropoietin, or both cytokines showed a delay in mitomycin C (MMC)-induced bone marrow (BM) failure compared to untreated mice. However, long-term cytokine exposure followed by MMC challenges did not protect mice from the reduction of peripheral blood counts or the number of early myeloid progenitors. These results suggest that cytokine treatment may be beneficial only in the short-term, while long-term treatment is not protective for BM aplasia.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations10
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationFrench-language works237,207