MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099023875 · doi:10.1016/j.molonc.2010.08.001

Brain tumor stem cells: The cancer stem cell hypothesis writ large

2010· review· en· W2099023875 on OpenAlexafffund
Peter B. Dirks

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Oncology · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Cells and Metastasis
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
FundersCanadian Cancer Society Research InstituteSick Kids FoundationCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHospital for Sick ChildrenTerry Fox FoundationOntario Institute for Cancer Research
KeywordsStem cellCancer stem cellWritBiologyBrain cancerNeural stem cellCancer researchPathologyCancerMedicineCell biologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Brain tumors, which are typically very heterogeneous at the cellular level, appear to have a stem cell foundation. Recently, investigations from multiple groups have found that human as well as experimental mouse brain tumors contain subpopulations of cells that functionally behave as tumor stem cells, driving tumor growth and generating tumor cell progeny that form the tumor bulk, but which then lose tumorigenic ability. In human glioblastomas, these tumor stem cells express neural precursor markers and are capable of differentiating into tumor cells that express more mature neural lineage markers. In addition, modeling brain tumors in mice suggests that neural precursor cells more readily give rise to full blown tumors, narrowing potential cells of origin to those rarer brain cells that have a proliferative potential. Applying stem cell concepts and methodologies is giving fresh insight into brain tumor biology, cell of origin and mechanisms of growth, and is offering new opportunities for development of more effective treatments. The field of brain tumor stem cells remains very young and there is much to be learned before these new insights are translated into new patient treatments.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations144
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular OncologySame topicCancer Cells and MetastasisFrench-language works237,207