MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124100316

Identification of differentially expressed genes in uveal melanoma using suppressive subtractive hybridization.

2011· article· en· W2124100316 on OpenAlexaff
Solange Landreville, C. Lupien, François Vigneault, Manon Gaudreault, Mélissa Mathieu, Alain Rousseau, Sylvain L. Guérin, Christian Salesse

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Oncology and Treatments
Canadian institutionsHôpital du Saint-Sacrement
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuppression subtractive hybridizationBiologyGeneGene expressionMicroarray analysis techniquesMicroarrayMelanomaMolecular biologyGene expression profilingNorthern blotGeneticsCancer researchcDNA library
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Uveal melanoma (UM) is the most common primary cancer of the eye, resulting not only in vision loss, but also in metastatic death. This study attempts to identify changes in the patterns of gene expression that lead to malignant transformation and proliferation of normal uveal melanocytes (UVM) using the Suppressive Subtractive Hybridization (SSH) technique. METHODS: The SSH technique was used to isolate genes that are differentially expressed in the TP31 cell line derived from a primary UM compared to UVM. The expression level of selected genes was further validated by microarray, semi-quantitative RT-PCR and western blot analyses. RESULTS: Analysis of the subtracted libraries revealed that 37 and 36 genes were, respectively, up- and downregulated in TP31 cells compared to UVM. Differential expression of the majority of these genes was confirmed by comparing UM cells with UVM by microarray. The expression pattern of selected genes was analyzed by semi-quantitative RT-PCR and western blot, and was found to be consistent with the SSH findings. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that the SSH technique is efficient to detect differentially expressed genes in UM. The genes identified in this study represent valuable candidates for further functional analysis in UM and should be informative in studying the biology of this tumor.

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 score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations9
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicOcular Oncology and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207