MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132378346 · doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6601839

Role of osteopontin in tumour progression

2004· review· en· W2132378346 on OpenAlexaff
Susan R. Rittling, Ann F. Chambers

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Cancer · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone and Dental Protein Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsOsteopontinMetastasisCancerBiologyCancer researchMalignant transformationTumor progressionPathologyMedicineBioinformaticsImmunologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since its first identification as a transformation-associated protein, osteopontin (OPN) has been recognised as important in the processes of tumorigenicity and metastasis. Here, we review the evidence that OPN might be considered as a candidate prognostic marker in human cancer. In animal systems, evidence from cell injection experiments and genetically manipulated mice suggest an important but complex role for the protein in tumour progression. Moreover, studies in a variety of human cancers associate high levels of OPN expression in tumours or in blood with more advanced cancers. The mechanism of action of OPN in promoting cancer is still unclear, and we consider aspects of OPN biology that can complicate interpretation of human studies. Nevertheless, growing evidence supports a role for OPN as a potential prognostic factor for various human cancers.

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 score0.003
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
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.346 · 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

Citations412
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of CancerSame topicBone and Dental Protein StudiesFrench-language works237,207