Fine needle aspiration biopsy to reestablish cell culture in an animal model of uveal melanoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To access the reliability of fine-needle aspiration biopsy in harvesting a sufficient amount of viable melanoma cells to establish a cell culture and maintain a melanoma cell line from an animal model of uveal melanoma. METHODS: For this study, fifteen male New Zealand albino rabbits had their right eye surgically inoculated with uveal melanoma cell line 92.1. The animals were immunosupressed with cyclosporine A using a dose schedule previously published. The animals were followed for 12 weeks. Intraocular tumor growth was monitored weekly by indirect ophthalmoscopy. After the fourth week, one animal was sacrificed per week preceded by fine-needle aspiration biopsy using a sharp 25-gauge, 1-inch long needle. Two separate aspirates were made from different areas of the tumor. Each aspirate was flushed to a separate cell culture media and sent for cell culture. The cells were frozen after two weeks when there were at least 1 million cells, which is enough to maintain a cell line. Cells were defrosted for HMB-45 immuno-stains to confirm the melanoma origin. RESULTS: Cell growth was observed from the samples harvested from 11 out of the 15 animals inoculated with uveal melanoma. All cell cultures, after defrost, immunoassayed positive for HMB-45. CONCLUSION: Fine needle aspiration biopsy seems to be a reliable method to harvest cells from solid intraocular melanomas in an animal model, to establish cell culture and to maintain a melanoma cell line.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".