MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140907826 · doi:10.1002/dvdy.21613

Reprogramming multipotent tumor cells with the embryonic neural crest microenvironment

2008· review· en· W2140907826 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer C. Kasemeier‐Kulesa, Jessica M. Teddy, Lynne‐Marie Postovit, Elisabeth A. Seftor, Richard E.B. Seftor, Mary J.C. Hendrix, Paul M. Kulesa

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Dynamics · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Cells and Metastasis
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsBiologyNeural crestEmbryonic stem cellReprogrammingCell biologyTumor microenvironmentMultipotent Stem CellProgenitor cellStem cellNeuroscienceEmbryoCellCancerGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The embryonic microenvironment is an important source of signals that program multipotent cells to adopt a particular fate and migratory path, yet its potential to reprogram and restrict multipotent tumor cell fate and invasion is unrealized. Aggressive tumor cells share many characteristics with multipotent, invasive embryonic progenitors, contributing to the paradigm of tumor cell plasticity. In the vertebrate embryo, multiple cell types originate from a highly invasive cell population called the neural crest. The neural crest and the embryonic microenvironments they migrate through represent an excellent model system to study cell diversification during embryogenesis and phenotype determination. Recent exciting studies of tumor cells transplanted into various embryo models, including the neural crest rich chick microenvironment, have revealed the potential to control and revert the metastatic phenotype, suggesting further work may help to identify new targets for therapeutic intervention derived from a convergence of tumorigenic and embryonic signals. In this mini-review, we summarize markers that are common to the neural crest and highly aggressive human melanoma cells. We highlight advances in our understanding of tumor cell behaviors and plasticity studied within the chick neural crest rich microenvironment. In so doing, we honor the tremendous contributions of Professor Elizabeth D. Hay toward this important interface of developmental and cancer biology.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations108
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmental DynamicsSame topicCancer Cells and MetastasisFrench-language works237,207