MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Tumor-Specific Blood Serum Factors as Basis of Tumor Dormancy

2014· article· en· W2145862286 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ф. В. Доненко, Natalia Kormosh, Thomas Efferth, Michail Kiselevski

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Biotechnology for Wellness Industries · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicErythrocyte Function and Pathophysiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDormancyBiologyImmunologyCancer researchTransplantationCancerIn vivoInternal medicineEndocrinologyMedicineBiotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the present review, we focus on the importance of blood serum factors for tumor growth in vivo.Data from mice experiments indicate the existence of serum factors, which decrease the dormancy of Ehrlich carcinoma cells from 85 to 20%.The impaired production of these factors increases the life span of tumor-bearing animals from 14 days to 120 days.Blocking the production of tumor-specific factors causes the complete regression of already developed Ehrlich carcinoma.These serum factors do not affect the malignant carcinoma cells in vitro.We identified serpins as tumor dormancy serum factors.Experimental evidence suggests that serpins are not only essential for tumor growth.Serpins are also involved in the regeneration of normal tissues, such as adipose tissue, recurrence after cosmetic operations (liposuction), inhibiting rejection after liver transplantation, protection of parasitic flat worms living in host tissues and organs etc.We conclude that the inhibition of serum dormancy factor may represent attractive novel strategies for the prevention and treatment of relapsed 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Biotechnology for Wellness IndustriesSame topicErythrocyte Function and PathophysiologyFrench-language works237,207