Cell–cell and cell–matrix dynamics in intraperitoneal cancer metastasis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The peritoneal metastatic route of cancer dissemination is shared by cancers of the ovary and gastrointestinal tract. Once initiated, peritoneal metastasis typically proceeds rapidly in a feed-forward manner. Several factors contribute to this efficient progression. In peritoneal metastasis, cancer cells exfoliate into the peritoneal fluid and spread locally, transported by peritoneal fluid. Inflammatory cytokines released by tumor and immune cells compromise the protective, anti-adhesive mesothelial cell layer that lines the peritoneal cavity, exposing the underlying extracellular matrix to which cancer cells readily attach. The peritoneum is further rendered receptive to metastatic implantation and growth by myofibroblastic cell behaviors also stimulated by inflammatory cytokines. Individual cancer cells suspended in peritoneal fluid can aggregate to form multicellular spheroids. This cellular arrangement imparts resistance to anoikis, apoptosis, and chemotherapeutics. Emerging evidence indicates that compact spheroid formation is preferentially accomplished by cancer cells with high invasive capacity and contractile behaviors. This review focuses on the pathological alterations to the peritoneum and the properties of cancer cells that in combination drive peritoneal metastasis.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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.
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".