Examination of blood‐brain barrier (BBB) integrity in a mouse brain tumor model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study examines, on a functional and biochemical level, brain tumor‐induced alterations in capillary endothelial cells forming the blood‐brain barrier (BBB). Tumors were induced by injecting Lewis Lung carcinoma (3LL) cells into the right hemisphere of female Balb/c mice. Changes in BBB permeability were assessed at various stages of tumor development, using both magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and radiolabeled permeability markers. The expression of P‐glycoprotein (P‐gp) in the BBB was also evaluated using Western Blot. Median mouse survival following 3LL injection was 15 days. Tumor volume progressed from 1.38 mm 3 on day 7 to approximately 78 mm 3 on day 15. Histological and MRI analysis indicated the resulting tumor mass was restricted to the right hemisphere. The permeability of the BBB to 3H‐mannitol was similar in both hemispheres at 7 and 10 days post‐injection. At day 12 and 15, significant increases in BBB permeability was observed. The alterations in BBB permeability were associated with an increase in cerebral vascular volume, but P‐gp expression was unaffected at all stages of tumor development. The BBB is largely intact during tumor development with disruptions only observed at the later stages. Furthermore, the BBB expression of P‐gp is unaffected by tumor progression despite an increased angiogenesis in the tumor bearing hemispheres. Funding support provided by PHS Grant R01‐CA93558.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".