MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160044421 · doi:10.2174/1566524013363339

The Functional and Clinical Roles of Osteopontin in Cancer and Metastasis

2001· review· en· W2160044421 on OpenAlexaff
Kara A. Furger, Rajashree K. Menon, Alan B. Tuck, Vivien Bramwell, Ann F. Chambers

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Molecular Medicine · 2001
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone and Dental Protein Studies
Canadian institutionsOttawa Regional Cancer Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOsteopontinMetastasisCancerMalignancyCancer researchBiologyCancer cellMedicineBioinformaticsImmunologyPathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Osteopontin (OPN) is a secreted and integrin-binding protein that has been implicated in a number of pathologies. In this review we will focus on the functional and clinical roles of OPN in cancer and metastasis, with a particular emphasis on breast cancer. While much evidence has suggested that OPN is associated with cancer, its functional contribution to cancer remains poorly understood. Here we will review evidence for mechanisms by which OPN may act to enhance malignancy, including evidence that signaling pathways directly induced by OPN, as well as interactions with growth factor receptor pathways, can combine to activate expression of genes and functions that contribute to metastasis. OPN has been shown to be over-expressed in a variety of human tumors and is present in elevated levels in the blood of some patients with metastatic cancers. We also will discuss recent clinical evidence that suggests that OPN is not only associated with several tumor types, but that levels of OPN in cancer patients' blood or tumors may provide prognostic information.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.136
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.316 · 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

Citations216
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Molecular MedicineSame topicBone and Dental Protein StudiesFrench-language works237,207