MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170501509 · doi:10.1158/0008-5472.can-04-2938

Androgen-Induced Differentiation and Tumorigenicity of Human Prostate Epithelial Cells

2004· article· en· W2170501509 on OpenAlexaff
Raanan Berger, Phillip G. Febbo, Pradip K. Majumder, Jean J. Zhao, Sayan Mukherjee, Sabina Signoretti, Katrina Campbell, William R. Sellers, Thomas M. Roberts, Massimo Loda, Todd R. Golub, William C. Hahn

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsImmunovaccine (Canada)
FundersNational Cancer InstituteProstate Cancer FoundationU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsProstate cancerProstateAndrogen receptorAndrogenCancer researchBiologyInternal medicineEndocrinologyCancerMedicineHormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Androgen ablation is the primary treatment modality for patients with metastatic prostate cancer; however, the role of androgen receptor signaling in prostate cancer development remains enigmatic. Using a series of genetically defined immortalized and tumorigenic human prostate epithelial cells, we found that introduction of the androgen receptor induced differentiation of transformed prostate epithelial cells to a luminal phenotype reminiscent of organ-confined prostate cancer when placed in the prostate microenvironment. Moreover, androgen receptor expression converted previously androgen-independent, tumorigenic prostate epithelial cells into cells dependent on testosterone for tumor formation. These observations indicate that androgen receptor expression is oncogenic and addictive for the human prostate epithelium.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
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)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.329 · 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

Citations175
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207