MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cancer Stem-Cell Related miRNAs: Novel Potential Targets for Metastatic Prostate Cancer

2015· article· en· W2212921542 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anshika Singh, Anand P. Khandwekar, Neeti Sharma

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Analytical Oncology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Cells and Metastasis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProstate cancerMetastasisCancerCancer stem cellCarcinogenesismicroRNAAngiogenesisMedicineCancer researchOncologyProstatePopulationCancer cellBioinformaticsInternal medicineBiologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Globally Prostate Cancer is the second most commonly diagnosed and sixth leading cause of Cancer mortalities in men worldwide but currently there is no cure for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Chemoresistance and metastasis are the main causes of treatment resistance and mortality in Prostate Cancer patients. Although several advances have been made to control yet there is an urgent need to investigate the mechanisms and pathways for chemoresistance and prostate cancer (PCa) metastasis. Cancer stem cells (CSCs), a sub-population of cancer cells characterised by self-renewal and tumor initiation, have gained intense attention as they not only play a crucial role in cancer relapse but also contribute substantially to chemoresistance. Contributing to the role of CSCs are the miRNAs which are known key regulators of the posttranscriptional regulation of genes involved in a wide array of biological processes including tumorigenesis. The altered expressions of miRNAs have been associated with not only with tumor development but also with invasion, angiogenesis, drug resistance, and metastasis. Thus identification of signature miRNA associated with EMT and CSCs would provide a novel therapeutic strategy for the improvement of current treatment thus leading to increase in patient survival.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.374
Threshold uncertainty score0.584

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.059
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Analytical OncologySame topicCancer Cells and MetastasisFrench-language works237,207