MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The effect of physiological concentrations of six hormones on the growth of breast and prostate cell lines treated with human serum

2010· article· en· W2297404000 on OpenAlexaffabout
Amin Esfahani, Balachandran Bashyam, Cyril W.C. Kendall, Korbua Srichaikul, Michael C. Archer, David J.A. Jenkins

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer, Lipids, and Metabolism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLNCaPEndocrinologyInternal medicineDihydrotestosteroneTestosterone (patch)HormoneCell growthGlucagonProstate cancerChemistryProstateInsulinBiologyAndrogenMedicineCancerBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background The majority of cell culture studies assess the effect of hormones on cancer cell growth using media supplemented with charcoal treated serum (CTS). Our objective was to determine the effect of various hormones on the growth of breast and prostate cancer cells incubated in untreated whole human serum (PHS). Methods MCF‐7, MCF‐10A breast and LNCaP prostate cancer cell lines supplemented with PHS were treated with two physiological concentrations of six hormones (17β‐estradiol (E2), dehydroepiandosterone (DHEA), dihydrotestosterone (DHT), testosterone (T), insulin and glucagon). Cell viability was measured after 72 hours using the MTS assay. Results All hormones stimulated growth of MCF‐7 cells (p<0.05). MCF‐10A cell growth was inhibited by DHEA, DHT and T (p<0.05), unaffected by E2 and glucagon, and stimulated by insulin (p<0.05). LNCaP cell growth was stimulated by the highest concentration of DHEA and DHT (p<0.05) and inhibited by the highest concentration of E2 (p<0.05). Insulin and T did not alter LNCaP growth. PHS lowered the magnitude of the hormonal effect by comparison to CTS. Conclusions Unexpectedly, high concentrations of testosterone did not stimulate LNCaP cell growth and we observed for the first time that glucagon stimulates breast cancer cell growth. (Funding provided by Canada Research Chair discretionary funds)

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicCancer, Lipids, and MetabolismFrench-language works237,207