Effects of Surgical Excision and Radiation on Medulloblastoma Cell Invasiveness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Surgical resection and adjuvant radiation are mainstays of medulloblastoma (MB) patient management. We utilized a novel 3-dimensional assay to identify how (a) radiation, (b) excision of the primary tumour aggregate, and (c) both treatments combined influence MB cell invasiveness. METHODS: Five MB cell lines (UW228-1, 2 and 3; Daoy, and Madsen) were implanted onto a 3-dimensional, type I collagen gel assay to assess tumour invasion distance over five days, in response to (1) needle-assisted excision of the central cell aggregate; (2) pre-exposure to single-dose and fractionated dose irradiation in doses from 6-25 and 8-24 Gy, respectively; and (3) excision plus either single-dose or fractionated radiation. RESULTS: Within hours, individual MB cells detached from the surface of the cell aggregates and invaded the collagen matrix, to distances up to 1200 microm and at rates up to 300 microm daily. The UW228-1 cell line was less invasive than the other cell lines and was dropped from further analysis. In the four remaining lines, a dose-dependent decline in tumour invasiveness was identified, both for single-dose and fractionated radiation, which achieved statistically decreased invasion distances at higher doses, especially of fractionated irradiation. Excision of the central tumour aggregate tended towards exerting a late effect on cell invasion, but exerted no significant influence on the radio-sensitivity of residual cells. CONCLUSIONS: Both single-dose and fractionated dose irradiation appear to inhibit MB cell invasiveness in a dose-dependent manner, whereas excision of the central cell aggregate exerts no effect on residual invading cells.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".