MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2315053004 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am10-3434

Abstract 3434: Lipopoylsaccharide promotes human esophageal cancer cell metastatic potential via the selectin/sialyl Lewis X axis

2010· article· en· W2315053004 on OpenAlexaff
Mathieu Rousseau, Rich Y.C. Hsu, Jonathan Spicer, Breadon McDonald, Carlos H.F. Chan, Rushika M. Perera, Betty Giannias, Lorenzo Ferri

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSelectinSialyl-Lewis XCancerCancer cellFlow cytometryEsophageal cancerCell adhesion moleculeIn vivoCell adhesionCancer researchPathologyMetastasisCellMedicineChemistryImmunologyBiologyInternal medicineBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Emerging data suggest that post-operative infections may increase esophageal cancer recurrence, possibly accounting for the poor prognosis associated with this malignancy. We have previously shown that lipopolysaccharide (LPS), a gram-negative bacterial antigen, injected into mice increases in vivo cancer cell adhesion to the hepatic sinusoids. However, the influence of LPS directly on the cancer cell is unknown. We thus sought to elucidate the direct impact of LPS and its sole trans-membrane receptor, Toll-Like Receptor 4 (TLR4) on human esophageal cancer cell metastatic potential. Methods: C57BL/6 mice were prepared for hepatic intravital microscopy and received intra-arterial inoculations with highly metastatic human esophageal squamous cells (HKESC-2; 1.5×106 cells/100μl) pre-incubated in LPS (0.1 μg/ml x 48hrs) or control media. HKESC-2-sinusoidal endothelial cell interactions were quantified with direct in vivo visualization of the hepatic sinusoids. In vitro static adhesion assay was use to measure cancer cell adhesion to fibronectin, collagen I and IV. SB203580, a p38 antagonist, was use to block LPS signaling. Two important adhesion molecules we have previously shown to be involved in the adhesion of these cancer cells to hepatic sinusoids, selectins and sialyl Lewis X (sLeX), were blocked using murine i.v. injection of fucoidin and incubation of cancer cells with blocking antibodies respectively. Results are presented as mean +/− SEM and MWU-test determined significance (* p<0.05). Results: HKESC-2 cells express TLR4 by flow cytometry and RT-PCR respectively. Immunoblots of LPS incubated HKESC-2 cells revealed increased phosphorylation of p38 MAP Kinase, an intracellular TLR4 downstream signaling molecule. Thus treated cells had a 2-fold increase in vitro adhesion to fibronectin but not to Collagen 1 or 4, an effect that was reversed by inhibition of p38 phosphorylation. Murine hepatic intravital microscopy demonstrated that LPS treated esophageal cancer cells had a 2.3 fold increase in adhesion to sinusoidal endothelium as compared to control (cells/field of view: 33.2+/−3.6 vs. 14.2 +/−0.5)*. This LPS-facilitated in vivo adhesion was attenuated by blockade of selectins and sLeX (7.7 +/− 0.4*; 14.37 +/− 0.8*). Conclusion: Using a physiologically relevant in vivo model of the early steps of cancer metastasis we have demonstrated that LPS-TLR4 mediated inflammation increased the metastatic potential of human esophageal cancer cells, at least partially through increased selectin-sialyl Lewis X binding. These findings identify LPS-TLR4 binding as a potential therapeutic target for the treatment and prevention of metastasis. Citation Format: {Authors}. {Abstract title} [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 101st Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2010 Apr 17-21; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2010;70(8 Suppl):Abstract nr 3434.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

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)0.0050.001

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.355 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicCancer Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207