MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2345395916 · doi:10.1080/2162402x.2016.1178438

No evidence for TSLP pathway activity in human breast cancer

2016· article· en· W2345395916 on OpenAlexaff
Cristina Ghirelli, Benjamin Sadacca, Fabien Reyal, Raphaël Zollinger, Paula Michea, Philémon Sirven, Lucia Pattarini, Carolina Martínez-Cingolani, Maude Guillot‐Delost, Nicolás André, Alix Scholer‐Dahirel, Vassili Soumelis

Bibliographic record

VenueOncoImmunology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsCanada Research ChairsUniversity of Toronto
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsThymic stromal lymphopoietinBreast cancerStromal cellTumor microenvironmentCancer researchCytokineMedicineImmunologyCancerBiologyInternal medicineTumor cells

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP) is an epithelial cell-derived cytokine that primes dendritic cells for Th2 induction. It has been implicated in different types of allergic diseases. Recent work suggested that TSLP could play an important role in the tumor microenvironment and influence tumor progression, in particular in breast cancer. In this study we systematically assessed the production of TSLP at the mRNA and protein levels in several human breast cancer cell lines, large-scale public transcriptomics data sets, and primary human breast tumors. We found that TSLP production was marginal, and concerned less than 10% of the tumors, with very low mRNA and protein levels. In most cases TSLP was undetectable and found to be expressed at lower levels in breast cancer as compared to normal breast tissue. Last, we could not detect any functional TSLP receptor (TSLPR) expression neither on hematopoietic cells nor on stromal cells within the primary tumor microenvironment. We conclude that TSLP-TSLPR pathway activity is not significantly detected within human breast cancer. Taken together, these observations do not support TSLP targeting in breast cancer.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.539
Threshold uncertainty score0.598

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations30
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOncoImmunologySame topicDermatology and Skin DiseasesFrench-language works237,207