MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

One-Cell Analysis as a Technique for True Single-Cell Analysis of Organelles in Breast Tumor and Adjacent Normal Tissue to Profile Fatty Acid Composition of Triglyceride Species

2016· article· en· W2346301550 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jason S. Hamilton, Guido F. Verbeck

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Analytical Oncology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLipidomeOrganelleAdipose tissueLipidomicsChemistryCellSphingomyelinFatty acidBiochemistryBiologyCholesterol

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Breast cancer develops in an adipose rich environment of normal adipocytes that are known to aid in tumor progression through an unknown method of lipid transfer from normal cells to tumor cells. Much research is built around lipid analysis of breast tumor and adjacent normal tissues to identify variations in the lipidome to gain an understanding of the role lipids play in progressing cancer. Ideally, single-cell analysis methods coupled to mass spectrometry that retain spatial information are best suited for this endeavor. However, many single-cell analysis methods are not capable of subcellular analysis of intact lipids while maintaining spatial information. One-Cell analysis is a true single-cell technique with the precision to extract single organelles from intact tissues while not interfering or disrupting adjacent cells. This method is used to extract and analyze single organelles from individual cells using nanomanipulation coupled to nanoelectrospray ionization mass spectrometry. Presented here is a demonstration of the analysis of single lipid bodies from two different sets of breast tumor and normal adjacent tissues to elucidate the fatty acid composition of triglycerides using One-Cell analysis coupled to tandem mass spectrometry. As a result, thirteen fatty acid species unique to the tumor tissues were identified, five in one set of tissues and eight in the other set.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.472

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Analytical OncologySame topicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry StudiesFrench-language works237,207