MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2557810535 · doi:10.1002/anie.201608983

Profiling Functional and Biochemical Phenotypes of Circulating Tumor Cells Using a Two‐Dimensional Sorting Device

2016· article· en· W2557810535 on OpenAlexafffund
Mahla Poudineh, Mahmoud Labib, Sharif Ahmed, Luan N. Nguyen, Leyla Kermanshah, Reza M. Mohamadi, Edward H. Sargent, Shana O. Kelley

Bibliographic record

VenueAngewandte Chemie International Edition · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Cells and Metastasis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Cancer Society Research InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCirculating tumor cellPhenotypeBiologyCell sortingCancer researchCancer cellCancerTumor progressionMetastasisFlow cytometryImmunologyGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During cancer progression, tumors shed circulating tumor cells (CTCs) into the bloodstream. CTCs that originate from the same primary tumor can have heterogeneous phenotypes and, while some CTCs possess benign properties, others have high metastatic potential. Deconstructing the heterogeneity of CTCs is challenging and new methods are needed that can sort small numbers of cancer cells according to their phenotypic properties. Here we describe a new microfluidic approach that profiles, along two independent phenotypic axes, the behavior of heterogeneous cell subpopulations. Cancer cells are first profiled according to expression of a surface marker using a nanoparticle-enabled approach. Along the second dimension, these subsets are further separated into subpopulations corresponding to migration profiles generated in response to a chemotactic agent. We deploy this new technique and find a strong correlation between the surface expression and migration potential of CTCs present in blood from mice with xenografted tumors. This system provides an important new means to characterize functional diversity in circulating tumor 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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.362

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations100
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAngewandte Chemie International EditionSame topicCancer Cells and MetastasisFrench-language works237,207