MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2626568439 · doi:10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-15-1636

Molecular Pathways: Targeting the Microenvironment of Liver Metastases

2017· review· en· W2626568439 on OpenAlexaff
Simon Milette, Jason K. Sicklick, Andrew M. Lowy, Pnina Brodt

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Cancer Research · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsColorectal cancerParacrine signallingMedicineCancerAutocrine signallingCancer researchMetastasisGastrointestinal tractTumor microenvironmentLiver cancerInternal medicineReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Curative treatment for metastatic solid cancers remains elusive. The liver, which is nourished by a rich blood supply from both the arterial and portal venous systems, is the most common site of visceral metastases, particularly from cancers arising in the gastrointestinal tract, with colorectal cancer being the predominant primary site in Western countries. A mounting body of evidence suggests that the liver microenvironment (LME) provides autocrine and paracrine signals originating from both parenchymal and nonparenchymal cells that collectively create both pre- and prometastatic niches for the development of hepatic metastases. These resident cells and their molecular mediators represent potential therapeutic targets for the prevention and/or treatment of liver metastases (LM). This review summarizes: (i) the current therapeutic options for treating LM, with a particular focus on colorectal cancer LM; (ii) the role of the LME in LM at each of its phases; (iii) potential targets in the LME identified through preclinical and clinical investigations; and (iv) potential therapeutic approaches for targeting elements of the LME before and/or after the onset of LM as the basis for future clinical trials. Clin Cancer Res; 23(21); 6390–9. ©2017 AACR.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.628
GPT teacher head0.615
Teacher spread0.013 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations119
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Cancer ResearchSame topicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology ResearchFrench-language works237,207