MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2739963469 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2017-3910

Abstract 3910: Analysis of metastatic potential by breast cancer type through a microfluidic blood-brain niche

2017· article· en· W2739963469 on OpenAlexaff
C. Ryan Oliver, Megan Altemus, Brendan M. Leung, Aki Morikawa, Michele Dziubinski, María G. Castro, Sofai Merajver

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInnovative Microfluidic and Catalytic Techniques Innovation
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCancerBrain metastasisMetastasisCirculating tumor cellCancer cellCancer researchBreast cancerIn vivoPathologyBiologyMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Metastasis from the primary tumor site to the brain is the most lethal complication from advanced cancer. 15% of breast cancers metastasize in the brain with a median survival of 5-14 months depending on the subtype. Therefore it is critical to identify when a tumor has the clonal potential to metastasize to the brain. Current detection methods and treatment therapies have continued to improve but do not shed light on clonal metastatic potential. Models for characterizing metastatic potential of clonal populations currently used include murine in vivo and simple in vitro systems. Murine models are costly, time intensive, slow to manifest metastasis and are not easy to analyze. On the other hand, in vitro systems are faster and more cost effective but currently do not recapitulate the complexity of the “live” micro-environment. We have developed a microfluidic device that mimics the cellular and physical components of the human blood-brain niche to study the brain metastatic process. The device is composed of two chambers separate by a porous membrane. The top chamber and apical side of the membrane is seeded with human brain endothelial cells and uses flow to mimic shear stress encountered within the vasculature. Cancer cells are introduced into this chamber in which they adhere to and migrate through the endothelium into the bottom chamber. The bottom chamber contains astrocytes suspended in a collagen gel to mimic the brain stroma and provide room for invading cancer cells to colonize and grow. Barrier integrity is monitored using TEER (trans-endothelial electrical resistance), and fluctuates as the tight junctions of the endothelium are compromised by invading cancer cells. This is characterized by IF and tight junction staining. Throughout all time points, from introduction into the flow chamber, adherence to the endothelium, extravasation through the barrier, migration into the stroma, and proliferation the cancer cells can be monitored via both microscopy and TEER. We have applied this microfluidic blood-brain niche model to compare brain-seeking subclones of breast cancer cell lines of known whole exome sequence and normal-like cell lines (MCF10A) in terms of their ability to extravasate, migrate and survive in the niche. We characterize their migratory behavior from live-cell microscopy and correlate it to the TEER measurements to establish a metastatic model. We then compare metastatic markers for ∝BBN traversing and non-traversing cells when appropriate. Citation Format: Christopher Ryan Oliver, Megan Altemus, Brendan Leung, Aki Morikawa, Michele Dziubinski, Maria Castro, Sofai Merajver. Analysis of metastatic potential by breast cancer type through a microfluidic blood-brain niche [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2017; 2017 Apr 1-5; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 3910. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2017-3910

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.334 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicInnovative Microfluidic and Catalytic Techniques InnovationFrench-language works237,207