MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2753109313 · doi:10.1038/cddis.2017.440

Circulating microRNAs in breast cancer: novel diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers

2017· review· en· W2753109313 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCell Death and Disease · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicroRNA in disease regulation
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
FundersKing Saud University
KeywordsBreast cancermicroRNAMedicineOncologyCancerBiomarkerBiologyInternal medicineBioinformaticsComputational biologyCancer researchGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Effective management of breast cancer depends on early diagnosis and proper monitoring of patients' response to therapy. However, these goals are difficult to achieve because of the lack of sensitive and specific biomarkers for early detection and for disease monitoring. Accumulating evidence in the past several years has highlighted the potential use of peripheral blood circulating nucleic acids such as DNA, mRNA and micro (mi)RNA in breast cancer diagnosis, prognosis and for monitoring response to anticancer therapy. Among these, circulating miRNA is increasingly recognized as a promising biomarker, given the ease with which miRNAs can be isolated and their structural stability under different conditions of sample processing and isolation. In this review, we provide current state-of-the-art of miRNA biogenesis, function and discuss the advantages, limitations, as well as pitfalls of using circulating miRNAs as diagnostic, prognostic or predictive biomarkers in breast cancer management.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.884
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.273 · 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