MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2780612279 · doi:10.1530/rep-17-0542

The fibroblast growth factor 8 family in the female reproductive tract

2017· review· en· W2780612279 on OpenAlexafffund
Anthony Estienne, Christopher A. Price

Bibliographic record

VenueReproduction · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicFibroblast Growth Factor Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalOttawa Fertility CentreCegep de Saint Hyacinthe
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologyFibroblast growth factorSubfamilyFGF8OvaryFibroblast growth factor receptorEndocrinologyInternal medicineCell biologyReceptorGeneticsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Several growth factor families have been shown to be involved in the function of the female reproductive tract. One subfamily of the fibroblast growth factor (FGF) superfamily, namely the FGF8 subfamily (including FGF17 and FGF18), has become important as Fgf8 has been described as an oocyte-derived factor essential for glycolysis in mouse cumulus cells and aberrant expression of FGF18 has been described in ovarian and endometrial cancers. In this review, we describe the pattern of expression of these factors in normal ovaries and uteri in rodents, ruminants and humans, as well as the expression of their receptors and intracellular negative feedback regulators. Expression of these molecules in gynaecological cancers is also reviewed. The role of FGF8 and FGF18 in ovarian and uterine function is described, and potential differences between rodents and ruminants have been highlighted especially with respect to FGF18 signalling within the ovarian follicle. Finally, we identify major questions about the reproductive biology of FGFs that remain to be answered, including (1) the physiological concentrations within the ovary and uterus, (2) which cell types within the endometrial stroma and theca layer express FGFs and (3) which receptors are activated by FGF8 subfamily members in reproductive tissues.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Citations24
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReproductionSame topicFibroblast Growth Factor ResearchFrench-language works237,207