Practical Considerations in Studying Metastatic Lung Colonization in Osteosarcoma Using the Pulmonary Metastasis Assay
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The pulmonary metastasis assay (PuMA) is an ex vivo lung explant and closed cell culture system that permits researchers to study the biology of lung colonization in osteosarcoma (OS) by fluorescence microscopy. This article provides a detailed description of the protocol, and discusses examples of obtaining image data on metastatic growth using widefield or confocal fluorescence microscopy platforms. The flexibility of the PuMA model permits researchers to study not only the growth of OS cells in the lung microenvironment, but also to assess the effects of anti-metastatic therapeutics over time. Confocal microscopy allows for unprecedented, high-resolution imaging of OS cell interactions with the lung parenchyma. Moreover, when the PuMA model is combined with fluorescent dyes or fluorescent protein genetic reporters, researchers can study the lung microenvironment, cellular and subcellular structures, gene function, and promoter activity in metastatic OS cells. The PuMA model provides a new tool for osteosarcoma researchers to discover new metastasis biology and assess the activity of novel anti-metastatic, targeted therapies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.019 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".