Effect of cell‐phone radiofrequency on angiogenesis and cell invasion in human head and neck cancer cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Today, the cell phone is the most widespread technology globally. However, the outcome of cell-phone radiofrequency on head and neck cancer progression has not yet been explored. METHODS: The chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) and human head and neck cancer cell lines, FaDu and SCC25, were used to explore the outcome of cell-phone radiofrequency on angiogenesis, cell invasion, and colony formation of head and neck cancer cells, respectively. Western blot analysis was used to investigate the impact of the cell phone on the regulation of E-cadherin and Erk1/Erk2 genes. RESULTS: Our data revealed that cell-phone radiofrequency promotes angiogenesis of the CAM. In addition, the cell phone enhances cell invasion and colony formation of human head and neck cancer cells; this is accompanied by a downregulation of E-cadherin expression. More significantly, we found that the cell phone can activate Erk1/Erk2 in our experimental models. CONCLUSION: Our investigation reveals that cell-phone radiofrequency could enhance head and neck cancer by stimulating angiogenesis and cell invasion via Erk1/Erk2 activation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".