Abstract 2243: Cell-phone radiofrequency enhances angiogenesis and stimulates cell invasion of human head and neck cancer cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Today, cell-phone is the most widespread technology globally. It has been suggested that cell-phone radiofrequency (RF) use may increase the risk of human brain and probably head cancers. However, the outcome of cell phone RF on head and neck (HN) cancer progression has not been explored yet. Thus, first we examined the outcome of cell-phone RF on angiogenesis using the chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) of the chicken embryo as a model. Then we investigated the effect of cell-phone RF on cell invasion and colony formation in soft agar of two human HN cancer cell lines. Our data revealed that cell-phone RF promotes angiogenesis of the CAM. In addition, cell-phone RF enhances cell invasion and colony formation of human HN cancer cells; this is accompanied by a down-regulation of E-cadherin expression. Regarding the mechanism of cell-phone RF on angiogenesis, cell invasion and colony formation, we found that cell-phone RF activates Erk1 and Erk2 in our experimental models which could be the main pathway behind these events. These data suggest that cell-phone RF enhances HN cancer progression by stimulating angiogenesis, cell invasion and tumor formation via Erk1 and Erk2. Citation Format: Ala-Eddin Al Moustafa. Cell-phone radiofrequency enhances angiogenesis and stimulates cell invasion of human head and neck cancer cells [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2018; 2018 Apr 14-18; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 2243.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".