MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Development of New Models to Study Human Her-2 Positive Breast Cancer

2012· article· en· W28944646 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Howard West, Karla Parra, Natzidielly Lerma, Paloma Valenzuela, Eduardo Ramirez, Courtney L. Becerril, Irving Miramontes, Elizabeth Gamez, Cynthia Rodriguez, Guido Bocci, Giulio Francia

Bibliographic record

VenueBridges Conversations in Global Politics and Public Policy · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast cancerMedicineCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To study the evolution of human Her-2 positive breast cancer, we evaluated a model of three dimensional spheroid co-culture using H2N human breast cancer cells that express high amounts of Her-2 protein, with the Her-2 negative MDA-231 cells. Human HCC1419, which can form compact spheroids, were used as controls. In tissue culture plates, H2N cells were found to have a doubling rate of about 48 hours, compared to around 144 hours for MDA231. Since H2N cells were engineered to express a fluorescent protein, we could note that these cells did not immediately overgrow the non-fluorescent MDA231 cells in a mixed three dimensional mass – suggesting that this model could allow for the study of long term evolution of specific subpopulation of tumor cells within a heterogeneous tumor mass.\nWhen the breast cancer cells were grown on tissue culture plastic, we evaluated a drug screen of newly synthesized potential anticancer compounds. One compound, CLM29 was observed to inhibit the growth of all three breast cancer cell lines. Furthermore, 25 micromolar treatment of H2N or of MDA231, but not of HCC1419 cells, lead over 4 days to the formation of cellular neurite-like extensive protrusions, suggesting the activation of a differentiation of breast cancer cells.\nOur results show the effective use of three different human breast cancer cell lines to develop models to follow the evolution of specific subtypes of breast cancer within a tumor mass, and to test new compounds with potential anti-breast cancer activity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBridges Conversations in Global Politics and Public PolicySame topicBreast Cancer Treatment StudiesFrench-language works237,207