MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2905245193 · doi:10.1038/s41598-018-36150-4

Isolation of Biopsy-Derived, Human Cervical Keratinocytes Propagated as Monolayer and Organoid Cultures

2018· article· en· W2905245193 on OpenAlexafffund
Peter L. Villa, Robert Jackson, Statton Eade, Nicholas Escott, Ingeborg Zehbe

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsThunder Bay Regional Health Sciences CentreLakehead UniversityThunder Bay Regional Research Institute
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNorthern Ontario Heritage Fund CorporationCalifornia HIV/AIDS Research Program
KeywordsColposcopyOrganoidBiopsyCervical cancerMedicineIsolation (microbiology)Cell cultureSkin biopsyBioinformaticsBiologyPathologyComputational biologyInternal medicineCancerCell biologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The successful isolation and propagation of patient-derived keratinocytes from cervical lesions constitute a more appropriate model of cervical disease than traditional cervical cancer-derived cell lines such as SiHa and CaSki. Our aim was to streamline the growth of patient-obtained, cervical keratinocytes into a reproducible process. We performed an observational case series study with 60 women referred to colposcopy for a diagnostic biopsy. Main outcome measures were how many samples could be passaged at least once (n = 11), and where enough cells could be established, to precisely define their proliferation profile over time (n = 3). Altering cell culture conditions over those reported by other groups markedly improved outcomes. We were also successful in making freeze backs which could be resuscitated to successfully propagate multi-layered, organoids from cervical keratinocytes (n = 3). For best results, biopsy-intrinsic factors such as size and tissue digestion appear to be major variables. This seems to be the first systematic report with a well characterized and defined sample size, detailed protocol, and carefully assessed cell yield and performance. This research is particularly impactful for constituting a sample repository-on-demand for appropriate disease modelling and drug screening under the umbrella of personalized health.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.317 · 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

Citations21
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchFrench-language works237,207