MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2913712850 · doi:10.25011/cim.v41i4.32221

Enabled homolog shown to be a potential biomarker and prognostic indicator for breast cancer by bioinformatics analysis

2018· article· en· W2913712850 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Qiang Li, Yanling Su, Min Zeng, Weixi Shen

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical and investigative medicine · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer, Stress, Anesthesia, and Immune Response
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiomarkerBreast cancerCancerCancer researchMetastasisOncologyBiologySurvival analysisInternal medicineMedicineGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Human enabled homolog (ENAH; also known as human ortholog of mammalian enabled, hMENA) is a member of the enabled/vasodilator-stimulated phosphor protein family that regulates fibroblast movement and nervous system development. The ENAH over-expression promotes breast cancer (BC) cell invasion and metastasis. METHODS: We studied ENAH mRNA expression in various tumors and normal tissues using the ONCOMINE database, and in an array of cancer cell lines using Cancer Cell Line Encyclopedia data. We also investigated the prognostic value of ENAH expression in patients with BC using Kaplan-Meier plots. RESULTS: Compared with normal tissues, ENAH expression levels were markedly elevated in BC. We identified a correlation between low ENAH and superior relapse-free survival (RFS) of patients with BC; specifically, those with ER(-), HER-2(+), Grade 3 and wild-type TP53 subtypes. Additionally, a correlation was detected between low ENAH and prolonged overall survival of patients with luminal B disease. CONCLUSION: ENAH is a potential biomarker and important prognostic factor in BC.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations7
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical and investigative medicineSame topicCancer, Stress, Anesthesia, and Immune ResponseFrench-language works237,207