MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990260819 · doi:10.15173/sciential.v1i3.2260

Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells—Bringing Humanity One Step Closer to Curing Cancer

2019· article· en· W2990260819 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Ishita Paliwal

Bibliographic record

VenueSciential - McMaster Undergraduate Science Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPluripotent Stem Cells Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInduced pluripotent stem cellEmbryonic stem cellBreast cancerCancer stem cellStem cellCancer cellCancer researchCancerMedicineBiologyImmunologyInternal medicineCell biologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cancer develops when healthy cells experience a mutation, allowing for rapid and abnormal growth. Mutagens, such as radiation and carcinogens, allow fast-growth variant cells to be positively selected and thus propagate the development of cancer. Radiation and chemotherapy are prevailing, but non-ideal forms of cancer treatment as they can harm healthy cells in the body. Stem cells can be used to replace the healthy cells that were lost, but there are ethical concerns regarding the acquisition of embryonic stem cells (ESCs), or technicalities in obtainment and usage of adult stem cells (ASCs). Thus, the discovery of induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) allows for the use of ASCs that are given the pluripotent characteristics of ESCs. In 2018, Kooreman and his colleagues from Stanford University coaxed iPSCs to display the epitopes of breast cancer. After exposing mice with breast cancer to iPSCs, 70% of the mice had a decreased tumour size compared to control mice. Thus, iPSCs may work as a vaccine for cancer and potentially treat and cure the disease. Further research is required to study the feasibility of the use of iPSCs for human breast cancer.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.005
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSciential - McMaster Undergraduate Science JournalSame topicPluripotent Stem Cells ResearchFrench-language works237,207