MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Pax‐5 expression in neoplastic mammary cell lines in response to stimulations by estrogen or tamoxifen

2008· article· en· W2997129514 on OpenAlexaffabout
Anick Beaulieu, Mark Laflamme, Rodney J. Ouellette

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEstrogen and related hormone effects
Canadian institutionsAtlantic Cancer Research InstituteUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTamoxifenEstrogenBiologyCarcinogenesisCell cultureCancer researchGene expressionStimulationCellEstrogen receptorCell biologyBreast cancerEndocrinologyCancerGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pax‐5 is an important contributor to B cell development. Several studies have shown that the deregulated expression of Pax‐5 is implicated in onset of different types of cancers. Previously, we have observed that Pax‐5 expression in B‐cells increases dramatically upon estrogen stimulation, and that Pax‐5 is expressed in breast cancer cell lines while it is undetectable in normal mammary cell lines. Based on this evidence, we hypothesis that Pax‐5 may exercise a key role in mammary oncogenesis and that this abnormal function may be modulated by estrogen. In order to shed light on these initial findings, using quantitative real‐time RT‐PCR we have characterized the Pax‐5 expression profiles in several mammary cell lines following stimulation with estrogen and Tamoxifen. We have found that in each case, Pax‐5 expression is differentially modulated when comparing treated and untreated cells. Further to this, we are using oligonucleotide microarrays to identify the gene expression pathways influenced by the differential Pax‐5 expression in these cell lines. This research is supported by a Canadian Institute of Health Research (RPP) Grant and an Atlantic Innovation Fund Grant to RJO.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.232 · 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
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicEstrogen and related hormone effects→French-language works237,207→