Contactin 1: An Important and Emerging Oncogenic Protein Promoting Cancer Progression and Metastasis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Even with recent progress, cancer remains the second leading cause of death, outlining a need to widen the current understanding on oncogenic factors. Accumulating evidence from recent years suggest Contactin 1 (CNTN1)'s possession of multiple oncogenic activities in a variety of cancer types. CNTN1 is a cell adhesion molecule that is dysregulated in many human carcinomas and plays important roles in cancer progression and metastases. Abnormalities in CNTN1 expression associate with cancer progression and poor prognosis. Mechanistically, CNTN1 functions in various signaling pathways frequently altered in cancer, such as the vascular endothelial growth factor C (VEGFC)-VEGF receptor 3 (VEFGR3)/fms-related tyrosine kinase 4 (Flt4) axis, phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K)/protein kinase B (AKT), Notch signaling pathway and epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) process. These oncogenic events are resulted via interactions between tumor and stroma, which can be contributed by CNTN1, an adhesion protein. CNTN1 expression in breast cancer correlates with the expression of genes functioning in cancer-stroma interactions and skeletal system development. Evidence supports that CNTN1 promotes cancer-stromal interaction, resulting in activation of a complex network required for cancer progression and metastasis (bone metastasis for breast cancer). CNTN1 inhibitions has been proven to be effective in experimental models to reduce oncogenesis. In this paper, we will review CNTN1's alterations in cancer, its main biochemical mechanisms and interactions with its relevant cancer pathways.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | high |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Other design | high |
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".