MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W32463580 · doi:10.1002/cam4.3133

Notice of Correction

2011· article· en· W32463580 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
John Hart, Bernard Omolo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfrared Thermography in Medicine
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFudan UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsNoticeMedicineStatisticsAudiologyPsychologyDemographyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transcription factors represent the crucial role of controlling gene transcription in cancer development and progression. However, their functions in gastric cancer have not been thoroughly characterized. For this study, we comprehensively evaluated the correlation between infiltration patterns of tumor microenvironment (TME) cells and TFs expression in the cohort of stomach adenocarcinoma (STAD) from TCGA database. We integrally explored differential expression panel and prognostic value of candidate TFs in TCGA-STAD cohort. Notably, we found a key transcription factor named HEYL, which its expression level was correlated with stromal component transformation of TME. HEYL was regularly high expressed in gastric cancer and correlated with patients' poor prognosis. Knockdown of HEYL prominently abrogated the tendency of cell proliferation, migration, and progression in gastric cancer. Consistently, overexpression of HEYL strikingly accelerated the gastric carcinoma development through activating oncogenic signaling pathways and transcriptional activation of cadherin 11 (CDH11). Our findings not only identified the close relationship between TFs and TME phenotype, but also emphasized the crucial importance of TFs, especially HEYL, which could be identified as a candidate biomarker to evaluate prognostic risk and therapeutic effect in gastric 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Chiropractic AssociationSame topicInfrared Thermography in MedicineFrench-language works237,207