MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210380978 · doi:10.3389/fcell.2022.803280

Nutritional Regulation of Mammary Tumor Microenvironment

2022· review· en· W4210380978 on OpenAlexafffund
Nikita Thakkar, Ye Bin Shin, Hoon‐Ki Sung

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDietary Effects on Health
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersBanting and Best Diabetes Centre, University of TorontoNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsMammary glandTumor microenvironmentMammary tumorOvernutritionBiologyStromal cellCarcinogenesisImmune systemAdipose tissuePopulationCancerPathogenesisEndocrinologyCancer researchInternal medicineBreast cancerMedicineImmunologyObesity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mammary gland is a heterogeneous organ comprising of immune cells, surrounding adipose stromal cells, vascular cells, mammary epithelial, and cancer stem cells. In response to nutritional stimuli, dynamic interactions amongst these cell populations can be modulated, consequently leading to an alteration of the glandular function, physiology, and ultimately disease pathogenesis. For example, obesity, a chronic over-nutritional condition, is known to disrupt homeostasis within the mammary gland and increase risk of breast cancer development. In contrast, emerging evidence has demonstrated that fasting or caloric restriction can negatively impact mammary tumorigenesis. However, how fasting induces phenotypic and functional population differences in the mammary microenvironment is not well understood. In this review, we will provide a detailed overview on the effect of nutritional conditions (i.e., overnutrition or fasting) on the mammary gland microenvironment and its impact on mammary tumor progression.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.794

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Cell and Developmental BiologySame topicDietary Effects on HealthFrench-language works237,207