Breast Cancer Subtype-Specific miRNAs: Networks, Impacts, and the Potential for Intervention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The regulatory and functional roles of non-coding RNAs are increasingly demonstrated as critical in cancer. Among non-coding RNAs, microRNAs (miRNAs) are the most well-studied with direct regulation of biological signals through post-transcriptional repression of mRNAs. Like the transcriptome, which varies between tissue type and disease condition, the miRNA landscape is also similarly altered and shows disease-specific changes. The importance of individual tumor-promoting or suppressing miRNAs is well documented in breast cancer; however, the implications of miRNA networks is less defined. Some evidence suggests that breast cancer subtype-specific cellular effects are influenced by distinct miRNAs and a comprehensive network of subtype-specific miRNAs and mRNAs would allow us to better understand breast cancer signaling. In this review, we discuss the altered miRNA landscape in the context of breast cancer and propose that breast cancer subtypes have distinct miRNA dysregulation. Further, given that miRNAs can be used as diagnostic and/or prognostic biomarkers, their impact as novel targets for subtype-specific therapy is also possible and suggest important implications for subtype-specific miRNAs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".