MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4388869942 · doi:10.2196/48127

Deciphering the Role of Insulin-Like Growth Factor 1 in Endometrial Cancer in Patients With Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: Protocol for a Methodological Approach Using Cell Culture Experiments

2023· article· en· W4388869942 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
William Atiomo, Fatma Alqutami, Sara Albasha, Mahmood Yaseen Hachim

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGrowth Hormone and Insulin-like Growth Factors
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolycystic ovaryIGFBP3Endometrial cancerOncologyMedicineInsulin-like growth factorEndometriumBioinformaticsCancerEndocrinologyInternal medicineBiologyGynecologyInsulinInsulin resistanceGrowth factorReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Endometrial cancer (EC) is the most common gynecological cancer in women globally. It is linked to increasing obesity rates and longer life spans. The molecular mechanisms leading to EC are unclear; however, women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) have a 3- to 5-fold increased EC risk. According to a pilot study conducted in the United Kingdom, insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) gene and protein were raised in the endometrium and blood of women with EC and PCOS, compared with those without PCOS (controls). Therefore, raised serum IGF-1 levels may contribute to an increased EC risk in women with PCOS, but it is necessary to test this hypothesis since not all studies have demonstrated this association. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate the role of IGF-1 in mediating EC risk in PCOS. This will be achieved by evaluating the proliferative effects of PCOS serum, IGF-1, and IGF-1 antagonist on human endometrial cancer 1-A and 1-B cell lines, with a comparison to controls (using serum from women without PCOS and cell culture media). The study will also identify differentially expressed genes and pathways activated by various treatments. METHODS: We intend to recruit 20 women with PCOS and 20 women without PCOS for this cross-sectional study. All experiments will be carried out 4 times to ensure consistency. We will perform transcriptomic and phosphoproteomic profiling to identify differentially expressed genes and phosphoproteins between different treatments using RNA sequencing and phosphoproteomics. We will also perform bioinformatics pathway analysis to identify whether any unique collection of genes or phosphoproteins explains increased EC risk in PCOS. The primary outcome measure will be the cell proliferation (growth) difference measured by cell index values. Our protocol stands out due to its unique approach; no previous study has used this approach to investigate the oncogenic effect of serum from women with PCOS. Additionally, no previous study has considered the differential mutations of genes related to the insulin signaling pathway across various types of human EC cell lines and the potential impact of these variations on their experimental findings. RESULTS: Participants are currently being recruited. It is expected that preliminary findings suitable for analysis and publication will be available by the summer of 2024. CONCLUSIONS: Although we currently do not have any results to report, sharing our protocol at this stage will aid in research collaboration, provide an opportunity for early feedback, and help reduce duplication of effort by other research groups. The findings of our study will have broader implications. A deeper understanding of the mechanisms underlying the regulation of the IGF system in PCOS and EC will improve our ability to develop effective treatment modalities for EC and will be a vital step toward reducing EC in women globally. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/48127.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.005

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 head0.321
GPT teacher head0.514
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicGrowth Hormone and Insulin-like Growth Factors→French-language works237,207→