MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399849915 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0301040

Revisiting the NPcis mouse model: A new tool to model plexiform neurofibroma

2024· article· en· W4399849915 on OpenAlexafffund
Camille Plante, Teddy Mohamad, Dhanushka Hewa Bostanthirige, Michel Renaud, Harsimran Sidhu, Michel ElChoueiry, Jean-Paul Sabo Vatasescu, Mikaël Poirier, Sameh Geha, Jean‐Philippe Brosseau

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurofibromatosis and Schwannoma Cases
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - Santé
KeywordsNeurofibromaPlexiform neurofibromaNeurofibromatosisPathologyMalignant peripheral nerve sheath tumorMedicineNeurofibromin 1Biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neurofibromatosis Type I (NF1) is a rare genetic disorder. NF1 patients frequently develop a benign tumor in peripheral nerve plexuses called plexiform neurofibroma. In the past two decades, tissue-specific Nf1 knockout mouse models were developed using commercially available tissue-specific Cre recombinase and the Nf1 flox mice to mimic neurofibroma development. However, these models develop para-spinal neurofibroma, recapitulating a rare type of neurofibroma found in NF1 patients. The NPcis mouse model developed a malignant version of neurofibroma called malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor (MPNST) within 3 to 6 months but intriguingly without apparent benign precursor lesion. Here, we revisited the NPcis model and discovered that about 20% display clinical signs similar to Nf1 tissue-specific knockout mice models. However, a systematic histological analysis could not explain the clinical signs we observed although we noticed lesions reminiscent of a neurofibroma in a peripheral nerve, a cutaneous neurofibroma, and para-spinal neurofibroma on rare occasions in NPcis mice. We also observed that 10% of the mice developed a malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor (MPNST) spontaneously, coinciding with their earring tag identification. Strikingly, half of the sciatic nerves from NPcis mice developed plexiform neurofibroma within 1-6 months when intentionally injured. Thus, we provided a procedure to turn the widely used NPcis sarcoma model into a model recapitulating plexiform neurofibroma.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicNeurofibromatosis and Schwannoma CasesFrench-language works237,207