Given a passage with a context and an answer, construct a question on the basis of the information present in the passage. Construct the question in such a way that (i) it is unambiguous, (ii) it is answerable from the passage, (iii) its answer is unique (iv) it answer uses text phrases from the passage. Avoid creating questions that (i) can't be answered correctly without actually understanding the passage and (ii) uses the same words or phrases given in the passage.

Context: To explore the role of SCF/c-Kit signaling in the invasion of bladder cancer T24 cells.', 'Western blotting was used to detect the expression of c-Kit and PI3K pathway activation stimulated by stem cell factor (SCF) in T24 cells. The invasiveness of T24 cells before and after SCF stimulation and Wortmannin (aspecific PI3K inhibitor) treatment was evaluated using Transwell invasion assay (direct and indirect counting methods).', 'T24 cells expressed c-Kit protein and showed obvious Akt phosphorylation after stimulation with SCF (1 ng/ml) for 24 h. Compared to the control group, SCF stimulation (1 ng/ml) caused a greater number of T24 cells to migrate through the polycarbonate film (P<0.01), and this effect was blocked by the application of Wortmannin before the stimulation.
Answer: SCF/c-Kit signaling promotes the invasiveness of T24 cells, and this effect is mediated by the PI3K pathway.
Does [ SCF/c-Kit signaling promote invasion of T24 cells via PI3K pathway ]?

Context: Serum elevations of interleukin-6 (IL-6) correlate with multiple organ dysfunction syndrome and mortality in critically injured trauma patients. Data from rodent models of controlled hemorrhage suggest that recombinant IL-6 (rIL-6) infusion protects tissue at risk for ischemia-reperfusion injury. Exogenous rIL-6 administered during shock appears to abrogate inflammation, providing a protective rather than a deleterious influence. In an examination of this paradox, the current study aimed to determine whether rIL-6 decreases inflammation in a clinically relevant large animal model of uncontrolled hemorrhagic shock, (UHS), and to investigate the mechanism of protection.', 'Swine were randomized to four groups (8 animals in each): (1) sacrifice, (2) sham (splenectomy followed by hemodilution and cooling to 33 degrees C), (3) rIL-6 infusion (sham plus UHS using grade 5 liver injury with packing and resuscitation plus blinded infusion of rIL-6 [10 mcg/kg]), and (4) placebo (UHS plus blinded vehicle). After 4 hours, blood was sampled, estimated blood loss determined, animals sacrificed, and lung harvested for RNA isolation. Quantitative reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction was used to assess granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), IL-6, and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNFalpha) messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) levels. Serum levels of IL-6 and TNFalpha were measured by enzyme-linked immunoassay (ELISA).', 'As compared with placebo, IL-6 infusion in UHS did not increase estimated blood loss or white blood cell counts, nor decrease hematocrit or platelet levels. As compared with the sham condition, lung G-CSF mRNA production in UHS plus placebo increased eightfold (*p < 0.05). In contrast, rIL-6 infusion plus UHS blunted G-CSF mRNA levels, which were not significantly higher than sham levels (p = 0.1). Infusion of rIL-6 did not significantly affect endogenous production of either lung IL-6 or mRNA. As determined by ELISA, rIL-6 infusion did not increase final serum levels of IL-6 or TNFalpha over those of sham and placebo conditions.
Answer: Exogenous rIL-6 blunts lung mRNA levels of the proinflammatory cytokine G-CSF. The administration of rIL-6 does not increase the local expression of IL-6 nor TNFalpha mRNA in the lung. Additionally, rIL-6 infusion does not appear to cause systemic toxicity.
Does interleukin-6 infusion blunt proinflammatory cytokine production without causing systematic toxicity in a swine model of uncontrolled hemorrhagic shock?

Context: Is weight-training exercise intervention harmful to women with or at risk of breast cancer-related lymphoedema?', 'Systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised trials.', 'Women with or at risk of breast cancer-related lymphoedema.', 'Progressive weight-training exercise.', 'The primary outcomes were severity (volume difference) and incidence of arm lymphoedema. Secondary outcomes included muscle strength of the upper and lower limbs, quality of life and body mass index.', 'Eleven studies from eight trials involving 1091 women were included. Weight-training exercise of low to moderate intensity with relatively slow progression significantly improved the upper limb strength (SMD 0.93, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.12) and lower limb strength (SMD 0.75, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.04) without increasing the arm volume (SMD -0.09, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.05) or incidence of breast cancer-related lymphoedema (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.15). No significant effects were noted for body mass index (SMD -0.10, 95% -0.31 to 0.11). Some aspects of quality of life may improve with weight training. PARTICIPANTS in all trials used pressure garments and received supervision; no trials used high-intensity weight training.
Answer: Weight training appears to be safe and beneficial in improving limb strength and physical components of quality of life in women with or at risk of lymphoedema. Pressure garments, supervision and limiting the intensity of the weight training may each be important, but this could not be confirmed with this review.

Is weight training harmful for women with breast cancer-related lymphoedema : a systematic review?