In this task, you're given a paragraph from the research paper and your task is to generate a suitable title for the research paper based on the given paper. Under 100 words is a good title length.

[EX Q]: Sixteen longSAGE libraries from four different clinical stages of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia have enabled us to identify novel cell-surface biomarkers indicative of CIN stage. By comparing gene expression profi les of cervical tissue at early and advanced stages of CIN, several genes are identifi ed to be novel genetic markers. We present fi fty-six cell-surface gene products differentially expressed during progression of CIN. These cell surface proteins are being examined to establish their capacity for optical contrast agent binding. Contrast agent visualization will allow real-time assessment of the physiological state of the disease process bringing vast benefi t to cancer care. The data discussed in this publication have been submitted to NCBIs Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/) and are accessible through GEO Series accession number GSE6252.
[EX A]: Using LongSAGE to Detect Biomarkers of Cervical Cancer Potentially Amenable to Optical Contrast Agent Labelling

[EX Q]: Background: Influenza-like illness (ILI) may be caused by a variety of pathogens. Clinical observations are of little help to recognise myxovirus infection and implement appropriate prevention measures. The limited use of molecular tools underestimates the role of other common pathogens. Objectives: During the early weeks of the 2009-2010 flu pandemic, a clinical and virological survey was conducted in adult and paediatric patients with ILI referred to two French University hospitals in Paris and Tours. Aims were to investigate the different pathogens involved in ILI and describe the associated symptoms. Methods: H1N1v pandemic influenza diagnosis was performed with real time RT-PCR assay. Other viral aetiologies were investigated by the molecular multiplex assay RespiFinder19H. Clinical data were collected prospectively by physicians using a standard questionnaire. Results: From week 35 to 44, endonasal swabs were collected in 413 patients. Overall, 68 samples (16.5%) were positive for H1N1v. In 13 of them, other respiratory pathogens were also detected. Among H1N1v negative samples, 213 (61.9%) were positive for various respiratory agents, 190 in single infections and 23 in mixed infections. The most prevalent viruses in H1N1v negative single infections were rhinovirus (62.6%), followed by parainfluenza viruses (24.2%) and adenovirus (5.3%). 70.6% of H1N1v cases were identified in patients under 40 years and none after 65 years. There was no difference between clinical symptoms observed in patients infected with H1N1v or with other pathogens. Our results highlight the high frequency of non-influenza viruses involved in ILI during the pre-epidemic period of a flu alert and the lack of specific clinical signs associated with influenza infections. Rapid diagnostic screening of a large panel of respiratory pathogens may be critical to define and survey the epidemic situation and to provide critical information for patient management.
[EX A]: High Burden of Non-Influenza Viruses in Influenza-Like Illness in the Early Weeks of H1N1v Epidemic in France

[EX Q]: This study analysed the consequences of deviation from the WHO case definition for the assessment of patients with suspected severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in The Netherlands during 2003. Between 17 March and 7 July 2003, as a result of dilemmas in balancing sensitivity and specificity, five different case definitions were used. The patients referred for SARS assessment were analysed from a public health perspective. None of the patients referred had SARS, based on serological and virological criteria. Nevertheless, all 72 patients required thorough assessment and, depending on the results of the assessment, institution of appropriate prevention and control measures. Changing case definitions caused confusion in classifying cases. A centralised assessment of the reported cases by a team with clinical and public health expertise (epidemiological and geographical risk assessment) is a practical solution for addressing differences in applying case definitions. The burden of managing non-cases is an important issue when allocating public health resources, and should be taken into account during the preparation phase, rather than during an outbreak. This applies not only to SARS, but also to other public health threats, such as pandemic influenza or a bioterrorist episode.
[EX A]:
Public health implications of using various case definitions in The Netherlands during the worldwide SARS outbreak