Genomic and immunophenotypical differences between hepatocellular carcinoma with and without cirrhosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To compare the expression of genes involved in p53, Wnt/beta-catenin, and retinoblastoma (Rb) 1 pathways between cirrhosis-associated hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC-C) and hepatocellular carcinoma arising in non-cirrhotic liver (HCC-NC). METHODS AND RESULTS: The gene expression profile was analysed using oligo-DNA arrays, and then validated at protein level in a tissue microarray using immunohistochemistry. Compared with their background non-neoplastic liver tissue, HCC-C showed a significantly higher rate of p53, beta-catenin (protein only) and cyclin D1 expression, whereas HCC-NC showed a significantly higher rate of p21(Waf1/cip1) and p27(Kip1) expression. HCC-C had a significantly higher rate of p53 expression and a significantly lower rate of p21(waf1/cip1) expression than HCC-NC. There was no statistically significant association between the expression of genetic markers and tumour histological grade, underlying aetiology, or lymphovascular invasion. Aberrant beta-catenin expression was more commonly seen in single tumours in comparison with multiple tumours. Increased p16(INK4) and p21(waf1/cip1) expression was more commonly observed in large-sized tumours (>50 mm) than small-sized tumours. CONCLUSIONS: Alteration of the p53 pathway plays a more important role in the pathogenesis of HCC-C, whereas alterations in cell cycle regulators p21(waf1/cip1) and p27(Kip1) play a more important role in the pathogenesis of HCC-NC.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".