Spindle checkpoint protein hMad2 and histone H3 phosphoserine 10 mitosis marker in pediatric solid tumors.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pediatric solid tumors of different histologic types are often treated with drugs (such as vincristine) that directly or indirectly target the mitotic spindle and the spindle checkpoint, leading to mitotic arrest, mitotic catastrophe and apoptosis. hMad2 (mitosis arrest deficient 2) expression in neuroblastoma has suggested utility in predicting prognosis. The present study was undertaken to determine hMad2 expression patterns in pediatric solid tumors, and its relationship to overall treatment response and short-term survival (2-years). The expression of hMad2 and histone H3-serine 10 phosphoprotein (mitosis marker) were examined using immunohistochemical staining methods in 26 pediatric solid tumors (six neuroblastomas, eight Wilm's, five sarcomas, four lymphomas and three hepatoblastomas). hMad2 expression paralleled overall histone H3 phosphoserine 10 expression in most tumor types. Low hMad2 score tumors (0-3.5) exhibited lower complete response (66.67%) and a higher recurrence/progressive disease (33.33%) than high score tumors (4-6) (78.57% and 21.43. %), consistent with predicted hMad2 function and reports in adult tumors. Histone H3 serine 10 phosphoprotein is useful in mitosis enumeration and hMad2 expression may provide additional help in neuroblastoma profiling and could be useful when spindle checkpoint specific target drugs are used.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".