Morphology and expression status investigations of specific surface markers on B‐cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The morphology of cells and expression status of specific surface markers [cluster of differentiation (CD)], such as CD5, CD19, CD20, CD38, and CD45, have long been considered as the essential indicators for the diagnosis and prognosis of B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia (B-CLL). Clinically, it is difficult to simultaneously obtain cell morphology and distribution of surface markers with flow cytometry, especially for some surrogate markers such as CD38. Here, as an alternative and complementary prognostic method, fluorescence microscopy and image processing method are introduced to directly visualize the cells from patients and to quantitatively determine the expression status of surface markers. In this study, the morphological parameters of B-CLL cells were measured to establish the correlation between the cellular morphology and the surface marker expression. It was clear that the CD38+ and CD38- B-CLL cells from the same CD38+ patients had hardly any size differences; however, an increase in perimeter was observed for CD38- patients. Moreover, the expression level of the receptors on the cell was independent of the cell size. There was no evidence showing that the expression intensities of CD19 and CD38 were related to each other for the CD38+ B-CLL cells. On the same cells, CD5 was more selectively expressed on the cell membrane; however, the expression patterns suggested that the cell membrane of CD38- B-CLL cells contained the least expression level of CD19.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".