Expression and localisation of Akt-1, Akt-2 and Akt-3 correlate with clinical outcome of prostate cancer patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated the correlation between the expression and localisation of Akt-1, Akt-2, Akt-3, phospho-Akt proteins and the clinicopathological parameters in 63 prostate cancer specimens. More than 60% of cancerous tissues overexpressed Akt-1, Akt-2 or Akt-3. Cytoplasmic Akt-1 expression was correlated with a higher risk of postoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) recurrence and shorter PSA recurrence interval. Cytoplasmic Akt-2 did not show any significant correlation with clinicopathological parameters predicting outcomes. Cytoplasmic Akt-3 was associated with hormone-refractory disease progression and extracapsular invasion. Nuclear Akt-1 and Akt-2 expression were correlated with favourable outcome parameters such as absence of lymph node and perineural invasion. Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox regression model also showed that Akt-1 and Akt-2, but not Akt-3 or phospho-Akt was associated with a significantly higher risk of PSA recurrence. In contrast, nuclear Akt-1 was significantly associated with a lower risk of PSA recurrence. Multivariate analysis revealed that clinical stage, Gleason score and the combined cytoplasmic nuclear Akt-1 marker in cancerous tissues were significant independent prognostic factors of PSA recurrence. This is the first report demonstrating in patients with prostate cancer and the particular role of Akt-1 isoform expression as a prognostic marker depending of its localisation.
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) | 0.000 | 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".