MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973099503 · doi:10.1227/neu.0b013e3181faa680

Biomarkers of Pituitary Neoplasms: A Review (Part II)

2010· review· en· W1973099503 on OpenAlexaff
Fateme Salehi, Anne Agur, Bernd W. Scheithauer, Kálmán Kovács, Ricardo V. Lloyd, Michael D. Cusimano

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurosurgery · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPituitary Gland Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMatrix metalloproteinaseMedicineCancer researchVascularityBasic fibroblast growth factorPituitary tumorsVascular endothelial growth factorFibroblast growth factor receptorPathologyGrowth factorFibroblast growth factorReceptorInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several new markers have shown a capacity to predict the clinicopathological behavior of pituitary neoplasms; these markers have shown potential to correlate with tumor subtype and size and patient age and sex. These various markers are involved in a host of cellular functions, including cell-cycle progression, cell proliferation, apoptosis, cell adhesion, and tumor vascularity. In this companion article to our first review of Ki-67 as a marker of pituitary adenomas, we present and analyze the literature regarding matrix metalloproteinases and their inhibitors (tissue inhibitor metalloproteinases), vascular endothelial growth factor, fibroblast growth factor and its receptor, apoptotic markers and p53, as well as cyclooxygenase-2, galectin-3, and pituitary tumor transforming gene. Some of these markers, such as fibroblast growth factor and fibroblast growth factor receptor and matrix metalloproteinases, show particular promise in their ability to identify pituitary tumors that behave in an aggressive manner. We suggest the need for uniform design and application of methods and standardized criteria for the interpretation of results. A uniform approach will establish clinicopathological utility of emerging markers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.826
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.273 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations53
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurosurgerySame topicPituitary Gland Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207