MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975664761 · doi:10.1097/pap.0b013e3181d973c2

The Utility of Discovered on Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor 1 (DOG1) Antibody in Surgical Pathology—the GIST of It

2010· review· en· W1975664761 on OpenAlexaff
Cheng‐Han Lee, Cher‐Wei Liang, Íñigo Espinosa

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Anatomic Pathology · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastrointestinal Tumor Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouver General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGiSTPDGFRAStromal tumorMedicinePathologyStromal cellBiomarkerImmunohistochemistrySurgical pathologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

DOG1 (discovered on GIST 1), known also as TMEM16A and ANO1, has emerged in recent years as a promising biomarker for gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST). It was originally discovered through microarray expression profiling analysis as gene that is highly expressed in GIST, and subsequent immunohistochemical studies have shown its use in its diagnosis. The results from several series have shown a high overall sensitivity and specificity for DOG1 in the detection of GISTs and about 6% of GISTs overall exhibiting a DOG1+/KIT-immunoprofile. DOG1 antibodies are more sensitive than KIT antibodies in detecting tumors of gastric origin, tumors with epithelioid morphology, and tumors harboring PDGFRA mutation. Furthermore, DOG1 immunoreactivity is rarely observed in other mesenchymal and nonmesenchymal tumor types. These results support the use of DOG1 as a diagnostic biomarker for GIST. When used in combination with KIT, this panel of diagnostic biomarkers can help pathologists and clinicians to identify more patients who may benefit from targeted therapies.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.379 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations87
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Anatomic PathologySame topicGastrointestinal Tumor Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207