Immunohistochemical expression of phospho-Akt in uveal melanoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the immunohistochemical expression of phospho-Akt and its possible association with clinicopathological features in uveal melanoma. Thirty-four enucleated eyes from 34 patients with choroidal melanoma were included in the study. Patients were divided into two groups based on the treatment received: (1) primary enucleation (n=18); (2) radiotherapy, either external beam or brachytherapy, and enucleation (n=16). Clinicopathological data were obtained. The minimum follow-up time was 72 months. Immunohistochemistry for phospho-Akt was performed using an anti-phospho-Akt (Ser 473) rabbit antibody. The association of phospho-Akt with clinicopathological parameters was investigated in each patient group separately. Phospho-Akt immunostaining was cytoplasmic in both groups. In the primary enucleation group, 10 tumours were phospho-Akt positive (55.5%). Patients with phospho-Akt-positive tumours were older (average 70.8 years versus 59 years, P=0.01) and phospho-Akt immunoreactivity was significantly associated with a higher risk of metastatic disease (Kaplan-Meier analysis, P=0.02). In the radiotherapy and enucleation group, nine tumours were phospho-Akt positive (56.2%). The absence of phospho-Akt expression was correlated with male gender (P=0.02). The following conclusions can be drawn from this study: (1) phospho-Akt immunoexpression was detected in 55.5% of uveal melanomas treated with primary enucleation and in 56.2% of uveal melanomas treated with radiotherapy and enucleation; (2) the association of phospho-Akt immunoexpression with clinicopathological features, including prognosis, merits further study.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".