MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998524837 · doi:10.3892/or.8.5.965

Expression of DNA mismatch repair proteins hMSH2 and hMLH1 and the cyclin G1 inhibitor, p21(waf1/cip1) in pediatric tumors: Correlation with response to therapy

2001· article· en· W1998524837 on OpenAlexaff
Halliday Idikio

Bibliographic record

VenueOncology Reports · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeuroblastoma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHepatoblastomaDNA mismatch repairCancer researchWilms' tumorBiologyDNA repairCancerOncogeneCell cycleDNA damageSarcomaImmunostainingDNAImmunohistochemistryPathologyMedicineInternal medicineImmunologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The expression of the DNA mismatch repair proteins hMSH2 and hMLH1 and p21(waf1) the cyclin G1 inhibitor, may determine response of adult cancers to anti-cancer drugs, that include alkylating agents and platinum-based drugs. The role of DNA mismatch repair proteins (hMSH2 and hMLH1) and p21(waf1) in pediatric tumor responses to chemotherapy and irradiation is described in the present study of 23 pediatric solid cancers (4 wilms' tumors, 9 neuroblastomas, 3 hepatoblastomas, 3 lymphomas and 4 sarcomas) using immunohistochemical methods. Immunostaining was scored for intensity (0-3) and extent (0-3). Most tumors stained strongly for hMSH2 and weakly or negative for hMLH1. All the hMLH1 negative tumors (1 wilms', 1 hepatoblastoma, 1 sarcoma, 2 lymphomas and 2 neuroblastomas) achieved complete response. p21(waf1) negative and positive tumors achieved relatively similar treatment response. The results suggest that the expression of DNA mismatch repair proteins hMLH1 and hMSH2, and p21(waf1) do not influence individual cancer responses to treatment and the results may reflect the use of multiple drugs and irradiation that cause many different types of DNA damage.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations5
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOncology ReportsSame topicNeuroblastoma Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207