Comparison of Monoclonal Versus Polyclonal Calretinin Antibodies for Immunohistochemical Diagnosis of Malignant Mesothelioma
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Of putative specific markers for diffuse malignant mesothelioma, nuclear staining with Zymed polyclonal calretinin antibody has shown the best specificity to date for epithelial diffuse malignant mesothelioma versus adenocarcinoma. We compared specificity and sensitivity of this polyclonal antibody for diagnosis of diffuse malignant mesothelioma with a new monoclonal antibody from DAKO. One hundred eighteen adenocarcinomas and 111 diffuse malignant mesotheliomas-70 epithelial, 22 sarcomatous, and 19 biphasic-were immunostained with calretinin antibodies from Zymed (polyclonal rabbit, prediluted, PAD:DC8) and DAKO(monoclonal mouse, 1:100, clone DAK Calret 1) using manufacturer-recommended procedures. Cases were blinded and assessed for nuclear versus cytoplasmic staining, percent positive cells, and background. Both antibodies showed similar positive predictive values for diffuse malignant mesothelioma by nuclear staining (Zymed=95%; DAKO=97%). False positives in 4 (3.4%) and 2 (1.7%) adenocarcinomas, respectively, stained greater than 10% of cells. Sensitivity for epithelial malignant mesothelioma was slightly less for DAKO antibody (Zymed=80%; DAKO=73%). Neither antibody performed well on sarcomatous malignant mesothelioma (Zymed=2/22; DAKO=1/22). Both antibodies are useful in the diagnosis of epithelial malignant mesothelioma, although monoclonal antibody is slightly less sensitive.
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.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it