Hepatocellular carcinoma with lymphoid stroma: a tumour with good prognosis after liver transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Carcinomas with lymphoid stroma arising in non-liver-organs have a better prognosis than other carcinomas and may be associated with Epstein-Barr virus. We determined the frequency, characteristics and prognosis of hepatocellular carcinomas with lymphoid stroma. METHODS AND RESULTS: Histology of the livers of 162 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, who underwent an orthotopic liver transplantation, was reviewed independently by three pathologists. Hepatocellular carcinoma with lymphoid stroma was diagnosed when all tumour samples contained more lymphocytes than tumour cells. Epstein-Barr virus was detected by in-situ hybridization and by polymerase chain reaction. Five patients (3.6%) were classified as hepatocellular carcinomas with lymphoid stroma. All patients were males. Cirrhosis was present in four/five patients. Serum alpha-fetoprotein levels were normal. Inter-observer histological reproducibility was good. Tumour cells did not contain Epstein-Barr virus. The five patients were alive without tumour at three years, although two of them had adverse prognostic factors at the time of transplantation (more than one tumour with a diameter > or = 40 mm). Only one patient had tumour recurrence, but he survived 7.6 years post-transplantation. The 5-year survival of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma with lymphoid stroma was better than that of the patients with other types of hepatocellular carcinomas (P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Hepatocellular carcinoma with lymphoid stroma should be considered as a distinct clinicopathological and prognostic entity.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".