Prognostic value of syndecan‐1 expression in patients treated with radical prostatectomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association of syndecan-1 expression with pathological features and disease progression in patients treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) as syndecan-1 plays a role in the regulation of cell proliferation, migration, and differentiation and its expression is altered in various malignancies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Syndecan-1 immunostaining was performed on a tissue microarray containing cores from 232 consecutive patients treated with RP and bilateral lymphadenectomy for clinically localized prostatic adenocarcinoma. Patients were categorized as having features of aggressive progression if they had evidence of metastases, an after progression prostate-specific antigen (PSA) doubling time of < 10 months, and/or failure to respond to local salvage radiation therapy. Expression was defined as > or = 10% cells staining for syndecan-1. RESULTS: Syndecan-1 was expressed in 86 patients (37.1%). Expression of syndecan-1 was associated with higher PSA levels (P = 0.004), higher pathological Gleason sum (P = 0.027) and lymph nodes metastases (P = 0.027). Patients with syndecan-1 expression were at significantly greater risk of PSA-progression after surgery (P = 0.034) in univariate but not in multivariate analysis. Patients with features of aggressive progression (n = 22) were more likely to express syndecan-1 than those with features of nonaggressive progression (63.6% vs 36.4%, P = 0.010). Patients with syndecan-1 expression were at significantly greater risk of aggressive progression after surgery (P = 0.005) in univariate but not in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Expression of syndecan-1 was associated with established features of biologically aggressive prostate cancer and PSA-progression in univariate analysis. These findings suggest a role for syndecan-1 in prostate carcinogenesis and progression.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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".