Differential CRX and OTX2 expression in human retina and retinoblastoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The histogenesis of retinoblastoma tumors remains controversial, with the cell-of-origin variably proposed to be an uncommitted retinal progenitor cell, a bipotent committed cell, or a cell committed to a specific lineage. Here, we examine the expression of two members of the orthodenticle family implicated in photoreceptor and bipolar cell differentiation, cone-rod homeobox, CRX, and orthodenticle homeobox 2, OTX2, in normal human retina, retinoblastoma cell lines and retinoblastoma tumors. We show that CRX and OTX2 have distinct expression profiles in the developing human retina, with CRX first expressed in proliferating cells and cells committed to the bipolar lineage, and OTX2 first appearing in the photoreceptor lineage. In the mature retina, CRX levels are highest in photoreceptor cells whereas OTX2 is preferentially found in bipolar cells and in the retinal pigmented epithelium. Both CRX and OTX2 are widely expressed in retinoblastoma cell lines and in retinoblastoma tumors, although CRX is more abundant than OTX2 in the differentiated elements of retinoblastoma tumors such as large rosettes, Flexner-Wintersteiner rosettes and fleurettes. Widespread expression of CRX and OTX2 in retinoblastoma tumors and cell lines suggests a close link between the cell-of-origin of retinoblastoma tumors and cells expressing CRX and OTX2.
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".