Role of APAF‐1, E‐cadherin and peritumoural lymphocytic infiltration in tumour budding in colorectal cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tumour budding or dedifferentiation at the invasive margin of colorectal cancer (CRC) is an important prognostic marker and linked mechanistically to dysregulation of Wnt pathway signalling. Since budding is observed in only 40% of CRCs, we hypothesized that Wnt pathway dysregulation may be a necessary but insufficient explanation for budding and that buds may be destroyed selectively by tumour immune mechanisms. Twenty potential markers of tumour budding were evaluated in tissue microarrays (TMAs) obtained from the main tumour body of 1164 DNA mismatch repair-proficient CRCs and the findings were correlated with tumour budding, lymphocytic infiltration and survival. Loss of expression of E-cadherin and APAF-1 were independent predictors of budding (sensitivity 70.3% and specificity 48.2% when one or the other was lost). Peritumoral lymphocytes (PTLs) were observed more frequently in CRCs with loss of either E-cadherin or APAF-1 that were budding-negative. PTLs and tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) were strongly correlated. The absence of TILs increased the adverse prognostic impact of E-cadherin and APAF-1 loss. Co-occurrence of E-cadherin loss, APAF-1 loss and low TIL counts in CRCs was an independent prognostic factor. The findings were verified in whole tissue sections from 88 CRCs with known KRAS mutation status (which was not associated with budding). Loss of E-cadherin and APAF-1 within the main body of CRCs are independent predictors of tumour budding. The prognostic benefit of lymphocytic infiltration may be explained by the immune destruction of budding cells.
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 | 0.001 | 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".