MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2049536840 · doi:10.5430/jst.v3n5p12

Comparison of clinical staging of benign and malignant ovarian tissues with DNA flow cytometry

2013· article· en· W2049536840 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jerry T. Thornthwaite, J. Clint Stanfill, Ahmed S. Ahmed

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Solid Tumors · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKing's College London
KeywordsOvarian cancerAneuploidyDAPIFlow cytometryCancerPathologyMalignancyCancer researchNuclear DNAOncologyMedicineDNABiologyInternal medicineMolecular biologyStainingGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The prevention, diagnosis and treatment of ovarian cancer are major issues. The outcome of patients with advanced ovarian cancer is poor despite aggressive therapy including surgery, combination drug chemotherapy and radiation treatments. From the literature, the direct correlation between DNA ploidy and survival is greatly enhanced using high resolution DNA measurements, which results in a coefficient of variation (CV) range between 1%-2% (1.42 ± 0.19, n=66) for trout red blood cells (TRBC) and 2%-3% (2.18 ± 0.46 SD, n=22) for tonsil nuclei derived from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissues (deparaffinated). DNA nuclear determinations from 50 ovarian cancer and 21 benign patients is presented. This was accomplished by measuring the DNA content of nuclei simultaneously isolated from deparaffinated tissues, stained with the fluorescent DNA specific dye, 4’, 6-diamidino-1-phenylindole (DAPI) and analyzed on a high resolution flow cytometer. A high percentage of aneuploidy (92.0%) was determined from the ovarian cancer patients, especially of the aneuploid DNA histogram types, such as hypodiploid, multiploid and hypertetraploid (64.0%), which have shown poor prognosis in a variety of cancers including ovarian. Furthermore, aneuploidy was detected in 23.8% of the benign patients. DNA flow cytometry may complement pathological assessment of ovarian cancer to better determine malignancy, thus justifying a closer follow-up with more specialized approaches to treatment in clinical trials that involve new therapies including the use of chemically defined, natural products, which may help offset the overall poor prognosis seen in ovarian cancer.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.328

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.344 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Solid TumorsSame topicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207