Telomerase activity in clinically normal dogs and dogs with malignant lymphoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine whether telomerase activity was present in lymph nodes, buffy coat, and serum samples from dogs with malignant lymphoma (ML) and in liver, lymph node, buffy coat, and serum samples from clinically normal dogs SAMPLE POPULATION: Tissue specimens and blood samples were obtained from 11 clinically normal adult dogs (age range, 1 to 4 years) and 14 client-owned dogs with ML. PROCEDURE: The telomere repeat amplification protocol assay was used to quantify telomerase activity in the tissues from clinically normal dogs and dogs with ML. RESULTS: Of 11 clinically normal dogs, 8 had lymph node samples, 5 had liver samples, and 1 had buffy coat samples with detectable telomerase activity. None of the serum samples from the clinically normal dogs had detectable telomerase activity. Of 14 dogs with ML, 9 had lymph node samples, 3 had buffy coat samples, and 1 had serum samples with measurable telomerase activity. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Telomerase activity was not specific to tumor cells and overlapped with that found in cells from clinically normal dogs. Telomerase activity in neoplastic lymph nodes was not substantially different from that found in lymph nodes from clinically normal dogs. The determination of telomerase activity cannot be used as a sole diagnostic test for cancer. Therapeutic modalities directed toward the telomerase enzyme may not be feasible in dogs, because somatic tissues from clinically normal dogs possess variable amounts of telomerase activity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".