MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060140423 · doi:10.3892/ijo.2013.1797

FKBP10/FKBP65 expression in high-grade ovarian serous carcinoma and its association with patient outcome

2013· article· en· W2060140423 on OpenAlexafffund
Michael C. Quinn, Paulina M. Wojnarowicz, Amy Pickett, Diane Provencher, Anne‐Marie Mes‐Masson, Elaine C. Davis, Patricia N. Tonin

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Oncology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicSignaling Pathways in Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMcGill UniversityInstitute for Research in Immunology and Cancer
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBiologySerous fluidStainingImmunohistochemistryStromal cellPathologyOvarian carcinomaSerous carcinomaTissue microarrayCellCancer researchMolecular biologyOvarian cancerCancerGeneticsImmunologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The frequent loss of chromosome 17 in epithelial ovarian carcinomas (EOC), particularly high-grade serous carcinomas (HGSC), has been attributed to the disruption of TP53 (at 17p13.1) and other chromosome 17 genes suspected to play a role in tumour suppressor pathways. In a transcriptome analysis of HGSC, we showed underexpression of a number of chromosome 17 genes, which included FKBP10 (at 17q21.1) and collagen I α 1 (COL1A1; at 17q21.33). FKBP10 codes for the immunophilin FKBP65 and is suspected to act as a chaperone for COL1A1. We have investigated FKBP10 (gene) and FKBP65 (protein) expression in HGSC samples and EOC cell lines that differ in their tumourigenic potential. COL1A1 expression was also investigated given the purported function of FKBP65. RT-PCR analysis verified underexpression of FKBP10 and COL1A1 in HGSCs (n=14) and six tumourigenic EOC cell lines, relative to normal ovarian surface epithelial cells and a non-tumourigenic EOC cell line. Immunohistochemistry analyses of 196 HGSC samples using tissue microarrays revealed variable staining intensities in the epithelial tumour component where only 7.8% and 1.0% of samples stained intensely for FKBP65 and COL1A1, respectively. Variable staining intensities were also observed for the stromal component where 23.6% and 24.1% stained intensely for FKBP65 and COL1A1, respectively. There was no significant correlation of staining intensity of either protein with disease stage. Staining of FKBP65 was clearly visible in normal epithelial cells of the ovarian surface and fallopian tube. There was a significant correlation between absence of FKBP65 staining in the epithelial cell component of the tumour and prolonged overall survival (p<0.001). Our results suggest that underexpression of FKBP65 protein is characteristic of HGSCs and that this expression profile may be linked to molecular pathways associated with an unfavourable outcome in cancer patients.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations36
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of OncologySame topicSignaling Pathways in DiseaseFrench-language works237,207