Slug Is a Predictor of Poor Prognosis in Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Slug, a regulator of epithelial mesenchymal transition, was identified to be differentially expressed in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) using cDNA microarrays by our laboratory. This study aimed to determine the clinical significance of Slug overexpression in ESCC and determine its correlation with clinicopathological parameters and disease prognosis for ESCC patients. METHODS: Immunohistochemical analysis of Slug expression was carried out in archived tissue sections from 91 ESCCs, 61 dysplastic and 47 histologically normal esophageal tissues. Slug immunopositivity in epithelial cells was correlated with clinicopathological parameters and disease prognosis over up to 7.5 years for ESCC patients. RESULTS: Increased expression of Slug was observed in esophageal dysplasia [cytoplasmic, 24/61 (39.3%) cases, p = 0.001, odd's ratio (OR) = 4.7; nuclear, 11/61 (18%) cases, p < 0.001, OR = 1.36] in comparison with normal esophageal tissues. The Slug expression was further increased in ESCCs [cytoplasmic, 64/91 (70.3%) p < 0.001, OR = 10.0; nuclear, 27/91 (29.7%) p < 0.001, OR = 1.42]. Kaplan Meier survival analysis showed significant association of nuclear Slug accumulation with reduced disease free survival of ESCC patients (median disease free survival (DFS) = 6 months, as compared to those that did not show overexpression, DFS = 18 months; p = 0.006). In multivariate Cox regression analysis nuclear Slug expression [p= 0.005, Hazard's ratio (HR) = 2.269, 95% CI = 1.289 - 3.996] emerged as the most significant independent predictor of poor prognosis for ESCC patients. CONCLUSIONS: Alterations in Slug expression occur in early stages of development of ESCC and are sustained during disease progression. Slug may serve as a diagnostic biomarker and as a predictor of poor disease prognosis to identify ESCC patients that are likely to show recurrence of the disease.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 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".