MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2076574574 · doi:10.1097/pcr.0b013e31816ddce9

Contributions of Microarray Analysis to Soft Tissue Tumor Diagnosis

2008· article· en· W2076574574 on OpenAlexaff
Cheng‐Han Lee, Torsten O. Nielsen

Bibliographic record

VenuePathology Case Reviews · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsVancouver General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTissue microarrayMicroarrayMedicineDNA microarraySoft tissueMedical diagnosisPathologyMicroarray analysis techniquesComputational biologyGene expression profilingImmunostainingBioinformaticsGene expressionBiologyGeneImmunohistochemistryGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microarray analysis refers to forms of high-throughput assay of biologic specimens for features such as gene copy number, messenger, or microRNA expression, and immunostaining patterns. In recent years, its application to the study of soft tissue tumors has provided us not only with important insights into the oncobiology of these fascinating tumors, but also has unveiled specific genomic signatures and markers that have diagnostic utility. In this report, we describe 2 cases in which microarray studies assisted pathologists in rendering the correct final diagnoses. Though the current focus and application of microarrays to soft tissue tumors is centered largely on diagnosis, evidence regarding the utility of such analyses in the prognostic and therapeutic settings is also beginning to emerge. The increasingly wide-spread use of microarrays is expected to unveil additional signatures and markers that will help to predict the clinical course and specific treatment response of soft tissue tumors.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.568
Threshold uncertainty score0.613

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.305 · 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePathology Case ReviewsSame topicSarcoma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207