MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2082447227 · doi:10.1002/pros.21422

Pathological significance and predictive value for biochemical recurrence of c‐Fes expression in prostate cancer

2011· article· en· W2082447227 on OpenAlexaff
Yasuyoshi Miyata, Shinichi Watanabe, Tomohiro Matsuo, Tomayoshi Hayashi, Hideki Sakai, Jim W. Xuan, Peter A. Greer, Shigeru Kanda

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Prostate · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProstate cancerBiochemical recurrenceMedicineImmunohistochemistryCancerPathologicalProstateOncogeneMetastasisHazard ratioStage (stratigraphy)Internal medicineIntraepithelial neoplasiaAdenocarcinomaOncologyPathologyConfidence intervalProstatectomyBiologyCell cycle

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: c-Fes is a proto-oncogene encoded non-receptor protein-tyrosine kinase (PTK). However, genetic studies have indicated that it has anti-tumorigenic effects in certain cancers. The pathological and clinical significance of c-Fes in prostate cancer are unknown. METHODS: Expression of c-Fes was evaluated in normal glands, prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN), cancer cells in tissues of knock-in mouse adenocarcinoma prostate (KIMAP) model, and prostate cancer patients free of metastasis. Expression of c-Fes was analyzed by immunohistochemistry, and quantified by using the immunoreactivity score (IRS) (staining intensity × percentage of positive cells). Relationships between c-Fes expression and pT stage, Gleason's score (GS), and biochemical recurrence in patients who underwent radical surgery were also investigated. RESULTS: In KIMAP, the percentage in normal glands, PIN and cancer cells positive for c-Fes expression were 0 (0/7), 25.0 (2/8), and 100% (7/7), respectively. In human tissues, c-Fes expression was also significantly higher in cancer cells than in normal cells and PIN, and it correlated with pT stage (P < 0.001) and GS (P = 0.047). Multivariate analysis showed that c-Fes expression was an independent predictor of poor outcome poor prognosis (hazard ratio = 3.21, 95% confidence interval = 1.11-9.37, P = 0.032). CONCLUSION: The results suggested that c-Fes expression is a useful predictor of biochemical recurrence after radical surgery. The results also suggested that c-Fes is a potentially useful therapeutic target in prostate cancer and a predictor of biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.234
Threshold uncertainty score0.292

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations20
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe ProstateSame topicProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207