Cyclin D expression in chronic lymphocytic leukemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although the majority of circulating leukemic cells in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) are in G0/early G1, recent studies have shown that these cells have undergone multiple cell divisions. In this study, we have determined whether there are abnormalities in cell cycle control in CLL by examining the three cyclin D isoforms in 43 patients and correlating the findings with clinical features. Cyclin D mRNA was measured by a sensitive RNase protection assay and the order of expression in CLL cells was D3 > D2 > D1. The mean cyclin D1 and D3 mRNA levels were 4 to 6-fold higher in CLL cells than in normal peripheral blood B cells. In contrast, the levels of cyclin D2 mRNA were similar in CLL and normal B cells. Expression of the cyclin D isoforms was two- to four-fold greater in normal T cells than B cells, and the order of expression for both cell types was D2 > D3 > D1. The relative overexpressions of cyclins D1 and D3 in CLL were unrelated to gene amplification, as assessed by Southern blotting, but structural changes in the genes were seen in four patients. Both cyclin D1 and D3 mRNA levels correlated positively with lymphocyte doubling time (LDT) and inversely with Rai stage and duration of disease. In addition, a significant correlation was observed between cyclin D mRNA levels and survival, with patients having high levels of cyclin D1, and to a lesser extent cyclin D3, mRNA having the best survival. Thus, cyclin D1 and D3 are relatively overexpressed in CLL cells and patients with higher levels have low stage disease, long LDT and prolonged survival. Further studies should evaluate the predictive value of cyclin D measurements in comparison to other prognostic markers in CLL.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".