Microvessel area of immature vessels is a prognostic factor in renal cell carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To analyze the presence of immature vessels as a predictive factor of prognosis in patients with renal cell carcinoma. METHODS: Tissue samples were obtained from 50 renal cell carcinoma patients who underwent radical nephrectomy, and the blood vessels were stained using antibodies to cluster of differentiation 34 and α-smooth muscle actin. Immature vessels were defined as those positive for cluster of differentiation 34, and mature vessels as those positive for both cluster of differentiation 34 and α-smooth muscle actin. The extent of vascularization was quantified by calculating the microvessel area and microvessel density. RESULTS: The microvessel area of immature vessels was positively associated with tumor grade (P < 0.0001), T stage (P < 0.0001) and American Joint Committee on Cancer stage (P < 0.0001), and was significantly higher in tumors with metastasis than in those without metastasis (P < 0.0001). The microvessel density did not associate with tumor grade or T stage. The disease-free survival and overall survival were significantly shorter in patients with high microvessel area. CONCLUSIONS: The microvessel area of immature vessels seems to be associated with renal cell carcinoma aggressiveness, suggesting this might be considered as a novel prognostic factor in patients with these 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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".