MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106093321 · doi:10.7150/jca.5468

Nanocytology vs. Immunohistochemistry of Intestinal Colonocytes to Assess the Risk of Colon Cancer based on Field Cancerization - A Preliminary Report

2013· article· en· W2106093321 on OpenAlexaff
Myron Arlen, Olga Saric, Xueping Wang, Alex Dubeykovskiy, Philip M. Arlen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cancer · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGenetic factors in colorectal cancer
Canadian institutionsPrecision BioLogic (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmunohistochemistryColorectal cancerMalignancyMonoclonal antibodyAntigenCancerCancer researchMedicineMalignant transformationPathologyAntibodyImmunologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ability to define malignancy in its earliest stages of development is an essential part of any program aimed at attempting to cure the malignant condition. In terms of colon cancer various approaches have been employed to define the transformation of colonocytes as they progress to the fully malignant phenotype. Approaches ranging from nanocytology to mass spectroscopy have been utilized with limited success.Our group at Precision Biologics has been able to define three distinct immunogenic proteins, most oncofetal in origin, which are expressed to various degrees in colon cancer and are essentially absent from normal colon tissue. Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have been developed against these tumor associated antigens (TAA), which is NPC-1, 31.1 and 16C3. Each, have shown significant ADCC in the presence of the tumor cells grown in culture. Studies were performed to clarify at what stage in the development of the colon cancer do such TAA proteins begin to be expressed. Utilizing Immunohistochemistry (IHC) with the mAbs targeting the TAA's, we have been able to demonstrate that such antigens appear in the cytoplasm as early as 6 or more months prior to the phenotypic appearance of malignancy utilizing H&E staining.Kits containing these colon Ca monoclonals from our lab, as well as positive and negative controls have been produced for use in the operating room to examine colonocytes at the margin of resection following colectomy; this in order to assure that transforming cells are not incorporated into an anastomosis. We have also been able to demonstrate that premalignant cells as well as those cells present in a fully malignant lesion do shed their antigens into the lumen of the bowel. As such, we have been able to show that a simple "office" stool ELISA can predict with a high degree of accuracy whether a premalignant polypoid lesion, a fully malignant adenocarcinoma or a totally normal colon free of any neoplastic process is present and thus decide on the need for or not, of performing colonoscopy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations6
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of CancerSame topicGenetic factors in colorectal cancerFrench-language works237,207