MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109140694 · doi:10.1158/1078-0432.621.11.2

Classic and Molecular Cytogenetic Analyses Reveal Chromosomal Gains and Losses Correlated with Survival in Head and Neck Cancer Patients

2005· article· en· W2109140694 on OpenAlexaff
Nádia Aparecida Bérgamo, Luciana Caricati da Silva Veiga, Patrícia P. Reis, Inês Nobuko Nishimoto, José Magrin, Luiz Paulo Kowalski, Jeremy A. Squire, Sílvia Regina Rogatto

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Cancer Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoOntario Institute for Cancer Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHead and neck cancerHead and neckCancerBiologyCytogeneticsOncologyGeneticsPathologyMedicineChromosomeSurgeryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Genetic biomarkers of head and neck tumors could be useful for distinguishing among patients with similar clinical and histopathologic characteristics but having differential probabilities of survival. The purpose of this study was to investigate chromosomal alterations in head and neck carcinomas and to correlate the results with clinical and epidemiologic variables. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Cytogenetic analysis of short-term cultures from 64 primary untreated head and neck squamous cell carcinomas was used to determine the overall pattern of chromosome aberrations. A representative subset of tumors was analyzed in detail by spectral karyotyping and/or confirmatory fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis. RESULTS: Recurrent losses of chromosomes Y (26 cases) and 19 (14 cases), and gains of chromosomes 22 (23 cases), 8 and 20 (11 cases each) were observed. The most frequent structural aberration was del(22)(q13.1) followed by rearrangements involving 6q and 12p. The presence of specific cytogenetic aberrations was found to correlate significantly with an unfavorable outcome. There was a significant association between survival and gains in chromosomes 10 (P = 0.008) and 20 (P = 0.002) and losses of chromosomes 15 (P = 0.005) and 22 (P = 0.021). Univariate analysis indicated that acquisition of monosomy 17 was a significant (P = 0.0012) factor for patients with a previous family history of cancer. CONCLUSIONS: The significant associations found in this study emphasize that alterations of distinct regions of the genome may be genetic biomarkers for a poor prognosis. Losses of chromosomes 17 and 22 can be associated with a family history of cancer.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.590

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.267
GPT teacher head0.541
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations23
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Cancer ResearchSame topicHead and Neck Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207