Prognostic Significance of MTOR Pathway Component Expression in Neuroendocrine Tumors
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Clinical studies have implicated the mechanistic target of rapamycin (serine/threonine kinase; MTOR) pathway in the regulation of neuroendocrine tumor (NET) growth. We explored whether expression of MTOR pathway components has prognostic significance in NET patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We evaluated immunohistochemical expression of MTOR and phospho (p) -MTOR; its downstream targets RPS6KB1, RPS6, and EIF4EBP1; and its upstream regulators, in a cohort of 195 archival neuroendocrine tumors. We correlated expression levels with clinical outcomes, after adjusting for other prognostic variables. RESULTS: We observed anticipated correlations between expression of upstream components of the MTOR pathway and their downstream targets. Expression of PIK3CA, MTOR, or p-EIF4EBP1 was associated with high MKI67 (Ki-67) labeling index. We failed to identify clinical correlations associated with expression of the upstream regulators TSC1, TSC2, AKT, p-AKT, PDPK1, PTEN, PIK3R1, or PIK3CA. In contrast, high expression of MTOR or its activated downstream targets p-RPS6KB1, p-RPS6, or p-EIF4EBP1 was associated with adverse clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: Our observations suggest that expression of MTOR or its downstream targets may be adverse prognostic factors in neuroendocrine 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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it