Cytokeratin and Vimentin Co-Expression in 21 Canine Primary Pulmonary Epithelial Neoplasms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Co-expression of cytokeratin and vimentin has been traditionally associated with a few select tumors. However, this phenomenon is being recognized in a wider range of tumors. Twenty-one canine primary pulmonary epithelial neoplasms were evaluated for the co-expression of cytokeratin and vimentin. The histologic pattern and grade, and an immunohistochemical grade for cytokeratin and vimentin staining, were determined for each neoplasm. Adenocarcinomas predominated, and histologically, most tumors were grade II. All of the neoplasms stained positive for cytokeratin, while only 8 (38%) stained positive for both vimentin and cytokeratin. Papillary adenocarcinomas were consistently vimentin negative. The anaplastic histologic pattern had significantly more vimentin staining than the other histologic patterns. There was no significant difference in histologic grade or grading criteria between those tumors that stained with vimentin and those that did not. The present study established that cytokeratin and vimentin co-expression occurs in canine primary pulmonary epithelial tumors at a similar frequency to human pulmonary neoplasms. Further investigation will be needed to characterize the significance of this finding, particularly with respect to prognosis.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".