MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116055122 · doi:10.1309/c7n9-j2au-5tb9-5frl

What Are the CD34+ Cells in Benign Peripheral Nerve Sheath Tumors?

2000· article· en· W2116055122 on OpenAlexaff
Mahmoud A. Khalifa, Elizabeth A. Montgomery, Nadia Ismiil, Norio Azumi

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Clinical Pathology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurofibromatosis and Schwannoma Cases
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCD34PathologyImmunostainingPopulationImmunohistochemistryCytoplasmBiologyPerineuriumAnatomyMedicineCell biologyPeripheral nerveStem cell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To determine whether CD34 expression in nerve sheath lesions was found in a unique cell population or in a subset of nerve sheath cells, we performed double immunohistochemical staining using a standard avidinbiotin complex method with 2 separate color developing systems. We studied 40 neurofibromas and 16 neurilemomas. All lesions strongly expressed S-100 in nuclei and cytoplasm. CD34 was detected in cells having ameboid dendritic cytoplasm present in greatest numbers in Antoni B zones of neurilemomas, myxoid zones of neurofibromas, at the periphery of lobules in both tumor types, and condensed in apposition to perineurium. The CD34+ cells also were detected in normal nerves. They were infrequent in Antoni A zones of neurilemomas. No dual S-100 and CD34 expression was seen. This double immunostaining confirms the presence of a CD34-reactive non-Schwannian cell type in these neural neoplasms. As the CD34+, S-100-negative cell population is present also in normal nerves and infrequently seen in the areas of cellular neoplastic Schwann cells, CD34+, S-100-negative cells in peripheral nerve sheath tumors most likely are nonneoplastic and may have a supportive function.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.313 · 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

Citations73
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Clinical PathologySame topicNeurofibromatosis and Schwannoma CasesFrench-language works237,207