MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116586212

Human kallikrein 8, a novel biomarker for ovarian carcinoma.

2003· article· en· W2116586212 on OpenAlexaff
Tadaaki Kishi, Linda Grass, Antoninus Soosaipillai, Andreas Scorilas, Nadia Harbeck, Barbara Schmalfeldt, Julia Dorn, M Myśliwiec, Manfred Schmitt, Eleftherios P. Diamandis

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoagulation, Bradykinin, Polyphosphates, and Angioedema
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOvarian cancerAscitesKallikreinBiomarkerOvarian carcinomaCancerMedicineInternal medicinePeritoneal fluidOncologyCarcinomaGastroenterologyEndocrinologyBiologyEnzyme
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human kallikrein 8 (hK8; neuropsin) is a serine protease and new member of the hK family. The aim of this study was to examine if hK8 may serve as a novel cancer biomarker. An hk8-ELISA, developed in-house, was used to study the distribution of hK8 in various biological fluids and tissue extracts from healthy individuals and ovarian cancer patients of different stages of the disease (International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology II-IV). For ovarian cancer patients, very high levels in ascites fluid were observed (<or=1000 microg/liter; n = 85 samples). Elevated serum levels were seen in 24 of 40 (62%) of ovarian cancer patients. Higher ascites fluid hK8 concentration was associated with better ovarian cancer progression-free survival (P = 0.02). In both serum and ascites fluid, there is a significant correlation between hK8 and CA125 concentration (r = 0.51 and 0.58, respectively). The serum concentration of hK8 was an indicator of progression on regression on longitudinal monitoring of an ovarian cancer patient. These data suggest that hK8 protein is detectable in ovarian cancer tissue extracts, serum, and ascites fluid, indicating that it may serve as a new ovarian cancer marker.

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)0.000
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 score0.281
Threshold uncertainty score0.649

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations89
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicCoagulation, Bradykinin, Polyphosphates, and AngioedemaFrench-language works237,207