Detection of c-<i>KIT</i>and<i>PDGFRA</i>Gene Mutations in Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mutational analysis of c-KIT or PDGFRA has become an important laboratory assay for patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) because the results are useful in predicting the responsiveness to imatinib. To assess the diagnostic usefulness of denaturing high-pressure liquid chromatography (DHPLC) in this setting, we performed DHPLC and DNA sequencing to study exons 9, 11, 13, and 17 of c-KIT and exons 12 and 18 of PDGFRA in 54 consecutive cases of GIST collected from a single population. Most (40/54 [74%]) carried c-KIT mutations, and 7 (13%) carried PDGFRA mutations. These results were similar to those described in the literature. It is important to note that DHPLC was found to be highly sensitive, detecting all of the mutations in these 6 exons that were identified by DNA sequencing. Our data suggest that DHPLC is a cost-effective, rapid, and sensitive test for screening for mutations of c-KIT and PDGFRA in GISTs.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".