Is Anti–h-Caldesmon Useful for Distinguishing Smooth Muscle and Myofibroblastic 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
Misinterpretation of positive staining of antibodies to desmin, smooth muscle actin, and muscle actin as representing smooth muscle differentiation in the context of a spindle cell tumor is not uncommon. Anti-h-caldesmon is a promising novel immunohistochemical reagent for more specific smooth muscle differentiation. We studied 72 tumors (11 leiomyosarcomas, 26 malignant fibrous histiocytomas [MFHs], 11 fibromatoses, 11 cellular cutaneous fibrous histiocytomas [CCFHs], 5 malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors, 4 synovial sarcomas, and 4 cases of nodular fasciitis), the reactive myofibroblastic response in 5 cases of acute cholecystitis, and the desmoplastic response surrounding 5 invasive breast carcinomas. Tissues were examined for expression of h-caldesmon, desmin, smooth muscle actin, and muscle actin. Diffuse staining for h-caldesmon was present only within the leiomyosarcomas. Focal staining for h-caldesmon involving less than 1% of lesional cells was present in 3 of 26 MFHs and 1 of 11 CCFHs. There was overlap in staining for the other "myoid" markers in all of the lesions that contained myofibroblasts. Anti-h-caldesmon seems to be a reliable marker of smooth muscle differentiation, and its inclusion in a panel of myoid immunohistochemical reagents should allow distinction of smooth muscle and myofibroblastic 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 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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