MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135067956 · doi:10.3324/haematol.2009.021766

Vascularization predicts overall survival and risk of transformation in follicular lymphoma

2010· article· en· W2135067956 on OpenAlexafffund
Pedro Farinha, Alastair H. Kyle, Andrew I. Minchinton, Joseph M. Connors, Aly Karsan, R. D. Gascoyne

Bibliographic record

VenueHaematologica · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
FundersBC Cancer AgencyFundação para a Ciência e a TecnologiaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchTerry Fox Foundation
KeywordsFollicular lymphomaFollicular phaseLymphomaMedicineInternal medicineCD34PathologyAngiogenesisMicrovesselPrognostic variableSurvival analysisOncologyMultivariate analysisBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Follicular lymphoma patients display heterogeneous overall survival and variable risk of transformation. Recent studies have highlighted the role of the microenvironment. The contribution of microvessel density to follicular lymphoma survival remains controversial. We used a quantitative tumor mapping approach to determine whether the degree of vascularization correlated with outcome in a uniformly treated cohort. Whole-tissue sections of diagnostic biopsies from 84 cases were stained for CD34 and tumor-to-vessel-distance that encompassed 90% of the tumor (TVD(90)) was determined using image analysis. Twenty-one cases with lower TVD(90) showed inferior overall survival (P=0.0001) and high risk of transformation (P=0.01). These cases significantly correlated with increased Lymphoma-Associated Macrophages (χ(2)=0.025). In multivariate analysis macrophages content, IPI and TVD(90) were independent predictors of overall survival (P=0.05, P=0.001 and P=0.01, respectively) and IPI and TVD(90) predicted risk of transformation (P=0.008 and P=0.08, respectively). Increased angiogenesis is an independent marker of inferior survival and may promote transformation.

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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.269

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations51
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHaematologicaSame topicLymphoma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207