Lymphovascular Invasion Is Associated With Poor Survival in Gastric Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Brief Objectives: To examine a population-based cohort for the association between clinicopathologic predictors of survival and immunohistochemical markers (IHC), and to assess changes in gene expression that are associated with lymphovascular invasion (LVI). Summary Background Data: LVI has been associated with poor survival and aggressive tumor behavior. The molecular changes responsible for the behavior of gastric cancer have yet to be determined. Characterization of IHC markers and gene expression profiles may identify molecular alterations governing tumor behavior. Methods: Clinicopathologic and survival data of 114 patients were reviewed. Archival specimens were used to construct a multitumor tissue array that was subjected to IHC of selected protein targets. Correlation of IHC with tumor thickness (T status), LVI and prognosis was studied. Microarray analysis of fresh gastric cancer tissue was conducted to examine the gene expression profile with respect to LVI. Results: In a multivariate analysis, nodal status (N), metastasis (M), and LVI were independent predictors of survival. LVI was associated with a 5-year survival of 13.9% versus 55.9% in patients in whom it was absent. LVI correlated with advancing T status (P = 0.001) and N status (P < 0.001). IHC staining of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) correlated with T status, tumor grade, lymph node positivity, and IHC staining of matrix metalloproteinase-2 (MMP-2) and matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9). Microarray analyses suggested differential expression of oligophrenin-1 (OPHN1) and ribophorin-II (RPNII) with respect to LVI. Conclusion: LVI was an independent predictor of survival in gastric cancer. Expression of COX-2 may facilitate tumor invasion through MMP-2 and MMP-9 activation. OPHN1 and RPN II appeared to be differentially expressed in gastric cancers exhibiting LVI. The reported function of OPHN1 and RPN II makes these gene products promising candidates for future studies involving LVI in gastric cancer. A multivariate analysis was conducted to examine clinicopathologic factors and protein immunoreactivity in a gastric cancer tissue array preparation using a population-based cohort. Microarray gene-expression profiles, with respect to lymphovascular invasion, are provided to further characterize molecular alterations and provide insight into the biologic behavior of gastric cancer.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".