MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139960143 · doi:10.1186/1746-1596-8-32

Immunohistochemical detection of Hsp90 and Ki-67 in pterygium

2013· article· en· W2139960143 on OpenAlexaff
Roberto Sebastiá, Marcelo Palis Ventura, Helena Parente Solari, E. Antecka, María Eugenia Orellana, Miguel N. Burnier

Bibliographic record

VenueDiagnostic Pathology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCorneal Surgery and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPterygiumConjunctivaImmunohistochemistryPathologyMedicineEpitheliumScleraBiologyOphthalmology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: To examine the immunohistochemical expression of heat shock protein 90 (Hsp90) and Ki-67 protein in human pterygium. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Tissues obtained during pterygium surgery of 15 patients who underwent the bare-sclera procedure and 10 normal conjunctivae were studied. All of these pterygia were primary ones. Recurrent pterygia were excluded. Normal bulbar conjunctivas (2 x 2 mm) were obtained from the nasal region close to the limbus from patients during their cataract and retina surgeries. Immunohistochemical detection of Hsp90 and Ki67 was done using the streptavidin-biotin method in paraffin embedded tissue sections. RESULTS: The percentage of cells stained for Hsp90 was greater for pterygium epithelium (76 ± 10.8) than for normal conjunctiva (1.4 ± 0.8). In each pterygium sample more than 60% of cells were positive. The differences in positive cells between normal and pterygium epithelium were highly significant for Hsp90 (P < 0,001).Pterygium epithelium also showed a higher percentage of cells that stained for Ki67 (10.1 ± 9.5) than for normal conjunctiva (2.1 ± 1.9). The differences in positive cells were also statistically significant for Ki67 (P < 0.01). Although there were significant differences in the majority of samples observed. It was noted that in some samples there was no difference between normal and pterygium epithelium for Ki67. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate an abnormal expression of Hsp90 and ki-67 in pterygium samples when compared to normal conjunctiva.The finding of abnormal expression of levels of Hsp90 in pterygium samples can stimulate new research into pterygium and its recurrence. VIRTUAL SLIDES: The virtual slide(s) for this article can be found here: http://www.diagnosticpathology.diagnomx.eu/vs/1128478792898812.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations18
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiagnostic PathologySame topicCorneal Surgery and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207