Automated sputum cytometry for detection of intraepithelial neoplasias in the lung.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite the benefits of early lung cancer detection, no effective strategy for early screening and treatment exists, partly due to a lack of effective surrogate biomarkers. Our novel sputum biomarker, the Combined Score (CS), uses automated image cytometric analysis of ploidy and nuclear morphology to detect subtle intraepithelial changes that often precede lung tumours. METHODS: 2249 sputum samples from 1795 high-risk patients enrolled in ongoing chemoprevention trials were subjected to automated quantitative image cytometry after Feulgen-thionin staining. Samples from normal histopathology patients were compared against samples from carcinoma in situ (CIS) and cancer patients to train the CS. RESULTS: CS correlates with several lung cancer risk factors, including histopathological grade, age, smoking status, and p53 and Ki67 immunostaining. At 50% specificity, CS detected 78% of all highest-risk subjects-those with CIS or worse plus those with moderate or severe dysplasia and abnormal nuclear morphology. CONCLUSION: CS is a powerful yet minimally invasive tool for rapid and inexpensive risk assessment for the presence of precancerous lung lesions, enabling enrichment of chemoprevention trials with highest-risk dysplasias. CS correlates with other biomarkers, so CS may find use as a surrogate biomarker for patient assessment and as an endpoint in chemoprevention clinical trials.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".