Expression of vascular endothelial growth factor in uveal melanoma and its correlation with metastasis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To evaluate the expression of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) in uveal melanomas and correlate its presence with tumour characteristics and systemic metastasis. METHODS: 47 cases of ciliochoroidal melanoma enucleated between 1983 and 1993 were retrieved from the pathology archives at the University of Western Ontario. Paraffin sections stained with haematoxylin and eosin, periodic acid Schiff, and periodic acid Schiff without haematoxylin after bleaching of melanin were examined. The expression of VEGF protein was examined by an immunoalkaline phosphatase method following antigen retrieval, using an antibody to VEGF and vector red as the chromogen. The intensity of VEGF immunoreactivity was graded on a scale of 0-7 and correlated with tumour cell type, tumour size, presence or absence of necrosis, pigmentation, mitotic activity, microvascular density, and microvascular pattern. RESULTS: VEGF immunoreactivity was present in 44/47 tumours (94%): the intensity was graded as very weak (1-2) in 29/47 (62%) and as weak or greater in 15/47 (32%). VEGF was also found in the ciliary epithelium, smooth muscle of the ciliary body and iris, retinal ganglion cells, inner photoreceptor segments, and the retinal pigment epithelium. Follow up data were available in 43/47 patients (91.5%), with a median follow up time of 10 years. 16/43 (37%) patients developed metastases. VEGF expression in melanoma was linked to the presence of tumour necrosis and the degree of pigmentation but no statistically significant relation with microvascular pattern, tumour size, or microvascular density was found. There was no statistically significant correlation between VEGF expression and metastasis. CONCLUSIONS: Most ciliochoroidal melanomas express VEGF and expression is correlated with the presence of necrosis but not with the occurrence of systemic metastasis or tumour angiogenesis.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".