Loss of major histocompatibility class II expression in non-immune-privileged site diffuse large B-cell lymphoma is highly coordinated and not due to chromosomal deletions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Decreased major histocompatibility class II (MHCII) expression is associated with poor survival in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Immune-privileged site DLBCL (IP-DLBCL) patients reportedly have frequent large deletions at the MHCII locus whereas the mechanism of decreased expression in non-IP-DLBCL is unknown. Gene expression profiling data were used for correlation analyses between expression levels of MHCII genes with each other and their transcriptional regulator, CIITA. Comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) assessed chromosomal alterations at MHCII-related loci. Finally, a map was created of expression of genes that are telomeric, within, or centromeric to the MHCII locus. Correlation coefficients among MHCII genes ranged from 0.73 to 0.92, whereas those between adjacent and intervening genes were lower (-0.12 to 0.49). Correlations between MHCII and CIITA expression were higher (0.53 to 0.60) than between CIITA and neighboring genes (-0.05 to 0.22). In 23 MHCII(-) cases, CGH detected 2 losses and 2 gains at MHCII loci. Expression of genes telomeric, within, and centromeric to MHCII loci were near normal in most MHCII(-) cases. Large deletions of the MHCII locus are uncommon in non-IP-DLBCL, implicating altered transcription as the operative mechanism for decreased expression.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".