Evaluation of RNA-binding motif protein 3 expression in urothelial carcinoma of the bladder: an immunohistochemical study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: RNA-binding motif protein 3 (RBM3), involved in cell survival, has paradoxically been linked to both oncogenesis as well as an increased survival in several cancers, including urothelial carcinoma (UCA). METHODS: The putative prognostic role of RBM3 was studied using cystectomy specimens with 152 invasive UCA with 35 matched metastases, 65 carcinomas in situ (CIS), 22 high-grade papillary UCAs (PAP), and 112 benign urothelium cases. RESULTS: The H-score (HS, staining intensity × % of positive cells) was used for RBM3 immunoexpression. CIS showed the highest HS (mean = 140) followed by benign urothelium (mean = 97). Metastases showed higher HS than primary invasive UCA (P ≤ 0.0001), and high HS was associated with a lower pT stage (P ≤ 0.0001) and a trend toward the absence of lymphovascular invasion (LVI, P = 0.09), but not pN stage (P = 0.35) and surgical margin status (P = 0.81). Univariate analysis (UVA) of disease recurrence only showed an association between pN stage and LVI (P = 0.005 and 0.03, respectively). On UVA of mortality, pT stage was strongly associated with death (P = 0.01) while pN stage, LVI, surgical margin status, and HS were not. Multivariate analysis confirmed the lack of HS association with recurrence (P = 0.08) and death (P = 0.32). CONCLUSIONS: Stronger RBM3 immunoexpression correlated with lower stage tumors and a diminished risk for LVI. However, RBM3 does not seem to carry a prognostic significance for clinical outcome (recurrence and mortality). The exact prognostic role of RBM3 in UCA is yet to be determined.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".