Correlation of microvascular density and proliferation index in undifferentiated nasopharyngeal carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Undifferentiated nasopharyngeal carcinoma is a highly malignant tumor with an endemic distribution. Several histologic parameters have been studied to provide prognostic information for patient management. Both proliferation index and microvascular density are commonly determined on such tumors, but the relationship between these two parameters has not been studied fully. Objectives: Determine the association between microvascular density and cellular proliferation in undifferentiated nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Methods: A series of 60 cases were studied in patients of Southeast Asian origin. Cellular proliferation was determined using Ki67 immunostaining, and vessel proliferation using CD31 immunostaining in terms of areas of increased staining (‘hot spots’). Ki67 results were scored on a scale of 0-4+ and CD31 results as a microvascular density/mm 2 . Results: The mean of the microvascular density was 22/mm 2 in the Ki67-negative group (25 cases). In the Ki67- positive group (35 cases), the mean was 35/mm 2 . The difference between the positive and negative group was statistically significant (p <0.001). Microvascular density significantly increased as the Ki67 score increased (p<0.001). However, the ‘hot spots’ for microvascular density in tissue sections did not correspond to areas of increased cellular proliferation. Conclusion: Pathologists usually determine only one of these two prognostic factors when dealing with undifferentiated nasopharyngeal carcinoma. The proliferation index is suggested because it is easier to perform and can be done on small biopsies not to contain enough surface area for microvascular density determination.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 teacher head, 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".