ecancermedicalscience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To determine the expression of breast metastasis suppressor 1 (BRMS1) in human uveal melanoma (UM) tissues and cell lines. In addition, we intend to establish a possible association between BRMS1 expression and the presence of metastatic disease. METHODS: Thirty-one formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues from enucleated eyes of patients with UM were immunostained. Clinical-pathological data were obtained, including age, tumour location, largest dimension, cell type, and occurrence of metastasis. The expression of BRMS1 mRNA in four human UM cell lines was determined by real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction, and protein expression was assessed by immunocytochemistry and western blot. The association between BRMS1 immunostaining and location, largest tumour dimension, and tumour cell type was determined using the correlation coefficient test. The association between BRMS1 immunostaining and the incidence of metastasis was assessed using Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: Of the 31 cases of UM, 24 (77.42%) stained positive and seven (22.58%) negative for BRMS1. From the positively stained tumours, 21 (87.50%) showed cytoplasmatic staining. Macrophages were usually positive when present in the tumour and staining intensity was generally higher than in UM cells. BRMS1 mRNA was present in all four human UM cell lines, as well as cytoplasmatic immunoexpression of BRMS1. Immunoblotting showed variable BRMS1 protein levels between the different cell lines. No statistically significant correlation was found between BRMS1 protein expression and survival (P = 0.69), tumour cell type (P = 0.68), largest tumour dimension (P = 0.75), and tumour location (P = 0.11). CONCLUSIONS: BRMS1 is expressed in UM both at the mRNA and protein level; however, neither was associated with any of the prognosticor outcome parameters that we tested.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.762 | 0.666 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".