Minichromosome maintenance protein 7 as prognostic marker of tumor aggressiveness in pituitary adenoma patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ki-67 labeling index (LI) is currently regarded as a useful prognostic marker of pituitary adenoma (PA) clinical behavior, although its relevance as a reliable clinical indicator is far from being universally accepted, since both validations and criticisms are found in the literature. Minichromosome maintenance 7 (MCM7), a cell-cycle regulator protein, has been recently proposed as a marker of tumor aggressiveness in tumors from many sites, including the CNS. Therefore, we evaluated MCM7, in comparison to Ki-67, as a potential marker of clinical outcome in PA. DESIGN AND METHODS: In this single-institution retrospective study, 97 patients with PA (23 ACTH, 12 GH, 29 PRL, 10 FSH/LH, and 23 non-secreting adenomas) were recruited and the prognostic value of both MCM7 and Ki-67 was evaluated by immunohistochemical techniques. In addition, p53 nuclear expression and mitotic index were also evaluated. RESULTS: Twenty-six of the 97 PA patients recurred during the follow-up period. Cox's regression analysis showed that high nuclear expression of MCM7 LI, unlike Ki-67 LI, was directly associated with a higher (7.7-fold) risk of recurrence/progression. Kaplan-Meier analysis of recurrence/progression-free survival curves revealed that patients with high MCM7 LI (≥15%) had a shorter recurrence/progression-free survival than those with low MCM7 LI (<15%). Moreover, among patients with invasive tumors, high MCM7 LI identified those with the highest risk of recurrence/progression. CONCLUSIONS: Data from this study suggest that MCM7 is a prognostic marker of clinical outcome in PA patients, more reliable and informative than Ki-67.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".