Ultrastructural differences in the endoplasmic reticulum among various pituitary tumor types
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our aim was to reveal ultrastructural differences in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) among surgically removed human pituitary tumors. More than 2000 pituitary tumors were studied by electron microscopy. In growth hormone (GH) adenomas, the ER is well developed and consists mainly of rough surfaced endoplasmic reticulum (RER) and few ER membranes without ribosomes, called smooth surfaced endoplasmic reticulum (SER). In the sparsely granulated GH adenomas, the ER is less prominent and is seen in fibrous bodies containing keratin immunopositive microfilaments. In prolactin (PRL) adenomas, the RER is conspicuous, forming concentric whorls. In adenocorticotropin (ACTH) and thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) adenomas, the ER and consists of RER and to a lesser extent, SER. In gonadotroph adenomas and null cell adenomas, the ER is poorly developed. In GH adenomas exposed to somatostatin analogs and in prolactin adenomas exposed to dopamine agonists, regression of ER is noted. In pituitary carcinomas, the ER is recognizable but it is less extensive than in the benign neoplasms. In conclusion, the ultrastructural investigation of ER provides valuable information on the cytogenesis and cellular composition of pituitary tumors. There is also a mild correlation between endocrine activity and extent of ER. However, no correlation exists between invasive and non‐invasive tumors and growth potential. Pituitary carcinomas cannot be distinguished from benign adenomas based on the ultrastructural features of ER.
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".