<i>CD10-positive mantle cell lymphoma</i>: biologically distinct entity or an aberrant immunophenotype? Insight, through gene expression profile in a unique case series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is an aggressive disease with genetic heterogeneity and discrete clinical subtypes. MCL is rarely CD10 positive. These cases raise the question whether a subset of MCL may be germinal centre (GC) derived, and have distinct clinicopathological characteristics. AIMS AND METHODS: A series of nine CD10-positive MCL cases is described herein. The clinicopathological and immunophenotypic features, immunoglobulin somatic hypermutation (SHM) status and gene expression profile (GEP) data are detailed. These features were compared with two independent sets (n=20, each) of CD10-negative MCL cases (controls), which were randomly selected from our institutional registry. RESULTS: GEP showed distinct expression of a GC signature in CD10-positive MCL cases with minimal impact on downstream signalling pathways. There were no significant differences in the clinicopathological features or clinical outcome between our CD10-positive and CD10-negative MCL cases. The frequency of SHM was comparable with established data. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides convincing evidence that CD10 expression is related to a distinct GC signature in MCL cases, but without clinical or biological implications.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".