MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2313425325 · doi:10.1097/pai.0000000000000181

Immunohistochemistry as a Surrogate for Molecular Testing

2015· review· en· W2313425325 on OpenAlex
Paul E. Swanson

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied immunohistochemistry & molecular morphology · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyGeneMolecular diagnosticsComputational biologyFusion geneImmunohistochemistryFusion proteinMolecular pathologyEpigeneticsGeneticsRecombinant DNAImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the myriad of genetic and epigenetic alterations in human neoplasms that seem to demand specific molecular probes for their identification and practical application to diagnostic pathology, immunohistochemistry (IHC) remains a vital component of laboratory testing in the emerging molecular era. The development and proper application of sensitive and specific antibodies raised against cryptic proteins only expressed in quantity after gene translocation, translocation-specific chimeric fusion peptides, and gene products overexpressed because of gene amplification demonstrate that IHC is a legitimate surrogate for traditional cytogenetic and in situ hybridization-based identification of chromosomal abnormalities, if not a viable molecular technique in its own right. Similarly, the detection of mutational events, through the reliable demonstration of protein loss, the identification of proteins overexpressed because of activating mutations, the specific visualization of mutant gene products, and the localization of splice variant gene products emphasizes the potential value of IHC as a surrogate for mutational analyses of genes important to both diagnosis and prediction of therapeutic response. In the latter setting IHC also provides a means of approximating gene expression profiles in the molecular classification and risk stratification of human neoplasms. For time being, the application of appropriately targeted sensitive and specific antibodies provides a cost-effective screening modality, if not replacement, for selected molecular techniques, but IHC will lose its value if the development of companion tests for emerging novel biomarkers does not keep pace with molecular techniques, particularly as the costs and time constraints of genomic sequencing diminish over time.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.837
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.321 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it