Association Between Phosphorylated Histone H3 and Oncotype DX Recurrence Scores in Breast Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigate the association between phosphorylated histone H3 (PhH3) and Oncotype DX recurrence score (RS). All invasive breast carcinoma with RS results from our city between 2007 and 2010 (n=47) were reviewed. Whole-tumor sections were stained for PhH3. Mitotic and PhH3 counts were performed and clinical charts reviewed. PhH3 correlated well with RS (r=0.69, P<0.001). Other correlations were: PhH3 versus mitotic count (r=0.87, P<0.001), PhH3 versus mitotic score (r=0.71, P<0.001), PhH3 versus modified Bloom-Richardson-Elston (MBR) grade (r=0.65, P<0.001), RS versus mitotic count (r=0.62, P<0.001), RS versus mitotic score (r=0.44, P=0.002), and RS versus MBR grade (r=0.49, P=0.001). Significant correlation between PhH3 and RS remained after controlling for mitotic count (r=0.39, P=0.007), mitotic score (r=0.60, P<0.001), MBR grade (r=0.56, P<0.001), and all 3 (r=0.37, P=0.014) by partial correlation. Two patients died of metastasis at 12 and 38 months after diagnosis. One had intermediate RS, and 1 high RS; both were in the top-third of PhH3 count. All other patients are alive and recurrence free. Correlation between PhH3 and RS was statistically significant in our cohort, and remained significant after controlling for traditional measures of proliferation. Given that RS has an established strong relationship with prognosis and therapy responsiveness, PhH3 may thus also be an important prognostic/predictive marker in breast cancer.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".