CD74 and intratumoral immune response in breast cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
// Zhi-Qiang Wang 1 , Katy Milne 1 , John R. Webb 1 , Peter H. Watson 1, 2 1 Trev and Joyce Deeley Research Centre, British Columbia Cancer Agency, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada 2 Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada Correspondence to: Peter H. Watson, email: pwatson@bccancer.bc.ca Keywords: CD74, MHCII, CD4, CD8, CD68 Received: December 15, 2015 Accepted: March 18, 2016 Published: April 06, 2016 ABSTRACT CD74 (invariant chain) plays a role in MHC class II antigen presentation. We assessed CD74 and MHCII expression in tumor cells, as well as CD8, CD4, and CD68 tumor infiltrating leucocyte (TIL) density by immunohistochemistry in a cohort of 492 breast cancer patients. CD74 expression was associated with poor prognostic markers including patient age, tumor grade, ER status, non-Luminal A subtypes, and with MHCII expression and higher TIL densities, particularly in the Basal-like subgroup. Univariate analysis showed a favorable prognostic effect of CD74 (Hazard ratio = 0.46, 95% CI = 0.26–0.89, p = 0.022) and for combined CD74/MHCII (Hazard ratio = 0.26, 95% CI = 0.17–0.81, p = 0.014) positive status for overall survival that was only manifested in the Basal-like subgroup. CD74 and MHCII expression is associated with patient survival in Basal-like breast cancer, and the association with TIL may reflect an effective intratumoral immune response.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".