[Prognostic significance of CD20 expression in Hodgkin and Reed-Sternberg cells of classical Hodgkin's Lymphoma].
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVE: Hodgkin and Reed-Sternberg (HRS) cells of classical Hodgkin's Lymphoma (CHL) express B-cell marker CD20 with a reported frequency of 5%-58%. The prognostic significance of CD20 expression in HRS cells of CHL is still controversial. This study was to investigate the prognostic significance of CD20 expression in naive CHL patients. METHODS: The expression of CD20, CD15 and CD30 in 70 specimens of CHL were detected by immunohistochemistry; tumor morphology was observed with HE staining. A sample with CD20 expression on more than 10% of HRS cells was considered CD20-positive. The failure-free survival (FFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were compared by log-rank test. Cox proportional hazard model was used in multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Of the 70 cases of CHL, 21 (30.0%) were CD20-positive, 26 (37.1%) were CD15-positive, and all were CD30-positive. The positive rate of CD20 was significantly higher in the patients aged > or =45 years than in those aged <45 years (53.3% vs. 23.6%, P=0.026). The patients were followed up for a median of 58.3 months. The 5-year FFS rates were 76.2% in CD20-positive patients and 77.6% in CD20-negative patients (P=0.484). The 5-year OS rates were 80.4% in CD20-positive patients and 92.5% in CD20-negative patients (P=0.006). Cox multivariate analysis showed that age and stage were independent prognostic factors for FFS and OS. CONCLUSIONS: The positive rate of CD20 is relatively low in HRS cells of CHL. It is higher in the patients aged > or =45 years than in those aged <45 years. However, according to our results, the expression of CD20 is not an independent prognostic factor for FFS and OS of naive CHL patients.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".