[The clinical study on application of using a novel blockade technique for gastric cancer to decrease blood-borne metastasis of cancer cells].
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of a novel blockade technique for gastric cancer on blood-borne metastasis of gastric cancer cells to portal vein. METHODS: Twenty-three cases of gastric cancer were divided into routine operation group (8 cases intraoperatively without blockade technique) and blockade group (15 cases with blockade technique). Blood samples from portal vein pre- and intraoperatively, as well as gastroepiploic vein limited within the blockade area were obtained to detect CK19 mRNA expression by using RT-PCR technique. RESULTS: Before the dissection of gastric lesion, the overall positive rate of CK19 mRNA expression in portal vein blood is 34.7% (9/23), including 37.5% (3/8) in routine operation group and 33.3% (5/15) in blockade group. While the course of tumor resection, those positive rates were 87.5% (7/8) in routine operation group and 6.7% (1/15) in blockade group respectively (P < 0.05). CK19 mRNA expression in the right gastroepiploic venous blood limited within the blocking area was all positive in 15 cases of blockade group. CONCLUSION: This blockade technique can be used effectively to block the intraoperative spread of gastric cancer cells, thus prevent blood-borne metastasis due to operative manipulation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".