Sinusoid endotheliitis as a histological parameter for diagnosing acute liver allograft rejection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To investigated the feasibility of using sinusoidal endotheliitis (SE) as a histological marker for liver allograft rejection. METHODS: We compared the histological features of 88 liver allograft biopsies with acute cellular rejection (ACR) and 59 cases with no evidence of ACR. SE was scored as: (1) focal linear lifting up of the endothelial cells by lymphocytes with no obvious damage to adjacent hepatocytes; (2) focal disruption of the endothelial lining by a cluster of subendothelial lymphocytes (a group of > 3 lymphocytes); and (3) severe confluent endotheliitis with hemorrhage and adjacent hepatocyte loss. RESULTS: < 0.001) when correlating SE with the venous endotheliitis activity index only. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that SE scoring could be a reliable and reproducible supplemental parameter to the existing Banff schema for diagnosing acute liver allograft rejection.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".