MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

EGFR expression in invasive anal carcinoma.

2011· article· en· W2590672938 on OpenAlexaffabout
Aleksandra Paliga, Ronald Onerheim, Adrian Gologan, Alan Spatz, T. Vuong

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal and Anal Carcinomas
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversitySt Mary's Hospital CentreJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCetuximabImmunohistochemistryMedicineTissue microarrayPathologyStainingAnal cancerCarcinomaCancerEpidermal growth factor receptorH&E stainHead and neck squamous-cell carcinomaHead and neck cancerColorectal cancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

412 Background: Squamous cell anal carcinoma (SCAC) treatment remains unchanged since the institution of chemoradiation over 4 decades ago. Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is a protein often expressed in aggressive cancers and that is the target of the monoclonal antibody: cetuximab. Concurrent cetuximab and radiation has been particularly effective treating squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. Like head and neck cancer, anal cancer is an epithelial tumor of the alimentary tract that is radioresponsive and is associated with HPV infection. The rarity of this cancer limits its evaluation for biological markers. This study set out to thoroughly characterize EGFR expression by immunohistochemistry in 101 invasive SCAC tissue samples. Methods: One hundred and one pretreatment paraffin embedded invasive SCAC biopsies, obtained from the Montreal area between 1999 and 2009, were tested for EGFR expression by immunohistochemistry. All samples were confirmed to harbor invasive anal carcinoma on H&E slide preparations. Corresponding cancerous areas were identified on paraffin tissue blocks and cut out for tissue microarray analysis. Samples were immunostained with an EGFR antibody (clone SPM 341) on the Discovery XT Autostainer (Ventana), and staining was assessed by light microscopy by two pathologists. A semiquantitative combination score combining staining intensity with the percent of cells staining gave a final score: just detectable or weak (1+); moderate (2+); strong/intense (3+). Results: Of 101 patient biopsies, 82 samples had sufficient material for interpretation. Of these samples, 72/82 (90%) stained positive for EGFR, while 41/82 (50%) samples displayed at least moderate to strong staining. Conclusions: This is the largest cohort of SCAC tissue samples tested to date for EGFR expression and it confirms that the vast majority of invasive SCAC overexpress EGFR. EGFR likely plays a role in anal cancer tumor-genesis and progression. Testing of EGFR inhibitors in this patient population is justified. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.538

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.254
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.192 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicColorectal and Anal CarcinomasFrench-language works237,207