Diagnostic Value of Epidermal Growth Factor, Cancer Antigen 125, and Cancer Antigen 15-3 in Bronchoalveolar Lavage Fluid of Lung Cancer
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: In the present study, we assessed the diagnostic value of epidermal growth factor (EGF) and cancer antigens 125 (CA125) and 15-3 (CA15-3) in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) of lung cancer from 79 enrolled patients with suspected lung cancer. Methods: All patients underwent fibrescopic examination, during which BALF samples were collected. Levels of EGF, CA125, and CA15-3 were determined in BALF using commercially available test kits. Results: The results showed that levels of EGF in BALF were significantly higher in patients with lung cancer than in patients with benign diseases (p < 0.01); no significant differences for CA125 (p = 0.67) or CA15-3 (p = 0.43) in BALF were observed between the lung cancer patients and the non-cancer control subjects. With a cut-off value of 27.22 pg/mL, EGF showed a sensitivity of 63.6% and a specificity of 65.7% in predicting the malignant nature of pulmonary disease. Conclusions: The study findings suggest that levels of EGF are significantly increased in BALF from patients with lung cancer than in BALF from patients with benign disease. Detection of the level of EGF in BALF is proposed as a noninvasive test to identify patients at high risk for lung cancer.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it