Bibliographic record
Abstract
Eosinophils may affect each stage of tumor development. The presence of eosinophils appears to correlate with longer patient survival in several non-CNS malignant tumors. Tumor-associated tissue eosinophilia (TATE) has been increasingly recognized. Two previous studies (Hayes RL, et al . 1995; 2001) revealed eosinophils in the intracavitary tissues of malignant gliomas following the infusion of IL-2 combined with activated autologous killer cells, but not in the primary operative specimens. Our recent study (Lu JQ, et al. 2014) demonstrated the infiltration of eosinophils in 19 of 44 pilocytic astrocytomas but not in 10 ependymomas. In the present study, we examined 7 cases of subependymal giant cell astrocytoma (SEGA; 4 with tuberous sclerosis; age range: 13 – 33 years; 4 males and 3 females), as SEGA is well known to contain infiltrating mast cells and lymphocytes. Five of 7 SEGA contained eosinophils that were focally scattered to rare in frequency; intratumoral and/or perivascular in location. In comparison, only one of 8 consecutive cases of glioblastoma showed infiltrating eosinophils. The incidence of TATE is significantly higher in SEGA than that in glioblastoma (71.4 % versus 12.5%; p =0.04, by Fisher’s exact test) but is not significantly different from that in pilocytic astrocytoma (71.4 % versus 43.2%, previously reported; p =0.232). Our findings support the concept that eosinophils may play a functional role in the development of astrocytic tumors, especially those with longer patient survival.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".