Annexin A10 and HES-1 Immunohistochemistry in Right-sided Traditional Serrated Adenomas Suggests an Origin From Sessile Serrated Adenoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is increasing body of evidence to suggest that some colonic serrated polyps do not fit morphologically with any of the proposed categories for serrated polyps recommended by the World Health Organization. Most of these polyps have morphologic features of traditional serrated adenoma (TSA) admixed with areas resembling sessile serrated adenoma (SSA) or hyperplastic polyp (HP). Based on these findings it has been suggested that at least some TSAs may arise in association with precursor HP or SSA lesions, particularly those that develop in right colon. To further evaluate this hypothesis, 39 serrated polyps from right side of the colon (cecum, ascending, and transverse colon) with mixed features of TSA and SSA were evaluated by 2 immunostains previously shown to represent markers of SSA. One is Annexin A10 which shows upregulated expression in SSA and the other is Hes-1 which is shown to be down regulated in SSA. The expression patterns of these markers were evaluated in SSA and TSA components of hybrid polyps and compared with control groups (pure SSAs and TSAs of right colon). SSA component in hybrid polyps did not show any significant difference in staining pattern compared with that seen in TSA component of hybrid polyps or in pure TSA polyps. These findings further support the hypothesis that recognizes SSA as a precursor lesion for TSA in the right colon.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".