MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3093720182 · doi:10.5430/jst.v10n2p22

Androgen receptor expression in the urinary bladder urothelial carcinoma and its relation to known prognostic factors

2020· article· en· W3093720182 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Eman T. El-taher, Maha Lotfy Zamzam, Ahmed Elzawawy, Wael Abdo Hassan, Marwa A. Suliman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Solid Tumors · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAndrogen receptorMedicineImmunohistochemistryPathologyUrinary bladderH&E stainAndrogenCarcinomaUrologyPathologicalOncologyInternal medicineCancerProstate cancerHormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: The current study was carried out to assess the prognostic value of androgen receptor expression in urothelial carcinoma of the bladder and correlate it to the disease outcome.Methods: Histologically confirmed cases of bladder urothelial carcinoma were studied. Clinical, pathological, and radiological data were collected. Paraffin embedded tissue sections were submitted for hematoxylin and eosin staining, as well as immunohistochemical staining for androgen receptor in tumor cells.Results: Nuclear androgen receptor expression was positive in 75% of the studied histopathological specimens. Additionally, a significant positive association between androgen receptor expression and tumor grade, muscle invasion & tumor size were noticed.Conclusions: There is a significant association between large tumor size, high grade, deep invasion, and expression of Androgen receptor in urothelial bladder carcinoma. Antiandrogen could be an effective chemo preventive or therapeutic approach in treatment of urothelial bladder carcinoma.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.329

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Solid TumorsSame topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207