Microvessel Density (Chalkley Method) in a Series of 79 Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Evaluation of the MVD (modified Chalkley method) in a series of 79 cases of GISTs diagnosed by the Pathology Service at the HCPA (Hospital de Clinicas de Porto Alegre) from January 1993 to December 2009. Methods: Seventy nine cases of GISTs were submitted to immunohistochemical analysis for CD31, an endothelial marker, to analyze MVD. Hot spots were identified for each case, and the mean numbers of stained blood vessels collected through Chalkley count, with the use of a 25 point grid, placed onto a scanned image. Images were analysed through an image analysis system. We used a cutoff of six vessels. Results: Our series was composed of 42 males and 37 females and presented an average age of 58.9 years. GISTs were predominately located in the stomach (45.6%) followed by the small intestine (38.0%). Sixty seven GISTs (84.8%) showed an average of less than six vessels stained by CD31 (MVD) and 12 (15.2%) GISTs an average of more than six vessels. A statistically significant difference was observed between survival rate of patients having GISTs with MVD of <= 6 vessels (mean = 2.4, CI 95%: 1.67 - 3.17) and patients having GISTs with MVD of >= 6 vessels (mean = 2.4, CI 95%: 1.67 - 3.17), P = 0.001. No association for MVD was observed related to sex, age, histological type, risk category, location and metastasis. Conclusions: Seventy nine cases of GISTs diagnosed at a single center in South Brazil were studied for MVD (Chalkley method). There was a statistically significant difference between MVD and the survival rate for these patients. The use of Chalkley method in GISTs may be helpful to evaluate clinical outcome. Gastroenterol Res. 2011;4(6):252-256 doi: https://doi.org/10.4021/gr373w
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".