MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3148214373 · doi:10.3390/cancers13071726

Is Carboxypeptidase B1 a Prognostic Marker for Ductal Carcinoma In Situ?

2021· article· en· W3148214373 on OpenAlexaff
Charu Kothari, Alisson Clemenceau, Geneviève Ouellette, Kaoutar Ennour‐Idrissi, Caroline Diorio, Francine Durocher

Bibliographic record

VenueCancers · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHER2/EGFR in Cancer Research
Canadian institutionsHôpital du Saint-SacrementUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDuctal carcinomaIn situBiomarkerOncologyMedicineBreast cancerPathologyTranscriptomeCancer researchDownregulation and upregulationInternal medicineBiologyCancerGene expressionChemistryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is considered a non-obligatory precursor for invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC). Around 70% of women with atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) undergo unnecessary surgery due to the difficulty in differentiating ADH from low-grade DCIS. If untreated, 14–60% of DCIS progress to IDC, highlighting the importance of identifying a DCIS gene signature. Human transcriptome data of breast tissue samples representing each step of BC progression were analyzed and high expression of carboxypeptidase B1 (CPB1) expression strongly correlated with DCIS. This was confirmed by quantitative PCR in breast tissue samples and cell lines model. High CPB1 expression correlated with better survival outcome, and mRNA level was highest in DCIS than DCIS adjacent to IDC and IDC. Moreover, loss of CPB1 in a DCIS cell line led to invasive properties associated with activation of HIF1α, FN1, STAT3 and SPP1 and downregulation of SFRP1 and OS9. The expression of CPB1 could predict 90.1% of DCIS in a cohort consisting of DCIS and IDC. We identified CPB1, a biomarker that helps differentiate DCIS from ADH or IDC and in predicting if a DCIS is likely to progress to IDC, thereby helping clinicians in their decisions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations19
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancersSame topicHER2/EGFR in Cancer ResearchFrench-language works237,207