Expressions of RhoC,CD44v6 and ICAM- 1 in human gastric cancer and its clinicopathological significance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To investigate the expressions of RhoC,CD44v6 and ICAM- 1 in gastric cancer and their correlations. Methods SABC immunohistochemistry was used to detect the expressions of RhoC,CD44v6 and ICAM- 1 in the specimens from 40 cases with gastric cancer. Their correlations were reviewed by clinicopathological data. Results The expression of RhoC,CD44v6 and ICAM- 1 were not correlated with tumor differetiation and invasion depth(P 0.05),but significantly correlated with lymph metastasis and pTNM stage(P 0.05). There was a significant correlation between the expression of RhoC and the expression of CD44v6 or ICAM- 1( r=0.355, P=0.006;r=0.354, P=0.003) respectively. If RhoC was positive- expressed,and either of CD44v6 or ICAM- 1 was positive- expressed, the sensitivity and the specificity for predicting the lymphatic metastasis was 93.75% ,62.5% respectively. Conclusions The positive expressions of RhoC,CD44v6 and ICAM- 1 are useful biological markers for predicting the metastatic potential of gastric cancer. The combined detection of three markers is a useful method for predicting lymphatic metastasis of gastric cancer.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".