MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3211071893 · doi:10.24953/turkjped.2021.05.004

Assessment of PD-L1 expression in patients with neuroblastoma and renal tumors

2021· article· en· W3211071893 on OpenAlexaff
Seher Şener, Aylar Poyraz, Arzu Okur, Faruk Güçlü Pınarlı, Ceyda Karadeniz

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Turkish Journal of Pediatrics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeuroblastoma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsPediatric Oncology Group
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuroblastomaMedicineWilms' tumorImmunohistochemistryPD-L1Immune systemStainingPathologyStage (stratigraphy)Cancer researchInternal medicineImmunologyImmunotherapyCell cultureBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Programmed death 1 (PD-1) is a co-receptor which is located at the surface of cells like natural killer, monocytes, T and B cells. It has two ligands including programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) and ligand-2 (PD-L2). T cell functions are inhibited by activation of PD-1/PD-L1 pathway and this pathway is used by viruses and some tumor cells in order to escape from immune eradication. In our study we evaluated PD-L1 expression in the tissue specimens of patients with Wilms tumor, neuroblastoma and other renal tumors. METHODS: Totally 60 patients who were followed up at Gazi University Hospital with the diagnosis of neuroblastoma, Wilms tumor and other renal tumors were included. PD-L1 expression was examined in tumor samples of the patients. RESULTS: Positive staining with PD-L1 was detected only in two male patients. Both of them had neuroblastoma and advanced stage disease. None of the patients with Wilms tumor and other renal tumors had positive PD-L1 staining. CONCLUSIONS: Unlike adult tumors, PD-L1 expression is not common in childhood tumors due to differences in immune system between children and adults. Further studies are needed to establish the importance and effects of PD-1/PD-L1 pathway in pediatric tumors.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.236

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.256 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Turkish Journal of PediatricsSame topicNeuroblastoma Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207