Assessment of panfungal PCR performance with formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue specimens
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We reviewed the performance of a panfungal ITS-2 PCR and Sanger sequencing assay performed on 88 FFPE specimens at The Hospital for Sick Children (Toronto, Canada) in 2019. A potential fungal pathogen was identified by ITS PCR in 62.7 and 2.9% of positive and negative direct slide examination of tissue specimens, respectively. ITS amplicons were detected in 87/88 specimens, with 53/88 (60.2%) considered as 'positive-contaminants' and 34/88 (38.6%) as 'positive-potential pathogen' upon sequencing. Potential pathogens included Blastomyces dermatitidis (17.1%), Cryptococcus neoformans (17.1%), Histoplasma capsulatum (14.3%) and Mucormycetes (11.4%). Laboratories should only perform ITS PCR on FFPE tissues if fungal elements have been confirmed on histopathology slides. LAY SUMMARY: In this study, we examined how well a DNA-based test could detect DNA from fungi in archived human biopsy tissues. The best performance was achieved if fungi were seen in the tissue under a microscope before being tested. Our results indicate that we should only use this test if these conditions are met.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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 it