High Expression of RECQL Protein in ER-Positive Breast Tumours Is Associated With a Better Survival
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: RECQL (also known as RECQ1 and RECQL1) is a gene of recent interest in breast cancer and an association between high levels of RECQL protein in breast cancer tumour cells and good survival of patients has been reported. Methods: To validate this association, we measured the RECQL protein levels in tumours of 933 breast cancer patients using immunohistochemistry analysis and followed the patients for death from breast cancer. Results: Women with a level of RECQL protein above the 75th percentile had better 15-year disease-specific survival among ER-positive patients (62.5% vs. 48.7%, HR= 0.72, 95%CI= 0.52-0.98, p-value = 0.04), but not among ER- patients (48.9% vs. 48.0%, HR= 1.07, 95%CI= 0.67-1.69, p-value= 0.79). Among the ER-negative patients, high RECQL protein levels were associated with better survival among women who received tamoxifen treatment (67.0% vs. 51.5%, HR= 0.64, 95%CI= 0.41-0.99, p-value= 0.04). Conclusion: RECQL might be a new predictive marker for tamoxifen treatment among ER-positive patients.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".