Platelet Activation and Platelet Indices as Markers for Disease Progression in Women with Breast Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Several studies reported the role platelet activation, platelet volume (MPV) and other Indices in breast cancer but the data is inconsistent and/or diverse. The aim of this study was to systematically evaluate the role of platelet activation and platelet volume indices in women with BC as predictors for cancer progression and poor prognosis. Methods: Patients were recruited from our local oncology center between 2019 to 2020 following ethics approval. 80 patients with locally invasive BC, 20 metastatic and 100 controls were recruited. ADP-induced platelet activation was assessed by light-transmission aggregometry. Platelet P-selectin (CD62P) expression with and without ADP stimulation was assessed by flow cytometry. A comprehensive analysis of platelet count and platelet volume indices (PVIs) (MPV, PDW, MPV/P and PDW/P) was conducted. Data were analyzed in relation to tumor pathology, hormone receptors (ER, PR, HER-2) and proliferation index Ki-67. Regression analyses were conducted for the prediction of poor prognosis, tumor aggression and metastatic potential. Results: We found a significant increase in platelet aggregation (MA), CD62P expression, CD62P+ADP, MPV, PDW, MPV/P and PDW/P in the metastatic group compared to the locally invasive group. Univariate regression analysis showed significance for ADP, MA, CD62P+ADP, MPV and PDW/P. Conclusion: MPV/P and PDW/P can be used as simple low-cost predictors for cancer progression and poor prognosis. We conclude platelet activation and specific platelet indices can help predict prognosis in females with BC.
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".