The Clinicopathological Significance of BiP/GRP-78 in Breast Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Public Datasets and Immunohistochemical Detection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The endoplasmic reticulum chaperone BiP (also known as GRP-78 or HSPA5) maintains protein folding to allow cell proliferation and survival and has been implicated in carcinogenesis, tumor progression, and therapy resistance. BiP's association with clinical factors and prognostic potential in breast cancer remains unclear. In this work, three types of analysis were conducted to improve the knowledge of BiP's clinicopathological potential: (1) analysis of publicly available RNA-seq and proteomics datasets stratified as high and low quartiles; (2) a systematic review and meta-analysis of immunohistochemical detection of BIP; (3) confirmation of findings by BiP immunohistochemical detection in two luminal-like breast cancer small cohorts of paired samples (pre- vs. post-endocrine therapy, and primary pre- vs. metastasis post-endocrine therapy). The TCGA PanCancer dataset and CPTAC showed groups with high BiP mRNA and protein associated with HER2, basal-like subtypes, and higher immune scores. The meta-analysis of BiP immunohistochemistry disclosed an association between higher BiP positivity and reduced relapse-free survival. BiP immunohistochemistry confirmed increased BiP expression in metastasis, an association of BiP positivity with HER2 expression, and nuclear BiP localization with higher a tumor stage and poor outcome. Therefore, three independent approaches showed that BiP protein is associated with worse outcomes and holds prognostic potential for breast 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 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 | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".