Programmed death-ligand1 is a determinant of recurrence in alveolar echinococcosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Alveolar echinococcosis (AE) recurrence is one of the major stakes in patients undergoing surgery, the main curative treatment. Preliminary data demonstrated an effect of programmed death-ligand1 (PD-L1) inhibitors on AE proliferation in animals. The current study aimed to analyze the prognostic value of PD-L1 expression in tissue samples of patients with AE undergoing surgery. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of patients operated for AE between 2002 and 2017 was performed. Patients with recurrence were matched 1: 2 with patients without recurrence. The matching criteria were PNM staging (P = hepatic localization of the parasite, N = extra-hepatic involvement of neighboring organs, and M = absence or presence of metastasis), resection status, preoperative albendazole treatment, and lesion size. PD-L1 immunohistochemistry staining was performed in surgical liver specimens. The expression of PD-L1 was assessed in immune cells. Disease-free survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Among 68 consecutive patients, eight patients with recurrence were matched to 16 patients without recurrence. PD-L1 was overexpressed in patients with recurrence (recurrence: PD-L1 <1%: one, PD-L1 ≥1%: seven; no recurrence: PD-L1 <1%: nine, PD-L1 ≥1%: seven, P = 0.040). Moreover, patients with lower PD-L1 expression (<1%) showed better median disease-free survival (120 months, 95% confidence interval 104-135 vs 74, 95% confidence interval 44-104, P = 0.050). CONCLUSION: These findings highlight the proof of concept of PD-L1 in AE, but further data on its prognostic importance and the role of immune checkpoint blockade as a promising therapeutical strategy are needed.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".