The clinicopathological features of ganglioglioma with CD34 expression and BRAF mutation in patients with epilepsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective The aim of the study was to evaluate the clinicopathological features, as well as the surgical prognosis, of epilepsy-associated gangliogliomas (GG) with CD34 expression and BRAF V600E mutation. Methods Clinical data of patients who underwent epilepsy surgery for GG were retrospectively studied. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to evaluate the correlations of clinical and pathological factors with molecular markers of CD34 expression and BRAF V600E mutation in GG. Results A total of 208 patients with GG had immunohistochemical detection of CD34 expression (positive/negative: 184/24), and among them, 89 patients had immunohistochemical detection of BRAF V600E mutation (positive/negative: 54/35). By univariate and multivariate analyses, seizure aura ( p = 0.025), concordance of ictal electroencephalogram (EEG) findings ( p = 0.045) and medial temporal tumor ( p = 0.030) were found to be related to CD34 expression, but only hospitalization time ( p = 0.042) was different for BRAF-mutated status. In addition, drug-resistant epilepsy ( p = 0.040) and concordance of interictal EEG findings ( p = 0.009) were found to be associated with tumor progression-free survival (PFS) in univariate analysis, but only concordance of interictal EEG findings was with significance in multivariate analysis. However, CD34 expression or BRAF V600E mutation in GG was not found to be associated with surgical outcomes of seizure control and tumor PFS. Conclusion The CD34 expression or BRAF V600E mutation in GG may partly influence the distribution of clinicopathological features of patients with epilepsy, but they may be not able to predict the surgical prognosis of seizure outcome and tumor recurrence.
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".