Association Between Expression of Vitamin D Receptor and Insulin-Like Growth Factor 1 Receptor Among Breast Cancer Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Vitamin D receptor (VDR) and insulin-like growth factor 1 receptor (IGF1R) are known to be involved in breast cancer (BC) progression. Our previous work reported a correlation of differential localization of IGF1R with hormone receptor status in BC. A recent report described VDR and IGF1R as potential indicators of BC prognosis, but their interplay was not discussed. The present study focused on understanding the association of VDR expression with IGF1R activation, different molecular markers, and subtypes of BC. Methods: A retrospective study was designed to evaluate the VDR expression among 48 BC patients pathologically diagnosed as invasive BC and were surgically treated at Sharjah Breast Care Center, University Hospital Sharjah (UHS), United Arab Emirates (UAE). Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tumor blocks with appropriate clinicopathological data were subjected to immunohistochemistry (IHC), and VDR protein expression was interpreted based on the staining intensity (SI) and the percentage of the positively stained cells (PP). Results: Nearly 44% of cases in the study were vitamin D deficient. A positive VDR expression with strong intensity (score > 4) was seen in 27 cases (56.3%). The expression pattern for VDR was equally distributed in cytoplasm and nucleus. For the IGF1R intensity, 24 cases (50%) of total cohort showed strong expression. A significant association was detected between IGF1R and VDR expression (P = 0.031). Conclusions: The present study identified positive association between IGF1R and VDR expression where most of the cases with strong VDR expression displayed strong IGF1R expression. These findings may contribute to current understanding on the role of VDR in BC and its interaction with IGF1R.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".