Coinfection of HPVs Is Associated with Advanced Stage in Colorectal Cancer Patients from Qatar
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High-risk human papillomaviruses (HPVs) are considered risk factors in the origin of several human malignancies, such as breast, cervical, head and neck, as well as colorectal cancers. However, there are no data reported on the HPV status in colorectal cancer in the State of Qatar. Therefore, we herein examined the presence of high-risk HPVs (16, 18, 31, 33, 35, 45, 51, 52, and 59), using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) in a cohort of 100 Qatari colorectal cancer patients, and their association with tumor phenotype. We found that high-risk HPV types 16, 18, 31, 35, 45, 51, 52, and 59 were present in 4, 36, 14, 5, 14, 6, 41, and 17% of our samples, respectively. Overall, 69 (69%) of the 100 samples were HPV positive; among these, 34/100 (34%) were positive for single HPV subtypes, while 35/100 (35%) of the samples were positive for two or more HPV subtypes. No significant association was noted between the presence of HPV and tumor grade, stage, or location. However, the presence of coinfection of HPV subtypes strongly correlated with advanced stage (stage 3 and 4) colorectal cancer, indicating that the copresence of more than one HPV subtype can significantly worsen the prognosis of colorectal cancer. The results from this study imply that coinfection with high-risk HPV subtypes is associated with the development of colorectal cancer in the Qatari population.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it