MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387235665 · doi:10.37762/jgmds.10-4.501

Immunohistochemical Expression of Nkx3.1 in Prostatic Adenocarcinoma and Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia at a Tertiary Care Hospital in Karachi

2023· article· en· W4387235665 on OpenAlexaff
Beenish Hussain, Syeda Naveera Raza, Amna Hussain, Ramsha Faridi, Saman Nadeem, Yusra Saleem

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Gandhara Medical and Dental Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrologic and reproductive health conditions
Canadian institutionsNational Defence Medical Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHyperplasiaMedicineStainingImmunohistochemistryPathologyProstateContext (archaeology)AdenocarcinomaProstatic DiseasesUrologyInternal medicineCancerBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES To determine NKX3.1 expression in prostatic adenocarcinoma and benign prostate hyperplasia on Immunohistochemistry at a tertiary care hospital in Karachi. METHODOLOGY 74 prostatic specimens were recruited in this comparative cross-sectional study at the Department of Pathology, Pakistan Navy Station Shifa Hospital, Karachi, from January 2018 to February 2019. Of these, 37 specimens were of prostatic adenocarcinoma, and 37 were benign prostate hyperplasia. All specimens were subjected to immunohistochemical staining with NKX3.1. Statistical analysis was done by using SPSS version 23.0. The association of the extent of NKX3.1 staining between the adenocarcinoma and hyperplasia group was assessed using the Chi-square test x2. RESULTSOf the 37 cases of benign prostatic hyperplasia subjected to NKX3.1 staining, 32 showed positive staining with strong to moderate intensity. No staining was observed in 5 cases. 37 cases of adenocarcinoma prostate stained for NKX3.1 revealed positive staining in 30 cases with strong to moderate intensity. Negative staining was seen in 7 cases. The prostatic adenocarcinoma showed a statistically significant association of NKX3.1 positivity compared to benign prostatic hyperplasia cases. The p-value was found to be 0.03. CONCLUSION NKX3.1 staining was highly specific for prostate epithelium, as it was positive in most cases. This immune marker was useful for distinguishing prostatic origin in the context of metastatic lesions. Adding NKX3.1 protein staining to a panel of features may add value to the diagnosis if applied in the appropriate clinicopathologic context.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Gandhara Medical and Dental ScienceSame topicUrologic and reproductive health conditionsFrench-language works237,207