Benign breast tumors may arise on different immunological backgrounds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Benign breast tumors are a nonthreatening condition defined as abnormal cell growth within the breast without the ability to invade nearby tissue. However, benign lesions hold valuable biological information that can lead us toward better understanding of tumor biology. In this study, we have used two pathway analysis algorithms, Pathifier and gene set variation analysis (GSVA), to identify biological differences between normal breast tissue, benign tumors and malignant tumors in our clinical dataset. Our results revealed that one-third of all pathways that were significantly different between benign and malignant tumors were immune-related pathways, and 227 of them were validated by both methods and in the METABRIC dataset. Furthermore, five of these pathways (all including genes involved in cytokine and interferon signaling) were related to overall survival in cancer patients in both datasets. The cellular moieties that contribute to immune differences in malignant and benign tumors were analyzed using the deconvolution tool, CIBERSORT. The results showed that levels of some immune cells were specifically higher in benign than in malignant tumors, and this was especially the case for resting dendritic cells and follicular T-helper cells. Understanding the distinct immune profiles of benign and malignant breast tumors may aid in developing noninvasive diagnostic methods to differentiate between them in the future.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".