A Longitudinal Study of E‐Cadherin and Beta‐Catenin in Progression of Oral Epithelial Dysplasia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study explored the expression patterns of epithelial-mesenchymal transition markers E-cadherin and beta-catenin in mild and moderate oral epithelial dysplasia (OED) to determine whether their expression predicts malignant progression in oral tissue. METHODS: Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue specimens with mild or moderate dysplasia were retrieved from 87 patients. Immunohistochemistry was performed to compare E-cadherin and beta-catenin expression in tissue sections that progressed to severe dysplasia, carcinoma in situ, or squamous cell carcinoma (n = 29) with those that did not progress (n = 58). Expression patterns were observed in the basal, parabasal, lower spinous, and upper spinous epithelial layers. Expression was assessed in the cell membrane for E-cadherin and beta-catenin (low expression = absent/weak staining, high = moderate/strong) and in the cytoplasm and nucleus for beta-catenin (low = absence, high = presence). Logistic regression was used to predict progression based on the expression pattern. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in the progression and expression patterns of E-cadherin and beta-catenin (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: This study found that the expression of E-cadherin and beta-catenin was not a predictor of early malignant progression, highlighting the importance of longitudinal studies in studying progression.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".