MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1540985757 · doi:10.1002/cncy.21449

The value of the “suspicious for urothelial carcinoma” cytology category: A correlative study of 4 years including 337 patients

2014· article· en· W1540985757 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Cytopathology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMedical diagnosisCytologyBiopsyUrine cytologyUrothelial carcinomaRadiologyCarcinomaCancerBladder cancerInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The terminology used in reporting urine cytology lacks uniformity and the significance of the "atypical" and "suspicious" categories is still not well established. This results in variable clinical follow-up and management of those cases. The authors sought to investigate the prognostic value of a diagnosis of "suspicious for high-grade urothelial carcinoma" (HGUCA). METHODS: All cases with a "suspicious" or "positive" cytological diagnosis spanning 4 years were included and correlated with the subsequent biopsies obtained within 6 months of urine collection. RESULTS: A total of 447 correlative events (57% positive and 43% suspicious) corresponding to 773 cytology specimens and 337 patients were included. The morphology of the "suspicious" cells was similar to what has recently been reported in the literature as "atypical urothelial cells, cannot exclude HGUCA." A "suspicious" diagnosis was more often rendered than a "positive" one in voided specimens (80% vs 65%, respectively). The mean interval between cytology and biopsy was 31 days. On follow-up, 92% of "suspicious" diagnoses (176 of 191 diagnoses) and 90% of "positive" diagnoses (230 of 256 diagnoses) were found to have a biopsy with a diagnosis of carcinoma (low grade or high grade). A diagnosis of HGUCA followed a "suspicious" and a "positive" diagnosis in 79% and 86% of cases, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A "suspicious" diagnosis as defined in the current study warrants close investigations and repeat biopsy to rule out HGUCA. In addition, the findings of the current study raise the question of the need for quantitative criteria for diagnosing HGUCA on cytology.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.401

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.283 · 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