The high post-test probability of a cytological examination renders further investigations to establish a diagnosis of epithelial malignant pleural mesothelioma redundant
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the study was to establish in a prospective and blinded manner the diagnostic yield of morphology, immunocytochemistry (ICH) and electron microscopy (EM) in the cytological analysis of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). Pleural fluid from consecutive patients, 14 with a histologically proven MPM, 12 with a malignant pleuritis due to adenocarcinoma (AC), and 13 with a reactive pleural effusion (RM), was separately analyzed. Smears were incubated with monoclonal antibodies (Tag72, Ber-Ep4, anti-CEA, EMA). These were considered suggestive for MPM when only EMA stained positive, for AC when three out of four markers stained positive, and for RM when no marker stained positive. The post-test probability of the morphological, ICH, and EM analysis were 92, 100, 92% or MPM, 91, 100, 86% for AC, and 88, 88, 90% for RM, respectively. We concluded that the high post-test probability of a combined morphological and ICH diagnosis of MPM warrants to cease further diagnostic procedures in these patients. Electron microscopy did not add to accuracy of diagnosis.
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 | 0.000 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".