Poor Outcomes After Conservative Management for Low-Grade, Apparent Early-Stage Endometrial Cancer [334]
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The conservative (fertility preserving) management of low-grade, early-stage endometrial cancer is gaining popularity. Some concerns could be raised in view of the tendency to underreport poor outcomes such as death, progression to advanced stage, or higher grade disease. METHODS: We reviewed published poor outcomes of low-grade, early-stage endometrial cancer and present two women who desired conservative management for fertility-preserving purposes and sustained poor outcomes in one tertiary care facility over a 5-year period. RESULTS: Despite established conservative management, the first patient's low-grade, early-stage endometrial cancer concealed an underlying pathology of clear cell adenocarcinoma. In the second case, a patient with low-grade endometrial cancer refused hysterectomy to attain fertility and when she accepted, was found to have stage IIIC1 (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2009) disease. IMPLICATION: These cases indicate that conservative management of endometrial cancer should still be considered with caution, performed by experienced teams, and the potential risks be explained to the patients.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".