MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1991914845 · doi:10.1097/pap.0000000000000046

Endometrial Stromal Tumors

2014· review· en· W1991914845 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher M. J. Conklin, Teri A. Longacre

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Anatomic Pathology · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUterine Myomas and Treatments
Canadian institutionsSurrey Memorial Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEndometrial stromal sarcomaStromal cellChromosomal translocationSarcomaCancer researchNodule (geology)PathogenesisMedicinePathologyBiologyOncologyGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Endometrial stromal tumors are rare uterine mesenchymal neoplasms that have intrigued pathologists for years, not only because they commonly pose diagnostic dilemmas, but also because the classification and pathogenesis of these tumors has been widely debated. The current World Health Organization recognizes 4 categories of endometrial stromal tumor: endometrial stromal nodule (ESN), low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma (LG-ESS), high-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma (HG-ESS), and undifferentiated uterine sarcoma (UUS). uterine sarcoma. These categories are defined by the presence of distinct translocations as well as tumor morphology and prognosis. Specifically, the JAZF1-SUZ12 (formerly JAZF1-JJAZ1) fusion identifies a large proportion of ESN and LG-ESSs, whereas the YWHAE-FAM22 translocation identifies HG-ESSs. The latter tumors appear to have a prognosis intermediate between LG-ESS and UUS, which exhibits no specific translocation pattern. This review (1) presents the clinicopathologic features of endometrial stromal tumors; (2) discusses their immunophenotype; and (3) highlights the recent advances in molecular genetics which explain their pathogenesis and lend support for a new classification system.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.004

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.355 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations177
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Anatomic PathologySame topicUterine Myomas and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207