No elevation in long-term breast carcinoma risk for women with fibroadenomas that contain atypical hyperplasia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The authors previously showed that women with a fibroadenoma have a relative risk of invasive breast carcinoma of approximately 2.0 compared with women of similar age from the general population. This relative risk approaches 1.0 when family history and proliferative changes in the adjacent parenchyma are removed and rises to > 3.0 if the fibroadenoma has complex histology. The risk for developing breast carcinoma in women with atypical lobular hyperplasia (ALH) and atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) or their minimal variants within a fibroadenoma is unknown. METHODS: The authors conducted a long-term, retrospective cohort study of 1834 women with adequate follow-up who presented with fibroadenoma at three local hospitals between 1950 and 1968. Histology was reviewed using established criteria, and the patients were categorized with ALH, ADH, minimal atypia, or no atypia. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of ALH or ADH within fibroadenomas was 0.81%. Minimal or true atypia within a fibroadenoma appeared to be correlated with proliferative disease in the adjacent parenchyma but could not predict for the presence there of well-established atypia. Only 7% of women with well-developed atypia developed invasive carcinoma on follow-up. Three women with minimal atypia developed invasive carcinoma. CONCLUSIONS: In this study of a large cohort of women with fibroadenoma, the authors found that atypia within a fibroadenoma cannot predict for the presence of atypia within adjacent breast parenchyma. They also found that atypia confined to a fibroadenoma does not incur a clinically meaningful risk of future breast carcinoma development greater than that of fibroadenoma alone.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".