Longitudinal Outcome Study of Sessile Serrated Adenomas of the Colorectum: An Increased Risk for Subsequent Right-sided Colorectal Carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sessile serrated adenomas (SSAs) are associated with colorectal carcinomas (CRCs) that demonstrate high microsatellite instability (MSI-H). Currently, SSAs are managed clinically in a similar fashion to adenomatous polyps (APs). We studied the natural history of SSA by analyzing the outcome of previously undiagnosed SSAs and comparing it with that of hyperplastic polyps (HPs) and APs. All colorectal polyps diagnosed between 1980 and 2001 as HP were selected for study. Polyps identified as possible SSAs were reviewed by 3 pathologists, and the diagnosis was confirmed. Clinical follow-up was obtained for each SSA patient and matched with control HP and AP patients. In total, 1402 colorectal polyps diagnosed as HP were examined and 81 polyps in 55 patients (5.8%) were rediagnosed as SSA. Of these, 40 SSA patients had no previous history of either CRC or AP with high-grade dysplasia (HGD). Of these 40 patients, 5 developed subsequent CRCs and 1 developed AP with HGD. The incidence of subsequent CRCs was significantly higher in SSA patients than in control patients with HP (12.5% vs. 1.8%) and AP (12.5% vs. 1.8%). All of the subsequent CRCs or APs with HGD developed in the proximal colon. Four of the 5 CRCs demonstrated a high microsatellite instability phenotype. We conclude that SSAs are high-risk lesions, with 15% of the SSA patients developing subsequent CRCs or APs with HGD. This incidence is higher than that of the control HP and AP patients, and would support close endoscopic follow-up in patients harboring SSAs.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".