HPV‐related vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia: Outcome of different management modalities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the outcome of various management schemes for HPV-related vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia (VIN, usual type). METHODS: Retrospective chart review of patients with histologically diagnosed grade 2/3-VIN who had at least one year of follow-up. The variables that were collected included patient characteristics, management modalities, and clinical outcome. RESULTS: Fifty patients with a median age of 45 years old were evaluated. The median duration of follow-up was 43.5 months (12-186). Complete response (CR) and partial response occurred in 28 (56%) and 4 (8%), respectively. Nineteen of 28 patients with CR recurred with VIN. Surgical excision yielded higher CR (77%) than did either ablational techniques (21-33%) or topical immunotherapy (33%). CONCLUSION: In this experience, surgical excision for VIN, usual type, resulted in better therapeutic success rates than other treatment modalities. Management schemes should be individualized based on extent of disease and patient compliance.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".