MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Advanced-Stage Serous Borderline Tumors of the Ovary: A Clinicopathological Study of 49 Cases

2003· article· en· W2025455201 on OpenAlexaffabout
C. Blake Gilks, Abdulmohsen Alkushi, Jenice J. W. Yue, Dominique Lanvin, Thomas Ehlen, Dianne Miller

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Gynecological Pathology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsVictoria General HospitalBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSerous fluidStage (stratigraphy)PathologicalMedicinePathologyCancerClear cellDiseaseOvarySurgical pathologyClinical significanceOvarian cancerInternal medicineSerous cystadenocarcinomaOncologyImmunohistochemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is controversy about patient outcomes and pathological parameters of prognostic significance in patients with stage II or stage III ovarian serous borderline tumors. Forty-nine cases of stage II and III ovarian serous borderline tumors were identified on review of the medical records at Vancouver Hospital and British Columbia Cancer Agency for the period from 1979 to 1996. Pathological features assessed included presence of micropapillary architecture, tumor cell DNA content (ploidy), and characteristics of the extraovarian implants, including invasiveness and mitotic activity. Clinical follow-up information (3-17 years of follow-up) was obtained for 48 patients. Fifteen patients had stage II tumors and 34 had stage III tumors. Fourteen patients experienced tumor recurrence 1 to 8 (mean 3.5) years after presentation and of these, six patients died of disease (2, 3, 4, 7, 10, and 11 years after presentation). Patients with gross residual disease, as assessed by the surgeon, more frequently experienced a recurrence compared with patients without gross residual disease, but this difference did not reach statistical significance (0.05<p<0.1). The patients who died of disease all had stage III tumors. Patients with invasive implants had a significantly worse outcome than patients with noninvasive implants (p<0.005). Other pathological features (ploidy, micropapillary architecture, invasiveness of implants, mitotic activity of implants) were not significantly predictive of tumor recurrence or death. No single pathological feature or combination of features was present in all patients who subsequently died of disease. In conclusion, the prognosis for patients with advanced-stage serous borderline tumors in this population-based study is very favorable, with only six patients ultimately dying of progressive disease. The combination of stage (stage III) and invasiveness of extraovarian implants identifies a small subset of patients with advanced-stage serous borderline tumors with a significantly worse prognosis, who may benefit from adjuvant therapy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.521

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations85
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Gynecological PathologySame topicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207