MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Proffered papers 
14.00–15.00 Tuesday 16 September 2003 8 Ampullary, pancreatic and biliary duct exfoliative brush cytology prepared by the thinprep method: performance and morphology

2003· article· en· W2026335537 on OpenAlex
Máire A. Duggan, Penny Brasher, Shaun Medlicott

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCytopathology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
Canadian institutionsAlberta Cancer FoundationUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCytologyMalignancyPositive predicative valueAmpullaCytopathologyPathologyLiquid-based cytologyGastroenterologyCancerInternal medicinePredictive value

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background ERCP‐directed brush cytology is used to sample lesions of the pancreatic and biliary ducts and the ampulla of Vater. With conventional preparations, the sensitivity and specificity range from 44% to 63% and 80% to 98%, respectively, and increased N : C ratio, nuclear molding and loss of honeycombing are reliable features of malignancy. The performance and morphology of specimens prepared by ThinPrep, a liquid‐based cytology technique is mostly unknown. Methods The laboratory information system was searched for all cases prepared by ThinPrep. Patient disease classification of benign or malignant was determined by linkage with the provincial cancer registry and was the gold standard against which sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV) were calculated. True positives and negatives were reviewed to identify predictive cytomorphologic features. Results Between 1996 and 2001, there were 149 ThinPrep specimens; 55 (37%) were reported as positive for malignancy and 94 (63%) as negative. Disease was classified as malignant in 86 (58%) patients and benign in 63 (42%). There were 42 false negative, 11 false positive, 52 true negative, and 44 true positive cytology results. Sensitivity was 51.2% (CI; 40.2 : 62.0), specificity 82.5% (CI; 70.5 : 90.6), and PPV and NPV 80.0% (CI; 66.6 : 89) and 55.3% (CI; 44.7 : 65.5), respectively. Cell groups with crowded, enlarged, irregular nuclei and nuclear features of vesicular chromatin and large, multiple irregular nucleoli correlated with malignant disease, while monolayered sheets of uniform columnar cells, regular nuclei and a finely granular chromatin correlated with benign disease. Conclusions The performance of ThinPrep brushings from this anatomic site equals conventional preparations. Cytomorphologic features of malignancy are more frequent and pronounced with ThinPrep.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.296 · 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