MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042276275 · doi:10.1097/pas.0b013e31829f306a

Interobserver Agreement for Assessing Invasion in Stage 1A Vulvar Squamous Cell Carcinoma

2013· article· en· W2042276275 on OpenAlexaff
Amal Abdel-Mesih, Dean Daya, Kazu Onuma, Monalisa Sur, Shangguo Tang, Noori Akhtar‐Danesh, Odette Boutross‐Tadross, Kathy Ceballos, William Chapman, Terence J. Colgan, Pratima Deb, Marisa R. Nucci, Esther Oliva, Alice Lytwyn

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Surgical Pathology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer AgencyUniversity of British ColumbiaMcMaster University Medical CentreJuravinski Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVulvar cancerVulvar CarcinomaStage (stratigraphy)VulvaPathologyBasal cellCarcinomaMajor duodenal papillaRadiologyInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Invasive squamous cell carcinoma of the vulva with ≤1 mm stromal invasion is classified as stage 1A. Cancer staging systems state that the depth of invasion should be measured from the epithelial-stromal junction of the adjacent most superficial dermal papilla to the deepest point of the invasive tumor. Measurement of the depth of invasion guides patient management. Even though this measurement is critical, no studies have reported the reliability among pathologists for determining the cutoff point of ≤1 mm stromal invasion in vulvar cancer. We assessed agreement among pathologists for determining whether a vulvar tumor is invasive, for the depth of invasion, and for tumor thickness. Forty-five cases of vulvar squamous cell carcinoma with a depth of invasion of ≤5 mm were chosen. Eleven gynecologic pathologists independently reviewed the slides and, for a subset of cases, pictorially recorded measurements on photographs. The number of cases that were reported as invasive by the 11 pathologists ranged from 21 to 44. The number of cases that were reported as showing a depth of invasion of ≤1 mm ranged from 7 to 27. Eight pathologists provided measurements for all lesions reported as invasive, the remaining 3 pathologists stated that they were unable to measure 2, 7, and 16 lesions, respectively. Mean κ for diagnosing vulvar carcinoma as invasive was 0.24 and for measuring the depth of invasion and thickness was 0.51 and 0.49, respectively. There was only fair agreement in determining whether the lesion was invasive. In cases in which pathologists agreed upon the diagnosis of invasion, agreement on depth was moderate. When using the recommended cancer staging method, interpretation of the location of the most superficial dermal papilla varied among pathologists. Measuring thickness did not improve agreement. This is the first study that has assessed the reliability of the diagnosis of invasion in vulvar cancer among gynecologic pathologists, the interobserver agreement for reporting the critical 1 mm threshold of depth of stromal invasion, and the way in which the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics method is used by pathologists.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.069
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.118
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.367

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0690.118
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations25
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of Surgical PathologySame topicCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchFrench-language works237,207