Review of findings in prophylactic gynaecological specimens in <scp>L</scp>ynch syndrome with literature review and recommendations for grossing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Prophylactic hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy is being increasingly undertaken in patients with Lynch syndrome (LS). The pathological features in such specimens are not well described and, unlike the SEE-FIM protocol for salpingo-oophorectomy specimens in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and the gastrectomy grossing protocols for patients with CDH1 (E-cadherin) mutations, guidelines have not been devised for the grossing of prophylactic gynaecological specimens from LS patients. We aimed to review the pathological findings in a series of prophylactic gynaecological specimens from LS patients and develop guidelines for the grossing of these specimens. METHODS AND RESULTS: We reviewed the pathological findings in 25 prophylactic gynaecological specimens from LS patients and audited the grossing protocols in different centres across Ontario, Canada. We found a 32% incidence of endometrial carcinoma or a precursor lesion; the two endometrial cancers identified were low-grade, low-stage endometrioid adenocarcinomas. To address the absence of guidelines for pathological examination, we undertook a literature review of gynaecological malignancies and incidental findings in prophylactic specimens in LS patients. CONCLUSION: We provide recommendations regarding the grossing of such specimens which includes in-toto examination of the lower uterine segment, endometrium, ovaries and fallopian tubes with representative sampling of the cervix.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".