T1a breast carcinoma and the role of axillary dissection
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
HYPOTHESIS: Axillary dissection (AD) does not affect recurrence or survival in T1a breast cancer. DESIGN: Cohort study comparing patients who underwent AD and those who did not. SETTING: Provincial cancer agency. PATIENTS: Six hundred ninety-one women with pathologically diagnosed T1a tumors. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rates of axillary metastases stratified according to grade and lymphovascular and/or neural invasion, rates of relapse, and disease-specific survival. RESULTS: Grade 1, 2, and 3 tumors without lymphovascular and/or neural invasion had axillary nodal involvement rates of 0.7%, 7%, and 7.8% of patients, respectively; with lymphovascular and/or neural invasion, axillary nodes were involved in 9.1%, 39.3%, and 44.4%, respectively. No statistically significant differences were found between the cohorts in relapse rates (P =.70) or survival (P =.84). CONCLUSION: Higher tumor grade and lymphovascular and/or neural invasion increased the rate of nodal metastases in T1a tumors, but AD did not improve relapse rates or breast cancer-specific survival.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it