MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059264542 · doi:10.1097/sla.0000000000000734

Progression and Management of Duodenal Neoplasia in Familial Adenomatous Polyposis

2014· article· en· W2059264542 on OpenAlexaff
Pablo E. Serrano, Robert C. Grant, Terri Berk, Dowan Kim, Hassan Al‐Ali, Zane Cohen, Aaron Pollett, Robert H. Riddell, Mark S. Silverberg, Paul Kortan, Gary R. May, Steven Gallinger

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Surgery · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGenetic factors in colorectal cancer
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of TorontoToronto General HospitalLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteMount Sinai HospitalMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFamilial adenomatous polyposisDysplasiaInternal medicineEsophagogastroduodenoscopyStage (stratigraphy)GastroenterologyDuodenal cancerColorectal cancerDuodenumPolypectomySurgeryCancerColonoscopyEndoscopy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Brief Objective: To describe the natural history and outcomes of surveillance of duodenal neoplasia in familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). Background: Duodenal cancer is the most common cause of death in FAP. Methods: Cohort study of patients prospectively enrolled in an upper endoscopic surveillance protocol from 1982 to 2012. The duodenum was assessed by side-viewing endoscopy and classified as stage 1 to 5 disease. Endoscopic and/or operative interventions were performed according to stage. Results: There were 218 patients in the protocol (98 with advanced stage). They had a median of 9 endoscopies (range: 2–25) over a median of 11 years (range: 1–26). Median age at diagnosis of stage 3 disease (adenoma: 2.1–10 mm) was 41 years and stage 4 disease (adenoma >10 mm) was 45 years. Median time from first esophagogastroduodenoscopy to stage 4 disease was 22.4 years. The risk of stage 4 disease was 34.3% [95% confidence interval (CI) 23.8–43.4] at 15 years. In multivariate analysis, sex, type of colorectal surgery, years since colorectal surgery, and stage were significantly associated with risk of progression to stage 4 disease. Five of 218 (2.3%) patients developed duodenal cancer at median age of 58 years (range: 51–65). The risk of developing duodenal cancer was 2.1% (95% CI: 0–5.2) at 15 years. Conclusions: Patients with advanced duodenal polyposis progress in the severity of disease (size and degree of dysplasia); however, the rate of progression to carcinoma is slow. Aggressive endoscopic and surgical intervention, especially in the presence of large polyps and high-grade dysplasia, appears to be effective in preventing cancer deaths in FAP. This review analyzes the long-term outcomes of 218 patients with familial adenomatous polyposis enrolled in a prospective upper endoscopy surveillance program. We found a 34.3% (95% confidence interval: 23.8–43.4) risk of progression to high-stage duodenal disease by 15 years and a 2.1% (95% confidence interval: 0–5.2) risk of developing duodenal cancer at 15 years.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.148
Threshold uncertainty score0.302

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations28
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of SurgerySame topicGenetic factors in colorectal cancerFrench-language works237,207