MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059729942 · doi:10.1097/pgp.0b013e318223118a

P16INK4a Expression in Undifferentiated Carcinoma of the Uterus Does Not Exclude Its Endometrial Origin

2011· article· en· W2059729942 on OpenAlexaff
Reda S. Saad, Miral Mohammed Mashhour, Sharon Noftech-Mozes, Nadia Ismiil, Valérie Dubé, Zeina Ghorab, Hala Faragalla, Mahmoud A. Khalifa

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Gynecological Pathology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUterusCarcinomaPathologyEndometriumImmunohistochemistryBiologyMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Undifferentiated carcinoma of the endometrium is a rare neoplasm, which, when involving the cervix, raises a question about its origin. Diffuse p16 positivity of uterine cancers is usually interpreted as a surrogate marker for high-risk human papilloma virus and favors cervical origin. In this study, we investigated the expression of cytokeratin 7 (CK7), monoclonal carcinoembryonic antigen (mCEA), estrogen receptor (ER), vimentin, and p16 in 28 cases of undifferentiated endometrial carcinoma, 20 high-grade endometrioid adenocarcinomas, and 50 cervical adenocarcinomas. Staining was considered positive when it was cytoplasmic for CK7, mCEA, and vimentin, nuclear for ER, and both nuclear and cytoplasmic for p16. Percentages of cells staining were recorded as follows: negative (0%-5%), 1+ (6%-25%), 2+ (26%-50%), 3+ (51%-75%), and 4+ (>75%). P16 was considered positive if it stained more than 75% of the tumor cells. Diffuse/strongly positive staining for p16 was seen in 40/50 (80%) cases of cervical adenocarcinoma and 14/28 (50%) cases of undifferentiated endometrial carcinoma. In high-grade endometrioid adenocarcinoma, staining was mainly patchy. CK7, mCEA, ER, progesterone receptor, and vimentin staining in undifferentiated endometrial carcinoma was as follows: 10/28 (36%), 4/28 (14%), 21/28 (75%), 23/28 (82%), and 26/28 (93%), respectively; for high-grade endometrioid carcinoma: 20/20 (100%), 1/20 (5%), 17/20 (85%), 18/20 (90%), and 19/20 (95%); for endocervical adenocarcinoma: 50/50 (100%), 45/50 (90%), 9/50 (18%), 8/50 (16%), and 6/50 (12%), respectively. Our data indicate that p16 may play a role in the tumorigenesis of a subset of undifferentiated endometrial carcinoma. In the setting of p16 positivity, undifferentiated endometrial carcinomas are more likely to be ER, progesterone receptor, and vimentin positive and mCEA negative when compared with endocervical adenocarcinomas. Distinction between undifferentiated endometrial carcinoma and endocervical adenocarcinoma, both of which can share diffuse p16 expression, should rely on detection of human papilloma virus in the latter.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations26
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Gynecological PathologySame topicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207