Adenomyosis is Associated With Myometrial Invasion by FIGO 1 Endometrial Adenocarcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adenomyosis is commonly seen in hysterectomy specimens for endometrial adenocarcinoma where it could be involved with the tumor. When adenocarcinoma involves adenomyosis, the tumor may remain limited to the adenomyosis or proceeds to invade the adjacent myometrium. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether the risk of myometrial invasion by grade 1 endometrioid adenocarcinoma in cases with cancer-positive adenomyosis is different from that of cases where cancer occurs in the absence of adenomyosis. Forty-six consecutive hysterectomy specimens with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) grade 1 endometrial endometrioid adenocarcinoma involving adenomyosis and 49 consecutive specimens with the same tumor occurring in the absence of adenomyosis were retrospectively studied by 4 experienced gynecologic pathologists. In cases with adenomyosis, myometrial invasion was confirmed by CD10-negative staining around glands with irregular outline surrounded by inflamed desmoplastic stroma. Myometrial invasion was found in significantly more adenomyosis cases (n = 42, 91.3%) than in cases without adenomyosis (n = 38, 77.5%) (chi = 4.79, P = 0.03). In 16 cases of the former group, the invasion only occurred from the foci of adenomyosis. Although myometrial invasion in the outer half was more common in the adenomyosis group (n = 16, 34.8%) than in cases without adenomyosis (n = 9, 18.4%), the difference was not statistically significant (chi = 3.29, P = 0.07). By involving coexistent adenomyosis, FIGO grade 1 endometrial endometrioid adenocarcinoma is associated with myometrial invasion, probably through increasing the surface area of its interface with the adjacent myometrium. When compared with their counterparts that occur in the absence of adenomyosis, these tumors are significantly more likely to invade the myometrium.
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 | 0.002 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".