Positive Adnexal or Uterine Serosal Involvement in Stage IIIC Endometrial Cancer Is an Adverse Factor for Recurrence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Clinical and pathological significance of stage IIIC endometrial cancer is unclear. Our study was designed to determine the risk of recurrence among patients with stage IIIC endometrial cancer according to different pathological findings. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all patients with FIGO IIIC endometrial carcinoma (n = 48) treated in our institution between 1996 and 2005. Patients without comprehensive surgical staging were excluded. Patients were classified into two groups: with adnexae and/or uterine serosal metastasis (group A, n = 18) and without metastasis (group B, n = 20). Cox proportional hazards model was used for multiple regression analysis. RESULTS: Mean age was 64 years (range 46-90). Eighteen patients received adjuvant chemotherapy and pelvic radiotherapy, 17 received pelvic radiotherapy alone, and 11 received chemotherapy or hormonotherapy. At a median follow-up of 26.7 months, 12 had recurrence of the disease. Serosal and/or adnexal involvement was a negative independent prognostic factor for disease-free survival [relative risk = 3.75 (1.01-13.9); p = 0.04], whereas histological type, grade, depth of invasion and age at diagnosis had no influence. CONCLUSION: Patients with stage IIIC endometrial cancer and metastasis to adnexae and/or serosa have a higher risk of recurrence than those with node metastasis alone. Optimal adjuvant therapy for these groups remains unclear.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".