MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073523783 · doi:10.1080/10428190210173

Diffuse Large B-cell Lymphoma: A Clinicopathologic Analysis of 444 Cases Classified According to the Updated Kiel Classification

2002· article· en· W2073523783 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueLeukemia & lymphoma/Leukemia and lymphoma · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaBC Cancer Agency
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsLymphomaMedicineAnaplastic large-cell lymphomaDiffuse large B-cell lymphomaInternal medicineRetrospective cohort studyStage (stratigraphy)Overall survivalSubtypingLarge cellPathologyGastroenterologyCancerAdenocarcinomaBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was: to compare the survival of diffuse large B-cell lymphomas (DLBCL) stratified according to the up-dated Kiel classification. A retrospective study of a cohort of 1378 cases was organized in 1996 by the Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma Classification Project, and the DLBCL were classified according to the updated Kiel classification. The distribution of the different types and subtypes was as follows: centroblastic (CB, 85.4%), composed of the polymorphic (CB-PM, 58.6%), monomorphic (CB-MM, 17.1%) and multilobated (CB-ML, 9.7%) subtypes; immunoblastic (IB, 11.2%), with (8.3%) or without (2.9%) plasmacytoid differentiation; and anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL) of B-cell type (3.4%). The rate of diagnostic agreement between pathologists was 78% for CB and 65% for IB lymphoma. The 5-year overall survival (OAS) for the entire group was 47% and the 5-year failure-free survival (FFS) was 42%. No significant differences in survival were found between the three major groups (CB, IB, ALCL). However, the 5-year OAS and FFS of patients with DLBCL not containing immunoblasts (CB-MM+CB-ML) was 51 and 52%, respectively, and was significantly better than the survival of those containing immunoblasts (CB-PM+IB+ALCL), which was 44 and 38% (p = 0.06 and p = 0.037), respectively. These results did not appear to be due to differences in the clinical features of the two groups, and was most significant for patients with low stage or low risk disease. However, histologic subtyping was not an independent risk factor for the entire group by multivariate analysis. In conclusion, patients with CB-MM and CB-ML (without immunoblasts) had a significantly better OAS and FFS than those with CB-PM, IB and ALCL (with immunoblasts). Therefore, we conclude that additional studies are still needed to further evaluate the importance of immunoblastic differentiation in DLBCL.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.421
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.240 · 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