Low-Stage Ovarian Clear Cell Carcinoma: Population-Based Outcomes in British Columbia, Canada, With Evidence for a Survival Benefit As a Result of Irradiation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the population-based outcomes of stage I and II ovarian clear cell carcinoma (OCCC) in a North American population treated with carboplatin/paclitaxel and abdominopelvic irradiation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis was performed of 241 patients referred in the carboplatin/paclitaxel era. Irradiation was to be used with a few defined exceptions. However, because of differing beliefs as to its effectiveness, its use was consistently avoided by specific oncologists, allowing the opportunity to study its possible effect on disease-free survival (DFS) in these concurrent cohorts. RESULTS: Five- and 10-year DFS rates were 84% and 70% for stage IA/B; 67% and 57% for stage IC; and 49% and 44% for stage II, respectively. Five- and 10-year DFS rates for those with stage IC disease based purely on rupture were similar to rates for patients with stage IA/B, at 92% and 71%, respectively. The remaining patients with stage IC had 48% 5- and 10-year DFS. Multivariate analysis using a decision tree identified positive cytology as the most important factor (72% relapse rate if positive and 27% if negative or unknown). If, in addition, the capsule surface was involved, then the relapse rate was 93%. Irradiation had no discernible survival benefit for patients with stage IA and IC (rupture alone), whereas for the remainder of patients with stage IC and stage II, it improved DFS by 20% at 5 years (relative risk, 0.5); the benefit was most evident in the cytologically negative/unknown group. CONCLUSION: DFS is similar in this North American population with early OCCC to the DFS reported in Asia. A potential benefit from irradiation was evident in a subset.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".