MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116611815 · doi:10.1136/jclinpath-2014-202805

Blood and lymphatic vessel invasion in pT1 colorectal cancer: an international concordance study

2015· article· en· W2116611815 on OpenAlexaffabout
Motohiro Kojima, Giacomo Puppa, Richard Kirsch, Olca Baştürk, Wendy L. Frankel, Michael Vieth, Alessandro Lugli, Kieran Sheahan, Matthew M. Yeh, G. Lauwers, Mauro Risio, Hideyuki Shimazaki, Keiichi Iwaya, Masayoshi Kage, Jun Akiba, Yasuo Ohkura, Shinichiro Horiguchi, Kohei Shomori, Ryoji Kushima, Shogo Nomura, Yoichi Ajioka, Volkan Adsay, Atsushi Ochiai

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Pathology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConcordanceMedicineColorectal cancerCohortLymphovascular invasionRectumCancerConsistency (knowledge bases)PathologicalCohort studyPathologyInternal medicineOncologyMetastasis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: This study was performed to evaluate the concordance in pathological assessments of blood and lymphatic vessel invasion (BLI) in pT1 colorectal cancers and to assess the effect of diagnostic criterion on consistency in the assessment of BLI. METHODS: Forty consecutive patients undergoing surgical resection of pT1 colorectal cancers were entered into this study. H&E-stained, D2-40-stained and elastica-stained slides from the tumours were examined by 18 pathologists from seven countries. The 40 cases were divided into two cohorts with 20 cases each. In cohort 1, pathologists diagnosed BLI using criteria familiar to them; all Japanese pathologists used a criterion of BLI from the Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum (JSCCR). In cohort 2, all pathologists used the JSCCR diagnostic criterion. RESULTS: In cohort 1, diagnostic concordance was moderate in the US/Canadian and European pathologists. There were no differences in the consistency compared with results for Japanese pathologists, and no improvement in the diagnostic concordance was found for using the JSCCR criterion. However, in cohort 2, the JSCCR criterion decreased the consistency of BLI diagnosis in the US/Canadian and European pathologists. The level of decreased consistency in the assessment of BLI was different between the US/Canadian and European pathologists. CONCLUSIONS: A uniform criterion strongly influences the diagnostic consistency of BLI but may not always improve the concordance. Further study is required to achieve an objective diagnosis of BLI in colorectal cancer. The varying effects of diagnostic criterion on the pathologists from Japan, the USA/Canada and Europe might reflect varied interpretations of the criterion. Internationally accepted criterion should be developed by participants from around the world.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.382

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.463
Teacher spread0.333 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations28
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical PathologySame topicColorectal Cancer Surgical TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207