Extensive intestinal metaplasia in gastric carcinoma and in other lesions requiring surgery. A study of 3421 gastrectomy specimens from dwellers of the Atlantic and Pacific basins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Extensive intestinal metaplasia (EIM) has been reported in gastrectomies from patients dwelling in the Pacific and Atlantic basins. AIMS: To compare all the results in an attempt to explain the findings. METHOD: All sections from 3,421 gastrectomies were reviewed at various hospitals: 1946 in the Atlantic and 1475 in the Pacific basin. Sections with EIM showed IM encompassing one or more entire low power field (>or=5 mm in length/section) in one or more section. RESULTS: In the Atlantic basin, EIM was present in 18.8% (153 of 814) of specimens with intestinal carcinoma (IC) and in 10.3% (65 of 630) of those with diffuse carcinoma (DC). In the Pacific basin, EIM was found in 62.9% (412 of 655) of gastrectomies with IC and in 33.3% (160 of 481) of those with DC. The numbers of specimens with EIM were significantly higher in the Pacific than in the Atlantic basin for both carcinoma phenotypes, particularly among elderly patients (>or=60 years). CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of gastrectomies with EIM was higher among populations at a higher gastric cancer risk than in those with a lower cancer risk. EIM was mostly associated with IC rather than DC or with miscellaneous gastric diseases (841 control gastrectomies) in both basins. The proportion of gastrectomies with EIM was significantly higher in Vancouver than in New York and in Santiago de Chile than in Buenos Aires, even though these populations reside at approximately the same geographical latitude, but in different basins. Environmental factors seem to accelerate the evolution of EIM.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".